Yes you have. Where is your millennium in those passages. It is time to produce biblical evidence. Your opinions mean nothing.Unbelievable. I deal with every scripture you post. I have evaded nothing.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yes you have. Where is your millennium in those passages. It is time to produce biblical evidence. Your opinions mean nothing.Unbelievable. I deal with every scripture you post. I have evaded nothing.
The complete thought is conveyed by two words: παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς As you rightly point out, the Greek word "παρεπιδήμοις" indicates foreigners who are living abroad. Putting this idea together with the Greek word "διασπορᾶς" which means "Israelites dispersed among foreign nations," we understand that Peter is speaking to Israelites who are living in foreign lands.1 Peter 1:1 Greek
3927 [e]
parepidēmois
παρεπιδήμοις
sojourners
Adj-DMP
"one who sojourns on earth: so of Christians, 1 Peter 1:1"
I'm confident that Strong's Greek is better than yours.![]()
I acknowledge the validity of that statement. Paul's argument primarily emphasizes that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross serves as the foundation for the New Covenant. Since the prophet Jeremiah foretold the establishment of this New Covenant, it implies that the old covenant is no longer necessary. However, I would like to highlight that the New Covenant consists of multiple components, and notably, the final aspect of this covenant has yet to be realized.Why not accept Hebrews 8:6-13?
So you claim. Why do you presume to know that our discernment is lacking while yours is not? Why do you presume that the text speaks directly to you and that we need your help to understand it?Are you just trying to stir up trouble? It speaks for itself to those with discernment who can see that it speaks plainly and straightforwardly. We take the time to explain that to those lacking in discernment.
That isn't the case, as I have already pointed out.It has all come to pass.
Not according to Paul.You're Israel.
I can speak for myself if you don't mind.Because that's the New Testament and he doesn't care much for that. He gets his understanding entirely from the Old Testament without allowing the New Testament to shed light on it.
Please consider the argument itself.What to believe?
1. God's promise to the House of Jacob and the House of Israel fulfilled at Calvary
2. Your denial
Hint?![]()
I have not made anything convoluted.Uh huh. That's called the church. So, that is who Peter was addressing. Very simple. You make simple things very convoluted for no reason.
Did you not understand that verses 5 and 6 are metaphorical while verse 9 is actual?He is speaking to and about the same people in verse 9 as he does in verses 5 and 6.
How do I explain spiritual discernment? Just read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. I believe you interpret scripture like the natural man.So you claim. Why do you presume to know that our discernment is lacking while yours is not? Why do you presume that the text speaks directly to you and that we need your help to understand it?
Yes, you most certainly have.I have not made anything convoluted.
Why do you answer questions with questions? Both are metaphorical. Do you not understand that verses 5 and 6 are speaking about the same people as verse 9?Did you not understand that verses 5 and 6 are metaphorical while verse 9 is actual?
Yes, Christian Israelites.The complete thought is conveyed by two words: παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς As you rightly point out, the Greek word "παρεπιδήμοις" indicates foreigners who are living abroad. Putting this idea together with the Greek word "διασπορᾶς" which means "Israelites dispersed among foreign nations," we understand that Peter is speaking to Israelites who are living in foreign lands.
And I can speak for you as well if I want to.I can speak for myself if you don't mind.
No. The Greek word is based on "zao", but the actual Greek word is "ἔζησαν" (ezsan), which has a different connotation. It refers to someone who has been physically restored to life after having died.No, it says they live (zao) and reign with Christ.
So, you don't believe you are a child of God and of the promise who is counted as Abraham's seed?Not according to Paul.
It wasn't left desolate to Jesus' disciples. Matthew 26:28Please consider the argument itself.
While the Cross indeed inaugurated the New Covenant God would make with the two houses, Jesus also said that their house would be left desolate to them. This clearly indicates that the New Covenant has not yet been kept with those houses.
Remember, making a covenant is one thing, but performing the tasks specified in the covenant is another.
It's based on a word that simply means to live or be alive. Why do you ignore that? Show me where the only definition of that word is to be physically restored to life after having died and that it can't be used to refer to someone who is spiritually alive but physically dead.No. The Greek word is based on "zao", but the actual Greek word is "ἔζησαν" (ezsan), which has a different connotation. It refers to someone who has been physically restored to life after having died.
Exactly. Dispensationalists act as if the entire nation of Israel was cut off back then and none of them have been saved since then and then at some point in the future God will save all of them. That is not taught in scripture anywhere.It wasn't left desolate to Jesus' disciples. Matthew 26:28
It wasn't left desolate to the 3,000 Israelites who gave birth to the Church at Pentecost. Acts 2:41
Nor to any Israelite in Christ since.
I didn't ask you to explain it. I asked you a different question which I am reluctant to repeat.How do I explain spiritual discernment? Just read 1 Corinthians 2:9-16. I believe you interpret scripture like the natural man.
You know, we've been able to have respectful discussions recently and I appreciate that, but I'm tired of talking to you for right now since we're never on the same page and it takes a lot of effort just to get you to see my points. It's just exhausting. I need a break from that. Thanks for the discussion.I didn't ask you to explain it. I asked you a different question which I am reluctant to repeat.
I concur that the individuals being discussed in both cases refer to the same group. However, I have previously emphasized that while verses 5 and 6 address Israelites who are residing outside their homeland, the insights shared about them are applicable to all Christians. This is due to Peter's use of metaphor in that particular passage. In contrast, when we examine verse 9, it becomes clear that Peter shifts to a literal interpretation, specifically focusing on the Diaspora and addressing it uniquely.Yes, you most certainly have.
Why do you answer questions with questions? Both are metaphorical. Do you not understand that verses 5 and 6 are speaking about the same people as verse 9?