Old covenant saints in the NC/covenant of grace

[MW]

In short, charity would dictate that you give me the benefit of the doubt in that I am endeavoring to articulate the position in full Scriptural adherence just as yourself.

Allow some place for rhetoric. You have said things that I take to be unbiblical. It is not charity to deny what you said. One of the things you claimed is temporary forgiveness. If you recant your position, fine; charity dictates I take you according to your new thoughts. But if you hold that position it is unbiblical in my judgment. That is what I mean by saying, "in the Old Testament that I read." You obviously do not read what I read there unless you have changed your mind to agree with me.

Ah, but I did not accuse you of this. I asked you a question. (unlike you accusing me of FV when I did not say anywhere that any saint in the OT had temporary forgiveness of sins. I said each sacrifice was efficacious but that the sacrificial system was set up for indwelling sin before the Holy Spirit).

I didn't say you accused me of this. I answered your question.

which had me interpret you as saying the blood of Christ is the type and the type is the blood of Christ (pretty sure you said this as well, but I cannot find it now? Did I imagine this or did you edit out a miswording you regretted?). It is ok if you did. Miswording or regrettable phrasing that leaves one open to misunderstanding happens all the time. I seem to be setting up camp in that zone, and am looking at myself in the mirror wondering how much of it is me (more than a significant amount) and how much of it is others.

I haven't changed what I said. If I've said something you can quote me on it. I own what I say and bear responsibility for it. If it is wrong I will admit it. If it is right, well, I cannot change from a good judgment to a poor one.

 

[Eyedoc84]

they had the blood of Christ there and then in the type.

which had me interpret you as saying the blood of Christ is the type

He said the blood is IN the type not that it is the type

 

[brandonadams]

I have not had time to read the last few pages, but plan to follow-up when I can (bumping to prevent thread from closing)