It’s not biblical!

[Jethro Bodine]

The text it's self is not strong enough to support the argument you are making.

It makes my argument exactly.
Your argument is not possible as long as the Greek word 'loipos' is in the verse, and it is!

 

[dwb001]

It makes my argument exactly.
Your argument is not possible as long as the Greek word 'loipos' is in the verse, and it is!

Nope... I don't see the grammar supporting that theory.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Your entire argument rests on the word "other".
Do I have that right?
I can tell you as a son of a Language Teacher... that the sentence structure may not say what you think it says.

What is it about 'the other scriptures' that you do not understand, lol?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Nope... I don't see the grammar supporting that theory.

Dude, just read the Greek words, lol!
There's no mystery here to be unraveled. It plainly says 'the other scriptures'.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Yeah, I know, lol.
But I have this habit of making sure that through repetition resisters of plain scripture know with certainty that they are indeed resisting plain scripture, so they have NO excuse to continue to think what they do...even though they will.

 

[dwb001]

What is it about 'the other scriptures' that you do not understand, lol?

Why would Paul include a letter to his friends as Holy Scripture?
Is it in keeping with a name the means "humble"?
Would it be in keeping with any of the Apostles to think that what they wrote was unassailable Scripture? (Revelation excluded of course)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why would Paul include a letter to his friends as Holy Scripture?
Is it in keeping with a name the means "humble"?
Would it be in keeping with any of the Apostles to think that what they wrote was unassailable Scripture? (Revelation excluded of course)

I see the character of Paul is completely lost to you in scripture. This man who called himself chief of sinners, poor in speech, unimpressive, the least of all the Apostles, abnormally born, yet perhaps the most exalted and respected and learned teacher in all of Christianity!

But also, one not afraid to assert his authority to build the church up, and as one who thought he had the Spirit, too.

 

[dwb001]

I see the character of Paul is completely lost to you in scripture. This man who called himself chief of sinners, poor in speech, unimpressive, the least of all the Apostles, abnormally born, yet perhaps the most exalted and respected and learned teacher in all of Christianity!

But also, one not afraid to assert his authority to build the church up, and as one who thought he had the Spirit, too.

Where did Paul say he was "the most exalted and respected and learned teacher in all of Christianity"?
And my questions still remain unanswered.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Where did Paul say he was "the most exalted and respected and learned teacher in all of Christianity"?
And my questions still remain unanswered.

This is so predictable, lol.

Go back and read my post again. I'm not letting you put me on the defensive with fabricated arguments about what I'm saying. I know in dealing with you that I'm dealing a particular kind of personality. One that follows a very predictable path of disagreeableness, and unreasonableness...and that's all I'm going to say about that, lol. But I do confess, I love going toe to toe with 'em! When I'm done with them they know they no longer have any excuse to be disagreeable about plain facts and truth...even though they will continue to be so.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why would Paul include a letter to his friends as Holy Scripture?

He did not have to be conscious of the fact that his own writings are included in his exhortation to us about the usefulness of scripture. We KNOW they are included because of Peter's witness to that fact, whether Paul himself realized it or not.

 

[dwb001]

This is so predictable, lol.

Go back and read my post again. I'm not letting you put me on the defensive with fabricated arguments about what I'm saying. I know in dealing with you that I'm dealing a particular kind of personality. One that follows a very predictable path of disagreeableness, and unreasonableness...and that's all I'm going to say about that, lol. But I do confess, I love going toe to toe with 'em! When I'm done with them they know they no longer have any excuse to be disagreeable about plain facts and truth...even though they will continue to be so.

Sorry... I din't get what you were putting out.
My questions still go unanswered and I am not seeing any questions in this post... so what was the point?
This looks like you are making a personal attack on my character.
Sounds like you like to lump people into groups that are easier to label and deal with.
The passage can be read two ways at least. Yes, because language is malleable. You read it one way and I the other.
I admit that many people read the passage your way... but will you not accept that my way to read it is also a valid interpretation?
Will you rise to the challenge of "both are valid possible readings of the passage"?

 

[dwb001]

He did not have to be conscious of the fact that his own writings are included in his exhortation to us about the usefulness of scripture. We KNOW they are included because of Peter's witness to that fact, whether Paul himself realized it or not.

So Peter decides what is Scripture. Neet.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This looks like you are making a personal attack on my character.

Yes, but I'm not being specific so as to not violate any terms of service.
I think you are shrinking down into disagreeableness and unreasonableness. Not ordinarily so as in an honest debate, but as an unfair debate tactic.

Perhaps I shouldn't be so 'in your face' about you being so blatantly wrong about this, but I guess I just don't care anymore (and an on-line forum is one place that can be done). Time is short and there's no time for as much patience with what you're doing here as there has been in times past.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So Peter decides what is Scripture. Neet.

So now HIS anointing is in dispute, lol!

I know there's no 'winning' with you, but I am going to take you to task for the outlandish stuff you try to post here.

 

[dwb001]

Yes, but I'm not being specific so as to not violate any terms of service.
I think you are shrinking down into disagreeableness and unreasonableness. Not ordinarily so as in an honest debate, but as an unfair debate tactic.

Perhaps I shouldn't be so 'in your face' about you being so blatantly wrong about this, but I guess I just don't care anymore (and an on-line forum is one place that can be done). Time is short and there's no time for as much patience with what you're doing here as there has been in times past.

???????????????????????

 

[dwb001]

So now HIS anointing is in dispute, lol!

I know there's no 'winning' with you, but I am going to take you to task for the outlandish stuff you try to post here.

OK

 

[dwb001]

So now HIS anointing is in dispute, lol!

I know there's no 'winning' with you, but I am going to take you to task for the outlandish stuff you try to post here.

What have I said that was outlandish?
I really don't know where that word applies.

 

[for_his_glory]

I am not Calvinist. I don't even begin to know what all that includes.
Would not your post violate ToS 1.4?
Because I am thinking for myself I am led like a bull with a nosering?

I do apologize as I thought you were a Calvinist and that is why I made that statement.

 

[dwb001]

I do apologize as I thought you were a Calvinist and that is why I made that statement.

This should be a DM and probably ask questions first next time.

 

[for_his_glory]

@dwd001 I am done dealing with you and your foolishness in this thread. We will try to work it all out in PM