Replies

Perhaps we have come to the point where you need to firmly show a separate “Grace dispensation.” Frankly the goal posts have changed in space and time several times from your side. Perhaps because of multiple posters. I will say coming to a conclusion that Paul tells an assembled group of Jews and Greeks two different things, one Faith the other repent is truly absurd and borders on saying Paul promoted confusion. There were mixed families in the Diaspora. What would a young man whose mother was Greek and father was Jewish do if he heard such a confusing message of “hey Greeks follow Faith, you Jews still need to repent. And AFTER Peter in chapter 15 says it’s one gospel and is Grace. Does not add up.

So far I have been presented with changing timelines, no answers to what your definition is of the mystery, no definition of what you view is “Grace.” Another no one has touched is why are Jesus’ words and commands in Luke 24 seem to be side stepped by the apostles that He had to start another dispensation? You may argue that there are not two gospels but your presentation so far is strongly suggesting it. Perhaps establishing the above definitions first will assist in presenting your case for two dispensations within the NT church.

>>What would a young man whose mother was Greek and father was Jewish do if he heard such a confusing message of “hey Greeks follow Faith, you Jews still need to repent.<<

I’ll simply refer back to my post on the meaning of repent.

>>Another no one has touched is why are Jesus’ words and commands in Luke 24 seem to be side stepped by the apostles that He had to start another dispensation?<<

I’m sure you mean this verse.

Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

First the “repentance”. A change of mind was needed for those who understood the Jewish “ways” just as I showed in my post on the meaning of “repent”.

Second is the “remission of sin”. The Greek word for sin is hamartia or “missing the mark”. What mark as far as serving God did the Gentiles have since they didn’t serve God in the first place other than to simply “believe” in God?

Now, once the Gentiles believed they had the indwelling of the Holy Spirit which was then their guide as to what the “mark” was so they didn’t need the law or the “rules” like the Jews had been living with prior to that.

Of course the Gentiles and we as well now can “miss the mark” but we have the assurance that our sins have been remitted by the shed blood of Christ. Not that we intentionally sin as I believe that would be “grieving the Holy Spirit” who is our continence if you will and we would be blatantly disobeying what the Holy Spirit is telling us.

So far I have been presented with changing timelines, no answers to what your definition is of the mystery

All of the mysteries are layed out pretty good in the scriptures...Shouldn't be any questions about those...

It's clear (to me) that when the church was started it was aimed at the Jews who were law compliant...Lots of things were unclean, even other people...

It was revealed in Acts 10 that a change was taking place to make things clean and lawful and ultimately remove people from the burden of the law...

This didn't happen with a bang...It was a gradual process...

To try to pinpoint the date or specific scripture when this change came in with a bang is impossible...It didn't happen that way...But I think we can all see that it happened...

Another no one has touched is why are Jesus’ words and commands in Luke 24 seem to be side stepped by the apostles that He had to start another dispensation?

This is intrinsically important to this conversation. I would submit that covenants are delivered by a single individual, and are not subject to change or amendment thereafter by secondary agents. The disciples who came after Moses did not have authority to change Moses. They had authority to handle things within Moses, but did not have any authority to add to or take away from... To include Yeshua, regardless of His stature. It is the signature of YHWH that what He said will not change, and will not return to Him empty. This includes all agents - judges, prophets, etc. in order that the original words are not clouded and made null.

The very same thing has to apply to Yeshua's message as well, if for no other reason than continuity's sake - The disciple cannot change what the Teacher taught, or the teacher is made to be wrong... A precept that the super-secret decoder-ring crowd rarely take into account. For the purpose of interpretation then, the words written in red must needfully carry primary authority. While the words of Paul or Peter or John are truly inspired, their words must needfully be passed through the filter of their Master's words, because like the Torah, the Master's words are forever.