Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
But you're the one that says that Jesus tells us "literally" that Gentiles are not a part of his ministry. That is not what the Catholic Church teaches. It's not what I believe. I don't know where you've got that belief from.Jesus is not such a poor speaker that he cannot say exactly what he means.
If those scripture passages tell us literally that gentiles are not part of his ministry in his first coming, why do you need someone else to understand his words?
It originally came from E.W. Bullinger.But you're the one that says that Jesus tells us "literally" that Gentiles are not a part of his ministry. That is not what the Catholic Church teaches. It's not what I believe. I don't know where you've got that belief from.
Why do you think an Anglican theologian who was also an ultradispensationalist is an authority that I ought to listen to?It originally came from E.W. Bullinger.
Why on earth would you think I thought that, when a couple of posts ago I called it unorthodox? You wanted to know where Guojing was getting his ideas from, and I supplied you with that info. Which is were you're supposed to say thanks and give me a likeWhy do you think an Anglican theologian who was also an ultradispensationalist is an authority that I ought to listen to?
OK thanks and I'll give you a like ;-)Why on earth would you think I thought that, when a couple of posts ago I called it unorthodox? You wanted to know where Guojing was getting his ideas from, and I supplied you with that info. Which is were you're supposed to say thanks and give me a like
And in Matthew 10:5 Jesus says to ONLY go NOT // ME , which is a DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE and in Greek never gooooooooooooooo into the ways of the GENTILES , period !!But you're the one that says that Jesus tells us "literally" that Gentiles are not a part of his ministry. That is not what the Catholic Church teaches. It's not what I believe. I don't know where you've got that belief from.
But you're the one that says that Jesus tells us "literally" that Gentiles are not a part of his ministry. That is not what the Catholic Church teaches. It's not what I believe. I don't know where you've got that belief from.
And in Matthew 10:5 Jesus says to ONLY go NOT // ME , which is a DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE and in Greek never gooooooooooooooo into the ways of the GENTILES , period !!
dan p
You're not the only one here who delivers the two gospels Paul’s Gospel vs Jesus’ Gospel gosple of the kingdom other sheep little flock doctrine. It was started by Ethelbert William Bullinger 1837 – 1913. It's known as Hyperdispensationalism and Bullingerism. Just in case you didn't know.
Your thinking is not correct, that is not what I am saying, nor is it what I am "trying to say". I think I succeeded in saying what I intended to say.Have you read any of those 4 passages I have given you? (Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:24, Romans 15:8, Ephesians 2:11-12)
If they say X, why do you still claim you "don't know where I got that belief about X from?"
I think what you are really trying to say is that, I don't know why anyone would take the words in those scripture passages literally.
Funny you should say that, I was on the receiving side of acts, chapter one. There Jesus says to go to all the nations, and at the end of Matthew's Gospel, he says to go to all the world. So, why do you think in one verse he says never ever go to the Gentile's and then in another verse he says go to them. Do you think he self contradicting? or maybe your interpretation is just wrong.And in Matthew 10:5 Jesus says to ONLY go NOT // ME , which is a DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE NEGATIVE and in Greek never gooooooooooooooo into the ways of the GENTILES , period !!
dan p
New thinking correctly that is not. what I am saying nor is it what I am trying to say. I do think I succeeded in saying what I said.
Apologies. the voice to text software didn't do justice to what I had said. Here is what I intended: "Your thinking is not correct, that is not what I am saying, nor is it what I am "trying to say". I think I succeeded in saying what I intended to say."Your first sentence is incomprehensible
All the same you're following Bullinger's teaching. Which you probably got from another source.I never read any of his writings.
From the point of view created by E.W. Bullinger.Its about reading the Bible and understanding the words literally, taking context into account.
Most Christians consider Bullinger's ultra-dispensationalism unorthodox and heresy.Why would you consider that as unorthodox?
All the same you're following Bullinger's teaching. Which you probably got from another source.
From the point of view created by E.W. Bullinger.
Most Christians consider Bullinger's ultra-dispensationalism unorthodox and heresy.
What is ultra-dispensationalism? | GotQuestions.org
What is ultra-dispensationalism? What is an ultradispensationalist / hyperdispensationalist? Is ultradispensationalism / hyperdispensationalism biblical?www.gotquestions.org
Apologies. the voice to text software didn't do justice to what I had said. Here is what I intended: "Your thinking is not correct, that is not what I am saying, nor is it what I am "trying to say". I think I succeeded in saying what I intended to say."
You haven't invited me because I haven't been debating with you. I just simply identified the name of and the creator of the doctrine you're following.I notice both of you prefer not to use scripture directly, despite multiple invitations to.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?