Alan Does the Twist (page 2)

Mishnah

Thanks for exposing alanf once again Rex. He is a complete idiot. He was exposed for libel with actual malice in another thread where he invented claims about Rutherford's morality. Then some nutball named larc tried to keep it going by using the same imaginings. The only peple who listen to alanf are former dubs who were just as in awe of the things the Society said. Just take a look at the nuts that fawn over alanf's junk and you get the picture. That's why he hangs around here, to get attention from the only ones who will give him the time of day. In a forum of outcastes and blasphemers alanf is a god!

Mishnah

What you mean to say alanf is that you were caught and exposed by Rex and you are not able to do anything about it. It's good to see that even you can't stand to try and distort things any further. Rex has done a fine service in calling your bluff.

AlanF

Ah, Mishnah releases his hold on Rex's dick long enough to tickle a keyboard. I see that you and Rex are in a typical Fundy mutual masturbation relationship. Neither you nor he provide arguments for anything -- just claims or pointers to other brandead Fundies. Birds of a feather and all that.

AlanF

Trilobite

AlanF,

So I take it you don't respect the scholarship of Hal Lindsey and Dr* Phillips from some prestigious Southern Baptist Institute of Dire Learning. Shame on you.

But you're off base with the mutual masturbation thing; it's more a case of mentula flaccidatum mutualis.

T.

* I wonder if that is one of them mail order dokturates?

Rex B13

Hi Al Baby,
You seem to lack any class at all.....anymore. Does it thrill you to be as vulgar as possible now that you have no moderators to watch over you? Hey, would you let your DAUGHTER read you post or how about your mother?
I also see that the rest of your toadies followed you over. Where did you pick up that new one, Troglodite? LOL
Rex

Maximus

Good night Ned, I know of only one person who understands this lingo. Is that you in that old shell, G?

What Rex and pals don't recognize is that the dispensational charts and mindset are not even warmed-over, third-rate arm-chair nineteenth-century ideas akin to Studies in the Scriptures. Scholars at fine Southern Baptist colleges wince at this shallow nonsense.

The point made above is well taken. How DO you explain how God changes his mind in each dispensational period? In your own words, please; no cut and paste or you will continue to lose all credulity.

Maximus

Trilobite

Maximus,

Excellent points! All of them!

T.

Rex B13

Maximus,
You have JW rationalism imbedded in your brain.
1) You cannot have all of the answers to Biblical theology. Mysteries can and do exist and this is partly where faith comes in. Rationalists think they can reason out every mystery and nuance of scripture. Salvation does not require this at all!
2) God can only answer why He uses different methods on humanity. My speculation is that He is demonstrating to us that we cannot hope to live as His creation by our own means. He has a plan that was set in eternity, before time even existed (predestination).
3) Each dispensation ends in failure and judgement of mankind. Man continuously falls well short of the mark (free will). This is indeed a demonstration of how far we are from God and why we need to accept His free offer of salvation by grace through faith alone.
4) Our Lord, Jesus recognized this dispensational truth when he addressed the syngogue in Luke 14.16-20, closing the scroll of Isaiah 61, 1,2 in mid-sentence, "This day is the scripture fulfilled in your ears". He left out the last clause of 61.2 (and the day of vengeance of our God) because he knew that it would not be fulfilled until His second coming. He made a dispensational distinction right there! There is no break in the text yet history shows that we have a two thousand year dispensation to prove it exists, the Church Age.

Here are the guidelines for interpreting scripture:
1) Truth that belongs to one dispensation period must not be read into another. We must always ascertain where we are in history when reading a portion of the Bible.
2) Truth that belongs to a past dispensation must not be used to interpret the present dispensation. To do so puts us under law,as the various heretical groups do time after time.
3) The reverse of the second rule is also applied.
4) Truth that belongs to the future must not be applied to the present. To put the church into the tribulation period is a misapplication of scripture. Israel is again the focus of God's efforts during that period.
5) Truth that belongs to one part of the future must not be read into another part. The judgement seat of Christ, the judgeemnt of all the nations and the judgement of the "White Throne" are all separate judgements.

This lack of knowledge (Knowing enough to get in trouble but not enough to figure a way out) is why such groups like the RCC, JWs, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Oneness Pentecostals exist.
Distortions of Biblical truth are exactly what this forum promotes.
Rex

Farkel

Maximus,

: Is that you in that old shell, G?

I was wondering the exact same thing!

Farkel

Rex,

: Here are the guidelines for interpreting scripture:
: 1) Truth that belongs to one dispensation period must not be read into another.

That sounds like the Watchtower Society! "Present Truth(tm)", "Former Truth(tm)" and "Future Truth(tm)." All the bases are covered that way.

I'm just a dummy. I thought truth was immutable. Apparently, you don't.

Farkel

Alan Does the Twist

Share this