Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Buggman; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Alex Murphy
Your words, OP, serve absolutely no purpose but to puff yourself up and to put a barrier between the Jewish people and the Cross

Lil 'ol OP can't do anything that isn't there. The cross is already a stumbling block to the unconverted Jewish people - as it is to all natural men. 1Co. 1 is explicit on that.

Alex Murphy is 100% correct - if it weren't for the dispensational fetish for the Jews, this would be a non-issue. I know I have absolutely nothing against any ethnicity. But I am angered by those who advocate this dual-covenant track that is found in dispensationalism. It's unbiblical.

62 posted on 08/10/2006 4:40:46 PM PDT by jude24 ("I will oppose the sword if it's not wielded well, because my enemies are men like me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: jude24; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Alex Murphy; P-Marlowe; xzins
Lil 'ol OP can't do anything that isn't there. The cross is already a stumbling block to the unconverted Jewish people - as it is to all natural men. 1Co. 1 is explicit on that.

Oh, baloney. The fact that there is already one stumbling block in the way--one natural to all men--doesn't mean that one cannot by their behavior set up more in the road, or else Sha'ul's words in Romans 14 become meaningless.

That's like saying that just because it's hard to scale a mountain, it's impossible for the act of pouring slippery oil all over the climber's path to make it any more difficult.

Alex Murphy is 100% correct - if it weren't for the dispensational fetish for the Jews, this would be a non-issue.

Ah, because of course there was no such thing as anti-Semetic Christian rhetoric before Dispensationalism showed up in the 1800s. Of course, it's all so clear now.

As for Alex being correct, we'll have to wait for him to define his terms to come to any conclusion on that (see posts #55 and 37).

65 posted on 08/10/2006 4:48:09 PM PDT by Buggman (http://brit-chadasha.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: jude24
Jude24: But I am angered by those who advocate this dual-covenant track that is found in dispensationalism. It's unbiblical.

So give me your exegesis of Hosea 3:4-5. BTW, not all dispensationalists hold a dual-covenant track... I don't.

 

67 posted on 08/10/2006 4:58:46 PM PDT by rabid liberty (pray for the peace of Jerusalem -- psa. 122:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: jude24

It's unbiblical.
= = = = =

Then the 24 elders--12 disciples and 12 patriarchs ruling on their thrones eternally in heaven is unbiblical

What Hogwash.

God meant what He said and said what He meant whether folks arbitrary biases can wrap their understanding about it, or not.


428 posted on 08/28/2006 1:54:33 PM PDT by Quix (LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED. LET ISRAEL CALL ON GOD AS THEIRS! & ISLAM FLUSH ITSELF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson