Not in evidence.

Bible says so. Glad to see you’re at least consistent in your “I have never read the Bible and don’t care what it says because it’s not Christian law” position.

without it being present

But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region. But the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women, and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts. But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium.

Scream for me.

just like anyone had a right to question extratextual tradition.

Glad to hear you support my right to question your extratextual heresies involving the killers of Christ being “already saved” and going to heaven.

He fulfilled the Mosaic law

Neat, thanks for destroying your own argument yet again.

we are (still today) deemed to have fulfilled the Mosaic law

Neat, thanks for destroying your own argument yet again.

The standard hasn't changed.

Right. No matter how many times your postmodernist heretical propaganda gets spewed–Christian standards haven’t changed and the killers of Christ are not saved, nor are their laws valid.

The point is that we serve in newness of spirit (7:6, i.e. obey the law of Christ).

The law of Christ says the exact opposite of what you say about who is and is not saved.

My first request for evidence was for what you say God "directly stated" about something superseding something. I pointed out there is no text

Already posted.

There is no text saying the new covenant supplants the old

Already posted.

it was always the new covenant supplements the old.

Replaces, yeah; that’s what the text says.

You argue supersession is directly implied but you can't show from the text

Already posted.

bypassing for now the degree to which you have responsibility for your words being clear

Someone not paying as close attention would have let this go, but I’m not letting it go. It’s quoted explicitly (and solely) to show that I noticed it and that you’re not getting away with it, even though digging through our shared history for direct citations as to why you’re a subhuman pile of jewish shit and how I have already directly cited, sourced, and defined every word I have used, in context, in all previous conversations is impossible (solely because the site doesn’t let you search user comment history or sort it by board). Again, you’re being called out on this specifically for the libel that it is.

if you want to say you do have evidence that I'm not taking your meaning, spell it out.

Did. A dozen times. You continue to copy and paste the same propaganda only dispensationalists post.

When I said your supersession "tends to exclude one race of humans from Christian salvation”

1. Nope.
2. Maybe they shouldn’t have killed Christ, then. Or blasphemed against His law. Or continue to purposely and consciously act in diametric opposition to that law.

What is your evidence

The fact that you keep lying about the contents of the Bible after having been given direct quotes.

Jesus has a second and better priesthood, not a replacement.

Oh, so there’s more than one way into heaven? Shut the fuck up, retard.

The point of the earthly is to reflect the heavenly

And yet you’re totally fine with it when it reflects the demonic.

The text literally says the new covenant is "established" in a better "place", so it contradicts the idea of replacement as if established upon the same promises without change.

replacement

same promises

without change

Words don’t mean whatever you want them to mean.

So, when you repeat "Bible says" removal and replacement, the fact that that is never said, and you present no evidence that it is logically implied

Your inability to read English is not my problem. The text was cited. What was that about "the degree to which you have responsibility for your words,” again?

I have said nothing against some Jewish branches being broken off

Neat, so you’re incapable of refuting anything I’ve actually said. Why are you still paid to spam this site, again?

the right of Pharisees to interpret Moses.

lol, that’s a bold one. I see why you love this idea, of course; it implies the “validity” of the papacy in exalting a human woman as sinless.

they were saved by belief in the Messiah to come

So the ones who don’t believe He came… They’re definitely still saved, though, right? Because they definitely still believe a mashiach will come (even though He already has), and they’re still waiting, to this day… They’re saved? Still?

So I'm unaware

Yeah.

What is it you're trying to preserve as a picture of Christianity?

The Bible tells you. It’s pretty damned simple to understand.

still desire to keep some Mosaic laws for themselves out of Christian liberty

Okay. The Bible is solely truth. It is not exclusively truth. That is, it is only truth, but not the only source of truth. Therefore anything outside the Bible which contradicts it is not true, but other things–which may not matter beyond opinion–are fine, as long as they don’t do so. That’s fine.

We’re not talking about that, though. We’re talking about the other laws being kept that the Bible says aren’t anymore.

the first still has power to foreshadow today as Col. 2:16-17 says.

“A shadow of things to come” here does not mean “foreshadow;” it means “pales in comparison to.”

there are many legalists (more Christians and Muslims than Jews) who try to obey some Mosaic rules for salvation

Mmm, nah, see, total fucking bullshit. Again. THE ENTIRE BODY OF JUDAISM obeys the Mosaic rules for salvation, denying Christ, denying the Gospel, denying the Spirit, denying the sole way to eternity. To be a jew is to deny Christ, and to deny from knowledge, rather than mere ignorance. This is easily the twelfth time we’ve had this discussion and you’ve been axiomatically incorrect every single time.

as long as they do they are damned thereby

Great, so sit the fuck down, shut the fuck up, and never reply to anything I post ever again. You’ve openly admitted the old covenant doesn’t exist anymore, because Christ fulfilled it. You’ve openly admitted that jews are damned for all eternity because they deny Christ. There are no relevant points of argument or disagreement between us anymore. It’s over. You’ve wasted years and spread countless lies, but it’s finally over. We’ve reconciled.

So as an evangelist to a difficult people I hold out hope that it can happen organically again.

Neat. That’s neither here nor there.

But that goes to our usual discussion about your hopelessness

Yeah, that’s fair.

which I say is belied by your fighting spirit.

lol, this isn’t spirit, my dude. Neither Holy nor human. I’m way too pathetic for ’spirit’ to describe me. If this is what you consider fighting, no wonder Christendom (and the white race) are already extinct. He needs to return already. Now. His kingdom has fully abandoned Him. I don’t look twice my age for no reason.

He says it's not in Matt. 5:17 ESV. You're taking his statement of "fulfilled" and interpreting it as "abolished" contrary to his own words.

Here we return to the pop quiz that you ignored with no justification whatsoever. To say that the old was not fulfilled by the new implies that you demand male genital mutilation for the sake of salvation, the abstention of pork for the sake of salvation, the non-mixing of fabrics, the “no spitting through your teeth on a Wednesday,” the… *The old laws are gone, my dude.

Now it's an interesting study to review his word for abolish, "kataluo", and the other word translated abolish, "katargeo", and review what is abolished and what is not said to be; it would be interesting to find what "fulfilled" covenants look like in Scripture

Found it. It means destroy, dissolve, overthrow, or abolish. Within the context of this specific verse, it means “annulling authority.” As in “it doesn’t have authority anymore.” As in “the old covenant has no power over you.” As in “there is a new covenant and Christ is it.” As in “the entirety of Christian doctrine from 33 AD to ~1900 AD, when the religion was exterminated.” As in, “not whatever jewish bullshit you’re pushing here.”

Now I get to have a pop quiz! Will he…

1. admit that words mean what they actually mean–irrespective of personal beliefs–and not what jews tell him they mean.
2. pivot hard and claim the New Testament was “written in Hebrew first” and therefore “the Greek isn’t an authoritative source.”

Oh boy, what will I choose!

you don't seem interested in learning from the Scriptures as you constantly have presented them as if they mean only what you say

The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.

and your view is incapable of improvement.

Now that you’ve been given a direct citation for that Greek word and its meaning in context, both in the Bible at large and within that specific verse, will you improve your view? Or are you incapable?

If you are willing to stop accusing me of being dispie then that passes.

Only if you continuously state henceforth the two things you’ve said in this very comment–that

1. Christ fulfilled the old covenant, which has been abolished thereby and replaced with His teachings.
2. Jews–as jews–are damned for all eternity because they explicitly reject Christ and their actions and beliefs are hollow mockeries of salvation.

But since you immediately went back to repeating the same lies WITHIN THIS SAME COMMENT even after you were found out and forced to admit these two things, I don’t see anything but the shadow of Scofield still in you.

I'm only an enemy of error.

Stop making them, then.

We'll eventually need something beyond your sticking to what you think the Bible says when it doesn’t.

Pain, striking, etc.

You've presented as someone who is willing to take the Bible literally on everything it teaches

Nowhere has this been made indicative. Next you’ll claim that I support “immediate capitulation to all evil” because [insert the verse you know I’m talking about here], or that I demand the "enslavement of all civilians to military logistics programs” because [insert other verse you know I’m talking about here]. That’s not going to fly.

does Col. 2:16-17 KJV literally say that meat, drink, holyday, new moon, and sabbath days are a shadow of things to come (even after the cross)? Because that would imply they were also a shadow of things to come before the cross.

You can hardly use the same example again (in the same post) when the definition of the word ‘shadow’ is still up in the air.

Okay. The joke is finally over. We got it. Please go back to sane posting.

Not this Qult bullshit again.

It remains law in the sense that Christ kept and is still keeping it

Held fulfilled. Contract’s over. Christ explicitly went outside it, repeatedly, as shown in the gospels, because He had already held it fulfilled and it had no power over him. Either you’re saying Christ sinned or you admit the Old Covenant is no longer law and was not kept from the coming of Jesus.

because he said he doesn't abolish it, and fulfill doesn't mean that it stops being law.

POP QUIZ: When you submit your last payment on a loan under the terms of the agreement, do you

• A. KEEP SENDING IN PAYMENTS
• B. STOP SENDING IN PAYMENTS

It’s not a hard question.

There's no Scripture about God's law ceasing to be law

No Christian has ever upheld it, then. Or maybe you’re just mentally ill and there is, directly from Christ Himself.

Not in evidence.

Directly stated by God.

Not in evidence.

[citation needed]

Except Jesus said otherwise

Not in evidence.

Already posted. Enjoy hell.

There's no evidence the old covenant is removed

Bible say so.

There's no evidence the new covenant between Christ and men replaces this

Bible says so.

Perhaps you're afraid

You’re shitting your pants in fear of actual Christianity, yeah.

we're bound to act all Mosaic

Expressly not, as Christ Himself said and acted.

we are freed by the new covenant

Thanks for admitting there’s a new covenant. Argument over. You’ve conceded the point.

The rest of your comments are wild strawmen about your imagination

The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.

At the same time the covenant between God and Israel is the same as the covenant between God and Christ

“OY VEY YOU’RE BEING “LEGALISTIC” BY SAYING DISPENSATIONALISM IS BAD ALSO WATCH ME BE THE MOST TALMUDIC KIKE IMAGINABLE AS I PILPUL MY WAY AROUND IGNORING WHAT THE BIBLE EXPLICITLY SAYS!”

Amazing, really.

You act as if the first is logically incompatible with the second, but they're both in the text.

The text which says the first is done and the second is law, you mean?

You act like the old covenant is gone when Scripture (like your own Heb. 8) says it's fading but not gone

Fulfilled, yeah. It’s gone. Personal opinions don’t matter. There are a few people damned to hell for eternity who still try to follow it while waiting for the Messiah (who has already come), so if that’s how you want to shit the bed over your pedantry, feel free. There are, in fact, a “fading” number of “jews” who still obey just the old rules. They’re irrelevant to objective reality.

Jesus says it's not abolished.

Explicitly said it.

You act like the new covenant is a replacement

Fulfilled, yeah. Words have definitions.

yes, it might be logically possible that Christ kept the same covenant given to Israel…

…but He didn’t.

Scripture doesn't say or imply the old covenant is gone…

…but it does.

Scripture doesn’t say or imply the new covenant is a replacement or supersession…

…but it does.

But instead of even opening your mind to the logical possibility

Because there is no debate about matters of objective truth. I’m not going to waste my time with someone who says, “But what if 2+2=17?”

you seem to have some deep need, possibly monetary

The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.

to fight that at every turn

You’re the eternal enemy of Christ, yeah.

because you think my adherence to the initial millennial view

Never said a word about it.

Oh well. Maybe voting will fix it.

I’m not [the thing I axiomatically have to be since I denounce everything else]

Sure thing.

Yet Christianity was never about excluding any race

Cool, so you can’t read.

Those who were born into the covenant

The old one, which has been fulfilled and is no longer law. To clarify.

were cutting themselves off from the covenant

The new one. Which is explicitly Christian law, defining Christianity as distinct from all other beliefs. To clarify.

it's not literally supersession

“The thing that supersedes isn’t supersession!” ~ the mentally ill

it agrees there was only one covenant all along and the new covenant is the unfolding of the old.

new

old

Cool, so there were two covenants, just as the Bible itself says. Got it.

But the issue is that you've acted as if you have this idea that supersession means racism

Strawman. You won’t be able to redirect the conversation.

Christ kept the same covenant.

The one He explicitly held fulfilled and thereafter created a new one; got it, yeah.

a formerly-hidden provision

So hidden that it’s explicitly stated in the Bible as being new.

So the old contract (covenant of works between God and all men) was not done with

Except Jesus said otherwise, so you’re not even pretending to cover up your lies anymore.

There's no supplanting there.

Just removal and replacement with a new one; that’s a totally different concept!

Not the text.

Already posted the text.

Think about what "exposit” means

Think about what

I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT

and

NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT MADE BY THEIR FATHERS

mean, heretic.

If you don't define and defend your position

“The Bible says so.” ~ my position

You have nothing.

it's easy to snipe everyone else and then never take criticism for a position because you can keep morphing it behind the scenes.

[muffled hand rubbing in the distance]

That's so 20th-century Usenet.

20th century jewsnet, you mean.

I agree that it's new that Christ makes a covenant between one man and many men

Cool, so there’s a new covenant. Thanks for continuing to publicly humiliate yourself.

But the old covenant stands

Not according to Christ, who has damned you to hell for eternity.

I asked you what supersedes

The Bible explains.

I gave you the option

You have no power over me. You’re not the arbiter of truth or the moderator of reality. You gave no options. I don’t give a fuck about your opinions. You directly contradict the contents of the Bible. You’re irrelevant.

So, yeah, you don't define and defend

Directly cited and sourced everything I said.

But let's see if we can think of a different motive.

Keeping people from falling for your jewish lies.

dispie strawmen

“Directly quoting dispensationalist beliefs is a strawman!” ~ the mentally ill

I always say that, as long as I'm alive, the US Constitution remains alive in me

You would willingly burn every copy of the Constitution and erase its words from everyone’s mind if given the chance. That’s neither here nor there. Your attempts at redirection aren’t working.

On what aspects?

Pay attention.

That would mean he makes fact statements that contradict what he believes.

… Did you mean ‘false’?

No grand conspiracy behind the quote.

Pulled it out of thin air, made it up, completely out of context, irrelevant to the discussion, not even close to anything anyone said remotely related to the topic. So yeah, the conspiracy is “You made up bullshit for absolutely no conceivable reason.”

Again

Thanks for admitting you didn’t even try. You’re done here.

The two aren't even comparable or in the same category.

They’re both fallacies. And you purposely misrepresented what I said. Try again with some effort.

Well that's what others will believe

Nah, it’s not.

Case study: this exchange.

Your single data point is not representative of anything other than your individual mental illness.

After how long?

About five seconds.

And people are unique, you know.

Objective data metrics aren’t.

Mmmm yes, because people are paid to shill for the True Worldview.

He’s shilling against it.

Sorry, but the world HATES Christianity

Yes, which is why he lies about it.

Why would he be paid, why not free?

Because I need at least some semblance of order and culture left in the world.

Wow, much conspiracy. Such evidence.

Great job not even pretending to construct a believable strawman. Get fucked. You didn’t even TRY to reply to what I said.

So you believe that begging the question and circular reasoning are two different fallacies?

So you beat your wife? Not playing your game. Try the fuck again with something someone actually said.

The way you present it

No, that’s not how I present it.

Nobody will ever, organically, get the conclusion "oh behavior”.

People with triple digit IQs naturally make these conclusions. They’re called context clues. If it walks like a duck, fucking shoot it during duck season.

Good, do it. Attack Venezuela, too. And Russia. Just end it all.

Don’t repeat proven lies designed to exterminate my people, then.

Funny how the Bible never uses the words "supersede", "supersession"

Funny how repeating the same copied and pasted talking points doesn’t matter when you were already disproven by the Bible itself.

but a theory that tends to exclude one race of humans from Christian salvation begins to use those words in the last couple hundred years.

Ever heard of a retronym, subhuman paid jewish shill? No one needed to say “snail mail” until e-mail was created. No one needed to say “supersessionism” until dispensationalism was created. Before your heresy appeared, Christianity was just Christianity.

Nice softball, though. Give me something actually difficult next time.

Funny how you call me dispensationalist when I reject dispensationalism as usually taught.

Literally worshipping it right here and now. Incapable of hiding it. Your account would be banned if you denied it.

You seem to think that because I believe in one covenant I must believe in dispensationalism.

Yep, you believe in proven and admitted heresy that Christ Himself denounces. Thanks for playing. You’re unfit to run your boards.

by the works of someone other than me.

So you’re a supersessionist, got it. Thanks for admitting it.

namely that people broke it.

Neat, so it’s not in effect anymore because the contract was over and done with and Christ created a new one. Thanks for playing.

The reason the new covenant lasts

Thanks for admitting there is a new covenant and that supersessionism is Christian doctrine.

This is not about one superseding another

Bible says otherwise. Thanks for playing.

because they are the same covenant

Nope, different terms. You’ve never read the Bible.

But the tree itself is not replaced, and that's what you seem to mean by "supersession"

No one gives a shit about your strawmen. None of what I have said is my opinion.

I simply throw Romans 11 backatcha.

Thanks for continuing to use the Bible to disprove your claims.

But since you appear incapable of defining supersession

Zero effort. -15/10; would not be trolled by again.

or of expositing Scripture

Posted it directly. Go suck off jews on another website.

This somehow proves that SR out of BILLIONS of humans

Behaves identical to the known paid shilling campaigns. That’s the “somehow.”

how far do I have to scroll

First paragraph. Entire page. You were wrong. Take it gracefully.

you JUST used that EXACT fallacy

You have no idea what the fallacy even is.

by linking articles that in no way prove SR out of BILLIONS is "paid".

Behaves identical to the known paid shilling campaigns

finally

I have literally never not said this in my entire time posting. You’re a worthless sack of shit paid shill who cannot read English and behaves like a Redditor to boot.

never think

never act like a human

just behave like a nigger and become incapable of comprehending causality

you won’t have any problems if you don’t associate behavior with causality

I dindu nuffin! Muh fee fees hurt!

Yep, that’s par for the course with your posts.

I'm a little closer to finding your "replacement" theology in the Bible after looking all over for it.

Yes, you’ve never read the Bible. You’ve admitted that dozens of times.

Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Supersessionism is the foundation of Christianity. It is itself Christianity. Nothing exists outside of it and never has. Your subhuman dispensationalist heresy—funded by zionists at the start of the 20th century—spits in the face of millennia of written proof of Christian doctrine.

Eat shit, you fucking kike heretic.

Quote?

Don’t be fucking glib. Pretending you don’t know what’s happening is a humiliation.

Logical conclusion.

Literally a fallacy. Don’t do it again.

He rebutted evolution, he says there's evidence Exodus happened, and he argued with…

Irrelevant. His “theology” directly contradicts the Bible.

So how did you determine

They publicly admit it.

So weak and small an amount.

They pay tens of thousands of shills.

If that were true

Fallacy.

He is pro Christian

Never read any of his posts, confirmed.

Who is giving out the checks?

Israel.

What currency?

Whichever; they own all of them.

How much money?

50¢ per post, per the leaked documents.

For what?

White genocide and the eradication of Christendom.

[nothing]

Thanks for admitting that all studies on the topic show women are killing their babies and the system is covering it up because men would go ballistic if they knew.

All you do is ignore the topic and focus on [the topic]

Great job. 10/10. Way to blow yourself out.

We are speaking common sense. You can't find sources for that.

1. Can, yeah. That’s the entire point of common sense. It manifests itself in testable reality. That’s why people believe it. It’s why they behave in accordance with it. It’s the definition of the phrase.
2. Thanks for admitting you lied from the very beginning and that whites can, in fact, fight back and win.

You keep avoiding my accusations.

“You rape children. Wait wait wait wait wait, why aren’t you replying to this? I said words. Therefore the words are real and you have to take them seriously merely because I said them! You don’t get to ignore my obvious personal attack and demand I reply to the topic of discussion! You have to engage with my deflection from the fact that my worldview is a proven hoax!”

Neat, don’t care. Reply to the topic or continue to be mocked.

Also, I'm white.

Clearly not. White peoples don’t behave this way.

Also, I'm here for conversation

Clearly not, otherwise you’d prove what you say instead of continuing to repeat lies only jews say.

not to prove things to people with closed minds.

I’m here to mock people like that by proving things to you.

I didn't start attacking you

Drown in your lies.

This is your MO. You are paid to be like this, or you don't for someone or something. No person acts like you. You're very strange but predictable.

The jew cries out in pain as it literally reads from a script only sophists believe.

And, I was never banned from here. Only from The Donald and GAW. That's why I changed accounts

Translation: “I was banned completely, otherwise I’d keep my old account around for the other boards that actually matter, instead of caring about the paid shilling boards at all.”

Why not just go back to Reddit where your behavior is worshipped by everyone, you filthy sophist?

Damn, you’re bad at your job.

It’s a paid shill. Don’t listen to anything it says.

Your scripted paid shilling propaganda is several decades out of date. No one gives a fuck what you have to say, and we’ll never believe you.

The most amazing thing about all this is

1. You’re physically incapable of disproving anything I have said.
2. You only replied because you’re shitting your pants in fear of whites becoming aware of our capabilities.
3. You can’t reply to the topic, so you have to attack me personally as though you’re accomplishing anything.

News flash, subhuman jew! No one cares about me! My words are still true, no matter what you lie about me!

Find another website to spam. You were banned for a reason.

that doesn’t work

NOOOOOOOO U RONG CUZ I SAY SOOOOOOOOOO

IT NO WORK I RIGHT CUZ I SAY I RIGHT I WIN NOW

NO I DONT HAVE TO PROVE ANYTHING I SAY

NO I DONT HAVE TO DISPROVE ANYTHING YOU SAY

I AM GOD HIMSELF

YOU PROVIDE EXTERNAL CITATIONS AND SOURCES FOR EVERYTHING YOU SAY, THEREFORE YOU ARE PAID TO LIE

Thanks for admitting you’re a paid shill sockpuppet account and that everything I said in this entire conversation is true.

No one is doing anything, nor will they. Least of all in response to paid jewish shilling like yours. You have zero evidence for any of your claims and refuse to even pretend to provide it.

Funny how a “brand new user” knows what “used to happen” here, isn’t it.

You just can’t help but out yourselves.