ECT MADists don't follow Paul

[john w]

It was.

(Rom 6:14) For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.




(Rom 7:7) ... I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law.

Catch , TOL? He asserts that " We know what sin is from the law," but it was nailed to the cross/abolished/no longer exists.

I've quoted the Romans 7:7 KJV verse to you over 100 times, punk.


Romans 6:14 KJV is not talking about it being" abolished, punk, it's talking about it's role in a believer's walk,"For sin shall no longer be your master," moron, not it being abolished.

It still serves to "tutor" the lost/unrighteous,so it can bring them to Christ, through instructing them what sin is, and it's "slave master" demands.


If the law is abolished, punk, there is no transgression, since sinis transgresion of the law, and sin is not imputed, where there is no law.


TOL sees again what a satanic moron you are.


"What is one of the purposes of the law., Craigie?"-aint John W to Tettie


"Because it brought me, and others, to Christ."-Tettie



But it no longer exists, was nailed to the cross," but was "resurrected" after thye cross, to show Craigie/other former lost people, to Christ, knowledge of sin.


Moron. The law was not nailed to the cross-you made that up. It still exists, serving the same purpose, it has always done.

Your pathetic, not even in my league.

 

[musterion]

Can one affirm that God is going to draw the Jews(the believing remnant) back to the Promised Land ,and claim God still has a plan with certain remnant of the nation Israel, and thus "slap" "in the face to what Christ Jesus accomplished on the cross regarding sin," and thus assert that "that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin wasn't good enough," AND STILL BE SAVED?

YES, or NO.

That's what I want to know.

 

[john w]

It was.

(Rom 6:14) For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.




(Rom 7:7) ... I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law.

You did not answer:
Who teaches the law to us, so that we can "know what sin is?" Who taught the law in the OT?

 

[musterion]

We know what sin is from the law.

Romans 7:7, as John correctly points out.

You may as well be an atheist, blasphemer.

 

[DAN P]

Hi and just where is there a verse for the ABOVE ??

DAN P

 

[tetelestai]

That's what I want to know.

If I were you, I would want to know too.

Instead of believing that Dispensational rubbish, why don't you just believe what the Bible says, and not have to worry if you are saved or not?

 

[tetelestai]

Romans 7:7, as John correctly points out.

You may as well be an atheist, blasphemer.

Try paying attention mystery boy.

(Rom 7:7) ... I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law.

 

[musterion]

If I were you, I would want to know too.

Instead of believing that Dispensational rubbish, why don't you just believe what the Bible says, and not have to worry if you are saved or not?

Answer the question.

 

[john w]

Satanic Craigie:

Who teaches the law to us, so that we can "know what sin is?" Who taught the law in the OT?


Josephus? Men?

Who taught the law, and why, in the OT?

Who taught the Acts 2 believers, to adhere to the law, such as observing the feasts, "the appointed times," in early Acts?

Who?

 

[musterion]

So, Tettles.

Can one affirm that God is going to draw the Jews(the believing remnant) back to the Promised Land ,and claim God still has a plan with certain remnant of the nation Israel, and thus "slap" "in the face to what Christ Jesus accomplished on the cross regarding sin," and thus assert that "that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin wasn't good enough," AND STILL BE SAVED?

Yes or no.

We're guessing you'll have to say "no."

 

[tetelestai]

Who teaches the law to us

Just in case you don't know if you're a sinner or not, let me give you a law that proves you are a sinner:

(Deut 22:5) A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.

 

[musterion]

Tettles.

I believe that salvation by grace through faith alone for Jew and Gentile alike, without observance of any Law, is a distinctive of this dispensation of grace. Just as that was not the way of salvation before this dispensation was ushered in through Paul, I believe it will once again no longer be the case when this dispensation is fulfilled.

Am I saved while I believe that?

 

[tetelestai]

So, Tettles.

Can one affirm that God is going to draw the Jews(the believing remnant) back to the Promised Land ,and claim God still has a plan with certain remnant of the nation Israel, and thus "slap" "in the face to what Christ Jesus accomplished on the cross regarding sin," and thus assert that "that Christ Jesus' one time sacrifice for sin wasn't good enough," AND STILL BE SAVED?

Yes or no.

We're guessing you'll have to say "no."

I already answered.

IMO, you guys are saved, but will be like a man who escapes a fire.

(1 Cor 3:15) If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved--even though only as one escaping through the flames.

But there's still hope for you, you're still alive.

You have to time to let go of Darby's false teachings, and embrace the truth.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I already answered.

IMO, you guys are saved, but will be like a man who escapes a fire.

(1 Cor 3:15) If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved--even though only as one escaping through the flames.

But there's still hope for you, you're still alive.

You have to time to let go of Darby's false teachings, and embrace the truth.

A scholar, you're not.

 

[musterion]

I already answered.

Not with Yes or No.

Please provide, either way, and I'll unsubscribe from this thread.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I already answered.

IMO, you guys are saved, but will be like a man who escapes a fire.

(1 Cor 3:15) If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved--even though only as one escaping through the flames.

But there's still hope for you, you're still alive.

You have to time to let go of Darby's false teachings, and embrace the truth.

Your truth is, Christ already returned in 70AD in the
form of the Roman army. So, get over it.

 

[whitestone]

I already answered.

IMO, you guys are saved, but will be like a man who escapes a fire.

(1 Cor 3:15) If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved--even though only as one escaping through the flames.

But there's still hope for you, you're still alive.

You have to time to let go of Darby's false teachings, and embrace the truth.

if you believe we are saved,,,

still hope for "what", while we are still alive?

 

[john w]

Just in case you don't know if you're a sinner or not, let me give you a law that proves you are a sinner:

(Deut 22:5) A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.

Wow! I'm picking the sodomite's argument apart, so accuses me of wearing women's clothing? That is your best shot, wimp, sodomite? Tell me it's not. How so, sweetie? Is that like the "homosexual,"kissy face, and clothes, you wore during/with your "close" meeting with "god"rulz, effeminate one? Or that men's clothing huskie paint face, big hands now "going through a divorce" wife of yours wore in that pic awhile back you posted?

Well, Clay Aiken face?

So there, soddy.

 

[tetelestai]

Not with Yes or No.

I didn't give an affirmative yes or no.

I said IMO (in my opinion) you are saved.

Please provide, either way, and I'll unsubscribe from this thread.

I couldn't care less if you post in this thread or not.

I answered the question. I said it was my opinion you guys are saved, but at the same time, you are saved like a man who escapes from a fire.

Wouldn't you rather be saved, and here "well done my faithful servant" instead of feeling like a man who barely escaped a house on fire?

 

[Right Divider]

That's pretty funny coming from you, who claims "soon", "near", "last days", "end of the ages", etc. means 2,000 years and still counting.

So this fixes your problem?

How could Paul be a good minister of Christ if he waited for 17 YEARS to do his "fact checking"? What if he had been wrong for 17 YEARS?

I guess that you've never read about the patience of God.

Paul's writings are the ONLY place that explains this CURRENT delay, but you reject it.

Stay ignorant my friend.

P.S. 1 Peter 3:15 helps explain the delay.