ECT MADist thought for the day

Status
Not open for further replies.

andyc

New member
If a believer who happened to be a kingdom slave had a wife who was part of the BOC, would the wife be unclean to the husband while she was menstruating?
The law states that under normal conditions the woman would be unclean for seven days, and who ever touches her would be unclean until evening. If the woman was unclean to her husband it would put her under the law. If she wasn't unclean to her husband it would negate the law.

What say you?
 

andyc

New member
I say you're a moron.




Next
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
If a believer who happened to be a kingdom slave had a wife who was part of the BOC, would the wife be unclean to the husband while she was menstruating?
The law states that under normal conditions the woman would be unclean for seven days, and who ever touches her would be unclean until evening. If the woman was unclean to her husband it would put her under the law. If she wasn't unclean to her husband it would negate the law.

What say you?

Luke 20:21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:

Luke 20:22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?

Luke 20:23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?

Luke 20:24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.

Luke 20:25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

Luke 20:26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.

Luke 20:27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,

Luke 20:28 Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

Luke 20:29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children.

Luke 20:30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.

Luke 20:31 And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died.

Luke 20:32 Last of all the woman died also.

Luke 20:33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.
 

andyc

New member
Luke 20:21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly:

Luke 20:22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or no?

Luke 20:23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?

Luke 20:24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.

Luke 20:25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

Luke 20:26 And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace.

Luke 20:27 Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that there is any resurrection; and they asked him,

Luke 20:28 Saying, Master, Moses wrote unto us, If any man's brother die, having a wife, and he die without children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

Luke 20:29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and died without children.

Luke 20:30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.

Luke 20:31 And the third took her; and in like manner the seven also: and they left no children, and died.

Luke 20:32 Last of all the woman died also.

Luke 20:33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them is she? for seven had her to wife.

This does not answer the question I posed. In the passage you quoted Jesus was simply explaining that there are no marriages in heaven. The reasoning is simply that we shall be spiritual beings like the angels, and so there shall be no physical union.
 

andyc

New member
This is the stupidest thread ever.

You're only saying that its stupid because you can't respond. This is why I differ to MADists. If something stumped me I would be determined to get to the bottom of it, but you just don't care.
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
This does not answer the question I posed.

I know. I wanted to show how the Pharisees and Sadducees asked convoluted questions for the sole purpose of trying to trip up the Lord.
And, how you did the same.

But, unlike the Lord, my answer to your question is, "I don't know."
 

andyc

New member
I know. I wanted to show how the Pharisees and Sadducees asked convoluted questions for the sole purpose of trying to trip up the Lord.
And, how you did the same.

But, unlike the Lord, my answer to your question is, "I don't know."

In Jesus' case he was the fulfilment of everything the pharisees were hoping for but they assumed he was an impostor. You're flattering yourself for putting me in the pharisee role and you in the Christ role simply because I offered you a challenge regarding MAD theology.
I'm not trying to trip you up to destroy your reputation, I'm trying to open your eyes to the error of MAD.

I was hoping to show you that law and grace can't co-exist.
 

deason

New member
Scratch this - I found a explanation thread!


Can someone define what MAD is for me please? I see it all over the forums, but I don't recognize it from anywhere else.

Someone help a newbie out!
 

andyc

New member
Can someone define what MAD is for me please? I see it all over the forums, but I don't recognize it from anywhere else.

Someone help a newbie out!

Chickenman has a thread for people who want to learn about what MAD is. Its basically a form of hyper dispensationalism where they see two gospel messages in scripture to two different classes of people. The gospel of the kingdom to Jews, and a mystery gospel given to Paul for gentiles.
Have a read through Chicken's thread and ask questions, they'll give you a warm friendly welcome, but they'll also be ready to set the rottweilers on you if you start to refute their strange claims.
 

deason

New member
Chickenman has a thread for people who want to learn about what MAD is. Its basically a form of hyper dispensationalism where they see two gospel messages in scripture to two different classes of people. The gospel of the kingdom to Jews, and a mystery gospel given to Paul for gentiles.
Have a read through Chicken's thread and ask questions, they'll give you a warm friendly welcome, but they'll also be ready to set the rottweilers on you if you start to refute their strange claims.

Thanks for posting this. I happen to find the threat right as you were sharing it.

I'm familiar with dispensationalism, though not in agreement with it. It was only now that I learned there was a hyper form of it!
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Thanks for posting this. I happen to find the threat right as you were sharing it.

I'm familiar with dispensationalism, though not in agreement with it. It was only now that I learned there was a hyper form of it!

andyc's a really pleasant chap, hope you two get acquainted. But, if you get on his bad side, he will passive-aggressively ridicule you to no end...but in a nice "Christian" way.


Chickenman's thread is not designed for debate or ridiculing "MAD".
There are hundreds of other threads on TOL designed for that.
 

graceandpeace

New member
In Jesus' case he was the fulfilment of everything the pharisees were hoping for but they assumed he was an impostor. You're flattering yourself for putting me in the pharisee role and you in the Christ role simply because I offered you a challenge regarding MAD theology.
I'm not trying to trip you up to destroy your reputation, I'm trying to open your eyes to the error of MAD.

I was hoping to show you that law and grace can't co-exist.

:thumb:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top