ME (Millennial Exclusion) Posts

There is no hidden agenda. All of the scriptures are the word of God. The point of this thread is to show that all of the scriptures are the word of God. To say that a doctrine is invalid if it cannot be proven from Paul's epistles alone is ridiculous.

I used the example of unbelievers in hell to illustrate this point with something that I had hoped everyone would agree on - namely that unbelievers go to hell.

 

The point you're missing is that the teachings of Jesus and Paul do not conflict with one another. That's why you won't find ME being taught by Paul because Jesus didn't teach it. Jesus did teach about condemnation and therefore you will see that Paul taught it as well.

 

Ephesians 5:6-7
6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

 

Paul taugh what Jesus taught.

If Jesus didn't preach it, neither did Paul.

Jesus didn't preach ME, neither did Paul.

Jesus taught condemnation of the unbeliever, so did Paul.


You have not made a valid point at all.

You have been shown that Jesus and Paul preached the same gospel.

 

The point you're missing is that the teachings of Jesus and Paul do not conflict with one another. That's why you won't find "Everyone gets rewarded/no (really serious) chastening/if you sin you weren't really saved" being taught by Paul because Jesus didn't teach it.


Jesus did teach about condemnation and therefore you will see that Paul taught it as well.

Yes I know. Matt 10, Mark 9, Matt 5, Matt 18

 

Are you suggesting that I should not partake of this discussion with you?

 

I'm suggesting that Paul warned believers of partaking in the wrath of God.

 

That is exactly the opposite of your previous position which was:

If Paul didn't preach it, It must not be true. (AKA. If-you-can't-prove-it-with-Pauline-scripture-it-proves-it-false)

You have flipped sides. Completely.

 

Rewards are only good things. The KD's taught us that. So, the guilty get good things.

 

I have always said that Jesus and Paul preached the same gospel of salvation through the shed blood of Christ.

Neither one of them preached ME.

 

No, they lose some of the good things that they could have had.

 

I thought you were referring to yourself with all the "vain words".

 

So Paul taught what Jesus taught, but only by inference, because you can't fine it in the teachings of Paul. That is why you couldn't find ME thelogy in the teachings of Paul, because Paul didn't teach it. Of course neither did Jesus, you just misinterpret his parables according to your own pre-conceived ides. Bob Ryan takes the same parables and teaches annihilation of the wicked. A Universalist takes the same parables and teaches that all will be saved, even Satan. You can make the parable teach anything you want. Isn't allegory great. The ones who popularized and invented it were both heretics. So much for your methodology of hermeneutics.

 

I will finish out clarifying myself. I don't even know what a KD is.

I meant the term reward according to recompense. So just re-word what I wrote and insert recompense. And in case you want to argue that reward can't mean recompense:

Main Entry: 1re·ward
Pronunciation: ri-'word
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French regarder, rewarder to look back at, regard, care for, recompense -- more at REGARD
1 : to give a reward to or for
2 : RECOMPENSE

Merriam-Webster

 

Jesus:

Paul:

 

Does Paul teach anything about unbelievers going to hell, other than by inference?

 

preachin' to the choir

 

Well, well, wouldya lookie here...:applause:

 

You are correct, Dr. Bob. It should have said, "A Moderator . . ."