musterion is famous for evading.
ECT What is the true root objection to MAD?
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
musterion is famous for evading.
musterion
Well-known member
I'm the one avoiding questions? I simply quoted Peter where he said it was unlawful. Your argument isn't with me, it's with him.
As to avoiding questions, that's your game. Here's some the ones you've been avoiding for years:
| •Why did Peter say it was unlawful to go to Cornelius if it was not? This was about SEVEN YEARS AFTER Christ had risen and given them the "great commission" which included Gentiles. Why did Peter still say it was unlawful for him to have come, and that Cornelius knew it? •Why did God need to use the vision (three times)? Peter already had the "great commission" which included Gentiles. What was the point of God telling him Gentiles were not to be counted as unclean when they'd already been sent to Gentiles SEVEN YEARS BEFORE? •Why was Peter rebuked by the other Jewish disciples for going to Cornelius (Acts 11:1-5) when they, too, knew of the "great commission" which included Gentiles? •Why didn't Peter not cite for them the "great commission," which included Gentiles, as his authority to go to Cornelius? •Why did Peter nor the eleven never preach to another Gentile again, so far as God's Word records? They had the "great commission," which included Gentiles. •Why did Peter tell Cornelius of Jesus about Nazareth sent to the Jews? More specifically...why did Peter not preach Christ crucified for Cornelius' sins and the sins of the whole Jew and Gentile world without distinction? |
These are questions YOU have spent years evading because you CAN'T answer them from Scripture. No one here can. All you can do is ignore them or twist them because, as JohnW says, you are a deceiver and a punk.
Good one clownie, as your reputation is punting most questions on TOL, running away from most debates like the spineless mutt that you are, such as the Hilston debate, and 3 threads in which I challenged you, to listen to Hank Hannegraaf, your idol, and just spamming "Darby."
I asked you to show us, identify those infallible teachers, that you claim teach you your satanic AD 70-ism/Preterism, sweetie. I've asked you for over 3 years, punk.
Here is what you said:
"MAD is a false non-Biblical belief system that was made up by fallable men."-Preterist Craigee Tet
"A secret parenthetical time period is a false theory made up by fallible men.”-Preterist con man “tetelestai,” AKA Craigie
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89588&page=9
"Yes Mr. Whalen, they were fallible men who invented dispensationalism just over 150 years ago.Mr. Whalen, you might want to ask yourself why you follow the teachings of these fallible men?"-Clownie Craigie
Show us these infallible teachers, that teach you, since one of your "arguments" against MAD is that it is taught by "fallable" men.
Do be a dear, creme puff. Show us. I've asked you for 3 years.
You won't-quiet as a turkey farm, on T Day. Your "ministry" is fraud, and spreading the snake oil, that your father provides you.
Slick..........real slick.
"According to MAD the above verse isn't for us."-Tettie the clown
vs.
"I believe the Apostle Paul's teachings are mostly for those of us who live post 70AD"-Tettie the clown
As I've been asking you for 3 years, Wimpy-identify which of Paul's teachings are "mostly for" us, and why.
Why do you always run away when faced with questions, spineless Craigie? What's the problem, punk?
.
"And that is what happened. The Lord came in a way that everyone could see Him. However, He never touched planet earth, and when this event was over, He then sat on the throne in Heaven NOT on planet earth.”-Tettie the clown
Still waiting for you to identify this "everyone" that saw the Lord Jesus Christ return in A.D. 70.
Wait....According to the mutt Craigie, "The Lord came in a way that everyone could see Him" was the Roman army.
Right, creme puff?
What's the problem, Hanegraaf groupie? Why do you always run away when faced with questions, spineless Craigie?
You taught us that, Craigie-we learned that from you.
andyc
New member
musterion
Well-known member
Tongues are a sign for unbelievers, not for believers (1 Cor 14:22). But unbelievers are the LAST people you'd EVER babble your pookeepoo noise around. You save it for when you're among your fellow babblers, where it's safe and encouraging, where you can pat each other on the backs with pride in "our gift." In complete 180° contradiction of the Bible.
But you and your tongues-cult will just keep on ignoring that, because it's part of the old dusty busted wineskin of the Bible, in favor of new words and new wine from "God."
You are a fraud.
But you and your tongues-cult will just keep on ignoring that, because it's part of the old dusty busted wineskin of the Bible, in favor of new words and new wine from "God."
You are a fraud.
andyc
New member
Thats because they juggle scripture to make it fit their criteria.
Musterion and heir keep emphasizing that they are saved by Christ's faith, and yet they dont reject free will. How stupid is that?
andyc
New member
Wrong thread.
musterion
Well-known member
Yeah, you're on the wrong thread. It's far beyond the ken of a thieving carnal child like you.
andyc
New member
The Corinthians were carnal babes. They spoke in tongues though.
Wow, anycain, jr.! How long did it take you, to "Google/Bing/Yahoo" that "juggle scripture" zinger, puzzler, baffler? You stumped us MAD wacko, country bumpkins so badly here, that us "Jethro's" are "speechless," not knowing how to return, such a dazzling display of debating brilliance, and 200+ miles per hour volley of yours...
Get saved, Ellie Mae.
Can you dig it? Good.
musterion
Well-known member
They had the true gift. You do not.
And yet Paul called them "saints," never questioning their justification, something that you, and your "spiritual" brethren of Cain hate, as you are frowning right now, grinding those big, bad, wolf choppers of yours right now, as you read this......You learned that way back there yonder in Genesis 4 KJV.
Go the the dentist, wolfie.
And get saved.
andyc
New member
Its working for me, so I'll keep speaking in tongues. You are welcome to doubt and do without. Makes no difference to me.
Heterodoxical
New member
Today, 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heterodoxical View Post
M.A.D., to my understanding considers the scriptures addressing the Jews to not apply to them. That's a pretty big distinction, no?
Cite an example and we'll go from there.
You were evading at this point. Still scrolling looking for this answer.
Mysterious answer....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heterodoxical View Post
M.A.D., to my understanding considers the scriptures addressing the Jews to not apply to them. That's a pretty big distinction, no?
Cite an example and we'll go from there.
You were evading at this point. Still scrolling looking for this answer.
Mysterious answer....
Heterodoxical
New member
This was your answer.
NOTE IT IS A QUESTION>>>> NOT AN ANSWER!!!
AND for the record, the fact I call you out on evasion doesn't make me angry, it makes me coherent and responsible. It makes YOU manipulative and evasive.
Today, 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heterodoxical View Post
I like you already Doc.
So, does OT prophecy have anything to do with M.A.D. theology?
Is Christ the Messiah?
NOTE IT IS A QUESTION>>>> NOT AN ANSWER!!!
AND for the record, the fact I call you out on evasion doesn't make me angry, it makes me coherent and responsible. It makes YOU manipulative and evasive.
Today, 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heterodoxical View Post
I like you already Doc.
So, does OT prophecy have anything to do with M.A.D. theology?
Is Christ the Messiah?
musterion
Well-known member
Or to the unbelievers your tongues don't witness to. Fraud.