ECT "Things that are different" included Gentiles

Interplanner

Well-known member
I addressed your verse now it is your time to run and hide from what is revealed at Jeremiah 31:31-34 about the New Covenant promised to the house of israel and the house of Judah.





And there we have it folks. SO Jerry thinks the 40 days from the Res to Pentecost were a seminar on zionism. You would think this would be reflected widespread in the quotes of the OT by the NT, by the apostles. It is not. It is nowhere. So what does Jerry do? Follow the template of the quotes of the OT? That's what he should do because Christ spent 40 days teaching that.

Instead he finds his own interp of one passage, and it so happens that that passage is NOT used that way in Hebrews 8-10 where it is extensively interpreted.

This is why D'ism is fundamentally irrational. Anything that would make sense in methodology is total chaos and convenience, and biased to be Zionist.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Wrong again Jerry.

"diatheke" is translated "covenant" 20 times in the NT, but only 13 times as "testament", according to Strongs.

That proves nothing but the fact that you have no answer to the points I made. Are you not aware that an "inheritance" and being a "heir" are integral parts of a Last Will and Testament?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Anderson was a Darby Follower.

Therefore, anything you quote from him, is meaningless.

Anderson preached alongside of Darby. Your ideas came straight from the Jesuit Alcazar.

You do know about the infamous history of the Jesuits, don't you? It's probably your goal to be adopted into their camp.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Anderson preached alongside of Darby. Your ideas came straight from the Jesuit Alcazar.

You do know about the infamous history of the Jesuits, don't you? It's probably your goal to be adopted into their camp.




Ribera and Alcazar designed two types of diversions from the historical meaning, Jerry. To protect the Pope. One was futurist and became D'ism. Alcazar was grounded in something in the 3rd century and faded away. They were Counter-Reformation--in methodology.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
I got news for you tet! No one receives the forgiveness of sins until they believe (Acts 10:43).

Aarghh . . . no sinners can believe, until they are first forgiven and regenerated to new spiritual life; and given new spiritual capacity (new heart, mind, will, eyes & ears) that enables any to believe the Gospel of Grace in Jesus Christ.

What an endless argument . . .

MAD and Dispies and Arminians all believe human "belief" comes before justification, when Scripture clearly says justification is realized by the gift of faith from God, alone.

The spiritual sons of God only believe, because they have first been redeemed, reconciled, and forgiven their sins, by Christ on the cross.

We love Him (only) because He first loved us. I John 4:19

Only in His light, can sinners see light. Psalm 36:9b
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Since you think that I am wrong about the meaning of Jeremiah 31:31-34 then tell me exactly what I said that is error.





Jerry!!!
What do you read man? I have shown 100x in posts here at ECT that nothing in Heb 9-10's interp of Heb 8 on Jer 31 goes your direction. Nothing!!! No land, no future worship sytem, no restored old covenant; it is all Christ and his perfect sacrifice for all men to save them from sin and death.

(If it has all the features of Judaism, it is still old; it is not "new" because it is being done over again. It was new because CHRIST did it and did it right. he is the representative that Israel could never be. That's why Heb 9-10 glory in Christ nonstop).

Do you pay attention at all?

this fixation with the one Israel/Judah line has RD so burnt (since I pointed it out) that he never mentions the 6 other passages on the new covenant. that is a horrible way to read and interp.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I got news for you tet! No one receives the forgiveness of sins until they believe (Acts 10:43).

Doesn't matter Jerry.

The sacrifice for ALL sins has already taken place.

(Heb 10:12) But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

That's the New Covenant Jerry.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I addressed your verse now it is your time to run and hide from what is revealed at Jeremiah 31:31-34 about the New Covenant promised to the house of israel and the house of Judah.

Jeremiah 31 was fulfilled by Christ Jesus.

That's why the writer of Hebrews quotes Jer 31 in Hebrews 8.

I keep trying to tell you....the only reason NT writers quoted OT verses is because the OT verses were being fulfilled when the NT writers were writing the NT.

It's a very simple concept to understand. However, you won't like it because it's a major problem for Darby's false teachings.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
This is why D'ism is fundamentally irrational.

Yep.

Dispies are stuck trying to defend Darby's false teachings instead of believing what the Bible says.

It's why they twist the scripture into knots trying to make the Bible fit Darby's false teachings.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
That proves nothing but the fact that you have no answer to the points I made. Are you not aware that an "inheritance" and being a "heir" are integral parts of a Last Will and Testament?

It proves you wrong.

How about addressing Heb 8:6?

(Heb 8:6 KJV) But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.


Both the KJV and Strongs make it clear that the Greek word "diatheke" is translated as "covenant" in Heb 8:6.

So, please tell us how the phrase "was established" is a future event?
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Anderson preached alongside of Darby.

Darby was 41 years older than Anderson.

Darby was born in 1800, and invented Dispensationalism in 1830. Anderson wasn't born until 1841 (11 years after Darby invented Dispensationalism). Anderson heard Darby preach when he was a kid.

IOW, Anderson was a Darby Follower.

Your ideas came straight from the Jesuit Alcazar.

Nope.

I can give you countless examples of preterism from the early church fathers who lived hundreds of years before Alcazar.

However, none of you Darby Followers can show Dispensationalsim being taught before Darby invented it in 1830.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Jerry!!!
What do you read man? I have shown 100x in posts here at ECT that nothing in Heb 9-10's interp of Heb 8 on Jer 31 goes your direction. Nothing!!!

Darby Followers hate the book of Hebrews.

The book of Hebrews singlehandedly refutes Dispensationalism in one fell swoop.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Looks like heir is whining and crying in the woodshed.

heir does this often because she can't handle anyone who disagrees with her Acts 9/Bullingerism.

heir is upset because I brought up the New Covenant in this thread. heir's ridiculous theory about the "two groups" in Ephesians being both Gentiles stems from heir's total lack of understanding the difference in the covenants.

So, instead of heir discussing, and trying to back her ridiculous claim with scripture, she goes crying and whining to the woodshed.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame

(Heb 9:15) For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.


It wasn't the future as of the writing of Hebrews.

C'mon Little Johnny W, no matter how hard you try, you have to realize that you cannot defend the false teachings of John Nelson Darby.

Set yourself free....give up Darby's false teachings.
No, you stupid little armed weasel, post one verse in isolation-ist....you "argued,"admitted sodomite, gay boy,Catholic:
Christ Jesus didn't shed His blood, and then say, "Oh Wait", the covenant that I just shed my blood for won't happen for at least 2,000 years.


Yes, you moron, the LORD God's pattern in the book, was/is, ratified/established,then enacted inaugurated, often years later.



You want examples, you stupid moron?

The punk did not touch that.


When was the "Abrahamic Covenant" ratified/established? When was it/will it be enacted inaugurated?When was David, the "Davidic Covenant," ratified/established as king, and when was he inaugurated, his kingship enacted?

Answer, punk.

How did you get so stupid, little arms Craigie?

Abraham was promised land-how long did it take, before that provision of the OC was enacted, inaugurated, you sickly looking, demonic weasel?

In the Abrahamic covenant, God unconditionally promised a seed(son) to Abraham and Sarah; when was that provision of the covenant fulfilled/enacted/inaugurated, gay little arms boy?

In the Davidic covenant, one of the terms of this unconditional covenant was that from David's seed, one would come who would "build an house for my name"(2 Samuel 7:13 KJV). That did not occur for how many years, sissy Craigie?
Christ Jesus didn't shed His blood, and then say, "Oh Wait", the covenant that I just shed my blood for won't happen for at least 2,000 years

Vs.

Genesis 3:15 KJV

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”

How long, you demonic idiot, was it from the promise, in Genesis 3 KJV, and the fulfillment/enactment, sweetie pie?


Craigie: The LORD God did not kick Adam and Eve out of Eden, promise a redeemer, to kick your father, the serpent's but, Oh Wait, this but kicking won't happen for at thousands of years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Craigie:2 Peter 3:4

And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.


Slower, you stupid moron...

Granted- The one sacrifice of the Lord Christ is the basis of every provision.


Hebrews 7:22 KJV


22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.

=the Lord Jesus Christ is now the guarrantee of a better covenant/testament

Why is the Saviour, during this age, the guarantee of a better covenant? He guarantees it, only because the Lord Jesus Christ has not yet enacted/inaugurated the better covenant. If the Saviour had already enacted it, no need for the guarantee would exist. Get it?

Hebrews 8 KJV
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.


This contrasts the OC given "through" Moses, a prophet,His servant, with the NC, coming through the Lord Jesus Christ, "the prophet." The better covenant stands upon better promises Yet the Jesus Christ still mediates the better covenant in the third heaven.

Just as the enactment of the "Mosaic Covenant" with national Israel did not occur until Moses came down from the mountain, as STP has often pointed out, the enactment of the NC with national Israel awaits the Lord Christ’s return apart from sin, for salvation, per Hebrews 8:8–13 KJV, Hebrews 9:28 KJV, Romans 11:26–32 KJV. While servant/prophet/mdeiator Moses was on the mount,mediating the covenant, the childfren of Israel were in unbelief. The LORD God wanted them to "get lost"-out of His presence. However, Moses, the mediator,interceded for them and established the OCt with the nation of Israel after a second attempt. Covenant ratification occurred while Moses was on the mountain (Exodus 19:3—24:3 KJV, but enactment did not happen until Moses descended from that mountain, and the people agreed to the terms of the OC-Exodus 24:3-7 KJV
 
Last edited:

glorydaz

Well-known member
Aarghh . . . no sinners can believe, until they are first forgiven and regenerated to new spiritual life; and given new spiritual capacity (new heart, mind, will, eyes & ears) that enables any to believe the Gospel of Grace in Jesus Christ.

Nang has conniption fits whenever people talk about the Gospel being the Power of God unto Salvation. :sigh:
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
How about addressing Heb 8:6?

(Heb 8:6 KJV) But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

As I have already demonstrated the Lord Jesus is the Mediator of a better diatheke, and the better diatheke is His last will and Testament, the gospel.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No, you stupid little armed weasel, post one verse in isolation....Yes, you moron, the LORD God's pattern in the book, was/is, ratified/established,then enacted inaugurated, often years later.



You want examples, you stupid moron?


When was the "Abrahamic Covenant" ratified/established? When was it/will it be enacted inaugurated?When was David, the "Davidic Covenant," ratified/established as king, and when was he inaugurated, his kingship enacted?


How did you get so stupid, little arms Craigie?

Er,no.

(Exodus 24:8) Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, "This is the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words."

As we see above "has made" was not an event that would happen in the future.

Now, lets jump to the first century:

(Hebrews 8:13) By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

Once again, we find "has made". Not a future event.

No matter how hard you Darby Followers try, your Dispensationalism cannot stand the test of scripture.

Give it up Little Johnny W....Darby was wrong...quit being a follower of his false teachings.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
As I have already demonstrated the Lord Jesus is the Mediator of a better diatheke, and the better diatheke is His last will and Testament, the gospel.

COVENANT!

The Greek word "diatheke" means "covenant" in Heb 8:6.

No matter how hard you Darby Followers try, you can't make Heb 8:6 fit into Darby's false teachings.

Dispensationalism is a mess.
 
Top