Theology Club: Today Many in the Neo-MAD Camp are King James Only

[Tambora]

That does not answer my question and you know it. Here it is again and perhaps this time you will actually answer it:

Do you think that the Jews who lived under the law were saved by faith alone?​

Going to keep right on ignoring that you have been refuted on the Passover & Unleavened Bread references, aren't you?
If you can't even understand that point, you can't possibly understand the rest concerning Passover & Unleavened Bread.
You ignore it because you have no understanding of it.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

That does not answer my question and you know it. Here it is again and perhaps this time you will actually answer it:

Do you think that the Jews who lived under the law were saved by faith alone?​

Who's the old geezer in your avatar?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Actually in the old days the old KJV bibles stated in their "pre-face" that the words that were in "italics" were not in the original manuscripts but were added to make the sentence flow more smoothly. Now the words you gave in bold are in the older copies of the KJV in italics(and then so were added/not found in original manuscripts). So in this case(the one you gave/17) they are added,and incorrectly.

Thanks, and you know that I agree with you that the words are added incorrectly at Matthew 26:17. I believe that the verse should be translated in this way, where the words are not added to the text:

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying to Him, “Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” (Ro.26:17).​

However, one person on this thread says that I am wrong mainly because I have not studied ancient Greece as he has for two years. He must think that he knows more about the Greek language than the translators here:

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” (NASB).​

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the Passover?” (ESV).​

"On the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do You want us to prepare the Passover so You may eat it? " (HSCB).​

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the passover?" (RSV).​

"Now on the first day of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Where wilt thou that we make ready for thee to eat the passover?" (ASV).​

"And on the first day of the unleavened food came the disciples near to Jesus, saying to him, 'Where wilt thou that we may prepare for thee to eat the passover?'" (YLT).​

I think that this proves that there exists legitimate Greek experts who translate the verse similar to the way which I think it should be translated.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Going to keep right on ignoring that you have been refuted on the Passover & Unleavened Bread references, aren't you?

No I haven't.

If you can't even understand that point, you can't possibly understand the rest concerning Passover & Unleavened Bread.
You ignore it because you have no understanding of it.

I will answer anything about those things. But why do you refuse to answer my question:

Do you think that the Jews who lived under the law were saved by faith alone?​

 

[Tambora]

However, one person on this thread says that I am wrong mainly because I have not studied ancient Greece as he has for two years.

Greek.

 

[Tambora]

No I haven't.

Of course you have. You just don't recognize it.

 

[Danoh]

Who's the old geezer in your avatar?

Unfortunately for the memory of the late, great, Sir Robert Anderson, that avatar is a picture of the late, great, Sir Robert Anderson.

The other day, while looking for an article by Sir Anderson, and his picture came up with it, I actually had to pause, and remind myself that the negative I automatically felt was not against the great man, but against this would be tyrant of the brethren, Jerry Shugart.

That it is that buffoon that I had allowed myself to feel such a need to punch someone out against, and not that great man, Sir Robert Anderson.

Can't wait til Jerry is either banned forever, gets a life, or drops dead... that hopefully, the negativity he has succeeded in associating to the memory of that great man, to Sir Robert Anderson, slowly die out its long over due death with this buffoon, Jerry Shugart.

The way he speaks to our sisters on here, I am afraid, that were such the case in person, he would be walking away a few less teeth to show for his disrespect, if I had any thing to say about it.

The man has no class whatsoever.

He is one more coward behind a desktop monitor.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I already answered this with reference to Luke 22:1.

Here is what you said about that:

I have just been looking up several explanations of this discrepancy and they are mostly unsupported ideas. But the best one I saw was both simple and very well supported by Luke 22:1, which simply subsumes Passover in the overall feast of Unleavened Bread. So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

So when we examine the context of what is said at Matthew 26:17 the subject is not really really the Passover Seder but instead the "overall feast of unleavened bread"?:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the Passover" (Mt.26:17-19).​

Is that what you are saying? That every time the word "Passover" is used in these verses it is referring to "the overall feast of Unleavened Bread"?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Can't wait til Jerry is either banned forever, gets a life, or drops dead...

Of course you do not like me correcting your mistaken ideas:

Again, though the first day of the feast of unleavened bread does not precede the feast of Passover, at the same time, within Jewish culture - all the way back to way back when - at times, either the words Unleavened Bread or Passover are used when referring to both.

The "first day of unleavened bread" was the day when the Passover lamb was killed:

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?" (Mk.14:12).​

"Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed" (Lk.22:7).​

The Passover Seder is not observed until the Passover lamb is killed and the Passover Seder is observed on the 14th day of the month:

And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the LORD" (Num.28:16).​

So the words "first day of unleavened bread" cannot be referring to the "first day of the feast of unleavened bread" because that feast did not happen until the 15th day of the month:

"In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread" (Lev.23:4-5).​

So you are wrong when you assert that when the term "unleavened bread' is used it refers to the "feast of unleavened bread."

You should be glad that I gave you the information which corrects your mistaken ideas. But instead, as usual, you just run and hide from the verses which I quoted. You want nothing to do with them

And then, since you cannot answer the message you attack the messenger:

Can't wait til Jerry is either banned forever, gets a life, or drops dead.

 

[Danoh]

Of course you do not like me correcting your mistaken ideas:



The "first day of unleavened bread" was the day when the Passover lamb was killed:

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?" (Mk.14:12).​

"Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed" (Lk.22:7).​

The Passover Seder is not observed until the Passover lamb is killed and the Passover Seder is observed on the 14th day of the month:

And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the LORD" (Num.28:16).​

So the words "first day of unleavened bread" cannot be referring to the "first day of the feast of unleavened bread" because that feast did not happen until the 15th day of the month:

"In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread" (Lev.23:4-5).​

So you are wrong when you assert that when the term "unleavened bread' is used it refers to the "feast of unleavened bread."

You should be glad that I gave you the information which corrects your mistaken ideas. But instead, as usual, you just run and hide from the verses which I quoted. You want nothing to do with them

And then, since you cannot answer the message you attack the messenger:

Can't wait til Jerry is either banned forever, gets a life, or drops dead.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Can't wait til Jerry is either banned forever, gets a life, or drops dead.

Of course you do. You do not like it when someone corrects you. For instance, you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved until they "believe" and are "baptized with water."

I corrected you by quoting these words spoken by the Lord Jesus to the Jews who lived under the law when He plainly says that all they had to do was to "believe" in order to be saved:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

Instead of swallowing your pride and admitting that the Lord Jesus is right you refuse to believe Him.

You should think that you are fortunate because you have someone who can correct you but instead you attack me personally.

 

[Danoh]

Of course you do. You do not like it when someone corrects you. For instance, you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved until they "believe" and are "baptized with water."

I corrected you by quoting these words spoken by the Lord Jesus to the Jews who lived under the law when He plainly says that all they had to do was to "believe" in order to be saved:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

Instead of swallowing your pride and admitting that the Lord Jesus is right you refuse to believe Him.

You should think that you are fortunate because you have someone who can correct you but instead you attack me personally.

Nonsense.

For when I fist began posting on here and someone sad to me that the more technically appropriate label was A9D, not Mid-Acts, I acknowledged that, and began using it as my own as "A9D aka Mid-Acts" that I might honor both the refinement and its history, as well as respect those who still go by the Mid-Acts label, though they are A9D.

God's Truth has corrected me, what; twice. Both times I have easily acknowledged said correction.

Interplanner has corrected me once. I have also acknowledged that.

STP, Tambora, and heir have attempted correcting me on some issues (more like share their view) with do not see eye to eye with. We have gotten nowhere on those issues, but have handled them with class, decency, and respect towards one another.

You have succeeded in none of the above.

One, you continually demonstrate that you get your notions out of books that are fifty plus years old.

Two, you continually demonstrate that you then add your notions.

Three, you continually demonstrate a high inability to get at the sense of the simplest of any one's words, let alone, the Scripture's.

Four, you continually demonstrate, a lack of the simplest of decency towards others.

Because five, you continually demonstrate that your need to be right, and your need to hound after others, is the issue.

Six, you continually demonstrate that if a thread is not about your favorite subject - you - you - and more of you - then out you pull your "of course we know..." and or your "let us consider..."

Which us all to "consider" the only thing you continue to prove - that you are an overblown, would be bullying windbag.

So please, get banned, get a life, or drop dead...

The sooner, the better.

Perhaps then we might get some decent threads finished without the incessant baiting that is your "of course we know..." and or "let us consider..."

While I mam at, please remove that image of Sir Robert Anderson and replace with one of Daffy Duck. As that is who you are - a dark cartoon character ever clamoring for a prize that each time ends up blowing up in his face by his own hand, only for him to blame everyone else, even as he once more clamors "Where's my recognition!"

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Nonsense.

You think that the words of the Lord Jesus spoken here to the Jews who lived under the law is nonsense:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

According to you the Lord Jesus is wrong when He tells the Jews that if they "believe" then they will be saved.

You contradict His words when you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved by believing. According to your bankrupt ideas they could not be saved until they believed and then were baptized with water.

The following verse verse describes you perfectly because to you the words of the Lord Jesus at John 5:24 are foolishness:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

 

[Danoh]

You think that the words of the Lord Jesus spoken here to the Jews who lived under the law is nonsense:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

According to you the Lord Jesus is wrong when He tells the Jews that if they "believe" then they will be saved.

You contradict His words when you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved by believing. According to your bankrupt ideas they could not be saved until they believed and then were baptized with water.

The following verse verse describes you perfectly because to you the words of the Lord Jesus at John 5:24 are foolishness:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

I know that your attempt to lord your views over others whether those views are right or wrong is wrong.

Just as I know that your every attempt to then twist every disagreement with your attempt to lord it over others, into some sort of a disagreement with the Lord Himself, is wrong.

Give up your charlatan ways, already.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Give up your charlatan ways, already.

You are the charlatan because you claim to be a Christian but yet you deny these words of the Lord Jesus Christ spoken to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

You do not believe Him when He tells the Jews that if they "believe" then they will be saved.

You refuse to believe Him, as witnessed by the fact that you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved by believing. According to your bankrupt ideas they could not be saved until they believed and then were baptized with water.

You will not deny that you teach that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved unless they believe and were baptized with water, will you?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I already answered this with reference to Luke 22:1.

Here is what you said about that:

I have just been looking up several explanations of this discrepancy and they are mostly unsupported ideas. But the best one I saw was both simple and very well supported by Luke 22:1, which simply subsumes Passover in the overall feast of Unleavened Bread. So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

So when we examine the context of what is said at Matthew 26:17 the subject is not really really the Passover Seder but instead the "overall feast of unleavened bread"?:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the Passover" (Mt.26:17-19).​

Is that what you are saying? That every time the word "Passover" is used in these verses it is referring to "the overall feast of Unleavened Bread"?

 

[Danoh]

You are the charlatan because you claim to be a Christian but yet you deny these words of the Lord Jesus Christ spoken to the Jews who lived under the law:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

You do not believe Him when He tells the Jews that if they "believe" then they will be saved.

You refuse to believe Him, as witnessed by the fact that you say that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved by believing. According to your bankrupt ideas they could not be saved until they believed and then were baptized with water.

You will not deny that you teach that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved unless they believe and were baptized with water, will you?

"You are not four - I'm four!" lol

 

[Desert Reign]

Here is what you said about that:

I have just been looking up several explanations of this discrepancy and they are mostly unsupported ideas. But the best one I saw was both simple and very well supported by Luke 22:1, which simply subsumes Passover in the overall feast of Unleavened Bread. So when they talk about the first day of Unleavened Bread they mean the preparation day of the passover.

So when we examine the context of what is said at Matthew 26:17 the subject is not really really the Passover Seder but instead the "overall feast of unleavened bread"?:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the Passover" (Mt.26:17-19).​

Is that what you are saying? That every time the word "Passover" is used in these verses it is referring to "the overall feast of Unleavened Bread"?

I don't know why you keep on asking me the same thing when the answer is already there. I can only assume it is because you want to show you are foolish to as many people as possible.

Interlocutor: A is B.
JS: Ah, so you agree than that A is not C. And if so then why do you think that B is not A?
Interlocutor: I didn't say that A is not C.
JS: But just because you didn't say it doesn't mean that you didn't assume it. Therefore you must have assumed it, therefore you must also agree that B is not A.
Interlocutor: You're being silly. What I said was clear.
JS: There you go again, resorting to personal attacks instead of answering my question. It's obvious you have no answer.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I don't know why you keep on asking me the same thing when the answer is already there.

Your idea is easily shown to be in error.

First let us look at this translation from the KJV in a little more detail:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?... Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I? And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me" (Mt.26:17-18,20-23).​

Now let us look at the same exact event described in the book of Mark:

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover?... And in the evening he cometh with the twelve....And as they sat and did eat, Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me. And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? and another said, Is it I? And he answered and said unto them, It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me in the dish" (Mk.14:12,17-20).​

It is obvious to anyone with an open mind that the the events described in Matthew which I quoted are the same exact events described in Mark which I quoted. And these words from Mark prove that the day spoken of is not the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, as you imagine:

"And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the passover" (Mk.14:12).​

The Passover lamb was killed before the 14th was over, not the 15th, the first day of the feast of unleavened bread:

"And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread" (Lev.23:6).​

That contradicts your idea that Mark 14:12 and Matthew 26:17 are describing events of the first day of the feast of unleavened bread.

The observance of the Passover Seder was on the 14th so the Passover lamb must be killed by that day so it can be eaten:

"And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the Passover of the LORD" (Num.28:16).​

Therefore, it is impossible that you are right when you assert that the words "first day of the feast of unleavened bread" is the correct translation in this verse:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?" (Mt.26:17; KJV).​

Since this is the first time that I have made this argument it is impossible that you have answered it already. So if you want to defend your idea then you must address what I said on this post.

 

[Danoh]

I don't know why you keep on asking me the same thing when the answer is already there. I can only assume it is because you want to show you are foolish to as many people as possible.

Interlocutor: A is B.
JS: Ah, so you agree than that A is not C. And if so then why do you think that B is not A?
Interlocutor: I didn't say that A is not C.
JS: But just because you didn't say it doesn't mean that you didn't assume it. Therefore you must have assumed it, therefore you must also agree that B is not A.
Interlocutor: You're being silly. What I said was clear.
JS: There you go again, resorting to personal attacks instead of answering my question. It's obvious you have no answer.

Rest assured, you are one in a long line the blow hard, Jerry Shugart, will have failed to hear as to this same old conclusion - that there is something odd about his gnat like compulsion to interject his desperate need to attempt to hound others into concluding with him that he is the 2nd Coming of Anderson and O'Hair; two men who died with still a great many questions unanswered.

What a fool this blow hard is. Not only to conclude that his incompetent manner of studying a thing out is the last word, but that all must bow at his feet.

"Attack the messenger" he will lament once more has been his only thank you from any of us who refuse to bow to his idiocy.

Lol, I never dreamed as a child, that that caricature I was watching on TV on Saturday Mornings - Daffy Duck: ever pestering after others to give him his long over due acknowledgement, only for it to blow up in his blow hard face - was an actual, living, breathing, caricature.

Jerry Shugart - the Jerry-at-trick aka Daffy Duck.

Would that "Ah-bah-dee - ah-bah-dee - that's all folks" were our sigh at last as to this Daffy, Mid-Acts Duck, of a pest named Jerry Shugart.

What a lousy way for anyone to work at being remembered... by his own, incessant hand...

Counter "attack the messenger" one must.

For "into the valley of death rode the six hundred" to their certain deaths, under the charge of one drunk in his pride, and bullying, as this fool, Jerry Shugart is.

Go away, pesky fellow. No cult followers here for you...