ECT The core of the argument between Christians and MAD.

[Nang]

I have talked with them.
I do not think they disagree. I think you think they disagree because of semantics.

But here's their chance to disagree with it if they do.

Good.

 

[Nang]

Grace is a precious subject to ponder. In the concordance I found it used throughout the old testament,but in the new testament Mathew nor Mark used the word Grace. In Luke 2;40 Grace was upon Jesus,in John 1;14,16 and 17 grace is again applied to description's of Jesus and grace. Then in Acts 4;33 "grace was upon them all",,but then in Acts 11,13,14,15 the usage of the word Grace explodes with the amount of times it is used.

I am of the Reformed view and our systematic theology is entitled "The Doctrines of Grace."

I am also a student of Covenant Theology, which centers upon and emphasizes God's Saving Grace that is irresistible and always efficacious.

So, yes, it is a precious subject to me; for which I would give my life to defend.

Nang

 

[whitestone]

Not only that, but there is several years between Acts 9 and 10.

Yes from the 17 years explained by Paul in Galatians there has been much study and debate over the mathematics matched with Luke's account in Acts,

 

[patrick jane]

Thanks for adding yet another personal judgment of others.
Tell me how that makes you the better person. :idunno:

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc View Post
People like dan p musterion john w nick m grosnick etc, are completely nowhere

i wanna be a nowhere man, living in my nowhere land, making all my nowhere plans . . . for nobody. jk. i mean, really, the thread title separates Christians and "MAD", as if those that believe, understand, live, and preach Paul's gospel are not Christian. it came From Christ.

looking back on my spiritual walk, reading and understanding Paul's epistles was the beginning of the end of my confusion. all other scripture became clearer to me. so when i see blatant attacks and mistaken interpretation, i applaud the "name-calling" in return.

a few post pages of scripture, but it's what they say at the beginning and end that drives a wedge - atrol:

 

[patrick jane]

Yes from the 17 years explained by Paul in Galatians there has been much study and debate over the mathematics matched with Luke's account in Acts,

the timing is important. i haven't 'studied' it necessarily, but Paul clearly states he was the first, more than once, and shows it throughout his writings. - atrol:

 

[andyc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc View Post
People like dan p musterion john w nick m grosnick etc, are completely nowhere

i wanna be a nowhere man

Congratulations. You've achieved it.

 

[musterion]

Post audio of yourself speaking in "tongues," Andy. Let's see if we can ID which foreign language it is, and how fluent it is.

Since we're all nowhere unbelievers, it's God's will.

 

[andyc]

We don't want to let the truths of scripture be negated by our understanding of the timeline. If the timeline is important to some more than others, why is it important?

If we look at Peter's vision of different animals previously unclean, was God explaining that these unclean animals were NOW made clean, or was Peter's understanding of faith not as it should have been?

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc View Post
People like dan p musterion john w nick m grosnick etc, are completely nowhere

i wanna be a nowhere man, living in my nowhere land, making all my nowhere plans . . . for nobody. jk. i mean, really, the thread title separates Christians and "MAD", as if those that believe, understand, live, and preach Paul's gospel are not Christian. it came From Christ.

looking back on my spiritual walk, reading and understanding Paul's epistles was the beginning of the end of my confusion. all other scripture became clearer to me. so when i see blatant attacks and mistaken interpretation, i applaud the "name-calling" in return.

a few post pages of scripture, but it's what they say at the beginning and end that drives a wedge - atrol:

Read the OP for explanation of the title.

LA

 

[IMJerusha]

All of our claims sound so bad when you say them. We must be really awful people. That or there is a great deal of misunderstanding going on.

I don't think you're awful people, Delmar. I just don't think you are saved while I am not. We both call the same Lord, Lord. We both love the same Lord and are part of the same Body. I care for you and I know you care for me. I don't think it's misunderstanding, per se. I think it's clinging to what is unimportant and not clinging to what is important. I know, that's an over simplified description but it'll do for now.

 

[IMJerusha]

Right.
It is just an expression used to describe a person's behavior.

It's a put down. Expressing that THEY need to change their ways, while you don't need to.


Not when you exempt yourself of the same behavior.


I know, I know.
Jesus and Paul were just meanies.

Bluntly, Tambora, I don't exempt myself but I'm also not going to admit to doing something I didn't do nor accept your derision because you can not or are unwilling to identify sinful behavior.

 

[IMJerusha]

Jesus and Paul never cursed people, or used similar language MADists have used to curse me to hell, and calling me the most vile names they could think of.

The next time it happens, I will be sure to contact IMJ and let her rebuke them on my behalf.

I've stood in your corner plenty of times and paid a price for it as well. I don't care. I'd do it again and I've stood in Tambora's corner and others as well. I'm sick of the mud slinging and hateful behavior for the sake of Yeshua. I can only imagine what He thinks of it.

 

[IMJerusha]

That does disappoint me. I have little doubt that you love the Lord and are one of His.

See?.....You're awesome!

 

[IMJerusha]

It is what comes out of LAs mouth that defiles. If LA was of Christ, then that testimony would come forth. But the opposite happens.

By at least two witnesses, he is. It is immaterial that his faith doesn't meet your criteria when it is God and Yeshua's criteria that is of utmost importance.

 

[Right Divider]

Paul was never an Antinomian, as MADists are Antinomians.

Another lie, keep 'em comin'

Paul lived holy because Jesus Christ was holy. So did Peter and all the Apostles. None of them taught that redemption produced license to abandon God's moral and holy standards.

You just think that your righteousness comes from your law keeping. Mine comes from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Gal 3:21-25 KJV Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law. (22) But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. (23) But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. (24) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. (25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.​

Paul says we are no longer under a schoolmaster. But you say otherwise. I know that Paul knows more then you, so I'll stick with him (and the Lord Jesus Christ) on this one.

 

[Right Divider]

I think the Gospel of Christ was kept hidden from Saul, until God knocked him off a horse as recorded in Acts 9.

There is no reason to blow this event up, and apply it to all and wrongly teach that no soul was shown the saving grace of God prior to when Saul was shown the saving grace of God.

There have been souls saved by the grace and Truth and promises of God since the beginning. Abel was taught the significance of shed blood for the remission of sin, and offered animals in faith in God to keep His promise of a Messiah. Multitudes of souls were saved by grace through faith prior to the Incarnation of that Savior, and they are recorded in Scripture in Hebrews Chapter 11.

The belief grace was only dispensed during Paul's lifetime, has no basis in fact or history or Holy Scripture. It is a myth, which has developed a cult following, who deny saving grace to none other but themselves. MADists are the ones who belittle those who refuse to restrict the Gospel to I Corinthians 15:1-4.

You like to use MADist almost was much as Tet likes to use 'Darby'

 

[Arsenios]

All lies, just like they said about Paul in his day.

Good ol' garden variety "DO AND DENY"...

Goes together with "BLAME THE VICTIM"...

Then the ol' "YOU DID IT TOO"...

Standard abuser methodologies in virtually every domestic violence case...

And now here on TOL...

Where you will not hear a MAD apology EVER...
Nor a confession...
Nor see repentance...

Because then the lesser'n might get the idea that us better'n might ever be wrong... Cain't let't'um thaink no sech thang!

Arsenios

 

[IMJerusha]

Of course it's not.
Wanna see a mad get mad? Discuss dying to self. That get's em all riled up.

Mads love to quote, "it's no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me". However, they take this as covenantal positional state, not an experiential state that must be walked out though the leading of the Spirit. Someone who lives to satisfy the flesh is not allowing Christ to live in them.

I have to agree with this. But I don't think it's right to call people "flakes". The word carnal is sufficient. Paul spoke often of striving for the prize....overcoming our carnal nature.

 

[Arsenios]

In (acts 11;15-17) is Peter saying that he already understood this(what was shown to him in Acts 10;10-15) or in acts 11;15-17 is Peter saying that he fell into a trance and was shown something he did not know in acts 2?

Is he not speaking of baptizing the Gentiles outside the Circumcision and the Levitical Law of Moses?

Arsenios

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Of course it's not.
Wanna see a mad get mad? Discuss dying to self. That get's em all riled up.

Mads love to quote, "it's no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me". However, they take this as covenantal positional state, not an experiential state that must be walked out though the leading of the Spirit. Someone who lives to satisfy the flesh is not allowing Christ to live in them

Its because this is not in their doctrine (teachings). MAD thinks it refers to flesh Jews.

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

MAD says these are saved Jews of the flesh.

LA