ECT Nang's Boastful Lie

[Jedidiah]

What did I not answer? You spoke of N.T. teachings, and I answered. You spoke of none of the N.T. being addressed to unbeliever, and I answered...

What was your answer ? Did you agree with me ? Fact is you didn't answer that point at all, not in your previous post nor in this one.

...Anytime the Truth (gospel/Holy Scripture) is preached, it will either condemn unbelievers or save the sons of God. Same words of Truth will either judge or bless, according to the good purposes of God...

Are you now saying that any of the N.T. (or the whole Word of God) is literally addressed to the lost ? Because it's not, Nang. It's not. When the lost read the Scriptures, they're reading "somebody else's mail."

...And it doesn't matter if the preacher is speaking from the O.T. or the N.T. It is all the Word of God, that concerns Jesus Christ.

And again a red herring. lain:

It's sloppy thinking if it's unintentional and it's diabolical if it's on purpose. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Well, we can be best buddies as soon as you repent from claiming there are more than one gospel promised and proclaimed throughout history.

But, you're a Calvinist! Don't forget to be 'forthright' with that
information?

 

[Nang]

​

What was your answer ? Did you agree with me ? Fact is you didn't answer that point at all, not in your previous post nor in this one.

​

Are you now saying that any of the N.T. (or the whole Word of God) is literally addressed to the lost ? Because it's not, Nang. It's not. When the lost read the Scriptures, they're reading "somebody else's mail."

I disagree. God never ever judged an ungodly nation in the O.T. or N.T. without first sending them a prophet, His words of warning of their sins, His Son, or simply His witness through natural laws of creation. This is the teaching of Paul in Romans Chapters One through Three and Romans 5:12-21, and Jesus in Luke 24:44-45.

Such fairness, is the very just purpose of all God's Law/Word.

It seems you are trying to force me to give answer according to your own mindset.

It is not dishonest for me to stick to my own beliefs, and give answer accordingly, thank you very much.

 

[Doom]

...there are distinctive administrations (by) God regarding His Truth.

oikonom Greek: administration or dispensation

Welcome to dispensationalism. :cheers:

You just admitted it. Now, let's see how long before you deny it, and claim you never said it, and then "bah" at everyone instead of owning what you said.

 

[Jedidiah]

...It is the same (gospel) message proclaimed to reprobates as it is proclaimed to the sons of God...

There is no book in the Bible addressed to the lost, and there are books literally, explicitly addressed to the Uncircumcised, and they are different from those literally and explicitly addressed to the Circumcised. This is the Bible, not MAD.

 

[Nang]

oikonom Greek: administration or dispensation

Welcome to dispensationalism. :cheers:

You just admitted it. Now, let's see how long before you deny it, and claim you never said it, and then "bah" at everyone instead of owning what you said.

I never denied that "dispensation" is a biblical word, and an historical fact.

I do deny what Dispensationalists have wrongly made of it . . .

 

[Jedidiah]

I disagree. God never ever judged an ungodly nation in the O.T. or N.T. without first sending them a prophet, His words of warning of their sins, His Son, or simply His witness through natural laws of creation. This is the teaching of Paul in Romans Chapters One through Three and Romans 5:12-21, and Jesus in Luke 24:44-45.

Such fairness, is the very just purpose of all God's Law/Word.

It seems you are trying to force me to give answer according to your own mindset.

It is not dishonest for me to stick to my own beliefs, and give answer accordingly, thank you very much.

You do grant then that Paul preached a distinct Gospel to the Uncircumcised then ? It didn't seem as if you grant that. I mean, it's right there, in black-and-white.

 

[Nang]

​

You do grant then that Paul preached a distinct Gospel to the Uncircumcised then ? It didn't seem as if you grant that. I mean, it's right there, in black-and-white.

Where?

I do deny that Paul preached a "distinct Gospel to the Uncircumcised."

There is only one gospel message that has the power to save, and that is the Gospel of Grace in Jesus Christ. And it has been proclaimed to all kinds of men, amongst all the nations, since Genesis 3:15.

 

[Doom]

I never denied that "dispensation" is a biblical word, and an historical fact.

All forms of dispensationalism produce a false gospel.

 

[Christian Liberty]

"dispensation" and "dispensationalism" are two different things. The latter is a specific system (or set of systems) that are in opposition to covenant theology.

 

[Nang]

There is a difference between a dispensation, and Dispensationalism.

So stop with the inane accusations.

They are without merit or grounds.

 

[Nang]

"dispensation" and "dispensationalism" are two different things. The latter is a specific system (or set of systems) that are in opposition to covenant theology.

Yep.

Thanks CL . . . for keeping me sane and calm.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Yep.

Thanks CL . . . for keeping me sane and calm.

I'm in a calm mood right now. I'm probaby not going to stay there long

 

[Nick M]

They either must live totally sinless lives, or their faith will prove to be on their lips only, but not in their hearts. And if their faith is not in their hearts, they cannot truly love God and the brethren.

Matthew 12

34 Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

 

[Doom]

"dispensation" and "dispensationalism" are two different things. The latter is a specific system (or set of systems) that are in opposition to covenant theology.

That's YOUR definition, and therefore without merit. A true dispensationalist believes that there are dispensations (administrations). That is why I am a dispensationalist, and so was the apostle Paul, and so is Jesus.

btw... why do you have a homo for your avatar?

 

[Doom]

There is a difference between a dispensation, and Dispensationalism.

So stop with the inane accusations.

They are without merit or grounds.

You are full of Bubba Shrimp.

God is a dispensationalist. In fact, you admitted that He is, so stop with the lies and deception.

 

[Jedidiah]

​

Paul preached a distinct Gospel to the Uncircumcised...it's right there, in black-and-white.

Where?...

Galatians 2:7

...I do deny that Paul preached a "distinct Gospel to the Uncircumcised."...

Come on ! This isn't a trick Nang ! You and I both know how obvious it is. "...the Gospel of the vncircumcision was committed vnto me, as the Gospel of the circumcision was vnto Peter..." is right there in black and white. It's been there since before Augustine. It's not some MAD wacko conspiracy theory.

...There is only one gospel message that has the power to save, and that is the Gospel of Grace in Jesus Christ. And it has been proclaimed to all kinds of men, amongst all the nations, since Genesis 3:15.

Galatians 2:7

 

[Christian Liberty]

That's YOUR definition, and therefore without merit. A true dispensationalist believes that there are dispensations (administrations). That is why I am a dispensationalist, and so was the apostle Paul, and so is Jesus.

I'm not the most knowledgeable about this, but it seems to me that most Christians do agree that God works with different people in different time periods in different ways. The question would be to how great an extent that is the case. Covenant theology would say that the OT is in force unless a given portion was, at least implicitly, changed in the NT (theonomic reconstructionists would probably go a little harder on this than I would) while dispensationalists usually say the OT is null except where repeated in the new.

Jesus wasn't a dispensationalist, nor was Paul. But I understand that you are.

btw... why do you have a homo for your avatar?

I'm actually going to change it soon precisely because I keep getting asked this. But, I like the character Michael Scofield from Prison Break. Its not for/about the actor.

 

[Nang]

​

​

Galatians 2:7

Note the definitive word "as," designating sameness between messages despite different audiences.

​

Come on ! This isn't a trick Nang ! You and I both know how obvious it is. "...the Gospel of the vncircumcision was committed vnto me, as the Gospel of the circumcision was vnto Peter..." is right there in black and white. It's been there since before Augustine. It's not some MAD wacko conspiracy theory.

​

Galatians 2:7

Augustine never taught there were different gospels.

Augustine never came close to teaching the MAD errors.

MAD is recent and MAD is wrong.

 

[Jedidiah]

...Augustine never taught there were different gospels.

Augustine never came close to teaching the MAD errors.

MAD is recent and MAD is wrong.

Well, he should have, because Galatians 2:7 is not error, nor recent, nor wrong.