ME (Millennial Exclusion) Posts

In another thread DHK said:

And it could not be answered. You could not demonstrate ME doctrine through the teachings of Paul. It was an impossible feat for you to accomplish…No one could demonstrat ME theology through Pauline teaching….The doctrine of ME is nowhere to be found in the teachings of Paul because it is false doctrine.

 

Believe my my brother, the OP was dripping with sarcasm. We went on for about 60 pages arguing the same thing you are arguing when we were challenged to prove a doctrine using first only Pauline scriptures (not counting Hebrews of course, because we all know that Hebrews was written to the Hebrews - that supposedly meant something but nobody could ever explain what) then we were restricted to only using the Book of Romans.

 

Your right. It teaches unfaithful believers will suffer temporarily for the sin. Aside from the purgatory idea popping up, its a denial of the full satisfaction of the death of Christ for sin. It is heresy.

Somone get the stake and faggots....just kidding

 

Can I ask you a question, RB, since I don't think you participated in the previous discussion... why is chastening for sin in this life not a denial of the full satisfaction of the death of Christ for sin?

 

I'll break it down for you. You gave a bunch of scriptures that purported to show unbelievers going to hell. But in order to show that that's what they mean you had to go outside of the Pauline epistles.

This is the whole point. You can't conclusively show that anyone (believer or unbeliever) is going to hell if you limit yourself to just the Pauline epistles. So whether you agree with a judgment seat of Christ, or prefer an awards banquet, one must admit that the idea that one can not completely expound a doctrine just from Paul's epistles has no relevance to its truth or falsehood.

 

There is a difference between discipline and punishment. Discipline/chastening is a tool a father uses to train his child. Punishment is the act of a judge to reward the guilty for the their crime.

 

That's ridiculous. Paul taught the same gospel as Jesus because he was taught BY Jesus. That's why you CAN'T prove ME with Paul's letters because Jesus didn't teach it.
But, I can prove condemnation through Paul's writtings because Jesus DID teach it.

 

So you had an agenda. Why didn't you just say so? I took you seriously.

 

I wonder if his name is Jason?

 

Can you prove this from Paul's epistles? No, seriously, is the word discipline really so distinct from punishment? And is there really no punitive aspect to God's chastening for believers?

 

Now you're catching on! :thumbs:

 

So if Paul doesn't say it, that negates the Lord Jesus Christ's own Words when He said 'He that believeth not is condemned already'? It negates Jesus' Word when He stated, 'Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee'?

Wow! Aren't you lifting Paul up instead of Christ to infer that if Paul did not say it it ain't true?

 

There is no punitive aspect to God's disciplining of His children. "For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness." Heb 12:10

Asking me to prove this from Paul's epistles is stupid. I challenging this idea from outset and now realize it was the hidden agenda of the OP because of some weird doctrine everyone is calling ME... At least that's my impression now.

Furthermore, Paul's epistles are the Word of God, so is Hebrews, the Gospels, et. Do you deny this?

 

What a ridiculous thread! What next, asking a calvinist to prove TULIP not using pauline letters?

 

You can go to http://kingdombaptist.org. Or you can get a copy of the book The Rod Will God spare it?

It's always good to go to original sources, whether you agree with the author or not. The vast majority of the information you will find on the web is rubbish, where the writers have no understanding of the material and have obviously not even heard, let alone considered the arguments.

 

I will be starting a thread justifying CCM using only the book of Obadiah.

 

Ya, it sometimes take me awhile though. I am outa this thread. The whole point of it was a pretense.

 

No brother, I don't deny that Paul's epistles are the word of God, and I believe Paul wrote Hebrews, and I believe that the Gospels are full of truth for believers. I was joking about using Paul. As for Hebrews 12:10, is this statement to be taken to exclude all other purposes for chastening? What about this one:

1 Thessalonians 4:6 That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified.

Is God not allowed to avenge a brother against another brother who defrauds him?

 

Sometimes one has to speak as a fool to make a point. I notice that those who argued the loudest for Paul's words on ME are conspicuously absent from this thread. With the exception of the beaver with selective hearing.

 

This neither proves a biblical distinction between punishment, nor that it is limited to this life.

AMEN MY BROTHER!!!!!! PREACH IT BROTHER REFORMED BAPTIST!!!

That's what we were saying for about 60 pages. The craxy part is, and it is absolutely midboggling how they fail to see their own inconsistent contradictions, the other side has now switched sides. Suddenly it doesn't matter that Paul doesn't teach it, when for 60 pages, if we couldn't peove ME in Paul's writing, it proved it to be a lie!

Absolutely unbelievable.