ECT The Definition of Musterion and why the Gospel was not a Mystery

D

Danoh

New member
Wick Stick said:
I'm just trying to get a handle on what you're saying. I think I disagree, but I wanted to make sure I understand you before I go off arguing against something that maybe isn't even what you're talking about.

I don't know Fruchtenbaum, but if he says that musterion has a different meaning for Paul that it does for Plato, then I disagree with him.

The Greeks engaged in mystery schools, and that didn't mean that they taught things that nobody ever knew before. That doesn't even make sense. It meant that the schools teachings were hidden (mysterious) to the people who weren't in the school. It's the opposite of open source.

Likewise, then, early Christians had teachings which they only taught to those who were already mature in Christ. Notice 1Corinthians 2:6-7. This is just one of many times in Paul's writings where he seems to stop himself and say, "hey, there's more that I want to share here, but I can't until you grow up!"

Mysteries aren't things nobody ever knew before, they're secrets a few people knew, and kept hidden, just as the often quoted Colossians 1:26 says.
Click to expand...

I'll concede the following - 1 Cor. 2:7-8 is not asserting the Cross was hidden in the OT.

Paul is talking about the issue of the Body's "our glory" that "the Lord of glory" also made possible by the Cross.

It is basically Romans 8's "whom he called, them he also glorified" - which is also beyond the issue of Christ having died for our sins.
 
intojoy

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
Jerry Shugart said:
In the following passage Paul speaks of the gospel according to the revelation of the mystery:

"But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Cor.2:7-8).​

Of course those who continue to cling to the fiction that only one gospel was preached during the Acts period must insist that it wasn't hidden at all!

You shouldn't pay any attention to those like Arnold who are now denying the traditional dispensationalist's teaching of the Church parenthesis! It will not be long until Arnold joins hands with the progressive dispensationalists who say that the Lord Jesus is now sitting on the throne of David!
Click to expand...

Why are you so intimidated by Arnold? I happen to think Bullinger's Witness in the Stars is crap but I don't think I am better than him. I hold men like him in higher esteem than myself even if I know their errors. But you who are a no one wants to puff yourself up by dissing Fruchtenbaum. When I emailed you his manuscript two years ago was that the first time you'd heard of him? Where've you been man?

Just take a look at his itinerary over the last 40 years and note that he has been teaching 300 days a year all over the globe non stop. I've been in auditoriums with thousands in attendance and been in rooms where only a few showed up yet his mission always the same, delivering God's word from a Jewish frame of reference. The one missing from Schofield's commentary.

You don't even know what the unpardonable sin is. How can you move forward as a teacher when you have not figured out Matthew 12?

Is it because of the passage that you quoted as evidence for a musterion where you try and make wisdom a synonym for gospel so weak that you have to add insults to brother Arnold? You show weakness Jerry.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Jerry Shugart said:
In the following passage Paul speaks of the gospel according to the revelation of the mystery:

"But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Cor.2:7-8).​

Of course those who continue to cling to the fiction that only one gospel was preached during the Acts period must insist that it wasn't hidden at all!

You shouldn't pay any attention to those like Arnold who are now denying the traditional dispensationalist's teaching of the Church parenthesis! It will not be long until Arnold joins hands with the progressive dispensationalists who say that the Lord Jesus is now sitting on the throne of David!
Click to expand...





The gospel he's referring to there is not different from the gospel. It was hidden from Judaism.

The church is not a parenthesis. It always was planned; great was the company of those who proclaimed his word to the ends of the earth, says Isaiah.

Christ is now sitting on David's foreseen throne, Acts 2:30-31.
 
heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
Danoh said:
Thus, the Hybrid designation - your results are neither those of the Acts 9 position, nor those of the Acts 28.
Click to expand...
There's nothing "hybrid" about what he said. It's in the scriptures. You just refuse to approve it.

Lol - talk about another gospel, which is not another.
Click to expand...
Says the one who doesn't even declare 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV as the gospel of our salvation.
 
intojoy

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
I understand that the issue will not change for y'all and that's fine with me. It's interesting to talk about and I'm sure I'll think on it more some day. But for now I'm moving on to less hostile ground for John Wrong's sake. Don't want to inflame that dude.
Jerry on the other hand is free game. I think he's close to 70 and I can take him hahahaha


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 
D

Danoh

New member
heir said:
There's nothing "hybrid" about what he said. It's in the scriptures. You just refuse to approve it.

Says the one who doesn't even declare 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV as the gospel of our salvation.
Click to expand...

Rubbish on your often insolent part in your ignorance - I have often pointed people both on here and away from here to 1 Cor. 15:1-4 - especially verses 3 and 4.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

But yours is par for the course for one who has been proving for some time that hers is nothing more than heir-er read into one thing or another by her:chuckle:
 
D

Danoh

New member
intojoy said:
That gentile salvation happens with Israel somehow? Not really understanding that no.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Click to expand...

Can't really blame ya - in one breath they assert that was a Prophesied salvation; in the next they assert Paul was the first to reveal it.

But that's the Hybrids as so called "MADs" for ya - their 2&2 often 5.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
intojoy said:
That gentile salvation happens with Israel somehow? Not really understanding that no.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Click to expand...

You totally have no business criticizing what you aren't clear on.

Gentile salvation through a priestly Israel was never a secret.

Gentile salvation in spite of a blinded Israel was a secret.

By the old model, it could not have happened. Hence the need for a dispensing of Grace, and a new apostle uniquely suited to be it's herald.
 
Nang

Nang

TOL Subscriber
Danoh said:
Can't really blame ya - in one breath they assert that was a Prophesied salvation; in the next they assert Paul was the first to reveal it.

But that's the Hybrids as so called "MADs" for ya - their 2&2 often 5.
Click to expand...

. . . nuts is what MAD is.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
musterion said:
You totally have no business criticizing what you aren't clear on.

Gentile salvation through a priestly Israel was never a secret.

Gentile salvation in spite of a blinded Israel was a secret.

By the old model, it could not have happened. Hence the need for a dispensing of Grace, and a new apostle uniquely suited to be it's herald.
Click to expand...





as long as the priests you mean are believers.

Model? What old model? The new model would be that believers are priests.

The dispensing of Grace was only new to Judaism. It was there the whole time, but intertestamental Judaism had blocked it out.
 
intojoy

intojoy

BANNED
Banned
musterion said:
You totally have no business criticizing what you aren't clear on.

Gentile salvation through a priestly Israel was never a secret.

Gentile salvation in spite of a blinded Israel was a secret.

By the old model, it could not have happened. Hence the need for a dispensing of Grace, and a new apostle uniquely suited to be it's herald.
Click to expand...

Still not totally clear but I think you're saying that gentile salvation thru Israel's priestly economy was not a mystery but that Gentiles salvation thru the fallen state of Israel was a mystery?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
I don't know how it could be an outright mystery when 'all day long I have held out my hands...' is in Isaiah along with the good parts. But that it was a mystery to Judaism is clear enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top