ECT If you want out of the deceptions of MAD read the rebuttal of Bullinger by Ironside.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lon

Lon

Well-known member
Lon said:
I started looking, when I was talking to Hilston. Though He is somewhat Calvinistic in sympathies, he is MAD. Because of that, about 12 years ago, I began reading more of these threads and simply trying to find commonalities.

I think it'd be surprising to see answers to the following OP's/Questions for MAD:
1) How many gospels today? What is/are they?
Click to expand...
I'm sure they say "one, the same one the rest of Christianity knows: The Lord Jesus Christ's work on the Cross, His burial, and Resurrection saves those who call on Him. Romans 10:9-11 The only thing they are arguing is that it 'was' a mystery. It only affects history, therefore is an interpretation. Wrong? I don't think it matters. Ask them: I don't think it affects us today.
Lon said:
2) Does MAD embrace the 5 solas, and is it true that you adhere to them more than many others do?
Click to expand...
I think they say "Yes, in fact, we may be the only ones who do!" We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is the only way to eternal life (Solus Christus). We believe only faith can save us and through grace alone (sola fide, sola gratia) Ephesians 2:8-10. In fact, we are the only ones who believe unequivocally that, we are His work alone. Others believe you have to show fruit or you aren't saved. We believe that faith and grace covers us completely and seals us. Works are the product 'of' salvation and no way, whatsoever, the means of keeping it."
They would have to confirm, but I've heard this repeatedly from them. Whereas, having Christ work in us and molding us IS a mark of the Holy Spirit in our lives, I also agree with them, it isn't for us to see another as in Christ. It is between only the one and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Lon said:
3) What do you love about the Lord Jesus Christ?
Click to expand...
"Everything, even what wasn't written to me. He is my Lord and Savior and God. I have no other hope, no other life.
Lon said:
4) What are some of the things the Lord Jesus Christ spoke of, that apply to your life? Which have you memorized?
Click to expand...
Answers will vary, but I bet they have memorized many of His words and stand on many of His promises.
Lon said:
5) While you disagree with Reformed theology, are they brothers and sisters in Christ if they trust in the saving work of Christ?
Click to expand...
Some of them may say "no" and I think based on works. To the best of my understanding, Perseverance of the Saints, is centered entirely in Christ ala Ephesians 2:10. There is no "not doing them" in any believer's life imho, else perseverance is disobedience. He/she may get away with it, but I'm convinced also, for even the gentiles, that Hebrews 12:3-11 talks about a spanking. There is no 'disobedience' for long imho.
 
heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
dodge said:
THAT is the most retarded thing I have ever heard the "who" and the "why" about the very same person ! the WHO was the WHY as in Jesus was prophesied (why) about and Jesus fulfilled (who) all the prophecies about.

Hello ! the who and why are the same person i.e. Jesus.

The WHO Jesus ! The WHY to pay for the sins of those who trust Him.
Click to expand...

That Christ is God's Son Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:2 KJV) is not the same as "that Christ died for our sins" declared in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV. You people are ignorant by choice! So be it!

1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
 
dodge

dodge

New member
heir said:
That Christ is God's Son Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:2 KJV) is not the same as "that Christ died for our sins" declared in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV. You people are ignorant by choice! So be it!

1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Click to expand...

Point ? Jesus was prophesied in the OT and fulfilled every prophesy concerning Him in the NT. YOU divide Jesus into separate entities to support a lie called MAD nothing more.

You obviously have no understanding of the title Christ. Your loss not mine.
 
Nang

Nang

TOL Subscriber
heir said:
That Christ is God's Son Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:2 KJV) is not the same as "that Christ died for our sins" declared in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV. You people are ignorant by choice! So be it!

1 Corinthians 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
Click to expand...


Lon,

Do you agree with Heir's post above?
 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
tetelestai said:
Those who have faith in Christ Jesus are the bride of Christ.

(Eph 5:25) Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

The church is a "her", the bride of Christ.
Click to expand...
No such thing as "the bride of Christ," punk-your AD 70-ism just makes things up.
 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
tetelestai said:
Please try to speak proper English.



See above, and it's "right", not "write".
Click to expand...
Please try to speak proper English.
Click to expand...


You flaming actress...


Vs.
tetelestai said:
The rules of grammar have to be thrown out the window...I rarely correct or point out someone's grammer and/or spelling...No matter what you say or do, whether it's spelling, grammer, punctuation, etc. Johnny will try so hard to make you look like you aren't smart....Do you even understand the simple basics of grammer?...lol....yep...er....
Click to expand...

Which side of that soft, effeminate cheek, do you want slapped, jellyfish Craigie? Spell "grammar" for us, sweetie. Please? Please teach us....

Habitual, dung filled hypocrite.
 
tetelestai

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
heir said:
That Christ is God's Son Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of David according to the flesh (Romans 1:2 KJV) is not the same as "that Christ died for our sins" declared in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what the word "Christ" means?

How about the word "Messiah"?

As long as you continue to desperately try and make the Bible fit your Bullingerism, you will continue to embarrass yourself with the posts you make.

C'mon heir, give up the Bulllingerism, and start believing what the Bible says.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
tetelestai said:
Do you even know what the word "Christ" means?

How about the word "Messiah"?

As long as you continue to desperately try and make the Bible fit your Bullingerism, you will continue to embarrass yourself with the posts you make.

C'mon heir, give up the Bulllingerism, and start believing what the Bible says.
Click to expand...





I cannot believe the appetite of the club to fracture the unity and coherence of the Bible. When they read LOTR they must think Sauron wins.
 
Lon

Lon

Well-known member
Nang said:
Lon,

Do you agree with Heir's post above?
Click to expand...

No, simply because it is dispensational and you and I are Covenant. There is no question we disagree and that was never my intended point. Rather, it seems to me, the dialogue has posturing about what is orthodox, heterodox, and heresy. Imho, none of this heresy. Realize too, being in the SBC, none of it is heterodox either.....except rattlesnake handlers. Those guys are weird.

Also, I think it behooves us all to remember this is a MAD house and this is their section (room in that house). For me, it seems we are the guests here and such was at least one time, the intent of ECT. I always try to act like the guest I am especially in this section. -Lon
 
D

Danoh

New member
Lon said:
No, simply because it is dispensational and you and I are Covenant. There is no question we disagree and that was never my intended point. Rather, it seems to me, the dialogue has posturing about what is orthodox, heterodox, and heresy. Imho, none of this heresy. Realize too, being in the SBC, none of it is heterodox either.....except rattlesnake handlers. Those guys are weird.
Click to expand...

No, Lon; many of the views being touted on TOL as "MAD" are held by very few within MAD...very FEW.

Theirs is a new strain within MAD.

Actual MAD holds that the Gospel of God is that aspect of the gospel of Christ which was Prophesied by God.

In contrast to that aspect of the gospel of God: the gospel of Christ that was Not Prophesied, or what Paul refers to as "my gospel."

Theirs is just their obvious very poor understanding of grammar, together with their just as obvious intolerance for anyone who disagrees with them.

Visit one or another actually MAD based assembly throughout the country - see if they either hold such off-based views and or spit on anyone who holds a different view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
Lon

Lon

Well-known member
Danoh said:
No, Lon; many of the views being touted on TOL as "MAD" are held by very few within MAD...very FEW.

Theirs is a new strain within MAD.

Actual MAD holds that the Gospel of God is that aspect of the gospel of Christ which was Prophesied by God.

In contrast to that aspect of the gospel of God: the gospel of Christ that was Not Prophesied, or what Paul refers to as "my gospel."

Theirs is just their obvious very poor understanding of grammar, together with their just as obvious intolerance for anyone who disagrees with them.

Visit one or another actually MAD based assembly throughout the country - see if they either hold such off-based views and or spit on anyone who holds a different view.
Click to expand...

I appreciate that and James Hilston said the same. A good question for another MADist of another color: If one only had the Apostle Paul's letters, would he/she have enough of the gospel? Would he/she be able to 'follow Paul' as he followed Christ? That would be the most extreme MAD I could think of and I'm thinking even at that, few and far between if there is such an animal. Most of the MAD I've talked to on here have read and still cherish the Gospels, for instance (it is a random inconclusive sampling of TOL MAD). In Him -Lon

P.S. On another note, how close are you to Hilston's position on MAD (if time and interest to my curiosity allows?)
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
MAD is as sola fide as one can get today. To the Reformed, it's just credal lip service since water rites replaced circumcision.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Lon said:
I appreciate that and James Hilston said the same. A good question for another MADist of another color: If one only had the Apostle Paul's letters, would he/she have enough of the gospel? Would he/she be able to 'follow Paul' as he followed Christ? That would be the most extreme MAD I could think of and I'm thinking even at that, few and far between if there is such an animal. Most of the MAD I've talked to on here have read and still cherish the Gospels, for instance (it is a random inconclusive sampling of TOL MAD). In Him -Lon

P.S. On another note, how close are you to Hilston's position on MAD (if time and interest to my curiosity allows?)
Click to expand...

Anyone can share the Lord with others based solely on Romans 1 thru 5, alone.

And I have met MADs who actually had a copy of only Romans thru Philemon.

Very few, though.

Most MADs hold to Genesis thru Revelation in light of Romans thru Philemon.

In contrast, most non-MADs hold to Genesis thru Revelation in light of Matthew thru John - but most of these will be found obviously not knowing the Scripture beyond what they read about in books, and or hear about in sermons and the like.

And much of mainline Christianity is based on a Pastor and or book writers who's study time consists of books "about" they then read into the Scripture.

Go to a Mid-Acts based study on YouTube, as various assemblies now post there.

Count how often such go through all the Scripture with their assemblies.

I have seen both kinds first hand many, many times.

And then you have the few within any school of thought who go beyond that to actually learn how to study a thing out properly, on their own.

The difference there?

The basic study approach overall, and the particular area of study one applies it to.

In this, even Roman Catholics, and Mormons and so on, at times end up bringing out some sound things from the Scripture.

And yet such are off as can be where the Blood of Christ, etc., is concerned.

Why?

Key weaknesses in their basic approach, overall.

"A little leaven, leaveneth the whole bread...".

Hilston?

Back when he and I went back and forth (even before there was a TOL) we both found we held a same understanding on some things, and not on others.

In contrast, I find very very little I understand any differently than many other Mid-Acts based Pastor-Teachers and or Bible students.

The difference in all these things?

Study approach.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top