musterion

I did not spurn it; I interpreted in light of what else Paul says on the matter. Cherry-picking scriptures as you do will not result in truth.

Not running away. I already cited relevant, in-context Scripture and you spurned it. Nothing more to say.

I'd examine any relevant presuppositions that you want to discuss; you need to bring up such points for discussion rather than run away.

Things are simple. Your religious presuppositions, which you will not examine, make them complicated.

You can backout of the discussion; but for the record I never said that the scriptures were something that one could never have a confident, justified interpretation of. I merely pointed out some of the errors of MAD and why it is a bad interpretation.

You want things simple; but Paul is not easily understood, as Peter testifies. If you aren't willing to dig deep and really study these matters then you won't understand Paul's meaning.

For instance - you think "law" only carries one meaning/reference: the Mosaic Law. This is not true for Paul; he uses the term freely for many things - like one's conscience, and even temptation/sin. More relevant to the discussion - he uses it to distinguish the customs and traditions of the Jews from God's will (the law vs God's Law/Christ's Law/the Law of Faith).

Same to you and yours!

Merry Christmas Must...to you and your loved ones.

Will do.

You are reporting way too many posts. 9 out of 10 posts that you report do not need to be reported. Please stop.

You, you hate wHATT??? :mmph: Philistine. :chuckle: Now I have unbridled compassion for you.

Wise policy!

It's all good, I was getting ready to mock one of his posts because what he said was so stupid. You cannot have any kind of meaningful discussion with the guy...and never in the past to my recollection. He is entrenched in his dogma, I'll give him that but the ability to explain it (himself) or justify it through God's word...no way.

Sorry, but I've been laughing for 15 minutes about this. Thank you for cheering me up.

Thanks. You're a lifesaver.
(I really DID think it was a dynamite story.) :AMR1:

Thanks once more. :e4e:
Gianfranco

That's sure how it looks.

LA is in the "predicting" business again?

Ah. I will endeavor in future to neither win, place nor show.

I started the race thread after someone noted I was a frequent nag a few years back and I looked into it, was unpleasantly surprised at how frequent and founded the Cub Reporter's thread to keep track of myself and to nudge others into a similar examination. It's meant as a good natured jab from someone who once could often be seen riding a fleet, high horse about the joint.

:e4e: