1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Mocking them Dispies again? :crackup:
ECT Obsolete, aging and soon disappearing: why MAD is pointless
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Mocking them Dispies again? :crackup:
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Timothy being a Grecian Hebrew.
The dividing is truth from error not peoples.
Interplanner
Well-known member
You mean that you have not yet learned that that is not what that verse about, but was only a jingoism by D'ism to sound right? 'rightly divide' has to do with church admin; see the context.
How can you say that when you have just been shown that the new covenant is not divided as you think because 2 Cor 3-5 is how the new covenant is for all manking; God was in Christ doing a sin offering! Are you actually going to divide that up?
Interplanner
Well-known member
Either talk in terms of 2 Cor 3-5 or shut up. There is no communication when you say I'm not using "the Word" rightly when you have just been shown the specifically correct way.
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Yes, Timothy was ordained an administrator by Paul.
His gift was being able to understand truth from error in scripture to the saving of the soul.
It was in his grandmother first.
Paul was exhorting (encouraging) him to continue in it.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Paul meant make the right kind of response to the right person in church situations; which does mean knowing a lot about Scripture but not about history and times and the era of grace etc.
That might make for a good pitch for you - for a "getting rid of my endless 'about' book sale" :chuckle:
So says the Preterist "historian," Interplanner...
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Obsession is unhealthy.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Why do I call it pointless?
1, yesterday I found out that Mr Thought Police about reading 'other books' HAS BEEN READING OTHER BOOKS this whole time!
2, yesterday I found out that the big contradiction that MAD was supposed to have solved was James 2 about faith. Honestly, the density of these people. It is not a contradiction with Rom 4. James 2 is a question of whether faith is dead, Rom 4 is not. How can the two passages contradict?
I am seeking to know why the pop MAD teacher Del ___ said that in 68 everyone left Paul, and whether he meant they went back to Judaism, or just away from his letters and justification as in Romans/Gal/Phil/2 Cor. Also whether he meant those in Judea, where the pressure to conform to radical Judaism peaked that year. This is a new question to me. He mentions it in his presentation linked at the other thread on Gal 2.
I also think his chronology has problems. The confrontation of Peter in Gal 2 was not Acts 9. Peter, therefore, strayed more than once.
1, yesterday I found out that Mr Thought Police about reading 'other books' HAS BEEN READING OTHER BOOKS this whole time!
2, yesterday I found out that the big contradiction that MAD was supposed to have solved was James 2 about faith. Honestly, the density of these people. It is not a contradiction with Rom 4. James 2 is a question of whether faith is dead, Rom 4 is not. How can the two passages contradict?
I am seeking to know why the pop MAD teacher Del ___ said that in 68 everyone left Paul, and whether he meant they went back to Judaism, or just away from his letters and justification as in Romans/Gal/Phil/2 Cor. Also whether he meant those in Judea, where the pressure to conform to radical Judaism peaked that year. This is a new question to me. He mentions it in his presentation linked at the other thread on Gal 2.
I also think his chronology has problems. The confrontation of Peter in Gal 2 was not Acts 9. Peter, therefore, strayed more than once.
1-I have NEVER been against books.
Rather against books SUPPOSEDLY about Scripture.
But ESPECIALLY against an OVER RELIANCE ON books for one's supposed understanding of Scripture.
That is YOU - TO - A- T.
So unreasonably rendered by this OVER RELIANCE of yours that YOU still "think" I am against books - NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES I have explained my intended sense to you.
You have been rendered practically CLUELESS as to how to extract the intended sense of another's words.
You - the would be liberator of error :chuckle:
2 - YESTERDAY you found out?
In other words, you have been going on and on and on - all this time clueless in your laziness to research a thing other than your Preterist "historian" notions.
3 - ALL MAD is and REMAINS a question to you.
You represent yourself as an expert witness against what you continue to prove you are clueless about :crackup:
Sure, James is supposedly the other side of Romans 4's coin.
When approached from enough angles til one of said angles "fits. "
As if reading a passage, first from this angle, and or perhaps from this other one, or maybe from this other one, is a sound way of arriving at its' intended sense.
All that is, is what that can only result in - in the "what this means to me" result of the amateur.
Hence; your kind's "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" 2 Tim. 3:7
4 - Well, at least you got it right that his chronology is off.
But that is nothing more than your leap years of a right guess repeating itself every twenty eight years, lol
Les' numbers are also off - there were no longer Twelve Apostles of the Circumcision by that time.
Case in point...
Matthew 10:2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
Acts 12:1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. 12:2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
But as I'd already noted; I don't always see eye to eye with any one MAD or another on one point or another.
Few will, being that each has his or her own level of time in the Scripture; individual talents in Adam that each brings to their study of a thing, and so on.
Some people are attracted to playing a piano soon after they are born. Others to books.
We can all recall these various kinds of talents in various classmates back when we were each children.
I still recall one classmate from my childhood who could memorize things in one trial. I can still see/hear her walk up to me way back then to proudly announce and then prove that "I memorized all that by heart" God bless her little smile
Yep.
whitestone
Well-known member
lol,I.P,,you cant answer the questions that I ask you at the beginning of your thread. If you say yes to any of them, the scriptures will chase you. If you answer them all "no" then you know that I will ask you about John 8:33 KJV and point out that they,,(those he was conversing with) were in fact of the seed of Abraham(so could claim his ascendancy, as a fore father),,but were not under the law,,,,
If you say no, then there is by far more than 2p2p,there are multitudes of peoples and plans,,,eventually there will be only the one current plan and stewardship,dispensation,Gospel(what-so-ever,you choose to call it),,,lol but I agree "you are a dispy and don't realize it".
Hi and since he can never disprove DISPENSATIONALISM he will illnever see the word DISPENSATIONALISM IN 1 Tim 1:4
as most all are BLIND !!
DAN P
ClimateSanity
New member
You replied to the wrong person.
whitestone
Well-known member
Hi and we brother with DISPENSATIONALISM because that is the message Paul was preaching and Paul never preach that we are saved by the NEW COVENANT , for he did not , as only Covenant Low Informational bible student teach what is for Israel !!
So what is INCLUDED in the New Covenant and explai how you were SAVED , IF YOU CAN WITH VERSES ??
DAN P
whitestone
Well-known member
lol,I.P.,,,consider it John 8:33 KJV ,,,they say that Abraham is their fore-father,,,but they were never in bondage in Egypt,nor Babylon? They cant be from Lots tribe because Lot was Abraham's nephew and so not of his children. Now who can claim to be his descendant and "never in bondage at the same time"?,,,don't open other peoples mail,,,