ECT Enlightened about MAD

[Danoh]

I always knew (since breaking through in college) about D'ism that it takes its dictatorial stance to impose its complications that it sees between the lines. I now realize that to salvage what it could from the decrepancy of that stance, MAD has its own set of complications, imposed by a 'teacher' or 'expert' class and even experimenting with the irrationality of neo-orthodoxy ('it's true because it is not found in other history!').

All you have to answer is what does 'saved' mean in the context of rom 10 forward. That's what it means at the end of 11, which is D'ism's and MAD's supposed grand-proof-text. It is obviously not a restored theocracy.

It is no surprise that you read right past the intended sense of the word "orthotomeo."

For you buy into what you consider the right source for "orthodox" or right doctrine - whatever you have concluded is some sort of a valid historical source.

What you mean is that; in your skewed perception; MAD Dispys are neo-historical.

That is how skewed your perception is; you don't even see what you actually mean.

You have so bought into the error that the Scripture is understood through the "historical" traditions of men.

You never appear to misquote them.

You do, however, not only never lay out a study via passages of Scripture, but those few phrases from Scripture you do quote; you often actually misquote.

Your obviously massive ego ever on the line; it is no wonder not an iota of this will pierce your vanity.

In this, you often prove yourself an egotistical know it all, who knows nothing at all.

 

[Danoh]

What has happened over the centuries is that we have gotten the idea that each individual person listening to Christ or an apostles only heard the one thing the text mentions in their incident. I don't believe that for a minute.

Then there are the simplifications in "The gospel message is simply to believe in Jesus to receive eternal life,".

In English, to believe in says nothing about dependence upon.
2, With Judaism hinting that the end of the whole created order could be soon, there needs to be clarity about justification from sins. 'To recieve eternal life' is an outcome of that, but but it has a way of avoiding the issue if it is offered directly. So "The gospel message is simply to believe in Jesus to receive eternal life," is a very poor representation of what Christ and the apostles sounded like.

By that time in that city (the jailer) and because he had access to proceedings, I don't think there was any question about what Paul was teaching before it came to the moment where his life was in danger about the escape. I'm not even sure he meant 'saved' like an evangelical means it; it is more likely that he means to find out why it would be better to live imprisoned vs. end it quickly with a sword.

Good post.

But, and especially in your case - in the immortal words of Chaka Kan "...don't let it go to your head now, o, don't let it.." :chuckle: