ECT The Dejected Fools

Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
I assume you mean between Moses and Christ. But really it's an impossible question asking why God does things like saying one age was childhood and another was adulthood. the point is that it is the age of maturity in Christ. There is no reverting back to the childhood.

Nor did God wait that long. There was constant contact with Gentile nations, if you know your OT. Look at what David said about dedicating the temple.

The NT is written mostly to intertestament Judaism, like what Paul grew up in, and it's misconceptions and replacement theologies like Gal 3:17 indicate. To answer what it is blind to, or veiled about. That needs to be remembered when reading it, especially because D'ism deals with almost spastic questions like moving Mt24A all the way to X000 years in the future and another episode of Judaism in Judea, this time with Christ in a temple there. the NT was not written to or about that.
Click to expand...

Interplanner said:
lol, Tam let's try to get up to speed!

1, most of the NT speaks to the situation the apostles found themselves in, dealing with inter-testament, 1st century Judaism. Paul grew up as a leader in it and was apprehended by God, thank God.
2, the whole reason why Gal 3:17 is expressed is to speak to that situation. Those are the replacments he is talking about. and the 'by whom'. The Judaism he grew up in had replaced the Promise with the Law.
3, but we must understand, the promise is not about the land. The land is nowhere in the NT as a benefit to anyone. The promise is the Spirit of God through those who believe to get out the message of the Gospel. We see this in v2 and 14. We see this in Acts 2:33 in the middle of describing Christ's enthronement. Because we are dealing with a 'kingdom' (reign) that is 'not by might nor power, but by His Spirit.'
4, a land/kingdom promise is like an FM jamming signal, creating confusion, vacuum, and interference with the NT.
5, the Spirit and the mission (that's why he works) is also the inheritance. This is why v17 seamlessly goes right into the inheritance in v18.
6, the law also had a infancy or minority or childishness to it. Only in the age of maturity in Christ could the Spirit work, 4:6. Because we are no longer 'as slaves' but 'as sons with full rights' v5, and sons are heirs, v7.

None of this is known in the least in D'ism in my experience with them, because Galatians is almost nowhere in the thinkinig of D'ism, with its Seed, meaning Christ, not seeds meaning many people.

So:
Gal 3:17 is not replacement theology. It is about Judaism as RT, the one we should be concerned with. The modern one is totally irrelevant.

'the verse even says the law did not replace the promise.' Exactly, but the promise was not what Judaism thought it was. It was also not what the disciples as late as Acts 1 thought.

1st century Judaism had an enormous problems of thinking that the 'redemption of Israel' would mean somehow replacing the situation under Rome. The problem is plural because for the upper classes, they wanted this but would never confront Rome. The Galileans and others however wanted this and believed in a whole end of the world eschatology in which they were to fight and have God's help fighting Rome doing so.

Obviously Paul's solution undercut the desire for a kingdom. Christ's was not the kind this world operates, Lk 17:20, 18:29, 22:16, 25, 26, 29, 37.
Click to expand...
:kookoo:
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
:thumb:

Funny how he always gets things wrong and often completely backwards.
Click to expand...




The law does not replace the Promise in the bible, BUT IT HAD IN JUDAISM!!! That is what Paul is dealing with!!! Get up to speed with the issues!!! Who was his audience, his opponents in Galatians? Who "cut in on them"? (Oooooof).
 
Last edited:
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
I have to know:

what do you kingdom pursuers not get about the list of Luke passages above about the kingdom, which are actually Paul's preaching? I'm referring to you people who specialize in what we are not to know in Acts 1.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
I have to know:

what do you kingdom pursuers not get about the list of Luke passages above about the kingdom, which are actually Paul's preaching? I'm referring to you people who specialize in what we are not to know in Acts 1.

Christ's kingdom was not the kind this world operates, Lk 17:20, 18:29, 22:16, 25, 26, 29, 37.
Click to expand...

The Dispy point is "at least not yet, said kingdom is not..."

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

And He had already answered the when, or timestamp of that...

Matthew 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 24:38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 24:39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

The coming of the Son of man?

Luke 21:26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 21:27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 21:28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. 21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; 21:30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled. 21:33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. 21:34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. 21:35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

The Dispy is well aware you read something else into that - because you have concluded 70AD was a lot of that, if not all of it.

Your mis-fire though, is obvious.

Believing you have solved for that, you have ended shifting around the rest of it to where it too appears to fit where what you believe you have solved for then appeared to place the rest of it in.

You're not alone in that kind of error - the hybrid form of MAD I every now and then get on the likes of STP and his pals about, is based on a similar kind of mis-fire.

Nevertheless, Romans 5:8.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Address specifics or shut up. "kookoo" is not doing theological work. It shows no intelligence, no work ethic, no background, no familiarity, no vocabulary, no ability to communicate.

What don't you understand from this background about Gal 3:17?
Click to expand...
In one post you say that it is replacement theology and in another you say that it is not replacement theology.

You are KOOKOO!
 
Last edited:
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
The law does not replace the Promise in the bible, BUT IT HAD IN JUDAISM!!! That is what Paul is dealing with!!! Get up to speed with the issues!!! Who was his audience, his opponents in Galatians? Who "cut in on them"? (Oooooof).
Click to expand...
Who cares about "JUDAISM" as you like to call it?

The LORD Jesus Christ was NOT teaching the twelve JUDAISM for forty days when He was teaching them about the KINGDOM.

And when the LORD Jesus Christ was done, they asked a perfectly appropriate and intelligent question.

There was NO so-called "rebuke" about it. Simply that it was not theirs to know the TIME.

Get up to speed with the issues!!!

P.S. You did not even know that the ones in Luke 24 were NOT the TWELVE. Talk about lacking KNOWLEDGE.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
Who cares about "JUDAISM" as you like to call it?

The LORD Jesus Christ was NOT teaching the twelve JUDAISM for forty days when He was teaching them about the KINGDOM.

And when the LORD Jesus Christ was done, they asked a perfectly appropriate and intelligent question.

There was NO so-called "rebuke" about it. Simply that it was not theirs to know the TIME.

Get up to speed with the issues!!!

P.S. You did not even know that the ones in Luke 24 were NOT the TWELVE. Talk about lacking KNOWLEDGE.
Click to expand...





Paul grew up in Judaism and it was interfering with his ministry everywhere. They were called Judaizers. In Colosse, there was even the belief that they had heard from the same angels that transmitted the Law, and thus made 2nd class people out of the Christians for not following a ton of commands there.

In Galatians, he pointed out they thought that the promise of the mission through the Spirit was voided and replaced by the Law. That's why 3:17 is there.

You are way out of your range of knowledge if you don't know some of these background items.

As I have explained twice now, Cleopas and his pal went and found the others when the explanation of the resurrection was made (not just the bare fact of it). You keep compartmentalizing it because you have the twots and no one in the text knows anything about anything anyone else ever did ad nauseum.

He had just told them they were fools in their knowledge of the OT, and then in Acts 1 he told them it's none of their business to ask about a kingdom for Israel because the power of the kingdom of God was coming.

All I hear from you is FM signal jamming so that people don't understand these basic facts.

You need to give reasons, not dictations. You turn the story/account into something it is not every time you touch it.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Being told that is not theirs to know, whether time or color or location, is a rebuke. It bugged him because it reminded him of the foolish heart comments and the opening of Mt 24 when they thought they were going to be escorted into the temple to reign on mighty stallions.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Right Divider said:
In one post you say that it is replacement theology and in another you say that it is not replacement theology.

Your are KOOKOO!
Click to expand...





At least I know you are paying attention. Except that we don't know what your "it" is. Keep working at your communication to clear things up!

Gal 3:17 is about replacement theology that Judaism was doing in the post-exile and 1st century. Not your modern RT that goes on today, which is irrelevant. That Judaism then had bludgeoned the Promise of the Gospel and Spirit of God to help take that Gospel to the nations, and replaced it with the Israel-only Law, or least hardly any interest in the Gentiles.

The RT of today is irrelevant, because it is an invention of the D'ism cult to make it feel persecuted about a non-issue. There clearly is the complete replacement of the old covenant in Hebrews, using those exact words. The modern one is a non-issue because it assumes 2P2P has a basis, which it does not.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
At least I know you are paying attention. Except that we don't know what your "it" is. Keep working at your communication to clear things up!

Gal 3:17 is about replacement theology that Judaism was doing in the post-exile and 1st century. Not your modern RT that goes on today, which is irrelevant. That Judaism then had bludgeoned the Promise of the Gospel and Spirit of God to help take that Gospel to the nations, and replaced it with the Israel-only Law, or least hardly any interest in the Gentiles.

The RT of today is irrelevant, because it is an invention of the D'ism cult to make it feel persecuted about a non-issue. There clearly is the complete replacement of the old covenant in Hebrews, using those exact words. The modern one is a non-issue because it assumes 2P2P has a basis, which it does not.
Click to expand...

All made up.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
The RT of today is irrelevant, because it is an invention of the D'ism cult to make it feel persecuted about a non-issue. There clearly is the complete replacement of the old covenant in Hebrews, using those exact words. The modern one is a non-issue because it assumes 2P2P has a basis, which it does not.
Click to expand...

You made this up.
 
Right Divider

Right Divider

Body part
Interplanner said:
Being told that is not theirs to know, whether time or color or location, is a rebuke. It bugged him because it reminded him of the foolish heart comments and the opening of Mt 24 when they thought they were going to be escorted into the temple to reign on mighty stallions.
Click to expand...
Always adding some irrelevant text to your post.

What a "real writer and grammar scholar" you are!

Though your area of expertise appears to be only fiction!
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
If they didn't have so much invested in the restoration of Israel, why were they dejected? They would have just said, Oh, now I see what you mean.'

The real, human part of Scripture is the netherworld to you. To read the bible the way you do turns it into a series of stick figures spouting theological statements from time to time. They have no roots, no background, no history, no feelings. Yuck.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
If they didn't have so much invested in the restoration of Israel, why were they dejected? They would have just said, Oh, now I see what you mean.'

The real, human part of Scripture is the netherworld to you. To read the bible the way you do turns it into a series of stick figures spouting theological statements from time to time. They have no roots, no background, no history, no feelings. Yuck.
Click to expand...

Made up.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
If they didn't have so much invested in the restoration of Israel, why were they dejected? They would have just said, Oh, now I see what you mean.'

The real, human part of Scripture is the netherworld to you. To read the bible the way you do turns it into a series of stick figures spouting theological statements from time to time. They have no roots, no background, no history, no feelings. Yuck.
Click to expand...

:chuckle:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top