Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Putting Jerry Shugard in Check is Easy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Is Jerry a woman now? Because according to his interpretation of Galatians the gender identities of believers no longer exist.


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by SaulToPaul View Post
      Who is Jerry Shugard?
      Some old dude


      Sent from my iPhone using TOL

      Comment


      • #18
        Still waiting. As soon as he gets here it is check mate.


        Sent from my iPhone using TOL

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by intojoy View Post
          Is Jerry a woman now? Because according to his interpretation of Galatians the gender identities of believers no longer exist.


          Sent from my iPhone using TOL

          Hi and if you mean Gal 3:28 , then lets see you explain the verse , MR GALLOW and no offense meant , especially , that you only have a third grade educarion , and I love you any way !!

          Let's see you dance around THIS ??

          dan p

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DAN P View Post
            Hi and if you mean Gal 3:28 , then lets see you explain the verse , MR GALLOW and no offense meant , especially , that you only have a third grade educarion , and I love you any way !!

            Let's see you dance around THIS ??

            dan p
            Dan you woman


            Sent from my iPhone using TOL

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by intojoy View Post
              Jerry, on the road to Emmaus what was it that was meant when they said:

              “But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel. Yea and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things came to pass.”
              ??Luke? ?24:21? ?ASV??
              http://bible.com/12/luk.24.21.asv


              Sent from my iPhone using TOL
              Jerry "silenced" shughard


              Sent from my iPhone using TOL

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                Dan you woman


                Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                Hi and that is a just a STUMBLING , lost your NERVE ??

                It looks like you are CHEAP SHOT ??

                dan p

                Comment


                • #23
                  Check


                  Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Mate


                    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                      Jerry "silenced" shughard


                      Sent from my iPhone using TOL
                      You are a lot like Jerry, in that you both think that a new thread is received telepathically.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                        Jerry, on the road to Emmaus what was it that was meant when they said:

                        “But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel. Yea and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things came to pass.”
                        ??Luke? ?24:21? ?ASV??
                        http://bible.com/12/luk.24.21.asv


                        Sent from my iPhone using TOL
                        No response.


                        Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                          Jerry, on the road to Emmaus what was it that was meant when they said:

                          “But we hoped that it was he who should redeem Israel. Yea and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things came to pass.”
                          ??Luke? ?24:21? ?ASV??
                          http://bible.com/12/luk.24.21.asv


                          Sent from my iPhone using TOL
                          For MAD theology to be intact, this question must be ignored.


                          Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                            Um


                            Sent from my iPhone using TOL
                            This is beyond a joke... right? You call people kid and young pup... but you are really going to hang your theological, dirty drawers out for everyone to see?

                            Acts and Luke are connected. In both books, the name "Theophilus" is present and the conclusion and beginning of Luke and Acts bind them as books that are best studied back to back.

                            Luke is enormously important because it is one of the strongest historical accounts of Jesus ever put together... "Compilation... Composite..."

                            Do you understand?

                            As in...
                            Luke 1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

                            Luke is a gathering of accounts and a weaving of collected writings and investigation about the life, death and Ressurection of Christ. In other words... it was completed after Jesus Christ the Son, left the earth. This is why the Author goes immediately into the ascension... in the book of Acts.

                            Luke and Acts are known by scholars to be written in a way that makes them "back to back".

                            The only reason the Gospels close with John... is because John is the full on... Deity of Jesus defense. John is the full apologios for Jesus Divinity... that was crucial to conclude the 4 main accounts with.

                            Anyhow... [MENTION=15326]intojoy[/MENTION]... young lad ... and I mean biblical, youthful... folly... The verse you site only amplifies the Mid-Acts perspective and concludes the book of Luke with Christ revealing "how He is the fulfillment of the Kingship of Israel".

                            And what does the Author of Luke and Acts say... in 24 of Luke and 1 of Acts?
                            Luke 24 44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

                            46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

                            50 And He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed them. 51 Now it came to pass, while He blessed them, that He was parted from them and carried up into heaven. 52 And they worshiped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, 53 and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God. Amen.

                            Now... Jesus reveals His Authority and (John 5:39) of the matter... in reference to The Ekklesiastical 11... and He then Ascends... but the Luke account merely foreshadows the blown up and expounded on "ascension" account of Acts 1.

                            What does "Ekklesia" ask of Jesus in Acts one... immediately before the ascension of Jesus?
                            Acts 1:6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.

                            This further shows the Luke 24 binding of Christ's revelation to Israel. Gentiles weren't on the menu yet.

                            Jesus simply refers to "All Nations"... but foreshadows with Luke 24 speech that starts with... "Jerusalem".
                            Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

                            That further shows that Pentecost was to Ekklesia. The Gentiles weren't brought into the matter with the DBR gospel... until...

                            Acts 9!!! But... Acts 9 only foreshadows the "WHO".... This doesn't even DBR lock in fully... until later in Acts... but... Luke and Acts show exactly the point, checkmate and accuracy of the side you are arguing against... and Luke 24 actually backs Mid Acts up in spades!

                            Go back to the Bible Junior and interpret the Bible with the Bible... instead of your lame kjv donkey commentaries! For real! You can't see the forest for the trees!

                            And... quit quoting yourself in this [MENTION=10]Jerry Shugart[/MENTION] call out thread that displays your biblical-tardation in the books of Luke and Acts... "most excellent Theophilus"... it's kind of sad and pathetic!

                            You're better than this and your d game needs some heavy work to even approach the humility of the A game you are falsely claiming victory over.

                            The Preterists are supporting you for Jiminy Crickets sake! Down some coffee... turn on Eye of the Tiger... Burn your commentaries... pray for biblical guidance and re-read Luke and Acts without your bull Nostril ideas!

                            I ain't even Mid-Acts and I knew what I just wrote!

                            Get right... Intojoy... my Eye wouldn't look so stinky towards you if you actually argued valid points... instead of dropping verses and books that decimate your proposed stance!

                            Super serious but with a note of respect because you ain't no pre-terrorist... SI theologian.

                            - Evil.Eye.<(I)>

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Evil.Eye. View Post
                              This is beyond a joke... right? You call people kid and young pup... but you are really going to hang your theological, dirty drawers out for everyone to see?

                              Acts and Luke are connected. In both books, the name "Theophilus" is present and the conclusion and beginning of Luke and Acts bind them as books that are best studied back to back.

                              Luke is enormously important because it is one of the strongest historical accounts of Jesus ever put together... "Compilation... Composite..."

                              Do you understand?

                              As in...
                              Luke 1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

                              Luke is a gathering of accounts and a weaving of collected writings and investigation about the life, death and Ressurection of Christ. In other words... it was completed after Jesus Christ the Son, left the earth. This is why the Author goes immediately into the ascension... in the book of Acts.

                              Luke and Acts are known by scholars to be written in a way that makes them "back to back".

                              The only reason the Gospels close with John... is because John is the full on... Deity of Jesus defense. John is the full apologios for Jesus Divinity... that was crucial to conclude the 4 main accounts with.

                              Anyhow... [MENTION=15326]intojoy[/MENTION]... young lad ... and I mean biblical, youthful... folly... The verse you site only amplifies the Mid-Acts perspective and concludes the book of Luke with Christ revealing "how He is the fulfillment of the Kingship of Israel".

                              And what does the Author of Luke and Acts say... in 24 of Luke and 1 of Acts?
                              Luke 24 44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.” 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.

                              46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

                              50 And He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed them. 51 Now it came to pass, while He blessed them, that He was parted from them and carried up into heaven. 52 And they worshiped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, 53 and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God. Amen.

                              Now... Jesus reveals His Authority and (John 5:39) of the matter... in reference to The Ekklesiastical 11... and He then Ascends... but the Luke account merely foreshadows the blown up and expounded on "ascension" account of Acts 1.

                              What does "Ekklesia" ask if Jesus in Acts one... immediately before the ascension of Jesus?
                              Acts 1:6 Therefore, when they had come together, they asked Him, saying, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority.

                              This further shows the Luke 24 binding of Christ's revelation to Israel. Gentiles weren't on the menu yet.

                              Jesus simply refers to "All Nations"... but foreshadows with Luke 24 speech that starts with... "Jerusalem".
                              Luke 24:45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

                              That further shows that Pentecost was to Ekklesia. The Gentiles weren't brought into the matter with the DNR gospel... until...

                              Acts 9!!! This doesn't even lock in fully... until later in Acts... but... Luke and Acts show exactly what you are arguing against and Luke 24 actually backs Mid Acts up in spades!

                              Go back to the Bible Junior and interpret the Bible with the Bible... instead of your lame kjv donkey commentaries! For real! You can't see the forest for the trees!

                              And... quit quoting yourself in this [MENTION=10]Jerry Shugart[/MENTION] call out thread that displays your biblical-tardation in the books of Luke and Acts... "most excellent Theophilus"... it's kind of sad and pathetic!

                              You're better than this and your d game needs some heavy work to even approach the humility of the A game you are falsely claiming victory over.

                              The Preterists are supporting you for Jiminy Crickets sake! Down some coffee... turn in Eye of the Tiger... Burn your commentaries... pray for biblical guidance and re-read Luke and Acts without your bull Nostril ideas!

                              I ain't even Mid-Acts and I knew what I just wrote!

                              Get right... Intojoy... my Eye wouldn't look so stinky towards you if you actually argued valid points... instead of dropping verses and books that decimate your proposed stance!

                              Super serious but with a note of respect necausenyou ain't no pre-terrorist... SI theologian.

                              - Evil.Eye.<(I)>
                              You're wrong. It doesn't matter that Luke and Acts are written by Luke. What matters is what he wrote. And in Luke 24:21 the disciples claim that they thought Jesus was supposed to redeem Israel's sins and establish the Jewish state. Later in that chapter Jesus tells the very ones who doubted the plan of Jesus that His death burial and resurrection was for the remission of sins and that that message would go forth from Jerusalem and it did in Acts 2.


                              Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by intojoy View Post
                                You're wrong. It doesn't matter that Luke and Acts are written by Luke. What matters is what he wrote. And in Luke 24:21 the disciples claim that they thought Jesus was supposed to redeem Israel's sins and establish the Jewish state. Later in that chapter Jesus tells the very ones who doubted the plan of Jesus that His death burial and resurrection was for the remission of sins and that that message would go forth from Jerusalem and it did in Acts 2.


                                Sent from my iPhone using TOL
                                First off... you misquoted me and speed quoted some errors I fixed.

                                Second... You messed up and responded so quickly to my carefully written out Response... that I know you are merely "perspective defending"... instead of researching... like a scholar.

                                Third... Your response here is so contradictory and self refuting... because it backs up my scholarly assertions and then says....

                                Ahem... Paraphrasing your intojoy style...
                                Waaaaaaaaaaaaa... Boooo... Hoooooo.... Hoooo! Stomp... Pout... Poor supporting argument on my (emphasis [MENTION=15326]intojoy[/MENTION]'s) part ... bathed in naive posturing against a perceived Theological Rival. (JS)

                                Get right junior... I would like to take you seriously as 23% of what you post isn't refuse. (Compliment on my part)

                                Not only does it matter... but your denying it shows your stubborn unwillingness to accept scriptural fact over your mistaken posture.

                                - Stink.Eye.<(@)>

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X