When you have to resort to child-like tactics, it shows you don't have a good defense of your position.
But, such is life for a Darby Follower such as yourself.
ECT "Things that are different" included Gentiles
- Thread starter heir
- Start date
When you have to resort to child-like tactics, it shows you don't have a good defense of your position.
But, such is life for a Darby Follower such as yourself.
Caught, in another lie, from his confused, invented AD 70-ism....
I asked him, when the OC ended?
His response?: AD 70.
I asked him if the OC, included the law?
And yet,
Catch that lie? The law ended at the cross...But the OC, which included the law, did not end until AD 70.
Watch him spin it, lie, side step, peppered with a few "Darby" "Hail Mary's." Watch...
Take a seat, you AD 70-ist/Preterist clown......Stay down on the mat....TOL is seeing you bloodied.
Pentecost was kept "post cross"-part of the law
Yet...."The law was nailed to the cross," according to Craigie pie.
Sit, loser,
Watch the side step....Darby.....Watch...
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I never said that. Of course the things which He said would happen before he returns to set up the earthly kingdom would come to pass. But as I said, if the children of Israel would have repented then the earthly kingdom would have remained in view.
Good catch.
No lie, just you being confused again.
Go back and study why the Israelites could not enter the Promised Land, and had to wonder in the desert for 40 years. HINT: 30AD to 70AD was 40 years.
Specifically, the part where circumcision was required under the law, but not one male was circumcised during those 40 years.
(Joshua 5:5) All the people that came out had been circumcised, but all the people born in the wilderness during the journey from Egypt had not.
The law ended at the cross.
The OC ended in 70AD.
No catch, just you guys being ignorant of scripture.
What does that mean Jerry?
Let's say the children of Israel would have repented before Stephen. What would have happened?
Was your law that ended at the cross part of different covenant than your covenant that ended in 70AD?
The Law and the Prophets was the OC.
Matthew 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.
Matthew 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 23:2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 7:52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 7:53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
Nonsense, He is talking about what would happen out of His knowing Israel would not repent.
Luke 19:41 And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, 19:42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. 19:43 For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, 19:44 And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.
But the door was open for them to repent...until it was no longer open.
Said door was still open in Acts 3, for example.
Put away your theologically biased history books.
And while you are at it, put away your reasoning into such things absent of their whole, you Josephen Russellite :chuckle:
Nope.
If the door was still open in Acts 3, then everything Jesus said in Matt 24, Luke 21, Mark 13, Luke 19, etc. would have been false.
Like I said, you Darby Followers have to come up with theories in order to try and make the Bible fit your Dispensationalism.
Your theories cannot stand the test of scripture.
No.
He prophesied what He prophesied in His foreknowledge that He would be rejected.
Yours is the false witness.
Matthew 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
His foreknowledge included the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.
There was no "open door" after the cross. The NC had begun, and the OC was about to fade away, and be gone forever.
(Heb 8:6) 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.
No "open door" in Hebrews.
The NC "WAS ESTABLISHED".
Yet, most of you Darby Followers deny that the NC was established.
heir
TOL Subscriber
It can be shown by the scriptures and has been demonstrated over and over that the both made one (Ephesians 2:14 KJV) is:
1.Jews and Greeks gathered into the Body during Paul's Acts ministry. They were in the commonwealth of Israel and had a hope
And
2. The "you Gentiles", who in time past were without Christ being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world
heir
TOL Subscriber
Paul's inclusion of himself is the first (1 Timothy 1:16 KJV) of the "we" who "first trusted" (Ephesians 1:12 KJV). The Ephesians to whom he wrote the letter were the "ye" who also trusted (Ephesians 1:13 KJV). And then there were instances of him making an all inclusive declaration using "us" and "we" like in Ephesians 2:4-5 KJV.
Interplanner
Well-known member
lol, who on earth thinks that the 'lateness' of the worship of Diana has anything to do with the knowledge or maturity of believers at Ephesus?
btw, the destination of the letter is blank in the best originals. It was circulated widely.
There is no evidence of getting a blessing through civic or DNA Israel. It was of course a blessing to join its mission, which is where it was supposed to go anyway. Israel was supposed to be a light to the nations, not as a restored civic structure but in Christ and his message, Acts 13:47.