SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
This passage just told you that sin entered the world BEFORE there was a law.
Just believe it.
ECT IS THERE REALLY ONLY ONE GOSPEL ??
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
This passage just told you that sin entered the world BEFORE there was a law.
Just believe it.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I think they call it the Abrahamic covenant! It was a promise.
I believe he wants people to think he is very smart and a real theologian when he is actually kind of a :dunce:
Yo, STP, your new pal again, Ol IP, closed those two threads he began on the Salsa, ur, I mean D'Souza :chuckle:
Ya think my showing Musser holding to Dispensational views might have had something to do with it?
As him for me, the next time you two sit down to agree to disagree; as he's still pretending he has me on ignore :crackup:
Rom. 5:8
Eagles Wings
New member
I thought we were advised to stop these kinds of put downs, or is that reserved for the chat box only, Kat?
Nang
TOL Subscriber
I was right.
You have never studied the legal implications or truths of "imputation."
(The legal sentence against the potential of sin, was rendered when Adam broke the Law and commands of God.)
:duh:
Figure it out. . .
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Agreed!!!
Especially since I doubt ktoyou has any knowledge of IP or direct/prior interaction with him at all.
She just floats onto TOL occasionally, like some kind of revered royalty from on high, but I doubt she is even aware of us ~common folk~ or that there has been a recent attempt by the mods to limit such elite put-downs.
IOW's, she doesn't know what she is talking about.
The response was to IP, not Nang who I have known well over ten years on tol.
There is some room for rebuke and harsh debate on the forums. The chatbox is for light conversation, not debates , or any callout, which is not well tolerated on the forums. I am sure STP knew who I was referring too.
glorydaz
Well-known member
[MENTION=18164]Eagles Wings[/MENTION], you might want to speak to your friend, Nang, if you're so worried about "put downs". :chuckle:
Eagles Wings
New member
Are you saying that it's okay to call someone a dunce then, particularly if you've known them for a while?
Oh, and it's also okay if you call them a dunce to someone else, but not to their face?
Just trying to understand the rules for "rebuke and harsh debate".
Let's be honest and real here.
As a senior member you could be setting an example.
Eagles Wings
New member
glorydaz
Well-known member
I don't care if you're addressing yourself in a mirror. What you type on this forum is my business.
Now go back to pretending to be nice. :carryon:
Well look at these emos we have: :loser: :dunce: :kook:
They would not be available if it was against the rules to use them, don't you think? :idunno:
It is when one gets on another member over and over, just to stress them, or when one stalks another member. This is when it gets into an inappropriate behavior issue.
Knight has always been well known for calling someone way off base a moron.
It should be obvious when one is acting like they are personally taking after another member, and that is what is against the rules. making it too personal and being obviously hateful is not acceptable.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Same old Nang
Yep...I prefer Mr. Nang to be honest. :chuckle:
glorydaz
Well-known member
And this is why we love you, Kat. :first:
I never gpt to know Mr. Nang, just good ole Nang who has a bit of a strange imagination. 'I float on TOL???' :idunno:
glorydaz
Well-known member
Well, watch closely...he pops in now and again like a wolf in sheep's clothing. If anyone could possibly call Nang a sheep, that is.
Nunya - Nunya Business
Does he have his own account?