SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Bump for clicherulz.
Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
Bump for clicherulz.
That isn't the problem, your perversion of the gospel is the problem.
Romans 5
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.
Romans 10
9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Ephesians 1
13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
Back to rulz...
You want people to think Paul preached the same thing, so you can pull people form his message. If they are saying the same thing, then you can get them to focus on the red letters.
You are guilty of eisegesis because you are clueless about theology and exegesis. We can read and quote the same verses, but interpret them differently, just like millions of Christians do. I accept that we are dead to sin and alive to Christ, but other verses also teach against your sinless perfectionism. What does it mean? I can reject your wrong understanding without rejecting Bible, gospel, Christ.
You are wrongly assuming you are infallible and anyone who disagrees with you is a dope (despite your views being refuted over and over throughout church history from the Bible).
Your circ gospel post cross is what rejects the gospel of grace, whereas non-Calvinistic views do not, despite how much Calvinists jump up and down promoting straw man myths about free will theism.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I once dated a Pauline, but never a Petrine or Johannine.
Here is the original, but with post purging, it might be a dead link.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Yes, since millions interpret them differently, it's really impossible to what a verse means. Just go with the majority, you will be ok.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The old "reciprocal love relationship" thing, hadn't heard it in a while.
if rulz loved the Lord, he would keep his commandments...what% is the minimum?
so much for the reciprocal love...
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever loveth him back (to a certain degree) shall not perish?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
This comment is not germane to the discussion. Who is your guru?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Acts 28:22 (KJV)
If you loved him you would keep his commandments. Uh-oh.
And he said unto them, These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their mind, that they might understand the scriptures; and he said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Ye are witnesses of these things. And behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city, until ye be clothed with power from on high. And he led them out until they were over against Bethany: and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them, and was carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: (*Luke *24:*44-52 ASV)
It's been nearly a decade with this clown, for me, I'm pretty sure he's just stupid.
Shasta
Well-known member
MAD is also unhistorical. The Ante Nicene Fathers, those who had known the Apostles together with the following two generations of their trainees had absolutely no knowledge of any dual gospel message. They also regarded all the books of the NT and the sayings of Jesus as the inspired word of God and quoted them extensively.
If the Apostles could not pass their teachings onto even the first few generations following them then then they and Paul were miserable failures as ministers of the gospel. The basic truths of the gospel were obscured by the RCC Church but when people started reading the Bible again they could see the truths for themselves. Not so MAD which was so obscure and arcane that throughout history no one mentions it until the 1800s. This is because it is not stated outright. It is an extra-Biblical construct, a meta-narrative superimposed on the text on the basis of a very few misread verses. Like a mirage it appears substantial only at a distance but whenever you try to look at it too closely or demand specifics it fades away.
So you will not show us. At least you admit it. You looked right at it and missed it. It is not complicated, it is the opposite. It does not need to be interpreted, it needs to be believed. One more time...
These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me.
That is not the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ was kept hidden from the world so satan and his servants godrulz and jason0047 could not stop it.
Romans 16
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began
1 Corinthians 2
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
The apostles did not know. It was kept form them also. If Peter knew, he would have preached it at Pentecost. But it was kept from him. The Holy Spirit speaking through him knew, but kept it from him.
People lost their salvation in Acts 5 when they kept proceeds from selling all their goods. Which reminds me, if you were apart of that gospel, you would not even be on the internet. You would have sold your goods and be living communally, while waiting for God to restore Israel.
I appreciate that however, I am looking at the entire passage and not just the portion you cut n p'd
It's not that in want to be disrespectful. I just see clearly that Jesus revealed to the disciples the propitiating instrumentality of His death, burial and resurrection. The words that He
opened he their mind, that they might understand the scriptures; and he said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
...pretty damn clear brother.
It's not that in want to be disrespectful. I just see clearly that Jesus revealed to the disciples the propitiating instrumentality of His death, burial and resurrection. The words that He
opened he their mind, that they might understand the scriptures; and he said unto them, Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
...pretty damn clear brother.
The cut and paste is the important part that was missed. It is what was said about the messiah. Him being crucified for sin was hidden in scripture. It was not revealed before Paul. The body of Christ and gentiles coming to God separate from Israel is hidden in God, and can not be traced out through scripture. He taught them what they should have known. Much like Nicodemus, he said you are master of Israel and you don't know these things? paraphrasing of course.
He didn't. It doesn't say he did, and Paul later says explicitly they did not know. At Pentecost Peter says he was raised up to sit on David's throne, as the messiah would bring Israel back together and put them in their proper place as a priest for the whole world.
And of course Luke says it was hidden from them when he mentioned his crucifixion. It is recorded so we can look back on it and know he is who he says he is.
31 Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of Man will be accomplished. 32 For He will be delivered to the Gentiles and will be mocked and insulted and spit upon. 33 They will scourge Him and kill Him. And the third day He will rise again.”
34 But they understood none of these things; this saying was hidden from them, and they did not know the things which were spoken.
Did you forget Peter drew his sword in the garden when they came for him? He did not know what would happen. It was hidden from him. He was in hiding after the crucifixion. They all were.
Acts 2
30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne,
And either I am right, or the Bible is wrong.
Romans 16
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began
1 Corinthians 2
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Romans 16
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began
1 Corinthians 2
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, 8 which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Natural missionary strategy progression, not change of gospels. Acts is selective history, historical narrative, not didactic. Base your views on all of the NT, including all Paul taught. Your assumptions are simplistic and flawed.
False dichotomy...you are wrong and the Bible is right. There is a difference between MAD proof texts and contextual exegesis.
Said another way, there is a difference between what it says, and what I want it to say.