Nathan_Jr

This is fcking brilliant!

D'oh!! I have dozens of questions out there Mike has still not answered.

I thought about that, but this will be about a TWI doctrine that is as intellectually and spiritually retarded as flat earth fantasy and as easy to disprove. Did you notice the tag?

The word IS is not in the text, like the word ONE is not in the text. I don't even need my notes to show this tremendous kernel of truth.

Thanks for this helpful distinction, WW.

Victor said the word replaces the absent Christ. He said the Bible is the word. The Bible can only ever be a translated version of copies of manuscripts. But the word is not a translation or a version. So the word cannot be the Bible as victor claimed. His crawfishing and contradictions are problematic. But maybe the secret code to wash the brain is in Paul, a Jew's Jew. (Ironic because Victor despised Jews.) Paul said ambassadors replace the Nazarene. Are ambassadors the Bible? Or are ambassadors the word?

To recap: The Bible replaces the absent Nazarene? Paul said ambassadors replace the Nazarene. Are ambassadors the Bible?

Does this topic belong in Doctrinal or About the Way?

"Love, I get lost sometimes"

Money for Nothing, Dire Straits

I thought the Quaaludes made the screwing easier. Guess I just didn't fully absorb it in my mind the first time.

Ha! If you try too hard to MAKE it fit, you'll strip the head.

Close, but not quite. You may have been trying on the wrong gloves, T-Bone. You failed to absorb into your mind that the very LEAST a Christian can be expected to do is tithe. A Christian can't even crawl, much less walk, without tithing - at a minimum. This is foundational. This is the dawning light. SINE QUA NON.

uh-oh

What is the mission of GSC? Why do you put mission in quotes? What IS your intention, if not to subvert? I will submit to you, profitably, whether you intend to or not, you can not nor could you ever subvert the righteousness of GSC.

Jesus, the Nazarene is absent. Not Christ. Christ is not absent. This has been shown many times over - the second time established it. I've already corrected you on this, now, stand. Stand corrected. And stand corrected on the errant figures of speech teaching. Above all, stand. Stand corrected. These loving corrections are doctrinally profitable for you unto righteousness.

It’s gotten hilarious for me! I really do tickle myself sometimes. I haven’t laughed much in the last few years. But I do when I come to GSC.

If there’s no difference, what is there to argue. At this point, let RAF decide. if he decides twice, it’ll be established. Imagine that! A KEY to arbitration. Bless my heart. These bloody gloves don’t fit like they used to.

Only my correction of victor's errant teaching on figures of speech. You don't have to respond. It's not a challenge. It's not an argument. It's a correction. I corrected Victor, again. Like the absent Jesus was a correction.

Fair enough. Let it be moved.

Well, you were taught wrong. But that's ok. You don't have to cling to that teaching anymore. You can, indeed, go beyond what you were taught. It's not always about emphasis. Often it's about poetry. It's about illustration. It's about descriptive conveyance of meaning that a literal construction just can't convey. If chosing to use a figure of speech for emphasis causes confusion, then you should write plainly, say what you mean and mean what you say, otherwise, you risk emphasizing confusion.