Nang's SPOTD is Tet's Hit Out of the Park!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nang

TOL Subscriber
I think all Dispensationalists have a strong desire to rewrite the Holy Scriptures in their words, rather than accepting the inspiration and revelation of Truth, as worded by God Almighty.

The repeatedly show resistance to His Holy concepts, and try to improve on Truth, rewritten to their liking.

What "Gruber" arrogance they display over faithful saints who humbly accept God according to His written Word.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No mystery at all . . .

heir and all the other Darby followers think the "mystery" is a "secret parenthetical dispensation" of church age believers distinct from Israel.

When in fact, the "mystery" was that the Gentiles became fellow heirs with Israel of the promises.

Dispensationalism is a mess.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
:rotfl: You're a joke. You couldn't even answer what the word of truth is concerning us on the first or second try.

I have no idea what you consider the "word of truth" to be, but Jesus Christ defined the word of truth in John 17:17.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
What "Gruber" arrogance they display over faithful saints who humbly accept God according to His written Word.

If GM, StP, heir, Musterion, Delmar, or Johnny really possessed a hunger and thirst for God's truth, they would spend most of their days doing online searches and exploring church history & biblical doctrines, to test the spirits and compare beliefs against their own (supposedly) profound study of God's Word.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
heir and all the other Darby followers think the "mystery" is a "secret parenthetical dispensation" of church age believers distinct from Israel.

When in fact, the "mystery" was that the Gentiles became fellow heirs with Israel of the promises.

Dispensationalism is a mess.

More and more I am believing Dispensationalism is God's judgment and delusion sent upon lawless ones, who have no love of His Truth. II Thessalonians 2:9-12
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Isaiah Chapter 53.

She is morphing, "evolving" into her buddy, Craigie, spamming a verse, thinking, "that oughta do it," with no explanation. Are you an evolutionist, besides embracing satanic Clavinism? Compare, my answer, breaking it down, showing differences, with hers, as Isaiah 53 shows NADA re. "crucified with Christ:"


"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." 1 Peter 1:2 KJV

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." 1 John 1:7 KJV

In both cases here, blood is used to cleanse.

Notice:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20 KJV

When Paul speaks about the cross of Christ, he sometimes refers to this "with crucifixion." Outside of Romans-Philemon, you will not find this. The bible is a book of details.

There is a dichotomy, a division. In this dispensation, the believer is accounted to be "crucified with Christ." That is, the believer is applied to the cross, if you will. Outside the present age, the blood of the cross is applied to the person. The direction of the 2 ways is opposite. You will not find Paul speaking of being washed in the blood, and no where outside of Roman-Philemon is anyone spoken of being crucified with Christ. Without recognizing Paul's distinct ministry, the dispensation of the grace of God, facts like these get "brushed aside", and divisions go unnoticed. And the proof texts supporting eternal "in-security" in past ages, as STP would say, get "blended" together with the doctrine for this dispensation.


Naggie: it says the same thing.


Contrasts, between my eloquence, and humility, and Naggie.

Naggie/Tet: No one taught this concept of "crucified with Christ," before Paul. Therefore, it is false.

 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I think all Dispensationalists have a strong desire to rewrite the Holy Scriptures in their words, rather than accepting the inspiration and revelation of Truth, as worded by God Almighty.

The repeatedly show resistance to His Holy concepts, and try to improve on Truth, rewritten to their liking.

 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
If GM, StP, heir, Musterion, Delmar, or Johnny really possessed a hunger and thirst for God's truth, they would spend most of their days doing online searches and exploring church history & biblical doctrines, to test the spirits and compare beliefs against their own (supposedly) profound study of God's Word.

Biblical doctrines are found in the study of God's Word, which is amazingly available these days, to saints online. And biblical doctrines do not exist apart from the history and spiritual development of the church of Jesus Christ, since the time of His cross and resurrection.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
I have no idea what you consider the "word of truth" to be, but Jesus Christ defined the word of truth in John 17:17.
"the word of truth" not "thy word is truth". Do words mean anything to you? I told you that you didn't even know what the word of truth is when you came in to a thread and made false accusations about those who hold to 2 Timothy 2:15. And sure enough, you couldn't define it.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
She is morphing, "evolving" into her buddy, Craigie, spamming a verse, thinking, "that oughta do it," with no explanation. Are you an evolutionist, besides embracing satanic Clavinism? Compare, my answer, breaking it down, showing differences, with hers, as Isaiah 53 shows NADA re. "crucified with Christ:"


"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." 1 Peter 1:2 KJV

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." 1 John 1:7 KJV

In both cases here, blood is used to cleanse.

Notice:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20 KJV

When Paul speaks about the cross of Christ, he sometimes refers to this "with crucifixion." Outside of Romans-Philemon, you will not find this. The bible is a book of details.

There is a dichotomy, a division. In this dispensation, the believer is accounted to be "crucified with Christ." That is, the believer is applied to the cross, if you will. Outside the present age, the blood of the cross is applied to the person. The direction of the 2 ways is opposite. You will not find Paul speaking of being washed in the blood, and no where outside of Roman-Philemon is anyone spoken of being crucified with Christ. Without recognizing Paul's distinct ministry, the dispensation of the grace of God, facts like these get "brushed aside", and divisions go unnoticed. And the proof texts supporting eternal "in-security" in past ages, as STP would say, get "blended" together with the doctrine for this dispensation.


Naggie: it says the same thing.


Contrasts, between my eloquence, and humility, and Naggie.

Naggie/Tet: No one taught this concept of "crucified with Christ," before Paul. Therefore, it is false.


You should be able to quickly discern Isaiah teaching the death of Messiah for the sins of His people.

Don't blame me and Tet because you don't.

:down:
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
More and more I am believing Dispensationalism is God's judgment and delusion sent upon lawless ones, who have no love of His Truth. II Thessalonians 2:9-12

Dispensationalism is definitely a delusion.

Dispensationalists parrot the teachings of John Nelson Darby, then do everything they can to not be associated with John Nelson Darby.

It doesn't get any more delusional than that.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Johnny's desperate.

He's trying to equate Jesus and Paul to John Nelson Darby.

Johnny thinks that because no one in the OT referred to God with the exact phrase: "God the Father" before Jesus used the phrase "God the Father", it is analogous to no one teaching the rapture until John Nelson Darby.

Dispies just can't handle that Darby invented the rapture.

However, Johnny's desperate attempt to compare Darby to Jesus and Paul, is in itself evidence that he admits Darby did in fact invent the rapture.


Wimpy Craigie is desperate.

He's trying to equate Jesus and Paul to Hank Hannegraaf.

Craigie the wimp thinks that because no one after Paul, the church fathers, referred to "the catching away..removal...departure" with the the exact phrase: "The Rapture," after Paul, until Darby, it is analogous to no one teaching the rapture until John Nelson Darby.

Preterists just can't handle the truth that they assert that "God the Father" is not "God the Father," and that they assert that the earth was flat at one time.

See how that works, demon?


Show us one person, That ever taught the concept of "God the Father," before the Lord Jesus Christ did.


" Johnny's desperate attempt to compare Darby to Jesus and Paul, is in itself evidence that he admits Darby did in fact invent the rapture."-punkie

"Jesus and Paul?" How so, sweetie? That's not in my argument. You argue, that if no one taught a doctrine for a spell, it's false.

Demon.
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
"the word of truth" not "thy word is truth". Do words mean anything to you? I told you that you didn't even know what the word of truth is when you came in to a thread and made false accusations about those who hold to 2 Timothy 2:15. And sure enough, you couldn't define it.

Are you claiming "the" word of Truth, is not the Father's Word of Truth?

Wow!

That is another example of your "Gruber" arrogance. . . (aka "liberal humanism conceit").
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
Biblical doctrines are found in the study of God's Word, which is amazingly available these days, to saints online. And biblical doctrines do not exist apart from the history and spiritual development of the church of Jesus Christ, since the time of His cross and resurrection.
You would have people study out the estimated 41,000 "Christian" denominations to find truth. SMH No thanks. I'll stick with my King James Bible and believe the words on the page and if/when I'm wrong in my belief, the word of God will correct me as I 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV. You know what you can do with your religion...count it but dung.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame

Wimpy boy is desperate, as he refuses to name one person, before him that ever taught:

-"Tet is a preterist that believes Christ already returned in 70 AD via the Roman Army."-Tambora, on another TOL thread

"Correct, and thanks for making it clear that it was the Roman army that was His return."-stupid Craigie

"The Roman army destroyed Jerusalem in 70AD. That is what Jesus meant when He said He will return."-Gomer Tet.




-that the concept of "God the Father" is "invented," as you assert, and is "rubbish."

-that the Lord Jesus Christ did not teach the law, as you assert.


-this:

"So, they were saved, but not technically until 70AD."-"expert" stupid Craigie on salvation

Show us one person, before you, who ever taught "technical salvation."


How does it feel, girlie punk?
 

Nang

TOL Subscriber
You would have people study out the estimated 41,000 "Christian" denominations to find truth. SMH No thanks. I'll stick with my King James Bible and believe the words on the page and if/when I'm wrong in my belief, the word of God will correct me as I 2 Timothy 2:15 KJV.

You just do that, dear.

You know what you can do with your religion...count it but dung.

How sweet of you to say so . . .


:rip:
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Dispensationalism is definitely a delusion.

Dispensationalists parrot the teachings of John Nelson Darby, then do everything they can to not be associated with John Nelson Darby.

It doesn't get any more delusional than that.

Delusional, you say, wimp? Like this?:


"That's not my argument.

I have never said that dispensationalism was "wrong" because of how old it was. I specifically said that no one taught about Christ coming back twice before Darby did."--habitual liar Wimpy Tet.


vs.

"My argument is that if there is not one single trace of something for 1,800+ years by anyone, then it was invented"-Craigie

Were you delusional, sweetie, or habitually lying again?


Well, silly boy Craigie?
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I'll stick with my King James Bible and believe the words on the page and if/when I'm wrong in my belief, the word of God will correct me

Until you give up the false teachings of John Nelson Darby, you are never going to realize how wrong you are.
 

heir

TOL Subscriber
Are you claiming "the" word of Truth, is not the Father's Word of Truth?

Wow!
The word of truth concerning us is specific. It is "the gospel of your salvation".

Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

I feel sorry for you. You've spent so much time studying all of your so called church history that you haven't studied to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (which you also can't define just how it is that we do that).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top