ECT Jerry's 'unaware of death' theory flops in John

[God's Truth]

You have spent a lot of time defending yourself, because you need to. I'm not the only one pointing out your error filled theories.

How about this, let's debate and neither can dismiss any scripture by saying, "That is not for us". In addition, we have to believe and accept scripture without bringing in another one.

How about it?

 

[Interplanner]

Israel was not an inanimate object.
Israel was a living, breathing kingdom of physical earthly people.

Promises were made to that living, breathing kingdom of physical earthly people.
GOD will not break his promises to that living, breathing kingdom of physical earthly people that GOD specifically chose apart from all other nations.

The BOC being established at the time of Paul is not that same living, breathing kingdom of physical earthly people that GOD specifically chose apart from all other nations.
The BOC never fell and needed restoration.

There isn't much in the OT that would tell you what the new Israel was supposed to be, but it did have to bless all nations, Gen 12, and
'it is too small a thing to restore the fortunes of Israel / I will make you a light to the nations' says God to the Servant,
and any description of the new Israel in Isaiah is far beyond anything that could take place on earth as is
and in Dan 9 Messiah succeeds in all things about salvation and righteousness, but Israel is decimated.

Your formula is way too simplistic to be heard again and again.

 

[God's Truth]

False dichotomy, moron. The Lord Jesus Christ lived on earth, died via an "earthly" cross, rose from an "earthly" grave.....

The opposite of "spiritual" is "carnal," not "earthly."

You're an idiot.

I meant 'prosper' not 'proper'.

As for what you said about carnal, carnal is about what is fleshy, and flesh is about this earth.

 

[Tambora]

How about this, let's debate and neither can dismiss any scripture by saying, "That is not for us".

You've lost already.
Matthew 16:20
opcorn:

 

[Tambora]

Your formula is way too simplistic

It simplistic to those that believe GOD keeps His word.

 

[Tambora]

Let's debate it.

You don't know how to debate.
What you do is not debating.

 

[God's Truth]

You've lost already.
Matthew 16:20
opcorn:

Were they to obey him?

Yes or no.

 

[Tambora]

Were they to obey him?

Yes or no.

Ummm, look at your rule again for this "debate".

How about this, let's debate and neither can dismiss any scripture by saying, "That is not for us". In addition, we have to believe and accept scripture without bringing in another one.

Is this for us?
Matthew 16:20
Yes or no?

opcorn:

You set your own trap ...... again.
That's why you cannot debate. You do not address what was actually said. Not even what you, yourself, say!!!!

 

[glorydaz]

How about this, let's debate and neither can dismiss any scripture by saying, "That is not for us". In addition, we have to believe and accept scripture without bringing in another one.

How about it?

What you propose is not a debate....it's a bloviating contest.


Why am I not surprised you'd want to engage in one of those?

 

[God's Truth]

Ummm, look at your rule again for this "debate".


Is this for us?
Matthew 16:20
Yes or no?

opcorn:

You set your own trap ...... again.
That's why you cannot debate. You do not address what was actually said. Not even what you, yourself, say!!!!

I did no such thing.

You said is Matthew 16:20 for us, but you are NOT supposed to say that.

 

[Interplanner]

the promises were made to the Seed, Christ, one person. Not to seeds, many people. You have to follow the argument of Paul, not Chafer and Ryrie.

 

[God's Truth]

What you propose is not a debate....it's a bloviating contest.


Why am I not surprised you'd want to engage in one of those?

Is that your new word of the day?

If you check the definition, you would find that it is so not what I do. I mostly never speak at length.

 

[Tambora]

I did not such thing.[/Yes you did.

Look at it again, GT.

let's debate and neither can dismiss any scripture by saying, "That is not for us".

You said is Matthew 16:20 for us,

ROFL!
I have never said it is for us. I have always maintained that it is not for us.
Try and pay attention to what is said, GT.
You might be able to have an actual debate if you would lean how.

but you are NOT supposed to say that.

Then it's a good thing I have never said it was for us.

You, on the other hand, have said this:

Jesus' words were not temporary and only to a select few.


Jesus' words are forever to everyone.

We have to obey everything Jesus commanded.

It's still a lie, GT.
And you think what you do is "debate"?
ROFL!

 

[glorydaz]

Is that your new word of the day?

If you check the definition, you would find that it is so not what I do. I mostly never speak at length.

You were just bragging how you out posted everyone. :juggle:

 

[God's Truth]

You were just bragging how you out posted everyone. :juggle:

I don't speak at length.

 

[God's Truth]

I did not such thing.[/Yes you did.

Look at it again, GT.





ROFL!
I have never said it is for us. I have always maintained that it is not for us.
Try and pay attention to what is said, GT.
You might be able to have an actual debate if you would lean how.


Then it's a good thing I have never said it was for us.

You, on the other hand, have said this:





It's still a lie, GT.
And you think what you do is "debate"?
ROFL!

You asked if this scripture was for us.

I said we cannot speak like that.

Now answer the question.

Were those people that Jesus said that to expected to obey?

 

[Tambora]

You asked if this scripture was for us.

Yep. So is it?

I said we cannot speak like that.

And it was a stupid rule to make when discussing scripture.

Now answer the question.

Were those people that Jesus said that to expected to obey?

Lord have mercy!
How many times do I need to tell you that not all of the commands of Jesus in scripture are for the BOC?
I told you numerous times that everything they were to obey AT THE TIME for them, is not for everyone at all times.
I've told you that every time you say something stupid like:

"WE have to obey EVERYTHING Jesus commanded"

"Jesus' words were not temporary and only to a select few. Jesus' words are forever to everyone"

It's still a lie, GT.
Would you now like to retract your lies that "We have to obey EVERYTHING Jesus commanded, and that Jesus' words were not temporary to a select few but are forever to everyone" ??????
Or are you going to hang on to those lies?

 

[glorydaz]

I don't speak at length.

Maybe we should put it up for a vote..... :chew:

To bloviate means to go on and on and on and on, usually in a pompous way. ... When someone bloviates, he is speaking in an empty, pretentious, full-of-himself manner.​

 

[SimpleMan77]

Ummm, look at your rule again for this "debate".


Is this for us?
Matthew 16:20
Yes or no?

Yep... we can only tell women... and those other modern things.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Jerry Shugart]

the promises were made to the Seed, Christ, one person. Not to seeds, many people. You have to follow the argument of Paul, not Chafer and Ryrie.

Some were made to more than one "seed" but of course you are blind to those verses:

"And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be" (Gen.15:15).​