Fundamental NT question

[Interplanner]

"Through the Gospel,
the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel,
members together of one body,
and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus."
Eph 3:6

If there is a ton of unfinished business this does not mean, why not say so?

 

[riverrat]

"Through the Gospel,
the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel,
members together of one body,
and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus."
Eph 3:6

If there is a ton of unfinished business this does not mean, why not say so?

I will answer your question with a question.
Why should every verse say so?

 

[Interplanner]

Just the ones in that section (Eph 2B-3A). All those verses and nothing futurist; not a hint. Why?

 

[riverrat]

Just the ones in that section (Eph 2B-3A). All those verses and nothing futurist; not a hint. Why?

Be specific about the verses.

 

[Biblewriter]

"Through the Gospel,
the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel,
members together of one body,
and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus."
Eph 3:6

If there is a ton of unfinished business this does not mean, why not say so?

The reason is very simple. This scripture is not even speaking of the future. It is speaking of the here and now.

God had already said what is coming, and said it clearly, explicitly, and repeatedly. There was zero reason to say it again, particularly when the subject was something entirely different.

this is not a "fundamental NT question." It is a silly and unbelieving cavil.

 

[Interplanner]

These assertions are exactly what Paul's risked life is about. So his risk is "silly" to you. These assertions are why things like 1 Thess 2 had to be stated, and I can see why!

I do agree that they were here and now; exactly. That is what it was all about. The first chapter of Eph says this age was the one to follow the previous age of Judaism and it was now here and it had Christ reigning and resurrected over it!

 

[Biblewriter]

These assertions are exactly what Paul's risked life is about. So his risk is "silly" to you. These assertions are why things like 1 Thess 2 had to be stated, and I can see why!

I do agree that they were here and now; exactly. That is what it was all about. The first chapter of Eph says this age was the one to follow the previous age of Judaism and it was now here and it had Christ reigning and resurrected over it!

The scriptures, as you have already admitted, speak of a past age and a present age. But you ignore the fact that they also speak of an "age to come."

 

[Interplanner]

Heb 9:11, sir, says it is already here in Christ. The whole beauty of this was lost to me all my youth by the imaginations of D'ism.

The present vs the age to come was a construct of Judaism and the age to come had arrived. That claim also infuriated Judaism's leaders.

BW, you don't have to do this. You don't have to answer anything I write. You don't enjoy it. I don't expect you to change anything; I'm not in a contest about that. I do like people "looking" in on it to know that I can meet most objections easily enough.

 

[Biblewriter]

Heb 9:11, sir, says it is already here in Christ. The whole beauty of this was lost to me all my youth by the imaginations of D'ism.

The present vs the age to come was a construct of Judaism and the age to come had arrived. That claim also infuriated Judaism's leaders.

BW, you don't have to do this. You don't have to answer anything I write. You don't enjoy it. I don't expect you to change anything; I'm not in a contest about that. I do like people "looking" in on it to know that I can meet most objections easily enough.

Actually, you have not provided a valid answer to anything. You have only continued to present your wrested interpretations of everything the Holy Spirit said in both Testaments.

And the reason I feel a need to do this is because I fear that you might be able to convince a few unlearned and unstable souls with your wrested interpretations of the scriptures.

You continue to present your interpretations of the meanings of some scriptures that never actually say what you claim they mean, as an excuse to pretend that many more scriptures that say the very opposite do not mean what they actually say.

 

[Interplanner]

OK, so Heb 9:11 never imagined it was already here. I get it! It's BW futurism!

 

[Interplanner]

BW tagged:

You continue to present your interpretations of the meanings of some scriptures that never actually say what you claim they mean,

So I can't read "the promises to the fathers were fulfilled in the resurrection" and understand it to mean that the promises to the fathers were fulfilled in the resurrection. I have to ask BW first!

Now I see! That's why I couldn't read Heb 9:11 about the good things already here and believe they were already here. I have to consult the 2P2P manuals first! "The Gospel is about the after life; the promises to Israel are about this world" --BW

 

[Biblewriter]

OK, so Heb 9:11 never imagined it was already here. I get it! It's BW futurism!

Neither myself nor any other futurist I ever read even imagined that Hebrews 9:11 is future.

 

[Interplanner]

Good. It totally sounded that way in a thread linked in the thread now titled "BW doesn't allow this to be present tense."

Hebrews crushes 2P2P because it says the future things as D'ism lists them are now here. Because D'ism has fragmented the changes of heart by the Spirit from externals like real estate.

 

[Biblewriter]

BW tagged:

You continue to present your interpretations of the meanings of some scriptures that never actually say what you claim they mean,

So I can't read "the promises to the fathers were fulfilled in the resurrection" and understand it to mean that the promises to the fathers were fulfilled in the resurrection. I have to ask BW first!


Now I see! That's why I couldn't read Heb 9:11 about the good things already here and believe they were already here. I have to consult the 2P2P manuals first! "The Gospel is about the after life; the promises to Israel are about this world" --BW

As I have repeatedly said, you are wresting my words as badly as you wrest scripture when you claim that I ever even Implied that Hebrews 9:11 refers to the future.

 

[Interplanner]

Then I'm OK, because when reading that the promises are fulfilled in the resurrection, I understand the promises to be fulfilled in the resurrection! Great! Next question?

I do think you expressed frustration with Hebrews because you are 2P2P. it, however, is not.