New and old - the meaning of this from the greek text

[ScottA]

So ScottA you acknowledge whom you serve as the "Good Servant."

No...you are manipulating the parable, and therefore, the word of God. It is not I who am suggesting that my Master delays His coming...but you. You judge yourself. Better for you if you do not go on attack. By the same measure, you will be measured.

On the contrary...I know that He has come already.

 

[Jay Ross]

No...you are manipulating the parable, and therefore, the word of God. It is not I who am suggesting that my Master delays His coming...but you. You judge yourself. Better for you if you do not go on attack. By the same measure, you will be measured.

On the contrary...I know that He has come already.

ScottA it is better that you too do not go on attacking. By the same measure, you will be measured.

As for manipulating the parable(s), if you had the discernment of the Holy Spirit, that you claim that you have, then you would agree with what I have already posted concerning the two parables in question and what the parables are about.

From what you have posted above in your response, your understanding of scripture and your spiritual confirming source is questionable to say the least.

 

[ScottA]

ScottA it is better that you too do not go on attacking. By the same measure, you will be measured.

As for manipulating the parable(s), if you had the discernment of the Holy Spirit, that you claim that you have, then you would agree with what I have already posted concerning the two parables in question and what the parables are about.

From what you have posted above in your response, your understanding of scripture and your spiritual confirming source is questionable to say the least.

You manipulated a parable given by Christ...that's Antichrist. You tried to trick me. You didn't succeed.

 

[Jay Ross]

You manipulated a parable given by Christ...that's Antichrist. You tried to trick me. You didn't succeed.

Scott, you are entitled to your opinion of what you may consider is a right interpretation, but please carefully consider your understanding before you go off and accuse another of having manipulated a parable, in this case the same parable told twice by Christ, to two very different audiences and accuse them of being an antichrist simply because you disagree with their understanding.

As far as trying to trick you. You do not need my help. You trick yourself all the time as demonstrated in your posts that are there for all to read and see.

 

[ScottA]

Scott, you are entitled to your opinion of what you may consider is a right interpretation, but please carefully consider your understanding before you go off and accuse another of having manipulated a parable, in this case the same parable told twice by Christ, to two very different audiences and accuse them of being an antichrist simply because you disagree with their understanding.

As far as trying to trick you. You do not need my help. You trick yourself all the time as demonstrated in your posts that are there for all to read and see.

I don't operate in opinions or interpretations. If this were a contest of such things you would have as much say as anyone, but it's not.

 

[Jay Ross]

I don't operate in opinions or interpretations. If this were a contest of such things you would have as much say as anyone, but it's not.

Then ScottA, if you do not operate in opinions or interpretations, why are you expressing opinions and interpretations in your posts? Oh, because you believe that you are always right in your opinions and interpretations and have God on your side? Really ScottA? Which leg are you attempting to tug, because you are so funny that it is almost a crying matter.

 

[ScottA]

Then ScottA, if you do not operate in opinions or interpretations, why are you expressing opinions and interpretations in your posts? Oh, because you believe that you are always right in your opinions and interpretations and have God on your side? Really ScottA? Which leg are you attempting to tug, because you are so funny that it is almost a crying matter.

Did I not just tell you that "I don't operate in opinions or interpretations?"

If you think that I have said something that is opinion or interpretation, then bring it up specifically, and ask and I can explain. But the answer is, No, it's not.

 

[Jay Ross]

So @ScottA, last chance, please explain what Jesus was saying in Matthew 13:52 based on the context of the original Greek Text: -

"Then He said to them, "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old."
NKJV

My understanding of this verse is that Jesus was referring to the Salvation Covenant which has been in existence since, at least, the creation of Adam and possibly even before that as well. It was certainly available during the Fall Event for Adam and Eve and the brief account of the lives of Adam and Eve suggest that they embraced God's Salvation Covenant.

This is in keeping with the understanding that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow and that God is offering to all of mankind, His Salvation Covenant, should they agree to accept it and abide in it.

This is a timeless covenant that God entered into with all of Mankind.

 

[EndTimeWine]

New and old is represented in Rev. 12 The woman clothed with the sun and the moon under her feet and crown of twelve stars. This sign is multifaceted. It Means 1. Israel 2. Mary 3. The Bride church. The Old Covenant is represented by the moon, the New Covenant is represented by the sun, and the woman is Mary. The twelve stars are the teachings of the twelve apostle and the twelve elders of the old covenant. The sun and moon represent the Two Covenants as I said, so it is 2x12. The 24 elders. In order to understand the old -the moon, you must have the light of the greater - the sun, to shine light upon it. For the moon can not give light of its own but receives light form the greater. The greater receives no light from another but of itself has light. Thus is why the symbolism of the sun and moon are represented in this sign. It is in Mary that the Old and New Covenants are Joined, this then at the Immaculate Conception and Incarnation of Christ and NOW. It is in Mary that unity of the two will happen. As She labored and brought forth Christ then, so too does she NOW! With the unifying of the two Covenants, hence the end time Bride Church. The Bride is as such through Mary's intercession . And the Bride will unite in Israel. Rev.19 the nourishment time Rev.12:6 This is the Elect and the first resurrection. All else will be and are her offspring. Rev.12:17. Who is part of the ELECT, the end time Bride Church? The sign has appeared over Israel, so this is at hand. God Bless!

 

[ScottA]

So @ScottA, last chance, please explain what Jesus was saying in Matthew 13:52 based on the context of the original Greek Text: -

"Then He said to them, "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old."
NKJV

My understanding of this verse is that Jesus was referring to the Salvation Covenant which has been in existence since, at least, the creation of Adam and possibly even before that as well. It was certainly available during the Fall Event for Adam and Eve and the brief account of the lives of Adam and Eve suggest that they embraced God's Salvation Covenant.

This is in keeping with the understanding that God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow and that God is offering to all of mankind, His Salvation Covenant, should they agree to accept it and abide in it.

This is a timeless covenant that God entered into with all of Mankind.

This I have answered from the start: He speaks of both the old and the new covenants. Which I went beyond to bring us up to speed with the present time, explaining that the covenants encompass, "First the natural, then the spiritual."

 

[Jay Ross]

This I have answered from the start: He speaks of both the old and the new covenants. Which I went beyond to bring us up to speed with the present time, explaining that the covenants encompass, "First the natural, then the spiritual."

Sorry ScottA, that answer is wrong because it is not based on the original Greek text. I actually told you that the covenant was from the time of Adam's creation and is God's covenant of Salvation.

The Old and the refurbished like new again Covenant of a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation was not being even hinted at in the Matthew 13:52 verse. Christ was pointing only to the Salvation Covenant for all of mankind.

Sorry but your slip/half slip is showing and I am not even tempted your habit of flaunting an alluring appeal to my senses.

 

[ScottA]

Sorry ScottA, that answer is wrong because it is not based on the original Greek text. I actually told you that the covenant was from the time of Adam's creation and is God's covenant of Salvation.

The Old and the refurbished like new again Covenant of a Kingdom of Priests and a Holy Nation was not being even hinted at in the Matthew 13:52 verse. Christ was pointing only to the Salvation Covenant for all of mankind.

Sorry but your slip/half slip is showing and I am not even tempted your habit of flaunting an alluring appeal to my senses.

You say the old is new, but Christ said "old and new." Thus, you speak of the old and are blind to the new, and when I tell you of the new, you do not receive it. History has many like you.

 

[Jay Ross]

@ScottA

Here is a PDF file which expands on what I have been posting and provides my justification for what I have posted.

Perhaps you may like to re-evaluate your previous post.

 

[ScottA]

@ScottA

Here is a PDF file which expands on what I have been posting and provides my justification for what I have posted.

Perhaps you may like to re-evaluate your previous post.

That is a gallant effort.

But which is better, the Word of God (which has been "confounded") or the mind of God from which I speak?

I claim: no contest.

 

[bbyrd009]

the Word of God (which has been "confounded")

where? ty

 

[ScottA]

where? ty

All language was confounded [by God] at the tower of Babel. Therefore, it "must be spiritually discerned."

 

[bbyrd009]

All language was confounded [by God] at the tower of Babel.

imo that is completely diff from "the Word is confounded" though. The Word cannot be confounded; only words can, iow

 

[ScottA]

imo that is completely diff from "the Word is confounded" though. The Word cannot be confounded; only words can, iow

The meaning of "confound" in this use, is: "guard."

Genesis 3:24
So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

Which if you will note, aligns the timing of the two events.

 

[Jay Ross]

That is a gallant effort.

But which is better, the Word of God (which has been "confounded") or the mind of God from which I speak?

I claim: no contest.

ScottA, in your mind there is no contest, but the evidence from your posts tells everybody, with spiritual discernment, that you do not speak from the word of or mind of God.

 

[ScottA]

ScottA, in your mind there is no contest, but the evidence from your posts tells everybody, with spiritual discernment, that you do not speak from the word of or mind of God.

So said the religions leaders. History repeats itself, and you have learned nothing.