Theology Club: Jerry Shugart's Supposed Problem with MADists

[Danoh]

At some point, I will move on, as most do, sooner or later, for whatever reasons, life being what it is.

A decision not held back by the likes of a Jerry Shugart.

He wanted his attention. Here it is...

According to you and your comrades if I quote Scriptures to support my beliefs then the thread is ruined. And it is especially ruinous to you all because you usually just run and hide from those verses!

Jerry appears to be the only person who refuses to see that it is not what he asserts that has people against him, and or avoiding him.

Case in point, I not only actually hold to some of his understandings, but can defend them way better than he has ever demonstrated over the years.

But I have often stated I absolutely refuse to either show agreement, or difference with his understandings.

This, out of my conviction that he will only do with them what he has done for decades now, with what little sound understanding in some things he has shown he actually has - do the following with it, in the service of his pride, vanity and need to lord it over others.

Do I need to hound after others within Mid-Acts - for years now - insisting they agree with me, and while I am at it; insulting them for holding a different understanding? No.

Does Jerry? Yes on all counts.

Do I need to derail every Mid-Acts thread, subject, post, attempt to explore an understanding with fellow Mid-Actsers - hounding after them - for years now - insisting they agree with me; insulting them for holding a different understanding? No.

Does Jerry? Yes on all counts.

Do I need to troll through old Mid-Acts based posts that I might once more hound after Mid Actsers - for years now - insisting they agree with me; insulting them for holding a different understanding? No.

Does Jerry? Yes on all counts.

Why?

Because he is the only person who refuses to see that it is not what he asserts that has people against him, and or avoiding him, rather; it is the above that I have just pointed out to him so clear that a child could see what the actual issue is with this vain, obnoxious, bullying, maligning, distorting, pest of a man named Jerry Shugart.

That only spells one thing - the man is not about to sacrifice his deep seated pride just because it has continued to fail him.

He will continue to assert that those he would bully into his own little man version of "I will be like the Most High" who refuse him his desperate need, have something wrong with them.

What he asserts is not the issue. It never was. That is his prerogative.

His decades old need to hound after others within Mid-Acts towards their submission to his vanity, together with his need to belittle them is, and always will be.

Would that he saw this...

Am I off on this people?

1] Is it that you actually take great difference with his right to understand things as he sees fit?

I strongly suspect not. Because that is simply not a trait the truly consistent Mid-Actser allows himself - not if he is to continue to grow in his own understanding.

2] Or is it that you take difference with his above practice - his hounding, and hounding and hounding, and belittling, and belittling.

Let this be a record of what the actual issue was with this complex man named Jerry Shugart had continued to deny in the service of his pride over grace with his supposed own, in his differences in understandings with them.

 

[Tambora]

At some point, I will move on, as most do, sooner or later, for whatever reasons, life being what it is.

I plan on staying at TOL. Been here for years and years. I just love this place!

A decision not held back by the likes of a Jerry Shugart.

Jerry won't ruin this place for me. The site will still have jerks.
Jerry just ruins studying with him. Studying is a dead end with Jerry.
He talks to ya, not with ya.
Gonna have to just skip over his posts for now.


Let the mods handle this.
They know about it, and they have concerns.




And in my opinion, this thread should not be in this forum. It's not about MAD studies. It's about Jerry's behavior. It should be in either THE REST forum or THE BACK ALLEY forum.

 

[Danoh]

I plan on staying at TOL. Been here for years and years. I just love this place!


Jerry won't ruin this place for me. The site will still have jerks.
Jerry just ruins studying with him. Studying is a dead end with Jerry.
He talks to ya, not with ya.
Gonna have to just skip over his posts for now.


Let the mods handle this.
They know about it, and they have concerns.




And in my opinion, this thread should not be in this forum. It's not about MAD studies. It's about Jerry's behavior. It should be in either THE REST forum or THE BACK ALLEY forum.

Just wanted to make a separate post: that in the future, anyone looking through various posts will know the truth of this issue.

Sort of like how Bryan has been laying out the history of what had really brought on the divisiveness between various Dispys: Legalism disguised some sole holder of truth all had to bow to or else...

In this, Jerry has earned himself a place in Mid-Acts history - regrettably, O'Hair's aptly named "Accuser of the Brethren."

The irony...

Though happy we will each be with each our loss, saved so as by the purifying fire of His rightly divided Word....

Nevertheless, would that he strive to correct this decades old hounding after and belittling insistence of his that he will one day suffer the loss of reward for.

 

[Desert Reign]

I am not MAD but I sympathise with you, buddy.
Jerry doesn't talk to you or discuss with you. He doesn't listen to you and completely ignores anything you say. If you say something that disagrees with him he merely repeats what he said the first time and tells you that you haven't answered his question.
He is either unwilling or unable (or both) to interact with others and therefore doesn't belong on a discussion forum in my view. I think you should either petition mods to ban him (with an appropriate warning) or, if that doesn't work, send him to Coventry. I think this is justified by the forum rules of disruptive behaviour.
An alternative would be to get him removed from the Theology Club board, where discussion is supposed to be of a higher standard.

 

[DAN P]

Just wanted to make a separate post: that in the future, anyone looking through various posts will know the truth of this issue.

Sort of like how Bryan has been laying out the history of what had really brought on the divisiveness between various Dispys: Legalism disguised some sole holder of truth all had to bow to or else...

In this, Jerry has earned himself a place in Mid-Acts history - regrettably, O'Hair's aptly named "Accuser of the Brethren."

The irony...

Though happy we will each be with each our loss, saved so as by the purifying fire of His rightly divided Word....

Nevertheless, would that he strive to correct this decades old hounding after and belittling insistence of his that he will one day suffer the loss of reward for.

Hi and now you see why they all setup a Mid-Acts position that would include Acts 13 and that is what we get !!

Yet I know Acts 9 people that are just as bad , that say that Paul was saved under the Kingdom gospel , that Paul baptized and all Mid-Acts have there problems ,

I know that forum that you came from , and look at how dead they are today as they ran off many of there posters , like Terral !!

dan p

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry doesn't talk to you or discuss with you. He doesn't listen to you and completely ignores anything you say.

I let the Scriptures talk for me and they run and hide from those Scriptures, just like you do on the King James Only thread.

You talk big but you refuse to answer very simple questions because you know that you have been refuted completely. However, your pride is so huge that you would rather continue to lead others astray by saying that the translation found in the KJV is without error despite the fact that you now know that it isn't.

If you say something that disagrees with him he merely repeats what he said the first time and tells you that you haven't answered his question.

You haven't answered my question but instead you ran from it. Here it is again:

Is the "day" spoken of at Matthew 26:17 the same "day" spoken of at Mark 14:12?​

Anyone who has the slightest degree of spiritual discernment knows that the answer is "yes" but you refuse to answer.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

 

[Danoh]

Hi and now you see why they all setup a Mid-Acts position that would include Acts 13 and that is what we get !!

Yet I know Acts 9 people that are just as bad , that say that Paul was saved under the Kingdom gospel , that Paul baptized and all Mid-Acts have there problems ,

I know that forum that you came from , and look at how dead they are today as they ran off many of there posters , like Terral !!

dan p

Not true. I am still a member. I just no longer post there because I see no point. Its Dispy forum is Acts Two and they stuck there.

One or two other MADists - both A9D - still post there every now and then.

I will agree there used to be some very knowledgeable A9Ders on there.

Some of them were banned, though, because they were simply too rude and or rabid in their insistence when others differed in understanding.

That site also banned Interplanner for his stance against the gay marriage issue.

That right there sealed my not going back.

He is a brother in Christ who despite my strong disagreement with him on many eschatological issues neverthesless has a strong testimony as to the finished work of the Cross.

Not that my coming over here has been what I'd sought - shared exploration of our understandings.

The one wonderful positive mostly thus far, has been knowing of and exchanging with Tambora, Glorydaz, heir, STP, John W, GrossM, Patrick, their thoughts on things, and one or three others, or so.

That, and seeing that that Inter was able to find a home where he could post.

Seeing Jerry's nonsense once more - sheesh, he goes way back in this fool insistence of his- being the huge negative only he can be.

Maybe I'll just post more on Linda's site. She'd ban Jerry in a heartbeat.

While Paul, while he is very supportive on his site and also would not put up with this fool, his site is just too controversial for my tastes.

Anyway, DP, you have been around some time, I'll give ya that, my brother

One thing I did get over there was awareness - from an enemy of Dispensationalism, lol - of an individual who had held to much that Darby later came to that was in key ways similar to his.

Nothing is ever all bad, nor never all good.

Lol, even Jerry has ended up a positive - a lesson in how not to be with the doctrine...

 

[Danoh]

I let the Scriptures talk for me and just like you they run and hide from those Scriptures, just like you do on the King James Only thread.

You talk big but you refuse to answer very simple questions because you know that you have been refuted completely. However, your pride is so huge that you would rather continue to lead others astray by saying that the translation found in the KJV is without error despite the fact that you now know that it isn't.



You haven't answered my question but instead you ran from it. Here it is again:

Is the "day" spoken of at Matthew 26:17 the same "day" spoken of at Mark 14:12?​

Anyone who has the slightest degree of spiritual discernment knows that the answer is "yes" but you refuse to answer.

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

There you have it folks - by his own hand - evidence of the obvious once more - on a thread lamenting this very neurosis of his.

Would that he drop dead for a while; get lost, take a breather and seriously think through this problem he is are to his own cause.

Doubtful...

 

[Desert Reign]

You haven't answered my question but instead you ran from it. Here it is again:

Is the "day" spoken of at Matthew 26:17 the same "day" spoken of at Mark 14:12?​

Which part of

So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

do you not understand?

If you don't give me a satisfactory answer to this question I shall suggest the mods to remove your membership of the theology club. You repeated your question many times despite I answered it and told you I answered it also many times. This is not conducive to fair discussion.

 

[Danoh]

Which part of

do you not understand?

If you don't give me a satisfactory answer to this question I shall suggest the mods to remove your membership of the theology club. You repeated your question many times despite I answered it and told you I answered it also many times. This is not conducive to fair discussion.

Jerry is suffering from a 2004 post-traumatic shock disorder - can't say I blame him - Jeremy always did know his Mid-Acts!

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13451

Which was right around the time another Dispy forum banned him, but he still managed to get a word in, lol

 

[Tambora]

Which part of

So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

do you not understand?

The nazi-madist will ignore your question and run and hide from it like he always does.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You repeated your question many times despite I answered it and told you I answered it also many times. This is not conducive to fair discussion.

I looked and looked for an answer by you never provided it. Were they they the same day or not?

If you can't figure it out then your spiritual IQ is practically ZERO!

 

[Danoh]

I looked and looked for an answer by you never provided it. Were they they the same day or not?

If you can't figure it out then your spiritual IQ is practically ZERO!

Lol, coming from Jerry, that is actually a compliment :rotfl:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

The first day of unleavened bread was the same day when they killed the Passover lamb:

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?" (Mk.14:12; KJV).​

You admitted that the Passover lamb was killed on the 14th:

The lamb itself was slaughtered and cooked in the evening or (if you want to be literal as Leviticus actually says 'between the evenings'.) In practice what that meant was any time after the sun started to go down. So it was definitely the same day because they did the preparation in the morning and they slaughtered the lamb in the evening. The evening however counted as the 14th after sundown.

So do you admit that the first day of unleavened bread happened on the 14th?