ECT What is your view of MAD and MADists? (Strictly for people who are not mad)
- Thread starter andyc
- Start date
dodge
New member
The fact is the woman was caught committing adultery, and Jesus said to them "you who is without sin cast the first stone". Of course since the law does not substitute for grace ALL of the accusers were sinners in need of a savior who brought GRACE.
Jesus brought GRACE and forgave the woman showing that those who trust and place their faith in Him are NOT under the law but under grace.
When Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more HE knew the charge of adultery was true and that is why He told her to go and sin no more. No where does the account leave room for the woman"s innocence. She was guilty and received grace instead of the punishment of the law.
Jhn 8:3
Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst,
Jhn 1:17
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Last edited:
andyc
New member
Yeah, she was caught in the act. That's about as busted as she could get. The whole thing stinks of a setup, otherwise they would have brought the guy along as well. There were two guilty partys involved. Obviously the pharisees wanted Jesus to contradict Moses, and this would give them a reason for everyone to discredit him. But.......Jesus .......the wisdom of God ........awesome. Unless you're mad.
dodge
New member
Amen, HE and only He is WORTHY.
I have read where many theologians believe when Jesus wrote on the ground believe He wrote "where is the man" !
NO doubt she was guilty and to assert otherwise is to disbelieve scripture.
Jhn 8:4
they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act.
andyc
New member
dodge
New member
Satan is an expert at getting folks to major on the minor and minor on the major, and that pretty much sums up the Madist beliefs for me.
Like scripture says he that glories let him glory in the Lord. Madist place more emphasis on Paul than on Jesus and that is NOT what Paul taught or tried to convey.
Galatians 3:21 KJV
(21) 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.
False.
musterion
Well-known member
He said only that He didn't condemn her, and to stop committing adultery. He did not "extend grace in spite of the Law" as some claim. He upheld the Law because she had been dragged before Him by hypocrites who did not also bring the man she was caught with, per the rule of Lev 20:10.
He knew she was guilty but they were guilty too. Had He condemned her as they wanted Him to do, He would have been as guilty of breaking it as those hypocrites were.
Christ did not condemn the woman but He did not justify her, either.
dodge
New member
dodge
New member
Tambora, I have read on this site where a MAdist said he was baptized unto Paul. Even Paul said that was wrong . Paul said was you Baptized in the name of Paul Etc.
musterion
Well-known member
Sure you did.
dodge
New member
Jesus who knew and knows ALL did not have her put to death as the law required for adultery !
Jesus said " neither do I condemn you". Is that not GRACE ?
Yeppers.
Jesus did not break the law; they did.
dodge
New member
Correct , I did .
dodge
New member
Heb 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
musterion
Well-known member
Quote the part where He said she was forgiven.
I doubt it.
dodge
New member
Quote the part where HE said she was NOT forgiven.
musterion
Well-known member
Dodge is another clumsy troll, making up objections as he goes along and ignoring whatever is offered in response.