Search results

This is a perfect example of the childish objection stuff. It isn't even honest. If there's something I've overlooked, just bring it. .

A priest, a lawyer, and a rabbi... :cool: .

I confess my patience with childish expressions of objection is wearing thin. .

I apologize, but surely you can't be unaware that your stuff often has an ivory tower ring to it, Scott. .

Actually, you're the one who started conflating the strictest definitions of "testament" and "covenant." Shame on me for falling for your dead-end nonsense. .

Easier than responding to a challenge, I guess. .

Well since we've descended into utter confusion, denial, and dishonesty, I'm out for now. .

The law never created righteousness; it only described it. O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever! (Deuteronomy 5:29) .

The words "covenant" and "testament" are virtually interchangeable in the Bible. You're dodging. .

No, you really don't. Unless your ignoring this: For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. .

Doubling down is easier than actually responding to the challenge, I guess. Under the law that prohibits murder, lying, theft, adultery. What does "under the law" mean, btw? .

And you're free to get triggered and call characterization of expression "name calling" and erect straw men about supernature-denial to your heart's desire. Just don't expect me to intellectually humor you very much. Yes, Rabbi (that was name-calling, btw), I'm familiar with some of the more...

? .

Just more neo-Gnosticism. Say something us plain folk can understand, Scott. .

That's a nice straw man. Whaddya want for it?.

Weaponizing the words "requirement for salvation" isn't going to hide the fact that there wasn't a peep about dishonoring parents, taking the LORD's name in vain, or bearing false witness, while those things are on the same list as the "Saturday sabbath." So I guess anything goes for the...

"Portions?" What trap are you setting for yourself now? .

The element of self-argument here is utterly astounding. You quote Colossians 2 and then trip all over yourself trying to make the case that we should do what would be, in effect, disregarding it. Simply amazing. Here you arrogantly confuse days that apparently belong to you somehow with days...

No, you're just having a bit of trouble with reading comprehension. The old covenant never saved anyone. .

Hi Aunty! Well, we've been down this road before and there are no new arguments. I can't help but wonder, though, if the Jerusalem Council wouldn't have insisted on abstention from murder and theft as being considered "necessary things" which, coincidentally, come from the same list that...