Christian Forums

Peter's instructions:

Acts 2:36-38
36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."
37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?"
38 Then Peter said to them,"Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
NKJV

Paul's instructions:

Acts 16:27-31
27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."
29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 And he brought them out and said,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 So they said,"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."
NKJV

a new way to look at faith vs. works? 

God bless...............

No, the instructions are not different. Belief in Scripture, encompasses the expected response of that faith even if all the "parts" aren't explicitly mentioned. Scripture comes as a whole, not sound bites.

Quote from: HRoberson on Wed Jul 27, 2011 - 16:27:56
No, the instructions are not different. Belief in Scripture, encompasses the expected response of that faith even if all the "parts" aren't explicitly mentioned. Scripture comes as a whole, not sound bites.

Pre-xactly.  Couldn't say it any better.  Manna #200 to you!  Hooray for evenly divisible numbers!

It's also an account of an event, not an instruction manual for a how-to-be-saved.

Which means, you have to understand the situations are different when those words are spoken. Peter is speaking to Jews who believed the message about Jesus already. (see the previous verses where Peter explicitly says Jesus is the Messiah, and they were 'cut to the heart' -they were convicted of the truth of Jesus)  The question to Peter was more like: what shall we do now that we believe what you said about Jesus?  So Peter explains repentance and baptism and the Holy Spirit.

The question to Paul was what shall I do? Period. So Paul tells him the first thing.  He starts with Jesus.  (If you don't believe in Jesus, there's no purpose to being baptized or repenting or anything else.)  Later, the jailer and his family got baptized.  So they ended up doing the same things.  There's really no actual difference.

The stories merely quote people at different points in the explanation of how to become a Christ follower.

Quote from: apokalupsis on Thu Jul 28, 2011 - 15:20:51
It's also an account of an event, not an instruction manual for a how-to-be-saved.

Which means, you have to understand the situations are different when those words are spoken. Peter is speaking to Jews who believed the message about Jesus already. (see the previous verses where Peter explicitly says Jesus is the Messiah, and they were 'cut to the heart' -they were convicted of the truth of Jesus)  The question to Peter was more like: what shall we do now that we believe what you said about Jesus?  So Peter explains repentance and baptism and the Holy Spirit.

The question to Paul was what shall I do? Period. So Paul tells him the first thing.  He starts with Jesus.  (If you don't believe in Jesus, there's no purpose to being baptized or repenting or anything else.)  Later, the jailer and his family got baptized.  So they ended up doing the same things.  There's really no actual difference.

The stories merely quote people at different points in the explanation of how to become a Christ follower.

Paul never included water baptism in his answer. The baptism that followed was not part of Paul's instructions.

Quote from: RichardBurger on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 10:08:43

Quote from: apokalupsis on Thu Jul 28, 2011 - 15:20:51
It's also an account of an event, not an instruction manual for a how-to-be-saved.

Which means, you have to understand the situations are different when those words are spoken. Peter is speaking to Jews who believed the message about Jesus already. (see the previous verses where Peter explicitly says Jesus is the Messiah, and they were 'cut to the heart' -they were convicted of the truth of Jesus)  The question to Peter was more like: what shall we do now that we believe what you said about Jesus?  So Peter explains repentance and baptism and the Holy Spirit.

The question to Paul was what shall I do? Period. So Paul tells him the first thing.  He starts with Jesus.  (If you don't believe in Jesus, there's no purpose to being baptized or repenting or anything else.)  Later, the jailer and his family got baptized.  So they ended up doing the same things.  There's really no actual difference.

The stories merely quote people at different points in the explanation of how to become a Christ follower.

Paul never included water baptism in his answer. The baptism that followed was not part of Paul's instructions.

Romans 6:4 disagrees with you.

Scriptures come as it is revealed by God. It is progessively revealed.

Way to go. So your scripture make mine to be wrong. If water baptism was required in order to be saved then Paul would have included it in Acts 16:31. Or are you saying he made a mistake?

Acts 16:27-31
27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."
29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 And he brought them out and said,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 So they said,"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."
NKJV

Let me ask you a question. Is Jesus the king of the grace church?

•Romans
◦2:4 Or do you despise the riches of his goodness, forbearance, and patience, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?
◦2:5 But according to your hardness and unrepentant heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath, revelation, and of the righteous judgment of God;


Did Paul need to re-state the need for repentence at every discussion of salvation? Obviously not. Does that mean it's necessity is obliterated? No. Belief is the first step. Without it the rest is useless, but the rest is still necessary as a complete faith response to the free gift of salvation. It depends on who he is talking to or about.

Paul says another place we are saved when we confess Jesus as Lord. Is that exclusive of belief, repentence, etc? It's not a buffet line. The gospel is what the entire Bible says it is. There are not multiple gospels.

Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

Of course repentence must be more than lip service. Just as confessing that Jesus is Lord should be more than lip service, or that belief should be more than just saying you believe. Paul thought repentence was important, yet didn't repeat it in every occasion to list how to be saved. One time it was confess Jesus' name, another time believe, etc. One cannot pick a single passage out and say, "AHA, there it is". The gospel is the entirety of the Bible. And there is not two or more different instructions on how to appropriate salvation.

Acts 16:27-31
27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."
29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 And he brought them out and said,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 So they said,"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."
NKJV

If verse 30 and 31 are not complete, as some say, then the verse is deceptive and not the truth. What is said in verse 31 is all that is necessary for salvation or the Holy Spirit was playing games with men.

The proble with many, when they look at the scriptures, is that they are constantly re-writing them to fit their theology. They just can't leave a verse to say what it says without twisting them into their theology.

Romans 3:21-26
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,
26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
NKJV

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 08:51:31
Acts 16:27-31
27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."
29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 And he brought them out and said,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 So they said,"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."
NKJV

If verse 30 and 31 are not complete, as some say, then the verse is deceptive and not the truth. What is said in verse 31 is all that is necessary for salvation or the Holy Spirit was playing games with men.

The proble with many, when they look at the scriptures, is that they are constantly re-writing them to fit their theology. They just can't leave a verse to say what it says without twisting them into their theology.

The Bible does not contradict itself. The Gospel is the entire Bible. Not a single verse. I would never say that the passage you quoted contradicted Acts 2:38. But you would and I am saying that is wrong. Those folks in Acts 2 were struck with the realization or belief that they had crucified the Christ, because they said, "what must we do?" It would have been redundant for Peter to say, "Well, you must believe." They just declared they did. Instructions vary with circumstance. It's not necessary to restate facet of obedience.

The great commission that Jesus gave in Mathew 28:
28:18 Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.
28:19 Therefore go, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
28:20 teaching them to observe all things that I commanded you. Behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.

This wasn't commissioning these guys to go into all the world and only disciple and baptize Jews, he was instructing them to go into ALL the world. There is not a different Gospel for Jews vs Gentiles.

I have NEVER said the scriptures contradict each other. To say so is a false accussation.

What I have said is that Jesus came to the Jews and preached to the Jews. I have also said that ""Jesus"" sent Paul with the gospel of grace and I am not going to impose another gospel (the gospel of the Kingdom at hand) into it as most want to do.

I believe all the scriptures are written under the direction of the Holy Spirit but not all of them are written to the grace church.

Show me, in the O.T. and the first 4 books of the N.T, where it says those under grace are co-heirs with Christ and are adopted children of God.

Saying that does not, in anyway, say any of the scriptures are wrong. But it does say that the gospel that was hidden in God was not revealed until it was given to Paul by Jesus. If a person can not """rightly divide"""" the word of truth then they will subvert the word of truth by blending all of them together.

I never said the scriptures were wrong. You are the one that has always advocated the 2 Gospel message. It is not right.  

I am the one that is saying the scripture DON'T contradict. When Paul said to believe, he didn't have to also say repent, etc. All are necessary to Jews and to Gentiles.

Did Paul nullify his claim in Romans about being saved by confessing Christ is Lord because he didn't tell everyone in a salvational setting to confess Christ is Lord? Let's get real Richard. It's a story of redemption from Genesis to Revelation. It's not a situation where it's like an Easter egg hunt and we search and search until we find a single scripture to backup our theology to the exclusion of the rest of the inspired word.  And YES there is much grace demonstrated by God in the First Testament.

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

Ya, just like the rest of you.

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sun Jul 31, 2011 - 12:00:58

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

Ya, just like the rest of you.

Except of course, that I'm right. You seem to project a bit too much onto others your own perceptions of them. You're right that repentance (self-examination and determination to improve tomorrow) is a repetitive endeavor, but you miss the mark by generalizing to greater Christendom some idea that they think they need not routinely examine themselves. If I were to comment on my circle of people, I would say that they do in fact realize that they haven't arrived yet.

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

So you are going to discuss ME. Just wonderful!

Quote from: HRoberson on Sun Jul 31, 2011 - 15:32:59

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sun Jul 31, 2011 - 12:00:58

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

Ya, just like the rest of you.

Except of course, that I'm right. You seem to project a bit too much onto others your own perceptions of them. You're right that repentance (self-examination and determination to improve tomorrow) is a repetitive endeavor, but you miss the mark by generalizing to greater Christendom some idea that they think they need not routinely examine themselves. If I were to comment on my circle of people, I would say that they do in fact realize that they haven't arrived yet.

I am not going to discuss ME!

Quote from: RichardBurger on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 15:11:34

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 11:53:36

Quote from: RichardBurger on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 10:08:43
Paul never included water baptism in his answer. The baptism that followed was not part of Paul's instructions.

Romans 6:4 disagrees with you.

Way to go. So your scripture make mine to be wrong.

Uh... you didn't actually quote a Scripture there. 

Quote from: RichardBurger on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 15:11:34
If water baptism was required in order to be saved then Paul would have included it in Acts 16:31. Or are you saying he made a mistake?

I wasn't aware that Acts 16:31 was the exclusive source of Paul's theology regarding how to be saved.  I thought we could include verses from ALL his writings to get a better, bigger picture.

Jarrod

Quote from: RichardBurger on Fri Jul 29, 2011 - 10:08:43

Paul never included water baptism in his answer. The baptism that followed was not part of Paul's instructions.

This wasn't an argument about baptism...  

Look, the passage says:

Act 16:32  Then they spoke the message of the Lord to him along with everyone in his house.
Act 16:33  He took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds. Right away he and all his family were baptized.

Do you really believe a Gentile family spontaneously decided to be baptized for no reason, or is it more likely that somewhere in Paul's explanation he told them about being baptized?

But regardless of that Richard, the point wasn't about baptism, it was simply that the quotes in Acts come from people in different stages of explaining Christ.  The first already believed in Christ, the second didn't even know about Him yet.

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 08:51:31
Acts 16:27-31
27 And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about to kill himself.
28 But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, "Do yourself no harm, for we are all here."
29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas.
30 And he brought them out and said,"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 So they said,"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."
NKJV

If verse 30 and 31 are not complete, as some say, then the verse is deceptive and not the truth. What is said in verse 31 is all that is necessary for salvation or the Holy Spirit was playing games with men.  

If Paul said that phrase, then he said it and it is not deceptive.  You are simply ignoring the obvious, and the points made by others here.  

Paul was quoted directly with one line, AND THEN verse 32 (which you really need to include in order to get the context) reads "then they spoke the message of the Lord to him along with everyone in his house."

Which literally means Paul kept speaking on this subject does it not?

There is nothing deceptive at all since the writer assumes the reader will understand this is the same message that was written about a few pages back.

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

Would you rather me say YOU and make it personal?

Quote from: RichardBurger on Mon Aug 01, 2011 - 06:52:06

Quote from: HRoberson on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 15:02:21

Quote from: RichardBurger on Sat Jul 30, 2011 - 07:36:41
Some people make a big deal about repentance when in truth they never do it except to say they did it. To them repentance is a ritual they perform when they are with others. Most do not really think they sin any longer because their theology teaches the prefection of the flesh sin nature and therefore the need to repent is mute.

But true repentance is a constant attitude of understanding and admitting to God that you are a sinful person in the flesh. I have discussed this with many religious people and because they think they getting better at not sinning they do feel any need to repent.

"Some....Most....many" Hmm....I think you tend to overstate your view, and conclude that your thoughts are correct. Both are doubtful undertakings.

So you are going to discuss ME. Just wonderful!

I'm going to discuss both my impression of your logical faults and your arguments. You let your perceptions and biases interfere with reality a bit too much. But then again, most mortals do.

Okay, lets try another one.

Romans 10:8-11
8 But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith which we preach):
9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." 
NKJV

I suppose this one is incomplete also since Paul did not include water baptist.

Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

What Jaime said.

I would add that the context of Romans 10 is comparing the Law of Moses to Faith in Christ.  It is discussing the Israelites rejection of faith in Christ and stubbornness to seek after righteousness by works.

In those verses, and the ones following, Paul quotes the Old Testament to prove that reaching out to God in humble faith, putting all of our trust and hope in Him, results in salvation, and that this has been true from the Old Testament times to the present day.

Isn't baptism an outward expression of this? 

And now, why delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins by calling on His name.'
-Acts 22:16

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 07:14:19
Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

If yoiu had left out the remark "Richard, why cherry pick?" I would address your reply.

Quote from: RichardBurger on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 11:24:38

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 07:14:19
Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

If yoiu had left out the remark "Richard, why cherry pick?" I would address your reply.

Yes, but that was his thesis.  The rest of the post was simply a description of why the practice of cherry-picking is bad exegesis.  (Well, actually it's eisegesis).

Quote from: RichardBurger on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 11:24:38

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 07:14:19
Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

If yoiu had left out the remark "Richard, why cherry pick?" I would address your reply.

Then I will use it more often, thanks!

I call a spade a spade where I'm from. I was fairly merciful in my address to you. I could have said, why do you blatantly ignore other scriptures. But "cherry pick" was probably more kind. We all do it to some extent. From now on, I will not spare you my true feelings.

Though I do realize that "cherry pick" scripture is vastly more onerous than a phrase you used in an earlier post (see below), Let's discus and lose the fake incredulity.....................or not.

From your post #12:

QuoteThe proble with many, when they look at the scriptures, is that they are constantly re-writing them to fit their theology. They just can't leave a verse to say what it says without twisting them into their theology.

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 14:31:31

Quote from: RichardBurger on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 11:24:38

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 07:14:19
Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

If yoiu had left out the remark "Richard, why cherry pick?" I would address your reply.

Then I will use it more often, thanks!

I call a spade a spade where I'm from. I was fairly merciful in my address to you. I could have said, why do you blatantly ignore other scriptures. But "cherry pick" was probably more kind. We all do it to some extent. From now on, I will not spare you my true feelings.

Though I do realize that "cherry pick" scripture is vastly more onerous than a phrase you used in an earlier post (see below), Let's discus and lose the fake incredulity.....................or not.

From your post #12:

QuoteThe proble with many, when they look at the scriptures, is that they are constantly re-writing them to fit their theology. They just can't leave a verse to say what it says without twisting them into their theology.

What do you call a person that says that another is cherry picking when you do the same thing? Do you need a hint?

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 14:31:31

Quote from: RichardBurger on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 11:24:38

Quote from: Jaime on Tue Aug 02, 2011 - 07:14:19
Richard, why cherry pick? Paul also told the women to remain silent in church, but also wrote in another place they were praying and prophecying. Did he conflict? NO I don't think so. He was addressing a specific issue with the women and their argumentative behavior. He wasn't giving a decree for women to never speak in church. The bible is a tapestry, not a bunch of individual strings.

If yoiu had left out the remark "Richard, why cherry pick?" I would address your reply.

Then I will use it more often, thanks!

I call a spade a spade where I'm from. I was fairly merciful in my address to you. I could have said, why do you blatantly ignore other scriptures. But "cherry pick" was probably more kind. We all do it to some extent. From now on, I will not spare you my true feelings.

Though I do realize that "cherry pick" scripture is vastly more onerous than a phrase you used in an earlier post (see below), Let's discus and lose the fake incredulity.....................or not.

From your post #12:

QuoteThe proble with many, when they look at the scriptures, is that they are constantly re-writing them to fit their theology. They just can't leave a verse to say what it says without twisting them into their theology.

What you fail to see is that what I said was not addressed to anyone as yours was to me. In my statement I did not use your name. Bye to you.

Addressimg each other in these discussions is what this forum is about. This is a discussion forum, not a sermon platform. Goodbye to you sir. However if you post something that I think warrants a comment, i will do so. I couldn't care less if you respond to me or not.

Besides if you make a global atatement to all that disagree with you, why is that somehow more gentlemanly than me specifically addressing the assertion YOU made.