29 Dec 09
Originally posted by jaywillHalf of what you've posted here makes absolutely no sense. Perhaps you've allowed your anger to get in the way of your ability to reason. I was thinking about addressing them all, but I'll start with one.
[b]==================================
C'mon Jaywill, surely you must realize that you answered my question with a completely unrelated and irrelevant question.
===================================== [/b]
I was wondering how you were going to evade the question of one of the most central truths of the New Testament.
You cannot exp ...[text shortened]...
Don't try to insinuate that it is not relevant if He lives or not.[/b]
I'll try to lay this out as simply as possible.
Here was my question:
Seriously Jaywill, have you considered that what you consider to be the work of Satan is the encouragement of people to actually follow the teachings and commandments of Jesus?
This was your response:
Is your Jesus raised from the dead ?
If you're done with your hissy fit, maybe you can explain how your question is related and relevant to my question.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobie[HINT] Is this question related to the topic of this thread? If so, how?
disarming isn't it 🙂 i just want an honest answer, that is all, its a fairly simple question, how does one demonstrate that one is DOING the will of the father as directed by Christ. 🙂
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneyes, the original idea as proposed by yourself was with regard to salvation, Doing the fathers will is intrinsically bound with salvation, therefore surely it is of the utmost importance that we are clear on what the fathers will is and how we can do it, is it not?
[HINT] Is this question related to the topic of this thread? If so, how?
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell, it's only tangentially related. Reread the OP.
yes, the original idea as proposed by yourself was with regard to salvation, Doing the fathers will is intrinsically bound with salvation, therefore surely it is of the utmost importance that we are clear on what the fathers will is and how we can do it, is it not?
I'm more than a bit reluctant to explore this tangent with you given your history. Plus your question seems disingenuous. Jesus spoke at length about what is and what is not righteous, as I'm sure you're well aware. Are you looking for me to document His teachings and commandments in detail? What would be the point since you're already familiar with them? You didn't seem satisfied with His summary that I quoted. I'm thinking you probably have something specific in mind, so why don't you just say what you have to say instead of trying to see how many hoops you can get me to jump through?
29 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne=================================
Half of what you've posted here makes absolutely no sense. Perhaps you've allowed your anger to get in the way of your ability to reason. I was thinking about addressing them all, but I'll start with one.
I'll try to lay this out as simply as possible.
Here was my question:
[quote]Seriously Jaywill, have you considered that what you consider to be hissy fit, maybe you can explain how your question is related and relevant to my question.
Half of what you've posted here makes absolutely no sense.
================================
It makes sense. This dismissal will get you no where.
===================================
Perhaps you've allowed your anger to get in the way of your ability to reason.
====================================
Don't worry. I can be angry and reason at the same time.
========================================
I was thinking about addressing them all, but I'll start with one.
=====================================
It took long enough.
=============================
I'll try to lay this out as simply as possible.
Here was my question:
Seriously Jaywill, have you considered that what you consider to be the work of Satan is the encouragement of people to actually follow the teachings and commandments of Jesus?
This was your response:
Is your Jesus raised from the dead ?
=====================================
Let me break it down for you.
If you don't teach that Jesus is raised from the dead, whatever you teach it is not the "treachings of Jesus".
Simple enough for you ???????
==============================
If you're done with your hissy fit, maybe you can explain how your question is related and relevant to my question.
==============================
If you weren't such a coward maybe I wouldn't have such a hissy fit.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWell, I responded to what seemed to be the germane points of your post...
Well, I responded to what seemed to be the germane points of your post, which is more than can be said about you - you've completely ignored the points of my post. The questions seemed rhetorical in nature and as such didn't seem to require a response. That said, can you not see that the verses in question only serve to underscore my point?
[quote]
M ...[text shortened]... e causes you to stumble, you can enter the kingdom of God anyway if you profess belief"
The post could not have been more clear in its achingly direct questioning. You have yet to respond to the specific and pointed queries, which will (once again) appear in this response.
... you've completely ignored the points of my post.
First things first. Respond to the questions I put to you and then we'll move on.
The questions seemed rhetorical in nature and as such didn't seem to require a response.
They're not, and they do.
That said, can you not see that the verses in question only serve to underscore my point?
Are you serious? How can the very passage I quoted to make my point serve yours? I would have to be the most lame debater ever to quote something that bolsters the other person's point.
You're not seeing the forest for the trees. IF you are to follow ONLY the red letters of the Gospels (which is my point) you will have a most difficult time resolving such passages as Mark 9:43-47, wherein the Lord Jesus Christ seemingly instructs His followers to amputate any offending part of their body to ensure their entrance into Heaven.
By quoting this exact same passage, the only point you are making is that you:
1. Have access to a Bible
2. Know how to read
3. Can find certain passages in that Bible utilizing book, chapter and verse demarcations
4. Can duplicate what you read via typing on your keyboard
What follows after the quote is your explanation into what the Lord Jesus Christ meant. Really? So, we are not to accept any other commentary, save yours? What about your entreaty to only go by what He said?
Enough of this pointless volley. Answer the following non-rhetorical questions, if you can:
1. Have you plucked out your offending eye?
2. Have you cut off your offending hand?
If--- and at this point, I'm not ruling this out--- both your eyes and hands (and any and all other body parts) are intact, are you simply giving yourself a 'pass' until you really mean to get serious about being righteous?
29 Dec 09
ToO is also going to have a rough time with this nugget from the Psalms...
Psalm 138:2
I will worship toward thy holy temple, And give thanks unto thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
[emphasis mine]
Of course, given what has come from him thus far, the most likely response will be that nothing which follows the first four books of the NT is considered doctrine. Which would explain just about everything discussed up to this point.
From the sound of it, though, it appears that he doesn't even accept everything found within the first four books!
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by FreakyKBHFreaky,
[b]Well, I responded to what seemed to be the germane points of your post...
The post could not have been more clear in its achingly direct questioning. You have yet to respond to the specific and pointed queries, which will (once again) appear in this response.
... you've completely ignored the points of my post.
First things first. Res ...[text shortened]... ng yourself a 'pass' until you really mean to get serious about being righteous?[/b]
Your point was excellent. If and ever you do get satisfactory responses from THinkofOne, I would like the challenge of addressing your question.
I think it should be answered by someone.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by FreakyKBHActually he does not accept anything other than the actual recorded teachings of Christ. He gave me a link ages ago to the founder of this faith. Thus if we are to reason successful with him, it must be on the basis of Christ's teachings, however you are correct, there are literally scores of passages which magnify the importance of Gods word in its entirety.
ToO is also going to have a rough time with this nugget from the Psalms...
Psalm 138:2
I will worship toward thy holy temple, And give thanks unto thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: [b]For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
[emphasis mine]
Of course, given what has come from him thus far, the most likely response w ...[text shortened]... t, though, it appears that he doesn't even accept everything found within the first four books![/b]
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIronically, this would entail him to eschew all other-colored words in the Bible, including those within the Gospels themselves. Therefore, even the "mundane" passages would be ignored, such as Matthew 1-3:14, wherein not a single word is uttered by the Lord Jesus Christ.
Actually he does not accept anything other than the actual recorded teachings of Christ. He gave me a link ages ago to the founder of this faith. Thus if we are to reason successful with him, it must be on the basis of Christ's teachings, however you are correct, there are literally scores of passages which magnify the importance of Gods word in its entirety.
Where does such inanity stop?
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by jaywillC'mon Jaywill, you struggle with reason even when you aren't angry. Your pride is always there to get in the way. Only someone that's exceedingly prideful calls another a "coward", because they believe the others pride will be wounded as theirs so often is.
[b]=================================
Half of what you've posted here makes absolutely no sense.
================================
It makes sense. This dismissal will get you no where.
===================================
Perhaps you've allowed your anger to get in the way of your ability to reason.
============================= ...[text shortened]... ========
If you weren't such a coward maybe I wouldn't have such a hissy fit.[/b]
Your approach to reading posts seems to mirror your approach to the Bible. You read individual sentences as if they each exist autonomously and miss the overall meaning. Suffice it to say, you missed the point of my post. When you've calmed down and can demonstrate that you understand it, we can continue. See if you can keep your pride in check and keep from throwing another hissy fit.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYep, Right on time as usual. The problem is my pride, not your sleaziness.
C'mon Jaywill, you struggle with reason even when you aren't angry. Your pride is always there to get in the way. Only someone that's exceedingly prideful calls another a "coward", because they believe the others pride will be wounded as theirs so often is.
Your approach to reading posts seems to mirror your approach to the Bible. You read individual s ...[text shortened]... ontinue. See if you can keep your pride in check and keep from throwing another hissy fit.
Go ahead and conceal your true beliefs if you think it will give you some kind of advantage.
Hide what really constitutes the canon of Scripture and hide whether Christ is resurrected.
Shhhhhhhh !!!
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAre you serious? How can the very passage I quoted to make my point serve yours? I would have to be the most lame debater ever to quote something that bolsters the other person's point.
[b]Well, I responded to what seemed to be the germane points of your post...
The post could not have been more clear in its achingly direct questioning. You have yet to respond to the specific and pointed queries, which will (once again) appear in this response.
... you've completely ignored the points of my post.
First things first. Res ...[text shortened]... ng yourself a 'pass' until you really mean to get serious about being righteous?[/b]
Yes, I'm serious and that's pretty much what I was thinking. What you seem to fail to realize is that you read the teachings of Jesus through the lens of Paul and as such cannot understand what Jesus is saying. You have eyes but cannot see. From what I can tell, Paul is your Lord.
What follows after the quote is your explanation into what the Lord Jesus Christ meant. Really? So, we are not to accept any other commentary, save yours? What about your entreaty to only go by what He said?
Feel free to give your own commentary if you like. My commentary rests on the words of Jesus. I suspect your commentary will rest on the words of Paul and others. Once again, from what I can tell, Paul is your Lord.
Enough of this pointless volley. Answer the following non-rhetorical questions, if you can:
1. Have you plucked out your offending eye?
2. Have you cut off your offending hand?
You don't seem to have understood my post. If you did, you'd realize that your questions have no meaning and show a lack of understanding of the words of Jesus. You have eyes, but cannot see.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieActually he does not accept anything other than the actual recorded teachings of Christ.
Actually he does not accept anything other than the actual recorded teachings of Christ. He gave me a link ages ago to the founder of this faith. Thus if we are to reason successful with him, it must be on the basis of Christ's teachings, however you are correct, there are literally scores of passages which magnify the importance of Gods word in its entirety.
Have you taken to telling half-truths again? Actually it's more accurate to say that I have no reservations of dismissing teachings that contradict the teachings of Jesus. That said, there is much wisdom is the Bible that is in harmony with the teachings of Jesus and I have no reservations about embracing it.
He gave me a link ages ago to the founder of this faith.
Wow, this one is totally untrue, unless the "founder of this faith" to which you are alluding is Jesus himself.
29 Dec 09
The words of Jesus, from the Gospel of Mark no less:
"Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and to the scribes. And they will condemn Him to death and deliver Him to the Gentiles,
And they will mock Him and spit at Him and scourge Him, and they will kill Him. And after three days He will rise." (Mark 10:33,34)
The truth will make you free.