Theology Club: Is MAD doctrine correct?

[Lighthouse]

Acts 1, will you now restore Israel? Why would a disciple ask that if they knew of the Body of Christ? Because they didn't.

Excellent point, Nick.:thumb:

Assuming James is even speaking of the same thing when he refers to "justifies" (I don't), the below Venn diagram^* nicely harmonizes Paul's statement with James' without resorting to dispensationalist theology.

^{*Provided because I know how much dispensationalists like charts and such.}

It would help your case if you could support the rationale of this chart with some sort of evidence; preferably Scripture.

P.S.
Did you see my thread on The Guardians of the Galaxy?

 

[godrulz]

I do not. I simply show that the didactic nature of tongues, etc., was to establish the authority of the apostles' authority as they laid the foundation of the church. Once the foundation is laid, nothing more is needed. Like those that you cavil against, please do not assign more to what I have argued. Just sayin'.

AMR

This is a paradigm you came up with, not an exegetical, theological necessity from the evidence.

For a scholarly rebuttal of one of your likely influences, B.B. Warfield:

http://www.amazon.com/Cessation-Charismata-Protestant-Post-biblical-Miracles-Revised/dp/0981952623

Oh, I finished 'Beyond the Bounds' as promised. It was good, bad, ugly, and I am still persuaded about Open Theism vs Calvinism

 

[godrulz]

Thanks for agreeing with us. It isn't written to you. It was a different way God was dealing with people at a different time.

This isolated event was descriptive, not proscriptive. It would be like us having a 'March for Jesus' and you arguing that it is another dispensation over one e.g. of something that was not commanded. You have no clue about simple Bible interpretation/application and resort to a simplistic system that is far more naive and problematic than you realize.

 

[Brother Vinny]

Excellent point, Nick.:thumb:


It would help your case if you could support the rationale of this chart with some sort of evidence; preferably Scripture.

P.S.
Did you see my thread on The Guardians of the Galaxy?

The chart was relying on--and only on--the two verses Nick gave. The chart does not represent my own views on soteriology, even (I shudder to think I would suggest there be a "works that justify" overlap). The chart merely reflects how some might get the two verses to harmonize.

P.S. I'll look for the thread. The movie was simply amazing.

 

[Nick M]

Matthew 22

37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

You have no clue about simple Bible interpretation/application and resort to a simplistic system that is far more naive and problematic than you realize.

Are you saying Nick M is a simple simpleton?

2 Cor 11:3 (KJV)

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Gal. 2 is a demarcation of ministry, not two true gospels.

As Nick M has asked repeatedly,

why set up a demarcation of ministry, shake on it, and then never follow it?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

This is not exegesis/sound NT theology, but wrong paradigm.

Thanks, I'm sure heir will be glad to know this.

 

[heir]

Thanks, I'm sure heir will be glad to know this.

I'm still trying to figure out what he's doing in this forum.

The MidActs Dispensationalism Forum is a PRO-dispensationalism theology forum. In other words this forum is intended to primarily discuss dispensationalism from the perspective that it is the correct biblical view. That does not mean that the view cannot be questioned or debated, instead it simply means this forum will not be a place for those that disagree to grandstand or monopolize the forum or mock the position that this forum represents.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I'm still trying to figure out what he's doing in this forum.

The MidActs Dispensationalism Forum is a PRO-dispensationalism theology forum. In other words this forum is intended to primarily discuss dispensationalism from the perspective that it is the correct biblical view. That does not mean that the view cannot be questioned or debated, instead it simply means this forum will not be a place for those that disagree to grandstand or monopolize the forum or mock the position that this forum represents.

I agree, Sister.

Plus, I already know what he is going to write before he writes it.

 

[Lighthouse]

The chart was relying on--and only on--the two verses Nick gave. The chart does not represent my own views on soteriology, even (I shudder to think I would suggest there be a "works that justify" overlap). The chart merely reflects how some might get the two verses to harmonize.

Do you agree that the chart does not, in any way, support its own premise?

P.S. I'll look for the thread. The movie was simply amazing.

:thumb:

 

[Nick M]

Matthew 22

37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

Which part is Paul's law which will not justify, and which part is James which will justify?

 

[heir]

^{*Provided because I know how much dispensationalists like charts and such.}

I've yet to see a good chart. Stick to the KJB.

 

[Brother Vinny]

I've yet to see a good chart. Stick to the KJB.

:shut:

 

[Nick M]

Matthew 22

37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

Which part is Paul's law which will not justify, and which part is James which will justify?

 

[godrulz]

I've yet to see a good chart. Stick to the KJB.

Are you KJVO? This is another problem that MAD tends to rely on. KJV is not the way to do exegetical work and formulate theology. This was one problem I had with 'The Plot' (relied too much on NKJV that fell apart when looking at original languages).

 

[Nick M]

This was one problem I had with 'The Plot' (relied too much on NKJV that fell apart when looking at original languages).

Why don't you show us what fell apart with the original language.

 

[Nick M]

Are you KJVO?

No, thanks for asking. And two people that are literate in Greek versions (not you) say the version is good. You just have to know early modern English.

 

[godrulz]

No, thanks for asking. And two people that are literate in Greek versions (not you) say the version is good. You just have to know early modern English.

KJVO thinks using Oxford dictionary is the way to go, but not Greek lexicons. This is ridiculous.

 

[Nick M]

This was one problem I had with 'The Plot' (relied too much on NKJV that fell apart when looking at original languages).

Why don't you show us what fell apart with the original language.