DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 12, 2017, 10:19:20 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
277965 Posts in 26514 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16
31  Theology / Debate / Re: Is Matt 26:20-29 for us today ??? on: January 07, 2011, 05:34:03 PM
Ok so then again what exactly was your original point?

 Hi Bother Jerry and here are  THE  main points .

 #1 ,  Matt 26 , and the Gospels are for Israel !!!

 #2 , There is only  ONE  NEW  COVENANT  , and that was given to Israel , like Jer 31;31  ,  Heb 8:8  ,  and Ezek 36:25-27  and we see the context is  ALL  Israel .

 #3 , This means that the Passover and the blood on the door posts is all Jewish and not for the Body of Christ >

 dan p
32  Theology / Debate / Re: Is Matt 26:20-29 for us today ??? on: January 07, 2011, 01:54:49 PM
But with #2 you did not ask anything.  It was a statement, there were exclamation points, not questions markes at the end of the sentence. 

And yep, Paul referred to the last supper with the Apostles in 1 Corinthians 11, which reflects that the tradition of doing the Lords Supper continued as a reflection of what happened that night.  Not certain how you get 2 covenants out of that...which seems to be typical in that you say things, but never really say your point.
And your point is?  With the shedding of Jesus blood there is a new covenant, not arguing that point, unless you were trying to make a different point earlier.  As to many....many is all who would receive it, the actual number is irrelevant, specially since "many" is a relatively subjective word itself.
There are not 2 new covenants.  There is the covenant of Christ which is a new Covenant, but it is to the Jews as well as the Gentiles. And there is the old Covenant which is to the Jews. 


 Hi Brother Jerry and I agree with you that there are  NOT  2  New Covenants , but there some dispendationalists that say there are 2 , because of what is written in 1  Cor 11:25 nwhere  DIATHEKE  is used , but Eph 2:12 refutes  that argument .  dan p
33  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 07, 2011, 01:45:25 PM
Hi Jerry

I reallly didn't want to go that far in this discussion but since asked I shall in a nutshell do so.  Some religions, Jehovah's Witnessess for example depend upon their  special writers for their truths.  I  am persuaded such is true of  dispensationalism as can clearly be seem by names of men and books  entered into the thread.  I have no time for such confusion!

God bless,
duval

Hi duval , and who I follow is Paul , since he is the one that follows Christ as Paul writes by the Holy Spirit .


 In  1 Cor 11:1 says , Be ye  FOLLOWERS/ IMITATORS  of me  , even as I also am of Christ  .


 What it means is , " you become " is a command to become followers as Paul leads  .

Then in  1 Cor 4:16 Paul writes by the Holy Spirit , "  Therefore ,  I encourage you , become  (   a  command  )   IMITATORS   of me  .


 Check out  Eph 5::1  ,  Phil 3:17  speak in the same way , "  become IMITATORS " .

 These writers , like Charles Baker ,  C R Stam , Les Feldick and Robert C  Brock  all write of Dispensationalism as Paul has also written and follow Paul . 

 dan p
34  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 06, 2011, 06:46:28 PM
That figures!

Respectfully,
duval

 Hi , and if you have figured it out , what is Dispensationalism , so start a new thread , why not Huh
35  Theology / Debate / Re: Is Matt 26:20-29 for us today ??? on: January 06, 2011, 06:44:04 PM
 

#5 "The context is Jewish, is that really true?"  Again no direction here, that seems like something out of the blue.  Jesus was speaking at the Passover meal and used that as a platform.  The Passover being an instruction of the Jews in the OT...and Jesus, if you did not notice, upheld the Laws of Moses.  Again not certain where you were trying to go with this one.

(the unnumbered) "Where is the Lord's Supper for the Body of Christ?" C'mon get more specific, what are you referring too here? 

[/quote]

 Hi Bother Jerry and I will have to say that Many there are 2 New Covenants , one for Israel and one for the Body of Christ .

 But , I will have to later show that the verse 29 is yet future .

 If you read 1 Cor 11:17-32 are the standards that are set for the Body of Christ , the Lord's table !!!
36  Theology / Debate / Re: Is Matt 26:20-29 for us today ??? on: January 06, 2011, 06:06:33 PM


#2 "blood of the new Covenant."  Not certain your point here except to point out the obvious of what the verse states.

#3 "This supper is for the Remission of Sins."  WHOA?  WHAT?  This was the Passover Meal that they were partaking of.  Do you know what the Passover is?  The meal is NOT for the remission of sins.  The Passover is to symbolize giving thanks to God for sparing Israel at the hands of Egypt.   I have no idea where you get the notion that the meal was for the remission of sins. 

  Hi Bother Jerry , and point #2 , is the Greek word  DIATHEKE  , where many Translate it by the following English words ;
 #1 , contract
 #2 , covenant
 #3 , new testament
 #4 , agreement
 #5 arrangement
 #6 , will

 In 1 Cor 11:25 , the Greek word  DIATHEKE is also used , and does that mean the there are  2  New  Covenants ? and that is why I   ASKED  it like that !!!

 And  WHOA  , here is what Matt 26:28 says "  My blood in the New Testament/New Covenant/  DIATHEKE  , which is shed for  MANY  for the  REMISSION of  SINS , and here it is !!!!

 What does Jesus mean , " which is shed for the  MANY Huh

 How many is  MANY Huh

 Maybe 12 persons , or 10,000 people or maybe 1,000,000 people Huh
37  Theology / Debate / Is Matt 26:20-29 for us today ??? on: January 06, 2011, 02:58:17 PM
Hi to all , and in time past , my Assembly used this verses to keep the Lord's Supper .

 #1 ,  in verse 26 , "  Take , eat , this is my body "  and is this the Body of Christ ??   NO !!

 #2 , And in verse 28 , He says , "  my blood of the New Testament/Covenant/ DIATHEKE  " !!!!

 #3 , This supper is for the  Remission of Sins , is this for today Huh

 #4 , Then in verse Christ will drink it anew with you in My Fathers Kingdom or Millennial Kingdom , is this for us today ??

 #5 , The context is Jewish , is that really true ??

 So , where is the Lord's supper for the Body of Christ ??
38  Theology / Debate / Re: The "GRACE" Movement (Hot Potato!) on: January 06, 2011, 02:33:33 PM
Dan,
 Like I've said, I'm rather new to Pauline diispensational thought but find it quite intriguing.
So no I have not heard of Les Feldick.
And yes I do like what I have read of these Pauline teachers including Brock.
What is your take on Miles Stanford? Pauline yet Acts 2. It was through his teachings that eventually I got  hooked on the mid-Acts view, HA.


 Hi prism , and those I have seen his name many times on christian forums , I have yet to read any of his teachings .

 I , have stayed with Charles Baker and C R Stam and then learned of Robert C  Brock and had the pleasure to meet him in home in St Petersburg  Florida and support his ministry .   He is 80 years old and is slowing down , but still writes a Journal on Pauline Dispensationalism .

 Most of what I posted on this site and on many other sites is  original with me , those I do use his material .  Les Feldick is more well known on the East coast and mid-west , and is on TV , DAN P
39  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 06, 2011, 02:24:09 PM
I am not familiar with the work of "Brock".  Thayer has long been recognized by many as the standard when it comes to Greek. English lexicons.  He does not agree with Brock, see pg. 555.---God bless, duval

 Hi duval and the only one that know of Brock are Pauline Dispensationalists , like  C R Stam and Paul Sadler of Berean Bible Society and those that follow dispensational teaching .
40  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 06, 2011, 02:18:52 PM
Just what it says, but just in case, let's put the whole verse here.

Ephesians 3:6 to be specific, that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel, (NASB)

So that the Gentiles through Jesus are now heirs to the kingdom of heaven, just like the Jews were before.  That the Gentiles are part of the same body of Christ, that the Jews were before, that the Gentiles were now partakers of the promise which is eternal life through Jesus Christ, just as the Jews were before.

 Hi Bother Jerry , so where is the verse that says the Gentiles are now heirs to  " the Kingdom of Heaven "??
41  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 05, 2011, 05:51:45 PM
Thanks PR....was getting busy at work, so did not have chance to dig up more.  But that was one I was heading too Smiley

 Hi Bother Jerry , since you were headed to Eph 3:6 , can you tell me your understanding as to what this verse means ??
42  Theology / Debate / Re: How are Gentiles SAVED in the Millennium ?? on: January 05, 2011, 05:37:32 PM
WGT....DUH....sorry had a moment of brain flatulence. 

So how does it being WGT have anything to do with the judgment in Rev 20.  Sorry you just had not explained your stance on that and how that has any relevance.

 Hi Bother Jerry and I am still trying to figure out why I said that ??

 But you know Jerry , you have not replied to post #18 , #20 or #24 , and many others ,

so stop dancing and at least reply , for I am feeling that your bible knowledge is very lacking !!!

 And talk about  NOT  present verses , what is the problem ??

 If, you just want to ask questions fine , but you are not taking no stand  !!!
43  Theology / Debate / Re: The "GRACE" Movement (Hot Potato!) on: January 05, 2011, 01:49:41 PM
It's in the perfect passive which means God had done the action. Don't you think that often a completed action from God's side  has it's outworking (within time) . For example our sanctification is a completed action by God and yet in time it has it's out workings amongst ourselves. Paul was separated unto the Gospel at a particular point and yet it is in the 'continual results' that we see a transition into this present dispensation.
 Greek is fine with the skeletal work but sooner or later flesh and bones need to be added which comes from context and Scripture interpreting Scripture. It just seems to be an awkward jump to conclude from Rom 1:1 that (Scripture says) this present dispensation 'exactly' began at so in so or such and such.
 I believe Stam's statement on pg.176 is a fair one, and why torture his position any further?...
""We believe that Paul's conversion and call to apostleship marks the beginning of the new dispensation and of the Body of Christ."

 Hi prism , and I am not trying to say that C R Stam is a bad bible teacher and even Stam used Greek words in his exposition and in his teaching .

 The verb tense is mostly avoided and as I have said , that I learned the Grace Message from Stam .  Most have never heard of R C  Brock and yet Stam and Brock were good friends and Stam stayed in Brock's home on many occasions and were good friends and my only regret is , that I did never meet Stam face to face .

 Have you heard of Les Feldick , another good Dispensationalist , who is mostly seen back East on TV , and has also spoken at Grace Bible College .

 The fact remains , that , not all that say they are Dispensationalist agree , do they ??

 The fact also remains that Rom 1:1 is true and can be  VERIFIED .

 Remember , that translations are  NOT  INSPIRED  and there no thing  such as   DOUBLE  INSPIRATION .  DAN P
44  Theology / Debate / Re: How are Gentiles SAVED in the Millennium ?? on: January 05, 2011, 01:32:17 PM
WGT?

 Hi Bother Jerry and  WGT means Western Greek Text and is also known by the following names ;

 #1 , Minority Text
 #2 , Alexandrian  Text
 #3 , Westcott and Hort Text
 #4 , Nestle's Text
 #5 , Nestle-Aland Text

 One of the main objections in accepting the  WGT  is its attitude as a whole , toward the Lord Jesus Christ .The part of the NEW  TESTAMENT  that shows any respect for the Lord is in the epistles of Paul .

The  WGT  , in this sense , is more Pauline than the  RECEIVED  TEXT , which is why 61 , readings have been taken from it

 dan p
45  Theology / Debate / Re: What 1 Tim 1:15 and 16 mean ?? on: January 05, 2011, 01:17:43 PM
[quote author.
What about Peter, James, John, and the other 8?  What about the people in mentiond there in Acts 2:47 where it says that "the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved"?

 Hi Brother Jerry , so lets begin with  " what about Peter , James , John and the other 8 " ??

 So , what about them  Huh   Are they in the Body of Christ ?? 

 Where is your verse for that Huh

 dan p

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 16



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2016 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media