ECT Mad finds itself in the trash by applying simple logic

[Lighthouse]

Er no, you are not even following anything being said. You're just saying anything, regardless of whether it's relevant or not.

Foolish child.

Well I think you're

, so what?

You may as well concede, as you've now lost the argument by simply failing to control your impulses and anger and cussing.

Innocent of what?

In general, moron. Romans 6:23

Are you seriously this dense?

You have got to be the dippiest dipstick this side of an engine block.

Scripture doesn't say.

Romans 6:23

They brought a woman to him caught in the act of adultery, and used the situation to test him.

Yup.

The test was to see if he would agree with the Mosaic law or not.

And you still don't know whether or not He did.

So far all we've had from you is what you *think* happened, and why you *think* it happened, and why you *think* the whole test was invalid.

Just another ignorance based assumption, because you can't follow a line of reason.

Did the men do as the Law proscribed in this situation? Yes or no?

Then simply it would mean that her condemnation was deserved from a legal / moral perspective, which is all the pharisees were wanting to know in the first place, nothing more. Agreeing with the mosaic law would not get people in trouble with Rome.

If they had executed her it would have. And they all had stones in their hands, waiting for His response.

Now let's see if you can use the brain in your head for something more than taking up space in your skull.

What would the Pharisees have done if Jesus said she should be stoned?

The accusers would have been happy about Jesus agreeing with Moses, but would have also been confused because he taught that harlots were entering the kingdom of God ahead of them. They knew that Jesus would want to give the woman opportunity to repent, which he did by the way, and by doing so would have been at odds with Moses.

Then how would they have accused Him? If He could get around it by saying she should be stoned what would they have had with which to accuse Him? They wanted to discredit or dispose of Him. We know the latter because they tried to kill him themselves once and got Him killed later.

No that's you. Continually.

:sigh:

There is no atonement for adultery under the law, so stop beating around the bush and show where there is grace and mercy under the law. You constantly keep blabbing nonsense.

The idea that there is no atonement for capital crimes is nonsense. But that's beside the point.

Jesus could not have condemned her in accordance with the Law, not because the Law allows adulterers and adulteresses to go free in some instances [because it doesn't]; He could not condemn her in accordance with the Law because:

1. The man was not also present.
2. Jesus did not witness the crime.
3. There were no witnesses at that point, let alone the two or three required for condemnation.

So, regardless of who's right or wrong about Jesus ministering the Law He still could not have condemned her under the Law.

Let me put it another way, if a similar situation had happened before Jesus was here [at a time when you believe the Law was in full effect] and a group of people asked a random guy his thoughts on the matter when he was neither a witness, a judge nor a priest [as recognized by them], and he did the same thing Jesus did and they all left that man could not have condemned the woman to death. Do you think I'm wrong? Could the lone man who did not witness the crime condemn the accused to death with no witnesses according to the Law?

So you enjoy wasting everyone's time.

No, I enjoy having intelligent conversations that sometimes include theories and speculations for the sake of argument. The only time I'm wasting is my own by trying to have an intelligent conversation with you.

Let's quickly clear up the fact that it was not the law condemning Ananias and Saphira *Sapphira. So this is irrelevant.

It was God, who gave the Law, condemning them. And why? Because they disobeyed Him and lied to Him. Dunderhead.

Jesus upheld the integrity of the law in order to make people realize how much they needed him. When we're talking about him enforcing the law, we're talking about him supporting the judicial aspect of the law.

Other than the time in John where you erroneously assume He didn't support it where else do you assume He didn't support it?

If Jesus agreed with Moses concerning the law's prescribed punishment for sin, would he have expected the Jewish leaders to carry it out?
If God said, "put adulterers to death", would Jesus have expected the Israel's leaders to see it done?

It's not up to the leaders to carry it out, for one. And for two Jesus knew the Romans had banned the Jews from executing anyone. But these men did pick up stones as though they intended to stone her. So Jesus made sure He didn't have to find out if they actually would have done it. As well as made sure they couldn't accuse Him of anything of which He was not actually guilty.

Here's another question for you: If Jesus had simply said the woman should be shown mercy and grace and let go [as you assume He did in the end] what would have happened? What would the Pharisees have done? What would the effect have been on Jesus' ministry?

In other words: What would have been the outcome, the result, if Jesus had outright contradicted Moses?

 

[Lighthouse]

Yes. He's become a troll on these topics.

I think we're dealing with ego more than anything else with him.

 

[andyc]

Foolish child.


You may as well concede, as you've now lost the argument by simply failing to control your impulses and anger and cussing.

Not at all. Just showing you how easy it is to reply with words like idiot and moron etc. You've been doing it for years. It's no good crying if I let you have some.

In general, moron. Romans 6:23

Are you seriously this dense?

You have got to be the dippiest dipstick this side of an engine block.

You have rules for yourself?

And you still don't know whether or not He did.

:duh: Of course he agreed with it, but he was obviously hoping for people to see beyond it.

Just another ignorance based assumption, because you can't follow a line of reason.

Did the men do as the Law proscribed in this situation? Yes or no?

Yes

There was no trial, which was something you won't accept.


If they had executed her it would have. And they all had stones in their hands, waiting for His response.

Now let's see if you can use the brain in your head for something more than taking up space in your skull.

What would the Pharisees have done if Jesus said she should be stoned?

Agreeing with the Mosaic law would not have put Jesus in a difficult position with Rome.

John 19:7 The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God."

If Jesus felt that the woman ought to have died, he could have said the same thing.

Then how would they have accused Him? If He could get around it by saying she should be stoned what would they have had with which to accuse Him? They wanted to discredit or dispose of Him. We know the latter because they tried to kill him themselves once and got Him killed later.

Dear oh dear. When I read nonsense like this, and your comments of me all through this post, it makes me laugh.
It's like talking to brick wall.

Moses received the law on behalf of Israel, and "thou shalt not commit adultery" was one of the commandments.
Death was the punishment. Jesus was a minister of a new covenant where sinners (adulterers) had the opportunity to repent.

You know this is true, but it gives mad a black eye, so you reject it, while making yourself look more and more stupid.

The idea that there is no atonement for capital crimes is nonsense. But that's beside the point.

Well show it from scripture in the old testament!

Go on!

Jesus could not have condemned her in accordance with the Law, not because the Law allows adulterers and adulteresses to go free in some instances [because it doesn't]; He could not condemn her in accordance with the Law because:

1. The man was not also present.
2. Jesus did not witness the crime.
3. There were no witnesses at that point, let alone the two or three required for condemnation.

All three of your excuses are all irrelevant because the woman was not on trial. You are concentrating on the judicial aspect of the law, which is only necessary when judgment is to be carried out.

So, regardless of who's right or wrong about Jesus ministering the Law He still could not have condemned her under the Law.

Yes he could.
He knew she committed adultery. If there was no forgiveness for adultery under the law, she would be condemned under the law even if she escaped physical judgement. It's similar to when Paul judged the man at Corinth who had his father wife.

Let me put it another way, if a similar situation had happened before Jesus was here [at a time when you believe the Law was in full effect] and a group of people asked a random guy his thoughts on the matter when he was neither a witness, a judge nor a priest [as recognized by them], and he did the same thing Jesus did and they all left that man could not have condemned the woman to death. Do you think I'm wrong? Could the lone man who did not witness the crime condemn the accused to death with no witnesses according to the Law?

He would have agreed with the law, and agreed that those who were caught should be put to death. Jesus came to save sinners, as he was the mediator between God and man in a new covenant, where he would take the penalty for all sins committed upon himself. The problem was that he accusers didn't recognize him as such, because they didn't believe in him.

It was God, who gave the Law, condemning them. And why? Because they disobeyed Him and lied to Him. Dunderhead.

This had nothing to do with the law. Dunderhead.

Other than the time in John where you erroneously assume He didn't support it where else do you assume He didn't support it?

Obviously whenever he forgave people of their sins because of their faith, he was removing the condemnation of the law upon them. You are yet to explain the basis for this (see the OP).

It's not up to the leaders to carry it out, for one.

I said, Jesus would have expected the Jewish leaders to see it done. If capital punishment was expected as part of the law, they should have been carrying it out regardless of Rome. Better to fear God than man.

And for two Jesus knew the Romans had banned the Jews from executing anyone. But these men did pick up stones as though they intended to stone her. So Jesus made sure He didn't have to find out if they actually would have done it. As well as made sure they couldn't accuse Him of anything of which He was not actually guilty.

Here's another question for you: If Jesus had simply said the woman should be shown mercy and grace and let go [as you assume He did in the end] what would have happened? What would the Pharisees have done? What would the effect have been on Jesus' ministry?

In other words: What would have been the outcome, the result, if Jesus had outright contradicted Moses?

Well it's obvious.

It would be left to people to regard Jesus as someone greater than Moses, or an impostor rebelling against Moses.

 

[andyc]

OK folks.

What was the basis for Jesus to forgive sins while supposedly still being under the law?

Have you figured it out yet?

 

[john w]

OK folks.

What was the basis for Jesus to forgive sins while supposedly still being under the law?

Have you figured it out yet?

Nice- "I, candyandycain, was getting pummeled, by Lighthouse, and others, bloodied, so much so, that I was left slumped, in a heap, on the mat, waiting for my daddy, the devil, to pump me up, again, with sophistry, and deceit, and grade school techniques, which he did, and told me to fly away, hoping no one would notice my getting whipped by MAD proponents, and now, I return, 2 months later, in a drive by shooting, knowing most are gone from this thread, and thinking, I showed these bullie MAD proponents a thing or two, and all these mean MAD wackos cannot answer my questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That is slick, candyandy......Real slick.....Like your father the serpent, as an eel sliding down the drain......

 

[andyc]

Nice- "I, candyandycain, was getting pummeled, by Lighthouse, and others, bloodied, so much so, that I was left slumped, in a heap, on the mat, waiting for my daddy, the devil, to pump me up, again, with sophistry, and deceit, and grade school techniques, which he did, and told me to fly away, hoping no one would notice my getting whipped by MAD proponents, and now, I return, 2 months later, in a drive by shooting, knowing most are gone from this thread, and thinking, I showed these bullie MAD proponents a thing or two, and all these mean MAD wackos cannot answer my questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That is slick, candyandy......Real slick.....Like your father the serpent, as an eel sliding down the drain......

Errrrrrrrrrrrr no.

Back in early october I was fighting a kidney stone for two weeks. Then due to massive dehydration passed out twice, once on the stairs which led to a bad spinal injury. so it wasnt you and the devil keeping me away. Although talking to you is so uplifting as always lol.

Anyway, are you going to tackle the question in the op?

Lighthouse regurgitates the same nonsense, what about you?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Nice- "I, candyandycain, was getting pummeled, by Lighthouse, and others, bloodied, so much so, that I was left slumped, in a heap, on the mat, waiting for my daddy, the devil, to pump me up, again, with sophistry, and deceit, and grade school techniques, which he did, and told me to fly away, hoping no one would notice my getting whipped by MAD proponents, and now, I return, 2 months later, in a drive by shooting, knowing most are gone from this thread, and thinking, I showed these bullie MAD proponents a thing or two, and all these mean MAD wackos cannot answer my questions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

That is slick, candyandy......Real slick.....Like your father the serpent, as an eel sliding down the drain......

You're a regular Ben Weaver type, you know that fella?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Back in early october I was fighting a kidney stone for two weeks. Then due to massive dehydration passed out twice, once on the stairs which led to a bad spinal injury.

I do not understand why you'd be having health issues, andy. (One of the healers of TOL)

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I do not understand why you'd be having health issues, andy. (One of the healers of TOL)

Oh yeah.

 

[john w]

Errrrrrrrrrrrr no.

Back in early october I was fighting a kidney stone for two weeks. Then due to massive dehydration passed out twice, once on the stairs which led to a bad spinal injury. so it wasnt you and the devil keeping me away. Although talking to you is so uplifting as always lol.

Anyway, are you going to tackle the question in the op?

Lighthouse regurgitates the same nonsense, what about you?

Hold on there, Hop Sing! You should not show such disrespect to your daddy, the devil! He just might take you to the wood shed, for a whippin! No charge on that advice, devil boy-on the house-consider it a Christmas gift.

"Anyway, are you going to tackle the question in the op?"-devil boy

1. As I predicted...Real slick.

2. Chapter, verse, where I am required to answer any/all questions, especially from the lost, such as yourself.

I thought so, drive by candyandy.

Kidney stone, spinal injury, you spin? Why not claim your miracle today, punk!!! Puh raayyyyyzz Gaaaaaaaaaaaaawd!


You fraud-Back to Pentecost, with all your scam, alleged miracles, raising the dead, and you can't have your minor kidney problem/spine healed by God? Give the Laaaaaawd a shout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!b

Penty scammer.

 

[john w]

I do not understand why you'd be having health issues, andy. (One of the healers of TOL)

"The dead still get raised today, but because of a lack of faith in this area, it's not as common as it should be."-candyandycain

Puh raaaazzzzzzzzzz Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus, Mayor!!! Shazam!!!

 

[john w]

You're a regular Ben Weaver type, you know that fella?

I try, Mayor.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little." Then He said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." And those who sat at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" Then He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace."

What? her faith saved her?

I am MAD and I have always said that those who lived under the law and those who did not were saved by grace through faith APART FROM WORKS!:

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).​

There are some within the MAD community who teach that those who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works. On the other hand, there are sme like me, who teach that those who lived under the law were saved by grace APART FROM WORKS!

 

[andyc]

I do not understand why you'd be having health issues, andy. (One of the healers of TOL)

Christians are not immune from health issues. Its how you deal with them. When being tried to the max, its important to avoid faithless people like you. Ive already had to fight the negativity of doctors, family, and work colleagues for refusing spinal fusion surgery while in hospital for a week. By the stripes of Jesus my spine is healed. Doctor wouldnt initially let me go to work, and work wouldnt let me come in without a certificate. Family has bombarded me with what I should, so your unbelief isn't going to bother me too much.

 

[andyc]

I am MAD and I have always said that those who lived under the law and those who did not were saved by grace through faith APART FROM WORKS!:

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).​

There are some within the MAD community who teach that those who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works. On the other hand, there are sme like me, who teach that those who lived under the law were saved by grace APART FROM WORKS!

Those under the old covenant were living in the hope of receiving grace. Those under the new covenant received grace.
Jesus forgave people of their sins while still living under law. what was the basis of this forgivenes that brought them out of condemnation of the law?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Those under the old covenant were living in the hope of receiving grace. Those under the new covenant received grace.

Paul made it plain that David, who lived under the law, was saved apart from works:

"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin" (Ro.4:5-8).​

Peter knew that he was saved by grace:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are" (Acts 15:11; NIV).​

Jesus forgave people of their sins while still living under law. what was the basis of this forgivenes that brought them out of condemnation of the law?

"For Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Ro.10:4).​

 

[andyc]

Hold on there, Hop Sing! You should not show such disrespect to your daddy, the devil! He just might take you to the wood shed, for a whippin! No charge on that advice, devil boy-on the house-consider it a Christmas gift.

"Anyway, are you going to tackle the question in the op?"-devil boy

1. As I predicted...Real slick.

2. Chapter, verse, where I am required to answer any/all questions, especially from the lost, such as yourself.

I thought so, drive by candyandy.

Kidney stone, spinal injury, you spin? Why not claim your miracle today, punk!!! Puh raayyyyyzz Gaaaaaaaaaaaaawd!


You fraud-Back to Pentecost, with all your scam, alleged miracles, raising the dead, and you can't have your minor kidney problem/spine healed by God? Give the Laaaaaawd a shout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!b

Penty scammer.

I wonder what the Galatians thought of Paul when he preached salvation and healing while suffering physically?

You don't have to deal with the OP, W, but if you don't want to, why are you here?

Move along.

 

[andyc]

Peter knew that he was saved by grace:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are" (Acts 15:11; NIV).​

"For Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Ro.10:4).​

He wasnt under the law then, was he?
If it is of grace it cannot be of works, otherwise grace is nolonger grace, yes?

When Jesus forgave peoples sins when they believed, what were they believing in?

 

[musterion]

I wonder what the Galatians thought of Paul when he preached salvation and healing while suffering physically?

You don't have to deal with the OP, W, but if you don't want to, why are you here?

Why are you still injured?

 

[Right Divider]

I wonder what the Galatians thought of Paul when he preached salvation and healing while suffering physically?

You don't have to deal with the OP, W, but if you don't want to, why are you here?

Move along.

Galatians is a very early writing. Toward the END of Paul's ministry, he was suggesting other things:

1Tim 5:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(5:23) Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.
​

2Tim 4:20 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:20) Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.
​

Why didn't he just heal them?