ECT Enlightened about MAD

Interplanner

Well-known member
I'm not doubting the Mads ignorance for minute, but there is a debate about what 'saved' meant when the jailer asked. Was he asking, 'how can you help me in my predicament here?--I'm going to get punished if I don't contain you guys' or was he asking 'how can I be accepted by the God you are speaking of in all your hymns and teaching?'

Do you think Paul stopped teaching the preeminence of justification from sins for this guy for some reason? That is what 'saved' means in its interchange with justification in Romans right up to the quote of Isaiah in ch 11 and beyond.

By not seeing the saturation of justification, D'ism doesn't have a clue what it is looking at in Rom 11 and the quote of Isaiah, even with the parallel lines.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Was he asking, 'how can you help me in my predicament here?--I'm going to get punished if I don't contain you guys' or was he asking 'how can I be accepted by the God you are speaking of in all your hymns and teaching?'

The jailer was going to kill himself because the thought the prisoners had escaped

(Acts 16:27-28) ... and was about to kill himself because he thought the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted, “Don’t harm yourself! We are all here!”..

So, once Paul let the jailer know they were still there, the jailer was no longer in a predicament.

Then the jailer asked what he must do to be saved.

Nowhere in the passage does it say Paul or Silas preached to them beforehand. The passage tells us Paul and Silas sang and prayed, but it also tells us the jailer was sleeping while Paul and Silas was singing and praying.

Here's the important part:

After the jailer believed:

(Acts 16:32) Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house.

There's nothing wrong with telling 1 Cor 15:1-4 to an unbeliever, and/or telling about the d,b,r and the sin issue to an unbeliever.

However, to be legalistic and claim there are certain things that have to be said to an unbeliever is...well...being legalistic.

That's what Danoh and mysteryboy are doing because of their MAD.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
To ... claim there are certain things that have to be said to an unbeliever is ... being legalistic. That's what Danoh and mysteryboy are doing because of their MAD.

Fifty bucks says you're making things up.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
So if he awoke from sleep and knew nothing of what they had been saying and there's a total loss of containment, he was afraid of protracted torture, thus the sword to be done in a moment. That fact puts his 'saved' in the category of survival.

I doubt he slept through all of it. But yes, he did wake up. The other prisoners were listening--an expression which often implies the main figure was listening plus the others. Or had been.

I just don't buy that the ONLY thing he had to go on was the cypher 'saved' as he is awaking out of sleep and fearing for his life. 'These men are going everywhere turning the world upside down.' The public had some knowledge of what they were about.

But I don't try to 'generate' doctrines out of incidental accounts any more than out of the Rev. Big mistake.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
But I don't try to 'generate' doctrines out of incidental accounts any more than out of the Rev. Big mistake.

I agree.

However, the MADists are being dogmatic and legalistic about it.

They claim Rom 10:9 is not good enough for an unbeliever today.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
It doesn't matter! It wasn't a 'magical' single line that you just say by itself as though saying it by itself had certain powers. The same with 'Jesus is Lord' in Corinthians.
 

Danoh

New member
So if he awoke from sleep and knew nothing of what they had been saying and there's a total loss of containment, he was afraid of protracted torture, thus the sword to be done in a moment. That fact puts his 'saved' in the category of survival.

I doubt he slept through all of it. But yes, he did wake up. The other prisoners were listening--an expression which often implies the main figure was listening plus the others. Or had been.

I just don't buy that the ONLY thing he had to go on was the cypher 'saved' as he is awaking out of sleep and fearing for his life. 'These men are going everywhere turning the world upside down.' The public had some knowledge of what they were about.

But I don't try to 'generate' doctrines out of incidental accounts any more than out of the Rev. Big mistake.

You are actually affirming what MADS are asserting, that Tet has in error in even as you read this that you are affirming into Tet's erroneous assertions.

Are you actually that dense? He is the one building a doctrine out of a passage in Acts.

While your mention of Paul's reasoning more than a few words is exactly what MADs are asserting.

And this issue has nothing to do with the two gospel issue - that is another issue.

Only your own version of his continued obtuseness and reading into things even as you actuallly make MADs case oblivious to said fact has you agreeing with that fool.

All you are doing is helping him back peddle - as if the jerk needs help.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Glad you actually got one line on topic. This is not the two gospels? Show why or why not? apparently it is just as much a test case of that as Acts 15 is of how to use Amos 9?

So, I've given you credit for one line. the rest is not a discussion, so be a man and figure out how to stop it.
 

Danoh

New member
Glad you actually got one line on topic. This is not the two gospels? Show why or why not? apparently it is just as much a test case of that as Acts 15 is of how to use Amos 9?

So, I've given you credit for one line. the rest is not a discussion, so be a man and figure out how to stop it.

Very simple, whether it is Noah many centuries earlier, or that Phillipian jailor, both are saved by the finished work of the Cross.

The former, based on the forebearance of God His knowledge of that coming finished work has bought the man of faith prior to the Cross.

The latter, based on that finished work this side of said finished work.

Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

At the same time, as verse 26 makes obvious, knowledge of the basis both are saved on is being declared at some point after, not before...the Cross.

Verse 21's "But now..."

Again, this is not the two gospel issue - that is another issue.

No MAD was attempting some kind of a smoke screen, as accused.

For the two gospel issue was not the issue on the table.

But I have often noted that MAD is about distinctions as to things that differ.

Things that conclusions from a "one size fits all" can only continue to walk right past oblivious of.

Tet is simply wrong once more.

He has yet to lay out the dbr.

Why would he skirt that?

The MADs he ia ever badgering of hiding behind Darby about never do.

All of a sudden to emphasize the dbr is some sort of a legalistic sin.

I don't buy it. He is either still lost; never having correctly understood the dbr, or is attempting to hide his ignorance of it.

In which case; he is wrong on either count and one the one issue he should be clear about.

I don't see you asking him to "be a man" on this that he has skirted for years.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
But he did show that he had been told that what the jailer had was not enough to be saved with now. That is the issue he was addressing, and why Musterion wanted there to be more content.

I think the jailer had heard a lot of content, but to be more practical, I think he was speaking of saving his life right there. Paul's guidance there compares to Paul leading the shipwrecked. The jailer was going to make it a quick death rather than be tortured for a contracted period.

I don't see where we disagree on this, and I don't think what you said about Noah was what D'ist professors told me.

I also don't resolve what people 'need to know' the same way--by how much theology they have. I believe that the natural revelation of God through reason is 1, we know there is a Creator and this place (and us) are his property; the alternative is chaos, and 2, there will be a day of divine justice, in which all debts will be reconciled fairly. the alternative is chaos.

The Christian message is the perfect and totally complete progression upon 1 and 2. Neither are abandoned by the Gospel, but it does say the day of justice has arrived in Christ. But if a person has concluded that (and that is the truth that all people know from God directly, even through common sense conclusions), I think they are saved. God will show them that the Gospel does not conflict with 1 and 2.

The second-guessing of what sort of tentative or prototype Gospel is in the gospel accounts is insidious on the part of Mads. It will be irresolvable, because in their final form, the four gospels are how the apostles taught once the seminar was over. A prototype is what Must kept going back to, and kept ignoring 'Look! the LAMB of God' in a Judaism-saturated setting. Ignored it 3x. A prototype is a total waste of time and it divides the believers in various camps and is the mind of the flesh at work, to claim to know the secret knowledge and to sell books.
 

Danoh

New member
But he did show that he had been told that what the jailer had was not enough to be saved with now. That is the issue he was addressing, and why Musterion wanted there to be more content.

I think the jailer had heard a lot of content, but to be more practical, I think he was speaking of saving his life right there. Paul's guidance there compares to Paul leading the shipwrecked. The jailer was going to make it a quick death rather than be tortured for a contracted period.

I don't see where we disagree on this, and I don't think what you said about Noah was what D'ist professors told me.

I also don't resolve what people 'need to know' the same way--by how much theology they have. I believe that the natural revelation of God through reason is 1, we know there is a Creator and this place (and us) are his property; the alternative is chaos, and 2, there will be a day of divine justice, in which all debts will be reconciled fairly. the alternative is chaos.

The Christian message is the perfect and totally complete progression upon 1 and 2. Neither are abandoned by the Gospel, but it does say the day of justice has arrived in Christ. But if a person has concluded that (and that is the truth that all people know from God directly, even through common sense conclusions), I think they are saved. God will show them that the Gospel does not conflict with 1 and 2.

The second-guessing of what sort of tentative or prototype Gospel is in the gospel accounts is insidious on the part of Mads. It will be irresolvable, because in their final form, the four gospels are how the apostles taught once the seminar was over. A prototype is what Must kept going back to, and kept ignoring 'Look! the LAMB of God' in a Judaism-saturated setting. Ignored it 3x. A prototype is a total waste of time and it divides the believers in various camps and is the mind of the flesh at work, to claim to know the secret knowledge and to sell books.

We're kind of agreed...kind of.

As for the two gospels issue.

Israel's Gospel (I'll into the other in another post).

What Israel is expected to believe in Matthew thru John is that Jesus is the Christ their Law and their Prophets did should come.

Period.

In early Acts that basic gospel is extended to now include the additional good news that though they had crucified Him, God had raised Him from the dead, and was offering them a pardon upon their confessing Him as having been their Christ.

The Lord confirming the fact of the Spirit's assertion of His having risen from the dead, as evidence of His Lordship, through the witness of the Twelve, via signs following.

But the issue still is that He is the Son of God; their prophesied Christ and Lord of Israel Who their Law and their Prophets had prophesied was for to come.

Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

What does verse 26 refer to? What one reads into it, or what other passages might shed light on it?

I'll opt for the latter; that I might read their light into that passage.

John 1:40 One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. 1:41 He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.

1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

1:49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.

That was to be Israel's confession.

Likewise as to those of Israel not of the same fold, as Israel was in division.

John 4:9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

4:11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? 4:12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?

4:25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. 4:26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he. 4:28 The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, 4:29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

The issue in their gospel is WHO He IS.

John 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only? 5:45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

John 9:28 Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. 9:29 We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is.

9:32 Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. 9:33 If this man were not of God, he could do nothing.

9:35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? 9:36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? 9:37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

It goes on like that into early Acts...

Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 2:24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 2:26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 2:28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 2:29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 2:32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 2:34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 2:35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

The issue in their gospel is that He is their Prophesied Lord and Christ: the Son of God.

They are being called to believe that.

Their required repentence is to turn back to the God of their Fathers by believing that Jesus is their Lord.

Theirs IS a Lordship salvation.

Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. 3:14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. 3:16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. 3:17 And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. 3:18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.

Acts 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 3:23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. 3:24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
No MADist should claim that Romans 10:9 Is not enough -

Danoh and musterion are claiming Rom 10:9 is not enough

That's how this all started.

I was asked what needs to be told to an unbeliever for the unbeliever to be saved, and I quoted Rom 10:9.

musterion and Danoh said Rom 10:9 isn't good enough because it doesn't address sin.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Danoh and musterion are claiming Rom 10:9 is not enough

That's how this all started.

I was asked what needs to be told to an unbeliever for the unbeliever to be saved, and I quoted Rom 10:9.



musterion and Danoh said Rom 10:9 isn't good enough because it doesn't address sin.


Jesus Christ addressed sin, of course Romans 10:9 would be enough, however, more should be learned
 

Danoh

New member
Danoh and musterion are claiming Rom 10:9 is not enough

That's how this all started.

I was asked what needs to be told to an unbeliever for the unbeliever to be saved, and I quoted Rom 10:9.

musterion and Danoh said Rom 10:9 isn't good enough because it doesn't address sin.

Your problem is you never understood the dbr. It appears you are still lost.
 
Top