User Tag List

Page 7 of 127 FirstFirst ... 456789101757107 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 1905

Thread: Is MAD doctrine correct?

  1. #91
    LIFETIME MEMBER Bright Raven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Calfornia
    Posts
    7,743
    Thanks
    227
    Thanked 2,856 Times in 1,844 Posts

    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2087211
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    I don't KNOW what any of that means !!

    Why do you use TWO EXCLAMATION POINTS at the end of every paragraph ??

    Why do you SKIP a space , before putting in a comma ??
    Maybe , to aggravate you!!
    He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.

    Jim Elliot

  2. #92
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    5,430
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 698 Times in 513 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    228161
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    I don't KNOW what any of that means !!

    Why do you use TWO EXCLAMATION POINTS at the end of every paragraph ??

    Why do you SKIP a space , before putting in a comma ??

    Hi , and since you do not KNOW what I have written means , and as I was wtiting , he will not know what it means !!

    I do not write so that you will not understand , but that you will check out the Greek text and will see that the Perfect Tense is correct for the Greek word APHORIZO , and you complaint about 2 exclamation points instead ??

    Use VINE'S or STRONGS and the internet and check the Greek Text ??

    dan p

  3. #93
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by Bright Raven View Post
    Maybe , to aggravate you!!
    No , thats not how its done !! You are SUPPOSED to put a space BETWEEN the last word in the sentence , and the exclamation points , like this !!

  4. #94
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    5,430
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 698 Times in 513 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    228161
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    No , thats not how its done !! You are SUPPOSED to put a space BETWEEN the last word in the sentence , and the exclamation points , like this !!

    Hi , and I really do not care , as long as all will understand , and English was not a strong suit of mind !

    Just one exclamation point this time and you will NEVER understand what I write , unless , that person reading is saved !!

    1 Cor 2:14 RULES , as to why many do not understand and will never understand , for it seems that is where you fit in !

    dan p
    Last edited by DAN P; January 11th, 2013 at 12:29 PM.

  5. #95
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11793
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    So?

    Do you take this to mean Peter never baptized anyone?




    The 12 apostles were specifically told to baptize, by Jesus. Paul, who was an apostle, was not sent to baptize, even though he was called by Jesus. That's the point. Paul was also not commanded to teach all the things Jesus had taught the 12.

    Just because baptism happened doesn't change these facts, and there's also the fact that Paul wrote that there was only one baptism; and most of the time when he wrote of baptism it wasn't by water.
    Bad theology, bad exegesis.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  6. #96
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11793
    Quote Originally Posted by Guyver View Post
    So you don't think that Mark 16 belongs in the Bible? Does John 3 belong in the Bible? What about 1 John 5?

    Just a few posts before you said...



    Why would anyone want to change their view to match the Bible if it is not to be trusted? If people can add or subtract from the scriptures, thus nullifying 2 Timothy 3:16 then what's the point? It's just another book like any other...filled with men's ideas.

    I sure hope you're wrong. Because if you are not, and Mark 16 isn't supposed to be there.....then you may as well just toss the whole lot.

    I don't see how anyone could think otherwise. What are you doing....just picking and choosing whatever you feel like believing?
    The end of Mark 16 (vv. 9 ff.), not all of Mark 16 is disputed based on textual criticism. I Jn. 5 is defensible, but not the one verse I Jn. 5:7. Jn. 7-8 is fine, but a portion (woman story) is disputed based on lack of MSS evidence.

    I am not denying whole chapters, but rightly questioning a verse or portion that appears to be a spurious scribal addition, not something linked to the original, inspired MSS.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  7. #97
    Veteran Guyver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Tardation
    Posts
    263
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    The end of Mark 16 (vv. 9 ff.), not all of Mark 16 is disputed based on textual criticism. I Jn. 5 is defensible, but not the one verse I Jn. 5:7. Jn. 7-8 is fine, but a portion (woman story) is disputed based on lack of MSS evidence.

    I am not denying whole chapters, but rightly questioning a verse or portion that appears to be a spurious scribal addition, not something linked to the original, inspired MSS.
    Maybe I'm the only one who acknowledges the can of worms that opens up. I know it's a commonly held notion...but the whole thing is ridiculous considering that there are no original manuscripts.

    Do you also question the works included in the canon, or are sixty-six books the right number?
    Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same.

  8. #98
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by Guyver View Post
    I know it's a commonly held notion...but the whole thing is ridiculous considering that there are no original manuscripts.
    Besides which, Mark 16:8 does seem to be a rather abrupt and implausible ending for a gospel.

  9. #99
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11793
    Quote Originally Posted by Guyver View Post
    Maybe I'm the only one who acknowledges the can of worms that opens up. I know it's a commonly held notion...but the whole thing is ridiculous considering that there are no original manuscripts.

    Do you also question the works included in the canon, or are sixty-six books the right number?
    I do not have a problem with canonicity and reject Apocrypha as non-canonical.

    The wealth of MSS evidence allows us to reconstruct the original to over 99% accuracy. If a verse has NO MSS support, then we are safe to assume it is spurious, a later interpolation (I Jn. 5:7).

    I agree with the teachings in the disputed passages, but have to be scholastically honest and admit they are likely not in the originals.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  10. #100
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11793
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    Besides which, Mark 16:8 does seem to be a rather abrupt and implausible ending for a gospel.
    This objection is noted by the scholars and there are answers for it. The bottom line is a lack of credible MSS support for v. 9 ff. I still read, study, believe, obey it, but recognize the flag translators raise about it.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  11. #101
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,720
    Thanks
    1,174
    Thanked 13,247 Times in 10,132 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147867
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    Why did Paul ever bother water baptizing anyone then?
    There was no prohibition against it.

    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz View Post
    Bad theology, bad exegesis.
    If you're going to make claims back them up.


  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Lighthouse For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 8th, 2017)

  13. #102
    Black Rifles Matter Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    16,833
    Thanks
    648
    Thanked 9,175 Times in 6,337 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147792
    Quote Originally Posted by Guyver View Post
    Maybe I'm the only one who acknowledges the can of worms that opens up. I know it's a commonly held notion...but the whole thing is ridiculous considering that there are no original manuscripts.

    Do you also question the works included in the canon, or are sixty-six books the right number?
    You are going to see his normal argument more often. His normal argument is that it doesn't mean what it says. Then he will not say what it (Paul) really means.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Nick M For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 8th, 2017)

  15. #103
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    472
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    There was no prohibition against it.
    That there is no prohibition against doing something is not a reason to do it.
    Last edited by Paulos; January 11th, 2013 at 10:27 AM.

  16. #104
    Black Rifles Matter Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    16,833
    Thanks
    648
    Thanked 9,175 Times in 6,337 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147792
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulos View Post
    That there is no prohibition against doing something is not a reason to do it.
    Israel had a commission. Paul was called into service, but in a different direction. Not all was revealed from the beginning.


    Acts 26:16

    16 But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Nick M For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 8th, 2017)

  18. #105
    Veteran Guyver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Tardation
    Posts
    263
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    You are going to see his normal argument more often. His normal argument is that it doesn't mean what it says. Then he will not say what it (Paul) really means.
    I'm going to give him credit for being honest about his beliefs, consistent, and not ducking any issues.

    He did answer my questions and didn't duck any as many people often do.
    Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us