ECT Things known for ages--Acts 15

[Interplanner]

I'm not angry.:nono: Far from it. Annoyed by your willful ignorance, but not angry. And I'm not afraid to call someone a fool in person. That has nothing to do with bravery. And if I didn't analyze my beliefs I wouldn't believe what I do now; I'd still agree with you.

But you think the theological difference is worth calling a person a fool about! That's your cause; it's not Christs. He would say you are without a cause. You call the person a fool, instead of saying the idea was foolish.

 

[Interplanner]

Once again, another MAD/D'ist person has removed a debate from its title to its personal interactions online with one individual. They do that a lot.

 

[Danoh]

Once again, another MAD/D'ist person has removed a debate from its title to its personal interactions online with one individual. They do that a lot.

True, some do.

For the worst one might say of you that one might actually be certain of despite your obvious eagerness for what you perceive is theologically sound; is that yours is obviously the result of your decades old error over relying on sources external to the Scripture.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Once again, another MAD/D'ist person has removed a debate from its title to its personal interactions online with one individual. They do that a lot.

How do you know? 77.3% of TOL's MAD are on your ignore list.

 

[Lighthouse]

But you think the theological difference is worth calling a person a fool about!

No, I don't. I don't think I was a fool when my theology was different. I was just wrong, and misinformed. I called you a fool for a completely different reason. But you're too foolish to realize why.

Just understand I had reason to cal you a fool. As much reason as Paul had to say so to the Galatians in Galatians 3:1.

That's your cause; it's not Christs.

Different kind of cause.:doh: But your foolishness doesn't allow you to see that.

He would say you are without a cause.

Prove it.

You call the person a fool, instead of saying the idea was foolish.

I can do both. Just like is done in the Bible.

How do you know? 77.3% of TOL's MAD are on your ignore list.

:chuckle:

 

[Interplanner]

No, I don't. I don't think I was a fool when my theology was different. I was just wrong, and misinformed. I called you a fool for a completely different reason. But you're too foolish to realize why.

Jut understand I had reason to cal you a fool. As much reason as Paul had to say so to the Galatians in Galatians 3:1.


Different kind of cause.:doh: But your foolishness doesn't allow you to see that.


Prove it.


I can do both. Just like is done in the Bible.



:chuckle:

Gal 3:1 does not call the Galatians fools in entirety like the reference in Mt 5. It specifically says that the addition to Christ alone is foolish, specifically identifying what was being done that was foolish.

You may notice in Mt 5 that no detail is given; it is a blanket statement. That is why it is very important to speak about ideas/propositions rather than people. If you were, then you need to say so, and the issue here is not the same.

In any case, the OP is the topic and it would be best to go back to the topic and say something about it, not me.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Gal 3:1 does not call the Galatians fools in entirety like the reference in Mt 5. It specifically says that the addition to Christ alone is foolish, specifically identifying what was being done that was foolish.

You may notice in Mt 5 that no detail is given; it is a blanket statement. That is why it is very important to speak about ideas/propositions rather than people. If you were, then you need to say so, and the issue here is not the same.

In any case, the OP is the topic and it would be best to go back to the topic and say something about it, not me.

1 Cor 15
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die

 

[Lighthouse]

Gal 3:1 does not call the Galatians fools in entirety like the reference in Mt 5. It specifically says that the addition to Christ alone is foolish, specifically identifying what was being done that was foolish.

Um, no. It specifically calls them foolish Galatians.

"O foolish Galatians!"
-Galatians 3:1

You may notice in Mt 5 that no detail is given; it is a blanket statement. That is why it is very important to speak about ideas/propositions rather than people. If you were, then you need to say so, and the issue here is not the same.

No. I was calling you, specifically, a fool. Because you don't see the error of your thinking when it is shown to you.

In any case, the OP is the topic and it would be best to go back to the topic and say something about it, not me.

You're the one who ran with my comment. And as the latest comment on the OP is about a month old I'd say the topic is dead within this thread.

 

[DAN P]

Gal 3:1 does not call the Galatians fools in entirety like the reference in Mt 5. It specifically says that the addition to Christ alone is foolish, specifically identifying what was being done that was foolish.

You may notice in Mt 5 that no detail is given; it is a blanket statement. That is why it is very important to speak about ideas/propositions rather than people. If you were, then you need to say so, and the issue here is not the same.

In any case, the OP is the topic and it would be best to go back to the topic and say something about it, not me.

Hi and the Greek word in Gal 3:1 is ANOETOS .FOOLISH and can be translated by the following words , UNWISE , FOOL , NOT UNDERSTOOD , OR FOOLISH !!

In Matt 5:22 the Greek word is different , MOROS and is translayted , FOOLISH , IMPIOUS , DULL , BLOCKHEAD , STUPID and from the text , this word brings JUDGMENT !!


dan p

 

[Interplanner]

Hi and the Greek word in Gal 3:1 is ANOETOS .FOOLISH and can be translated by the following words , UNWISE , FOOL , NOT UNDERSTOOD , OR FOOLISH !!

In Matt 5:22 the Greek word is different , MOROS and is translayted , FOOLISH , IMPIOUS , DULL , BLOCKHEAD , STUPID and from the text , this word brings JUDGMENT !!


dan p

And DanP misses the point again.

 

[DAN P]

And DanP misses the point again.

Hi and lets , the reader decide !!

dan p

 

[Interplanner]

There's nothing to decide Dan. There is a world of difference between belittling a person, calling them a fool for one thing and saying that one thing they did was foolish.

 

[DAN P]

There's nothing to decide Dan. There is a world of difference between belittling a person, calling them a fool for one thing and saying that one thing they did was foolish.

Hi and no matter who wrote what , Matthew or Paul , God is the AUTHOR !!

The Matthew passage is more damaging !!

dan p

 

[Danoh]

There's nothing to decide Dan. There is a world of difference between belittling a person, calling them a fool for one thing and saying that one thing they did was foolish.

And just who do you think you are not belittling when you assert that "D'ism is assenine"?

You not only consistently reveal a double-standard by that but repeatedly prove yourself "raca," vain or empty headed in your imaginings.

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

And though that passage is Dispensational, nevertheless, "cause" you repeatedly provide, for calling you "thou fool."

Of course, you could drop your double-standard.

That might ease up calling you thou fool, somewhat :chuckle:

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

There's nothing to decide Dan. There is a world of difference between belittling a person, calling them a fool for one thing and saying that one thing they did was foolish.

1 Cor 15
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die