18 Aug 08
Originally posted by jaywillActually you're afraid of the following. You started asking this round of questions AFTER I brought it up instead of addressing the issues I brought up in my post.
So you are afraid to admit that you reject the book of Acts and other NT books?
You prefer to keep that rather concealed and secretive only devulging that information as a last resort?
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWhy should I be afraid?
Actually you're afraid of the following. You started asking this round of questions AFTER I brought it up instead of addressing the issues I brought up in my post.
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneQuite often I'll post the complete line of thought, though I'll often quote a single verse or even a portion of a verse for brevity.
Are you incapable of making an honest post?
I almost always look at the verse in context of a complete line of thought. Quite often I'll post the complete line of thought, though I'll often quote a single verse or even a portion of a verse for brevity.
We both know that you really don't have an answer for a number of the lines of thought by Jesus. T ...[text shortened]... e disparaging remarks no matter how unfounded.
You are a seriously vengeful little man.
-----------------ToO---------------------------------------------
But you fail to look at the overall picture of the entire range of what Jesus taught and did.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNice try. ---------------------ToO------------------------------
Nice try.
Is there anything so vengeful as a "cheap grace" advocate whose "right" to sin is questioned?
Matthew 7:21
"Not everyone who says to me,'Lord, Lord,' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."
.............and what was I trying? If I am guilty of anything it's trying to make you think or respond. Do you have any answers to my points? You really are such a slippery fellow. I clocked you from the beginning. You unconsciously try to frustrate people so that when they get frustrated or emotional you can then unleash your tirade of insults ( pride, liars , deceivers , vengance etc) . It's all going on in your arrogant aloof mind though.
You have a position and you cannot allow it to be challenged. That's fine , but don't expect to learn anything (ooops - I suppose you have nothing to learn from anyone anyone I guess , being so perfected and all)
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWe both know that you really don't have an answer for a number of the lines of thought by Jesus. That's what you try to dismiss by calling it "messy" as if that changes the reality of the matter. -----------------------------------ToO----------------------------------------------------------
Are you incapable of making an honest post?
I almost always look at the verse in context of a complete line of thought. Quite often I'll post the complete line of thought, though I'll often quote a single verse or even a portion of a verse for brevity.
We both know that you really don't have an answer for a number of the lines of thought by Jesus. T ...[text shortened]... e disparaging remarks no matter how unfounded.
You are a seriously vengeful little man.
It doesn't change the reality of the matter at all. But this is the essence of the whole thing and the whole line of debate we have had.
I ACCEPT that it's all messy. I ACCEPT that some of the things Jesus says are flies in the ointment to my position. I ACCEPT that there is a case to answer and some thing that needs addressing.
BUT------------- you DO NOT accept the many flies in the ointment for your position (which I have been listing all along). NOT ONCE have you admitted the associated problems with your position as suggested by Jesus's teachings and actions. You won't even explore them.
So what is the overall game here? There are obvious flies in the ointment for both our positions but ONLY KM needs to address his , but ToO does not need to ? If so we are back to loaded dice again!
It seems to me it is all about power for you. You see no need to address anything but continue on the front foot all the time , afraid to think about Simon Peter and his sinfulness. Numb to the last supper and all that that means. Unable to explain why God would allow the entire teachings of his Son to be sidetracked by St Paul. Focussing only on those verses that back you up.
No , everyone else must address YOUR points , but no-one can take you to task. That's why you keep your real beliefs under your hat , because no-one can really challenge you if they don't know what you believe. There can be no flies in your ointment if you have no coherent overall position that requires that it holds together.
So why don't you join me in admitting that it's a bit of a mess. I struggle to reconcile St Paul with some of Jesus's teachings , you struggle to reconcile other things.
You say you are into truth , but I've got news for you. Truth is messy and requires that we move out of our comfort zones and look at the awkward aspects of what we believe. It seems to me that you want to do this with others but dare not go there yourself. Is it any wonder that you come across as arrogant , hypocritical and evasive to others? In the end you just go from one person to another but nothing happens. Why ? Because you are too afraid to meet anyone halfway on equal ground. You HAVE to be on the front foot.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIs there anything so vengeful as a "cheap grace" advocate whose "right" to sin is questioned?----------ToO------------------------
Nice try.
Is there anything so vengeful as a "cheap grace" advocate whose "right" to sin is questioned?
Matthew 7:21
"Not everyone who says to me,'Lord, Lord,' will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."
Boy , you're good. Very good. Not only do you sidestep with the consumate ease of a Gazelle , but then you go on a counter attack designed to dismiss any points made in one foul swoop. All points can be reduced to vengefulness? Very convenient and also kind of elegant.
A patronising swipe at me the "little man" whilst at the same time completely misrepresenting everything I have ever said. I have never said we have a right to sin and you know it. I have only said that our human imperfections are understood and accepted by God ( as evidenced in Simon Peter for example). You can turn that into me saying it's a "right" if you like , but you would only be fooling yourself. Do you think Paul was teaching that we had a "right" to sin? If so please provide the evidence if you can.
18 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterJust how much of the teaching of Jesus he reads is a mystery. He is secretive about what books and chapters of the New Testament he utterly rejects.
Quite often I'll post the complete line of thought, though I'll often quote a single verse or even a portion of a verse for brevity.
-----------------ToO---------------------------------------------
But you fail to look at the overall picture of the entire range of what Jesus taught and did.
By keeping his list of rejected books concealed I think he feels he can gain some leverage, pretending to be a believer in the New Testament. A strange case indeed.
You'll never get him to admit to what books and chapters of even the four gospels he rejects.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by jaywillI'm afraid that leverage and power is what it's all about. If you keep your cards under the table you feel "safe".
Just how much of the teaching of Jesus he reads is a mystery. He is secretive about what books and chapters of the New Testament he utterly rejects.
By keeping his list of rejected books concealed I think he feels he can gain some leverage, pretending to be a believer in the New Testament. A strange case indeed.
You'll never get him to admit to what books and chapters of even the four gospels he rejects.
18 Aug 08
3 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterIn the church in Corinth there was the sin of divisiveness from immaturity.
I'm afraid that leverage and power is what it's all about. If you keep your cards under the table you feel "safe".
Some said that they were of Paul. Others said that they were of Apollos. Others said that they were of Cephas. And a very subtle group said that they were "of Christ."
"For it has been made clear to me concerning you, my brothers, by those of the house of Chloe, that there are strifes among you. Now I mean this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? " (1 Cor. 1:11-13a)
It is obvioulsy wrong to play one apostle against the other in a divisive way. But there is also the subtly of some saying "I am of Christ". This sounds good. But on closer examination it means that they are of Christ in an exclusive way. "We are of Christ and other Christians are not of Christ."
This is just as divisive, to be "of Christ" in an exclusive way which implies other brothers are not of Christ.
The danger here also is that a perculiar pride kicks in of superiority. That is as if they are "Daddy's Favorite" dandled on the Father's lap, because they only care for Christ alone - the REAL McCoy, the genuine follower of Jesus rejecting even some of His apostles.
This is not good. No more argument will help. Love and prayer will help us all.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by jaywillI agree , it's not good really. ToO seems unreachable in many respects. He is not open to having his position explored or challenged. The only thing I feel I can do is reflect this back to him and hope he sees it.
In the church in Corinth there was the sin of divisiveness from immaturity.
Some said that they were of Paul. Others said that they were of Apollos. Others said that they were of Cephas. And a very subtle group said that they were [b]"of Christ."
"For it has been made clear to me concerning you, my brothers, by those of the house of Chloe, th ...[text shortened]... This is not good. No more argument will help. Love and prayer will help us all.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by knightmeister"Truth is messy and requires that we move out of our comfort zones and look at the awkward aspects of what we believe."
We both know that you really don't have an answer for a number of the lines of thought by Jesus. That's what you try to dismiss by calling it "messy" as if that changes the reality of the matter. -----------------------------------ToO----------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't change the reality of the matter at all. But ...[text shortened]... o afraid to meet anyone halfway on equal ground. You HAVE to be on the front foot.
Actually, truth is elegant in its simplicity. Where things get "messy" is when people try to rationalize their deviation from truth.
The teachings of Jesus are elegant in their simplicity. Righteousness is following the will of God. God is eternal. The attributes of God are eternal: truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. Eternal life is living in the domain of the eternal. One must BE righteous to have eternal life.
Sin is a deviation from righteousness. Sin is a deviation from following the will of God. Sin is a deviation from the eternal. Sin is a deviation from truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. Sin is living outside the domain of the eternal. One cannot sin and have eternal life.
18 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterHe is on what we sometimes call a "one liner".
I agree , it's not good really. ToO seems unreachable in many respects. He is not open to having his position explored or challenged. The only thing I feel I can do is reflect this back to him and hope he sees it.
You lay hold of one or two verses and they become practically the only thing the Bible teaches. There is no balance. There is no perspective. You get on one line and drive it.
It is not unlike "baptismal regeneration" as practiced by some Campbellites. You have to be baptized in their water. And it has to be with an understanding that it is for the remission of sins.
That doctrine then becomes the only point in the Bible and the master key to understanidng everything else.
You are only born again if you are emmersed in thier water with the proper doctrinal understanding.
At least most Campbellites that I have met will recognize the other books of the Bible.
18 Aug 08
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIf you do not have one excuse for not answering, you have another.
Actually you're afraid of the following. You started asking this round of questions AFTER I brought it up instead of addressing the issues I brought up in my post.
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
That's OK. I am no longer interested.