Did God put Israel's covenant on hold?

Right Divider

Body part
Paul said he was preaching the same gospel:
[1Co 15:9, 11 NET] 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. ... 11 Whether then it was I or they [the other apostles], this is the way we preach and this is the way you believed.
Fantastic job of confirmation bias.
1Co 15:11 KJV Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.
This does NOT say that they preached the IDENTICAL THING.
Php 4:15 KJV Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only.
Paul left Macedonia IN THE BEGINNING OF THE GOSPEL.
That gospel included a kingdom message:
[Act 20:25 NKJV] 25 "And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more.
"kingdom message"? Note that Paul does NOT say that he taught the GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM... because he did not.
And it included repentance:
[Act 20:21 NKJV] 21 "testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
Irrelevant. Everyone ... regardless of which gospel, needs to repent.

Your blinders appear to be permanently attached.

P.S. There is a reason that Paul uses the phrase/term "MY GOSPEL".
 
Last edited:

Derf

Well-known member
There is a reason that Paul uses the phrase/term "MY GOSPEL".
Yes--it was because he was preaching it. He also used the terms:
"the gospel"
"the gospel of God"
"the gospel of Christ"
"the gospel about Christ"
"this gospel"
"the gospel of your salvation"

And he used "the gospel" in connection with Peter:
[Gal 2:14 NET] 14 But when I saw that they were not behaving consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "If you, although you are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you try to force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"

If it was a different gospel, that Peter was not preaching or advocating or was supposed to be subject to, why would Peter need to be told to behave in accordance with it.

You're making it out to be a different gospel when it isn't. You're making yourself to be a divider of believers into different camps. You should stop.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Yes--it was because he was preaching it. He also used the terms:
"the gospel"
"the gospel of God"
"the gospel of Christ"
"the gospel about Christ"
"this gospel"
"the gospel of your salvation"

And he used "the gospel" in connection with Peter:
[Gal 2:14 NET] 14 But when I saw that they were not behaving consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "If you, although you are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you try to force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"

If it was a different gospel, that Peter was not preaching or advocating or was supposed to be subject to, why would Peter need to be told to behave in accordance with it.

You're making it out to be a different gospel when it isn't. You're making yourself to be a divider of believers into different camps. You should stop.
The gospel of the kingdom is about the SOON appearing (at hand) of the kingdom of Israel (i.e., their restoration to their place of honor above the nations [gentiles]).
The gospel of the grace of God is NOT about that.... hence they are DIFFERENT.

I won't stop telling the truth; no matter how many times you tell me falsehoods.

P.S. That you cannot tell the gospels apart and do your best to make them appear the same is something that you should stop.

P.P.S. I do NOT "divide believers into different camps" (whatever you're trying to mean by that). I'm simply dividing the Bible the way that it requires based on the plan meaning of words and the context of those words.
 

Idolater

"Lahey, I live in a tent!"
Temp Banned
The gospel of the kingdom is about the SOON appearing (at hand) of the kingdom of Israel (i.e., their restoration to their place of honor above the nations [gentiles]).
Number of times each is found in the KJV NT:
Kingdom of God 70
Kingdom of Heaven 33
Kingdom of Israel 0
 

Right Divider

Body part
Number of times each is found in the KJV NT:
Kingdom of God 70
Kingdom of Heaven 33
Kingdom of Israel 0
Now you've gone full retard. I guess you think that there is "no kingdom of Israel". 🤪
Are you ignorant of the fact that the "kingdom of heaven" is the future kingdom of Israel?

RC members are some of THE most Biblically ignorant Christians.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Beg to differ.

1st Corinthians 10
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.

28 But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:


Galatians 4
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Confer:
Hebrews 12
22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
I couldn't care less what you beg to differ about. Paul EXPLICITLY said that idols are nothing and to not allow anyone to judge you concerning the food you eat. He taught this just two chapters before the verse you quoted and then you INTENTIONALLY left out the portion of I Corinthians 10 that directly contradicts your dogma!

I Corinthians 10:25 Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake; 26 for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”
27 If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience’ sake. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This was offered to idols,” do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience’ sake; [i]for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.” 29 “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? 30 But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks?
31 Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, 33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Once again, your doctrine blinds you to God's word because you bring your dogma to the reading of it (a priori). Your entire theological world view doesn't even need the bible at all, or at most has only a cursory need for it. It makes no difference what the bible actually teaches, its what your dogma teaches that comes first. After that, you'll find some way to take the bible fit. You can skim any sections you don't like on your way to the part that tickles your ears.

Clete
 

Idolater

"Lahey, I live in a tent!"
Temp Banned
John 18
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
John 18
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
That's your response? What a pathetic joke. A subtantive discussion that last all of two whole posts. Yippee!

Once again, your dogma blinds you to God's word! Even the verses you quote are ripped out of their context and are used to defend things that they say nothing at all about. You do this because you don't give a damn about the context. You don't read the bible to learn anything other than how to prop up your dogma. You're really no different at all from the likes of David Koresh and Jim Jones, both of whom could quote the bible to you all day long in "defense" of their twisted doctrine.

I don't even see why you bother reading the bible at all except perhaps to qualm that queezy feeling you must have in your gut about the pathetic weakness of your position. I couldn't live with myself if my entire worldview hung on such a weak foundation. Why don't you just admit, if not to me then at least to yourself, that the bible really have basically nothing at all to do with the things that you believe or why you believe them?

Clete
 

Idolater

"Lahey, I live in a tent!"
Temp Banned
Colossians 1
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
 

Right Divider

Body part
Colossians 1
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
KINGDOM does NOT have a SINGULAR meaning in scripture. There is MORE than ONE kingdom.
Your perpetual blinders keep you in darkness.

Paul refers to God's invisible heavenly kingdom.
The gospel of the kingdom is about a kingdom of Christ (i.e., the King of Israel) on the earth.

THIS is the kingdom that Christ was referring to while He was on the earth preaching the gospel of the kingdom:
Mat 21:42-45 KJV Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? (43) Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. (44) And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. (45) And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.
 

Derf

Well-known member
I couldn't care less what you beg to differ about.
"So let me now spend the rest of my post commenting on what you beg to differ about."
Paul EXPLICITLY said that idols are nothing and to not allow anyone to judge you concerning the food you eat. He taught this just two chapters before the verse you quoted and then you INTENTIONALLY left out the portion of I Corinthians 10 that directly contradicts your dogma!

I Corinthians 10:25 Eat whatever is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for conscience’ sake; 26 for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.”
27 If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience’ sake. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This was offered to idols,” do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience’ sake; [i]for “the earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness.” 29 “Conscience,” I say, not your own, but that of the other. For why is my liberty judged by another man’s conscience? 30 But if I partake with thanks, why am I evil spoken of for the food over which I give thanks?
31 Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, 33 just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Here's the thing. If idols are nothing, and it doesn't matter if anyone eats meat sacrificed to idols, why do Jews have to abstain from eating meat sacrificed to idols? Is God's command to them of no import? Does that then say something about all the rest of the commands the Jews are still supposed to be keeping, according to the Kingdom of Israel rules? Or is there some way to discern why Paul says both that the idols are nothing and that those things sacrificed to idols are sacrificed to devils?

Paul was concerned both for his readers' freedom in Christ and their spiritual state if they were participating in the worship of devils. If, therefore, you are eating meat sacrificed to idols as if the idols were really something, instead of nothing, then that's not good for you in some ways (for conscience sake), especially if it leads to idol worship or sexual immorality, which was part of the Greek temple worship. And Paul is explicit about not lusting after evil things, or committing idolatry or sexual immorality:
[1Co 10:6-8 NKJV] 6 Now these things became our examples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted. 7 And do not become idolaters as [were] some of them. As it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." 8 Nor let us commit sexual immorality, as some of them did, and in one day twenty-three thousand fell;
 

Idolater

"Lahey, I live in a tent!"
Temp Banned
KINGDOM [sic] does NOT [sic] have a SINGULAR [sic] meaning in scripture. There is MORE [sic] than ONE [sic] kingdom.
So it stands to reason that 'gospel of the kingdom' also might not have a singular meaning. That there might be more than one 'gospel of the kingdom'.

By your reasoning.
Your perpetual blinders keep you in darkness.

Paul refers to God's invisible heavenly kingdom.
Huh. Christ speaks of 'the kingdom of heaven' in Matthew's Gospel.
The gospel of the kingdom is about a kingdom of Christ (i.e., the King of Israel) on the earth.
Huh.

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

How does a kingdom "on the earth" "cometh not with observation"?
THIS is the kingdom that Christ was referring to while He was on the earth preaching the gospel of the kingdom:
Matthew 21 doesn't conflict with my view. It is not inconsistent with my view.
 

Right Divider

Body part
So it stands to reason that 'gospel of the kingdom' also might not have a singular meaning. That there might be more than one 'gospel of the kingdom'.
The gospel of the kingdom is defined in scripture. It's easy to see if you weren't blinded.
Mar 1:14-15 KJV Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, (15) And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
This is the "kingdom of God" that Christ was talking about:
Mat 21:43 KJV Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Huh. Christ speaks of 'the kingdom of heaven' in Matthew's Gospel.
The kingdom of heaven is a kingdom ON THE EARTH.
Mat 6:10 KJV Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
Huh.

Luke 17
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

How does a kingdom "on the earth" "cometh not with observation"?

Matthew 21 doesn't conflict with my view. It is not inconsistent with my view.
Classic cherry-picking without understanding.

Christ's point was you won't have to GUESS when the kingdom really does arrive. It was NOT that it wouldn't be visible.

Your lack of knowledge of the hundreds of prophecies about the kingdom is amazing... or at least would be, if you were not a Catholic. Catholics are some of the most Biblically ignorant Christians.
 
Last edited:

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
"So let me now spend the rest of my post commenting on what you beg to differ about."
Are you seriously unable to follow simple converstion?

I was saying that your personal opinions do nothing to advance your case. Your desire to differ does not trump the explicit teaching of God's word!

The point is that you need to do something more than merely state your position and pull single sentence proof texts out of random spots in the bible.

Make an argument!
Here's the thing. If idols are nothing, and it doesn't matter if anyone eats meat sacrificed to idols, why do Jews have to abstain from eating meat sacrificed to idols?
The question answers itself!

The Jews abstain from all kinds of things BECAUSE they are Jews. And I do not mean because they are ethnically Jewish (although most of them are that too) but that they are under the law of Moses. Being subject to the law means that there is a whole list of things that Jews must not eat, including, but not limited to, the eating of meat sacrificed to idols. This includes all of the believers who came to Christ before God cut off of Israel and turned instead to the Gentiles through Paul who preached the Gospel of Grace rather than the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus and the Twelve preached.

Those saved under the gospel of the kingdom (i.e. the Dispensation of Circumcision) remained under the law until their natural death for "For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (Romans 11:29), thus Peter agreed with Paul that he (Peter) and the other Apostles who remain in Jerusalem and minister to the Circumcision believers while Paul went to the whole rest of the world. (Galatians 2)

Paul was concerned both for his readers' freedom in Christ and their spiritual state if they were participating in the worship of devils. If, therefore, you are eating meat sacrificed to idols as if the idols were really something, instead of nothing, then that's not good for you in some ways (for conscience sake), especially if it leads to idol worship or sexual immorality, which was part of the Greek temple worship. And Paul is explicit about not lusting after evil things, or committing idolatry or sexual immorality:
[1Co 10:6-8 NKJV] 6 Now these things became our examples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted. 7 And do not become idolaters as [were] some of them. As it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." 8 Nor let us commit sexual immorality, as some of them did, and in one day twenty-three thousand fell;
Paul was concerned about causing unnecessary offense. He was teaching people to consider the other more highly than themselves and therefore not to allow their freedom to cause others to stumble. The passages we are talking about are not written in code. They are as easy to understand as they are to read. The only cause of your confusion is that you refuse to acknowledge the Paul wasn't talking to Messianic Jews but to Christians saved under grace who has no need for the law except as a tool to convict potential converts of their sin and need of a savior. Indeed, Paul's entire ministry has to do with constantly telling his followers not to allow themselves to be placed under the law. That was a primary theme in nearly all of his writings, including the Corinthian letters.

Clete
 
Last edited:

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Here's the thing. If idols are nothing, and it doesn't matter if anyone eats meat sacrificed to idols, why do Jews have to abstain from eating meat sacrificed to idols?

Because the Jews are under different House rules (oikonomia) than the Body of Christ.

Things that are different are not the same...

Is God's command to them of no import?

Of course it's important.

Does that then say something about all the rest of the commands the Jews are still supposed to be keeping, according to the Kingdom of Israel rules?

All of them are important, as Jesus said in Matthew 5:19.

Or is there some way to discern why Paul says both that the idols are nothing and that those things sacrificed to idols are sacrificed to devils?

OIKONOMIA

Paul was concerned both for his readers' freedom in Christ and their spiritual state if they were participating in the worship of devils. If, therefore, you are eating meat sacrificed to idols as if the idols were really something, instead of nothing, then that's not good for you in some ways (for conscience sake), especially if it leads to idol worship or sexual immorality, which was part of the Greek temple worship. And Paul is explicit about not lusting after evil things, or committing idolatry or sexual immorality:
[1Co 10:6-8 NKJV] 6 Now these things became our examples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things as they also lusted. 7 And do not become idolaters as [were] some of them. As it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." 8 Nor let us commit sexual immorality, as some of them did, and in one day twenty-three thousand fell;

Romans 6:1
 
Top