ECT EXPANDING GAL 1:15 !!
- Thread starter DAN P
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
You fools with Trump Derangement Syndrome have blinded you to any truth anywhere.
Hi and your claim that there are many dispensationalists that are Mid-Acts , Hybrid !!
Where does the bible teach that ??
My blathering I believe is clear !!
dan p
Obviously, what I'd actually meant by "Trump supporter" slipped right past your "things that differ" lens, once more :chuckle:
Rom. 5:8.
What do you mean my claim?
And what claim, exactly?
Spell out in detail what you think I have meant about whatever it is you are going on about there.
Rom. 5:8.
glorydaz
Well-known member
If you would practice up on your delivery, there might be fewer occasions for your having to explain yourself.
glorydaz
Well-known member
See, it just MIGHT be YOU with the delivery PROBLEM. :chuckle:
glorydaz
Well-known member
:mock: Danoh
Other people "blather". He, alone, articulates his wisdom so that none can understand.
Yeah, you're right - I should just go with your frequent habit of reading into a thing - not ask someone what THEY had meant.
:chuckle:
Rom. 5:8.
Nope - most over on the Politics Forum know what I mean by that phrase, by now.
But you and your pals...
No surprise there.
Rom. 5:8.
glorydaz
Well-known member
No doubt you have no problem explaining things to others with your particular bent, but we're talking spiritual things here, and if the spiritual things Dan speaks of are blather to you, then nothing else needs to be added.
I was a thinkin that Danoh and Trump might be tied for the "I'm the greatest!" contest trophy.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Now that would be a contest worth watching. The Chump and the Trump in the ring.:jump:
Hi and I have seen some phrases about Mid-Acts Hybrid , so where are those terms in the bible ??
Where does Paul uses MID-ACTS OR HYBRID ?
dan p
Last edited:
Now I know FROM YOU what you were talking about.
You were talking about TWO issues.
Not to mention that the fact of the matter on those two issues is that you have two tracks on this that you every now and then lament the one or the other of.
Thus, before attempting to answer you, I was merely wanting to be sure it was the one and not the other, if not what it has turned out to be per your above reply - both issues.
For, from what I recall of your various posts - one of your laments is the issue of how that the descriptive "Mid-Acts" itself is not the same as the descriptive "Acts 9."
How that that phrase - "Mid-Acts" itself, is a result of a fusion of the Acts 9 view held by some, with the Acts 13 held by others, and so on - in what you have stated you view as a compromise of the truth between various people within your assembly.
Your other track on all this is what you have posted you have thought I mean when I use the word "hybrid."
And hybrid and fusion are the same thing.
In other words, both you and I have each attempted to point out what you and I have each viewed as one hybrid (fusion) or another, of one thing or another into one, on the part of others.
So I was merely checking to be sure which one you were actually going on about.
This is what a thorough "things that differ" student is ever curious about - what a person might actually being going on about on one thing or another, in contrast to the error of most to right away assume they know what they other person meant (as some on here have just finished proving they are ever prone to doing - reading into a thing).
Like it, or lump it, bro, the consistent Madist is nothing if ever curious about what are the things that actually differ in another's words.
At the same time, your insistence that the phrase "Mid-Acts" must be in Scripture in order for you to consider it spiritually legitimate, is nothing more than your own hybrid or fusion together, of your own notions on this issue, with the ideas, concepts, and principles taught by Scripture that result in the "Mid-Acts" label as a convenient descriptive.
By your full of holes argument, one might as well argue that a can of corn has no business being labeled a can of corn, because nowhere within said can of corn itself, are the words "can of corn" found. :chuckle:
By your full of holes argument on this; the same could be said of descriptives like "Trinity" "Triune" and so on.
Fact of the matter is that although the word "hybrid" is not used by Scripture; it does use other words that are exactly the same descriptive.
Your own lament about some in your assembly on this issue is nothing more than Scripture's longer descriptive "a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump."
That bro, is the same as saying "hybrid."
Or "hybrid for short..."
Likewise with the descriptive "Mid-Acts" and other descriptives not exactly used by Scripture.
Nevertheless, Romans 5:8 towards you.
For there is always the great opportunity of that passage as one's decided on lens towards others, whether or not one agrees or disagrees with them, on one thing or another.
There, you've been properly schooled in what's what on all this - put that in your Robert Brock pot, and smoke it. :chuckle: