Search results

@Clete The above is decidedly an argument from silence, don't you think? RD admits he doesn't know Jesus did something (gave His disciples instructions on how to replace Judas), then suggests a time frame when He might have done so, then claims it is reasonable to deduce (his terminology) that...

That's my point. if it doesn't contradict either position, then it can't be used to affirm one over the other. Careful. You're sounding like @Idolater. It is clearly saying that people considered him to be of the same office as the eleven. It doesn't say "God numbered him with the eleven...

Possibly, but you're justifying an argument from silence. "Apostle" isn't the problem. There were many apostles. But one of the 12 apostles handpicked by Jesus? Back at ya.

Funny, but not entirely true. From dictionary.com: hail · a shout or call to attract attention: hail · a shout or call to attract attention: Thus just getting her attention was a valid use of the phrase.

The same way you know that Jesus DID. Nevertheless, what I wrote is compatible with scripture. If you want to call scripture ridiculous, well, I would caution against it.

Not a plumber in your meme, but it reminds me that I saw a truck recently with the company name on it: "Half Moon Plumbing".

The scriptures describe the events, yes. The scriptures don't tell us that God made the choice. I quoted scripture, too, that supports my view. Are you suggesting that merely quoting scripture ascribes to it our personal meaning? Of course you don't believe that, but it seems like you do...

It does in context. It was in answer to this, from you: 'It isn't someone "deciding" anything'

Then if nobody decided anything, there wasn't a 12th apostle. Somebody decided who the 12th would be, right?

As I said, it's an argument from silence. hmmmm meaning your system drives your understood scripture, rather than scripture driving your understanding. All that may be true, but the other apostles were still involved in its spread, albeit reluctantly to the gentiles. The program might have...

Yes, do you have a real answer? How about if you just answer it, instead of "finding a mental path" to it?

Thanks! What makes you think he did? I'm not the one who decides what the requirements are. Are you? Were the apostles? If you say yes, then you're begging the question. If you say no, then you're agreeing with me. Remember Narnia, how all 4 thrones had to be filled by sons of Adam and...

Let's say your children gave you 2 choices. 1. Bring home pizza for dinner, or 2. Take everbody out for burgers. Let's also say that you had other plans (grilling steaks). So the children cast lots to see which one of their 2 choices you had to do. The lot lands on pizza. Do you bring home...

Then you agree that Peter could have been laying the same foundation as Paul? No, they didn't stopped following it at all, because they were still taking the gospel to those in Jerusalem (first part of the Great Commission). They had already taken it to Samaria (third part of the Great...

I appreciate that, Clete. Agree wholeheartedly! He did, just not as clearly as you are asking for (the old "the word 'trinity' isn't in the bible, so it isn't true" argument) Whether that was his purpose or not is borne out in other scriptures. Yes Yes Yes Not true, because they WEREN'T...

here's your post (we'll consider the same scritpures): Let's add in a scripture that begins to talk about the laying of foundations: 1 Corinthians 1:12 KJV - Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Cephas, of course, is...

Um, you kinda went unhinged there. It was answered appropriately. Plus, remember that Jesus gave His mother away?

Then you're also blind.

Are you seriously suggesting you didn't just give the scripture talking of Peter laying a foundation, Rom 15:20?