Originally posted by Proper KnobWhat makes you think you are an authority on the scripture? The Bible was around long before you and I. In fact everything was. It is you and I that are the Johnny come latelys.
Why is Paul's 'Apostleship beyond dispute'?!
He just seems like some 'Johnny come lately' who wrote a load of bumpf and then declared it was all inspired.
Is there anything without controversy? Not as long as there are two who disagree. There are three options. I'm right and you're wrong, or you're right and I'm wrong, or we're both wrong. But we can't be both right. There cannot be both a creator and no creator. It is either one or the other. The same idea is attributable to the inspiration of the scriptures. They are either the preserved Word of God, or they are the creation of man.
There are believers and there are unbelievers. Believers are either delusional or they are illuminated. Unbelievers are either deceived or they are rational.
It begs the question. What is Truth?
Knobster, if you really know what's going on in the scientific community in the realm of evolution you would know that it is a failing theory. In fact the evidence being discovered points more and more to intelligent design. The complexity of a single cell alone defies the idea of random selection. The odds are just too great that life began on its own.
Originally posted by josephwWhat makes you think you are an authority on the scripture?
What makes you think you are an authority on the scripture? The Bible was around long before you and I. In fact everything was. It is you and I that are the Johnny come latelys.
Is there anything without controversy? Not as long as there are two who disagree. There are three options. I'm right and you're wrong, or you're right and I'm wrong, or we're both ...[text shortened]... ies the idea of random selection. The odds are just too great that life began on its own.
Where did i ever claim i was an authority on scripture? To save you looking, i'll answer for you..........nowhere Joseph. Stop making it up.
I just find it curious. Along comes Paul who's writings form a considerable portion of the NT declaring they are -
........inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,.......
Pretty presumptuous.
Knobster, if you really know what's going on in the scientific community in the realm of evolution you would know that it is a failing theory.
Show me the evidence my good man.
Originally posted by Proper KnobI wasn't suggesting that you made the claim.
[b]What makes you think you are an authority on the scripture?
Where did i ever claim i was an authority on scripture? To save you looking, i'll answer for you..........nowhere Joseph. Stop making it up.
I just find it curious. Along comes Paul who's writings form a considerable portion of the NT declaring they are -
[i]........inspired of ...[text shortened]... volution you would know that it is a failing theory.[/b]
Show me the evidence my good man.[/b]
Paul is an anomaly and an enigma.
That you are curious about him is a good thing. Just as Peter said, Paul's writings are difficult to understand.
The Mystery was revealed to Paul by Jesus Christ. Not to be confused with mysticism.
Originally posted by galveston75Evidently you can't cite passages from the Bible where Jesus "clearly condemned...homosexuality", therefore you also made a false claim.
Wow.. It's extrememly unbelieveable that you are thinking this way but what can I say.
No Jesus specifically never said the word homosexual that I'm aware of. I'm sure you'll go with that and not read anything else I say but here it is in case your here to learn anything.
I'll try this from another angle for you. Are you aware of what fornication is? ...[text shortened]... y nothing else I have to say on this. It's your morals that could be the issue.
Seems likely that you knew that your claim was false at the time you made it, which would make it a lie.
Seems that you should read the passage you quoted from Mark 7. Pay attention to the part about "lying"
Seems that it is you whose "morals that could be the issue".
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobiehis mistake...is in a failure to differentiate between what was actually in the Mosiac law, that is what was written and what grew up as the oral law
As has been explained to thinkofone on numerous occasions (although it failed to
penetrate the mind and percolate to the heart), Christ, a rabbi and a Hebrew upheld
the Mosiac law.
(Matthew 5:17-18) . . .“[b]Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I
came, not to destroy, but to fulfill; for truly I say to you that sooner on in stating
that I have made a false claim, when clearly the matter has been demonstrated.[/b]
No surprise that you try to defend your false claim by making another one. It's long been your history to do so. Clearly the Mosaic Law that Jesus contradicted was also WRITTEN in Leviticus 24 as I pointed out. What the Jews thought was the "Law" of God, both oral and written, was not entirely correct. Jesus pointed this out in Matthew 5.
What do you think you gain with your continued use of deceit?
Those who have the truth have no reason to use deceit. Given your history, it's clear that you don't have the truth.
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneperhaps if you make reference to any of the scriptures cited it will be easily apparent that you dont know anything about the mosaic law and how it had evolved to the time of Christ, nor why he stated, you have heard that it was said, instead of, it is written (Matthew 4). It is not deceitful for i have provided references and scriptures, anyone can make an evaluation for themselves. You are only sad because it has been demonstrated that Christ upheld the law, making your acceptance of the immoral act of homosexuality, just that, iniquitous! and you are therefore left with the only desperate course open to you, that is to defile the characters of others because all recourse to reason has been lost to you, the vilest of all sins, the sin of slander.
[b]his mistake...is in a failure to differentiate between what was actually in the Mosiac law, that is what was written and what grew up as the oral law
No surprise that you try to defend your false claim by making another one. It's long been your history to do so. Clearly the Mosaic Law that Jesus cited was also WRITTEN in Leviticus 24 as I point ...[text shortened]... h have no reason to use deceit. Given your history, it's clear that you don't have the truth.[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe following cannot be denied:
perhaps if you make reference to any of the scriptures cited it will be easily apparent that you dont know anything about the mosaic law and how it had evolved to the time of Christ, nor why he stated, you have heard that it was said, instead of, it is written (Matthew 4). It is not deceitful for i have provided references and scriptures, anyone can ...[text shortened]... held the law, making your acceptance of the immoral act of homosexuality, just that, iniquitous!
Actually it's not that difficult to cite an example of where Jesus contradicted WRITTEN Mosaic Law as He did here:
Matthew 5
38“You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ 39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
This clearly contradicts the WRITTEN Mosaic Law cited here:
Leviticus 24
19‘If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done, so it shall be done to him: 20fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; just as he has injured a man, so it shall be inflicted on him.
You used deceit in an effort to deny this fact. Given your track record, it's not only what you do, it's who you ARE.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneSo do you live by these laws?
The following cannot be denied:
[quote]Actually it's not that difficult to cite an example of where Jesus contradicted WRITTEN Mosaic Law as He did here:
Matthew 5
38“You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ 39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the o ...[text shortened]... fort to deny this fact. Given your track record, it's not only what you do, it's who you ARE.
3 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneso what? where is it written in the Law that you must love your neighbour and hate
The following cannot be denied:
[quote]Actually it's not that difficult to cite an example of where Jesus contradicted WRITTEN Mosaic Law as He did here:
Matthew 5
38“You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ 39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the o ...[text shortened]... fort to deny this fact. Given your track record, it's not only what you do, it's who you ARE.
your enemy?
“You heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’”
that is correct, nowhere for Christ was referring to the Pharisaical interpretation of
the Law, throughout the discourse. It is noted that you make no reference to the
other scriptures where Christ taught others to observe its ordinances, instead you
pick one verse and try to align it with your argument, your lost, you have nothing
and its been demonstrated that Christ upheld the Law, and was in fact talking in
these instances of the Pharisaical interpretation of the Law.
Originally posted by galveston75How is this relevant to the germane points of my post?
So do you live by these laws?
What's keeping you from acknowledging that you can't cite passages from the Bible where Jesus "clearly condemned...homosexuality" and therefore you made a false claim? Pride?
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo what?
so what? where is it written in the Law that you must love your neighbour and hate
your enemy?
“You heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’”
that is correct, nowhere for Christ was referring to the Pharisaical interpretation of
the Law, throughout the discourse. It is noted that you make no reference to ...[text shortened]... Law, and was in fact talking in
these instances of the Pharisaical interpretation of the Law.
You made the following claim:
"his mistake...is in a failure to differentiate between what was actually in the Mosiac law, that is what was written and what grew up as the oral law"
My post proves that your claim was false.
What's more, it also proves your following accusation was false:
"you are therefore left with the only desperate course open to you, that is to defile the characters of others because all recourse to reason has been lost to you, the vilest of all sins, the sin of slander."
If anyone is guilty of slander, it is you.
That's "So what"?
It's always the same garbage with you RC. You routinely make false claims, make false accusations, lie and use other forms of deceit, etc. in an effort to prop up your position.
Even here you've tried to pretend that you didn't understand the point of my post so as to avoid it.
You are what you are RC.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneGeeezz dude. Can you not read the last few postings and see the answer? Your really thick aren't you?
How is this relevant to the germane points of my post?
What's keeping you from acknowledging that you can't cite passages from the Bible where Jesus "clearly condemned...homosexuality" and therefore you made a false claim? Pride?
I remember you pulling this stupid constant badgering before on other subjects when the answers were given so clear my dog would get it. I'm finshed with your plain ole dumbness.....