Why "some" Christians reject the Jews, and the rest forgive them.

[Shocker]

One of the ECF's wrote that the revelation applied to the events of first century judea, BUT that a second applicatiion would apply to the fall of rome and the end of the roman 'world' or global world depending on which writer.That was the concept they had as the wrote about still future events and 'comings'. The dispensatiinal futurist and fundamentalusts applied these writings to a still future end of the world when the intent was the end of the judaic and pagan world.


A few of the doctrines we prophess as "Christinan' and of God (who says he is GOOD) may actually stem from Ireneous and a few others and NOT GOD/CHRIST.

When you post garbage like this, you shouldn't be wondering why nobody takes you serious on this forum.

Just saying..

 

[Notrash]

I don't need to.
If you reject Paul, you are rejecting the commandments of God.

Its that simple.

1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
If you think the epistles are just letters that support the Bible, you wholeheartedly missed the point of why Christ chose Paul in the first place.
The epistles are Holy Scripture, and all scripture is God breathed.
Sorry, I cant force you to understand this.

Yes, you do need to. The verses quoted say the ecact opposite of what yours said. They say that his words are NOT commands. Thus the 'command' of ch 14 applies only to that subject at hand and not all his epistles.

That the epistles are not equated as "scripture" and "God breathed" was already proven

Again, Paul said that Timothy read the holy scriptures fm a child and they were "God breathed" and sufficient to lead him to faith etc. Did Timothy have this letter or any of Pauls letters as "scriptures" to read as a child? NO. He's referring to the OT "Graphe". Thus Pauls not referring to his own letters as God breathed in 2 Tim 3:15,16.

Likewise in 2 Peter 3. The focus in Peters 'copy' and paragraph is to say that these unstable and unlearned men twist or wrest the message of Paul's letters AND the Graphe similarly. It is NOT to equate the epistle and graphe as scriptures so the epistles can then be called "GOD BREATHED".

Both ideas and supports are violatiin against the laws of grammer, reason and composition.

So, your left with no support for the man-made doctri.e of verbal, plenary "INSPIRATION" except the need to declare it to apply a literal/futurist hermeneutic.

When Paul writes (actuaæly his writer) to greet Pricilla and Acquilla, do you ho hunting P&A so you can obey the "command of God? No???? Sinner????

 

[Shocker]

Yes, you do need to. The verses quoted say the ecact opposite of what yours said. They say that his words are NOT commands. Thus the 'command' of ch 14 applies only to that subject at hand and not all his epistles.

That the epistles are not equated as "scripture" and "God breathed" was already proven

Again, Paul said that Timothy read the holy scriptures fm a child and they were "God breathed" and sufficient to lead him to faith etc. Did Timothy have this or any of Pauls
letters

Pauls testimony is of God.

Im sorry if that bothers you..

 

[Notrash]

Pauls testimony is of God.

Im sorry if that bothers you..

It doesn't bother me at all to say that his understandigs and ineræretation/appæication to his first century audiencd (and many extendable principles and teachings) were acurate and that they are Important (divinely ordained) to have available to review, but thats not whats implied by claiming "god breathed" as being prophetic in theme.

Re-read the last post if you (or others following along) wish. I edited and added after posting.

This has been an important topic to delve into as it gets to some of the root reasons for different interpretations/understandings.

I hope others coming along may glean understanding , logic, reason and rational.

 

[Shocker]

It doesn't bother me at all to say that his understandigs and ineræretation/appæication to his first century audiencd (and many extendable principles and teachings) were acurate and that they are Important (divinely ordained) to have available to review, but thats not whats implied by claiming "god breathed" as being prophetic in theme.

Re-read the last post if you (or others following along) wish. I edited and added after posting.

This has been an important topic to delve into as it gets to some of the root reasons for different interpretations/understandings. I hope others coming along may glean understanding , logic, reason and rationalle.

Are we quite finished?

You keep working on whether or not Pauls words are from God (Jesus Christ).


Ill keep reading the Bible and trying to be a better Christ like individual.

Deal?

 

[Old Timer]

I'd say that Paul's writings are some of the deepest things of God.. moreso than any other portion.. while holding that all scripture is limitless in its power to speak to the human heart and mind.

Probably because Paul's primary audience is the church of God.. which is the Lamb's wife to be..

I would think that the Lamb's wife is going to be extremely privy to the deep things of God.. the most intimate etc..

Because the church of God is the Lamb's wife..

Perhaps the closest thing to His heart besides His Father..?

Dare I say..

 

[Notrash]

Are we quite finished?

You keep working on whether or not Pauls words are from God (Jesus Christ).


Ill keep reading the Bible and trying to be a better Christ like individual.

Deal?

A point of the difference of hermeneutic and points we've been bringing out is that a Person may be following the bad /futurist news of Ireneous and his second century literal/futurist viewpoints, or follow Paul and not the good news of life through God and Christ.

It's been a good discussionþand exposure. And we didn't even bring 1 Peters 1 into view.

 

[Shocker]

It's been a good discussionþand exposure. And we didn't even bring 1 Peters 1 into view.

is English your first language?