31 May 16
Originally posted by sonshipIt is not your place to ask specific persons if they follow Christ commandments or not. That is between them and Christ.
Well, you could just ask jaywill.
Tell me you gave a definitive reply to my question about the Lord's supper commandment, and I just have not seen it yet.
Or are you just still sweeping it aside ?
What these discussions are about is the general case of preaching that Christians do not need to follow Christ commandments v what the Bible says that to get into the Kingdom of God people MUST follow Christ's commandments.
Nobody asks you about your personal life and personal conduct. Nobody is interested in that.
31 May 16
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThe Bible is full of references to bad fruit, unrepentant sinners, bad seed, tares, children of the Devil, false teachers, goats, enemies of the cross of Christ etc.
What do you think jaywill would make of the following in regards to "fruit"?:
Matthew 7
17“So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 18“A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. 19“Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Do you think that he'd be a ...[text shortened]... d, some sixty, and some thirty.”?
That everyone else is "cut down and thrown into the fire".
All will be destroyed, burned, cut off,
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
31 May 16
7 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
There didn't seem to be much point. As I posted earlier:
What Jesus clearly stated in John 15:10 and John 14:21,23 do not fit within your beliefs. All you've done since I've posted them is engage in incoherent ranting and argumentum ad hominem in the hopes that all YOUR "hand waving" will distract from this fact.
I repeat. I expose the true nature of your teaching and you think it is an ad hom attack.
I don't know if you are married. But if someone found a mannequin for $45 and brought it to your home, and told you "Hello, Your wife is home" you would probably first consider the person wacky. Then you might feel a ting of sympathy for him, considering that he is just self deceived.
If the person persisted to place this mannequin before you insisting that this was Mrs. ToO, I think eventually you would have to tell him that he was a fraud.
The person might have his feelings hurt and say "But WHY are you launching an ad hom against me? I am just presenting to you your own wife."
The offended person's perception is lop-sided. He appreciates that he has been slighted by being called a phony. He is full of sympathy for himself that he has suffered an ad hom. Ironically he cannot understand that it has been an insult to present an artificial mannequin to a man with an amiable grin that this dead thing is the man's beloved wife.
You do not present the Jesus Christ of the gospel. You come with silly grin to a Christian and present this humanistic philosophy and say "Here's your Jesus." The first few times I may have patient understanding for your misconception.
Eventually you will receive what sounds like an ad hom comment. You are sensitive only to how you have been diminished by being called "a wolf in sheep's clothing."
But you have ZERO realization for the insult you have inflicted upon the Christian's intelligence with your amiable presentation of a dead Jesus. So do not be unhappy that I have responded in kind to your insult to me - trying to teach me of your absent, unavailable and deceased Son of God.
I should just ask you "Where is the body of Jesus then?" But your extended effort to conceal your true belief is also an insult to my intelligence. I don't agree with you trying to use Christ to dignify your "red letter" humanism.
So as a supposed teaching of the New Testament you are a false teacher - a wolf in sheep's clothing. And if that comes off as an ad hom, it is just too bad. Stop insulting Christians with YOUR ad hom that Christ is not the resin and available Lord.
Or at least man up to the belief that you hold that Christ is dead and gone.
Concealment I regard as cowardice and stealth.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
31 May 16
3 edits
What Jesus clearly stated in John 15:10 and John 14:21,23 do not fit within your beliefs. All you've done since I've posted them is engage in incoherent ranting and argumentum ad hominem in the hopes that all YOUR "hand waving" will distract from this fact.
How come you have yet to tell us if you keep the word of Jesus about commemorating the Lord's supper ?
This is the elephant in the living room which you will not address.
I see some nice eloquent grandstanding about keeping the commands of Jesus so He will make an abode with the keeper.
When asked REPEATEDLY about your attitude of keeping the celebration of His redemptive crucifixion for the forgiveness of sins -
shhhhhhhhhh ! .... silence .... quiet ..... maybe the point will go unnoticed !
Are you some kind of "red letter" Unitarian with not the courage to confess Christ stayed dead in the tomb ? Cowardice is the only assumption I can make to your reluctance to come out and plainly say so.
And from such a person I am suppose to learn great lessons on abiding in Christ and "keeping" His word ???
31 May 16
Originally posted by sonshipSo your point isWhat Jesus clearly stated in John 15:10 and John 14:21,23 do not fit within your beliefs. All you've done since I've posted them is engage in incoherent ranting and argumentum ad hominem in the hopes that all YOUR "hand waving" will distract from this fact.
How come you have yet to tell us if you keep the word of Jesus about commemorating ...[text shortened]... uch a person I am suppose to learn great lessons on abiding in Christ and "keeping" His word ???
ONLY IF ToO commemorates the Lords Supper, THEN his references to what Jesus preached becomes relevant and important.
Thats a great point .. never thought of that... youre a genius.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
31 May 16
2 edits
Originally posted by Rajk999My point is that he never admits that He rejects the New Testament's basic proclamation. All the while presenting it as if he believes it and is a guide to others concerning it.
So your point is
ONLY IF ToO commemorates the Lords Supper, THEN his references to what Jesus preached becomes relevant and important.
Thats a great point .. never thought of that... youre a genius.
My request is not unreasonable. I am not like Dasa who said everyone one not agreeing with Hinduism was dishonest. I am only asking him to ADMIT to what he doesn't believe and stop concealing it. That comes off as sneaky.
If he regards frivolous the specific command of Jesus concerning the commemoration of His establishing the new covenant through His redeeming death, how am I suppose to regard him as an authoritative guide on keeping the commandments of Christ ?
" ... apart from Me you can do nothing." (John 15:5b)
Apart from abiding in the living available resurrected Christ we can do nothing ?
Well we can do something. We can do a lot of things.
But they will all amount to nothing ... towards the kingdom of God.
So the believers must learn to abide in Him and He abide in them.
And this is life-long learning.
Anyone not believing Jesus died for his sins and rose again, hasn't even started.
Anyone purposely concealing that he rejects that part of Jesus' teaching, cannot teach anyone anything about abiding in Christ or keeping His word.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
01 Jun 16
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNice try but I don't dismiss anything. I do differentiate who the bible is addressing and when.
That's interesting. Not too long ago CB claimed that he doesn't pick and choose the verses and passages from the Bible that support his beliefs and dismiss those that don't.
"Dispensation" is just a way to do just that. Don't believe that the teachings of Jesus apply? Put them in an earlier "dispensation".
CB also subsequently found a way to dismiss Paul's writings about women.
Evidently his claim was false.
01 Jun 16
2 edits
Originally posted by sonshipC'mon jaywill, the reason I call it argumentum ad hominem is simply because it is. It has nothing to do with "feelings".There didn't seem to be much point. As I posted earlier:
What Jesus clearly stated in John 15:10 and John 14:21,23 do not fit within your beliefs. All you've done since I've posted them is engage in incoherent ranting and argumentum ad hominem in the hopes that all YOUR "hand waving" will distract from this fact.
I repeat. I expose th ...[text shortened]... ief that you hold that Christ is dead and gone.
Concealment I regard as cowardice and stealth.
Since you're struggling with the concept, here's the definition from Wiki:
"...argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself."
It's exactly what you've been doing here and in a most irrational manner.
01 Jun 16
1 edit
Originally posted by checkbaiterC'mon CB. Is it the word "dismiss" that you object to? How about "reject"?
Nice try but I don't dismiss anything. I do differentiate who the bible is addressing and when.
With regards to the applicability of the following to current times:
Do you accept or reject 1 corinthians 14:34-35?
Do you accept or reject the teachings of Jesus while He walked the Earth?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Jun 16
3 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneC'mon jaywill, the reason I call it argumentum ad hominem is simply because it is. It has nothing to do with "feelings".
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First of all Jesus quoted the commandment about loving the Lord with your whole being - heart, strength, mind, and so forth in loving the Lord your God. So not only the intellect is involved but the feeling of emotion is involved. Do you deny that love involves the emotion?
You should not deny that His word concerning love involves the spiritually engaged emotion. And therefore feeling of emotion is not irrelevant.
This is hypocritical of you because you have plenty of feelings for your kind of humanisim. You just want to talk about shutting down feeling when it comes to loving Christ for His death and resurrection.
You have feelings also about concealing your true attitude. i don't know if it is a feeling of caution or of shame or of what. But strong feelings drive cloaking of contempt for the fuller words of Jesus.
So I repeat. I expose the true insincere nature of your "Christian" teaching. And you just take is as an ad hom. I expose your con job.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Jun 16
3 edits
Since you're struggling with the concept,
--------------------------------------------------------
Since I am not "struggling" with the concept, I will just skip the Wiki lesson and move on.
here's the definition from Wiki:
"...argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have done both. I have shown you the fallacy of your teaching.
And I have tried to help you and others by pointing out what Jesus Himself pointed out about destructive false "Christian" teaching.
He, before me, pointed out the character traits of destructive opponents of His ministry.
He spoke of the character of the scribes and Pharisees quite much in Matthew 23.
So your calm voice of reason approach doesn't do much.
While waxing eloquent about keeping the word of Christ, you in fact intend to reject one of His most important words. That is to respect His redemptive breaking of His body and pouring out of His blood for the forgiveness of sins.
And now you want to done on some calm voice of reason and pretend this is all emotionalism. Fail.
It's exactly what you've been doing here and in a most irrational manner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I quite rationally point out your cloaked opposition to the words of Christ.
And you take that exposure as an ad hom attack.
Read Matthew 23 and notice the evaluation of the characters of His opponents.
He had to tell them about their character.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Jun 16
5 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Do you accept or reject the teachings of Jesus while He walked the Earth?
Attention all:
ThinkOOne's euphemism "Jesus while He walked on the earth" is a concealed, cloaked, and disguised con job. The truthful translation of this jargon is something about Christ never rising from the dead.
Make no mistake about it. Do not be deceived. The resurrection of Christ from the dead is a central part of His words,His teaching, His message. It was not an afterthought added by others.
That He would die and rise again was Christ's teaching.
Do not be conned by ToO glowing flattery about " Jesus while He walked on the earth". Understand what he is REALLY teaching - There was not resurrection and Christ is not Lord. That is his teaching.
He is pushing a humanism which he tries to dignify with selective reference to the red letters of the New Testament.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
02 Jun 16
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneCommentary for: 1 Corinthians 14:34
C'mon CB. Is it the word "dismiss" that you object to? How about "reject"?
With regards to the applicability of the following to current times:
Do you accept or reject 1 corinthians 14:34-35?
Do you accept or reject the teachings of Jesus while He walked the Earth?
[Let the women keep silence in the congregations, for it is not permitted for them to speak, but let them be in subjection, as also says the law.]
These verses are in brackets because there is good evidence that they were not part of the original text, but were an early textual note that was copied into the text. It is more accurate to the original text to omit these verses when reading. As much as we dislike omitting a verse or verses that have been accepted as part of the text, it is honest to recognize that occasionally the biblical text was changed, and in this case there is good evidence that these two verses are an early addition to the text. [For more information and full commentary on these verses, see Appendix 12: “The Role of Women In The Church”.]
http://www.revisedenglishversion.com/1-Corinthians/chapter14/34
Do you accept or reject the teachings of Jesus while He walked the Earth?
2 Cor 5:16
Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.
NKJV
Why do we not know Christ in the flesh any longer? Because He is risen and glorified.
That is not to say we disregard his teachings. There is much to acknowledge in his teachings.
We now acknowledge his teaching through the Epistles which are revelation FROM Jesus to holy men of God like Paul, Peter, etc., and through his spirit in the inner man.