Posts: 6851
Threads: 76
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
31
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 1:59 pm
(February 5, 2013 at 1:53 pm)catfish Wrote: That makes no sense to me. The reasoning is sound.
Quote:Yeshua also said Moses' laws weren't from God, so those scriptures cannot be "fulfilled" nor considered "infallible".
.
Incorrect. He specified all three parts of the Scripture of his day:
Luke 24
44 Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”
Posts: 2911
Threads: 11
Joined: July 20, 2012
Reputation:
16
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:03 pm
"Concerning me",,,, not supporting Moses' laws there...
Even the prophets condemned Moses' sacrifice laws and called the scribes liars.
Still "infallible"?
.
Posts: 6851
Threads: 76
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
31
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:07 pm
(February 5, 2013 at 2:03 pm)catfish Wrote: "Concerning me",,,, not supporting Moses' laws there...
Even the prophets condemned Moses' sacrifice laws and called the scribes liars.
Still "infallible"?
. If you want something specific to the law:
Matthew 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Posts: 2911
Threads: 11
Joined: July 20, 2012
Reputation:
16
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:13 pm
And? Yeshua specifically broke the "law" by healing on the sabbath.
How certain are you that he wasn't speaking of the 10 commandments? Why didn't Yeshua stone the adulteress then?
.
Posts: 6851
Threads: 76
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
31
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:25 pm
(February 5, 2013 at 2:13 pm)catfish Wrote: And? And you asked for one verse which supports the notion of biblical inerrance/infallibility, and you've been given several, from Jesus himself.
Quote:Yeshua specifically broke the "law" by healing on the sabbath.
Not according to him:
Matt 12
12b "Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."
Quote:How certain are you that he wasn't speaking of the 10 commandments?
Pretty certain.
Quote:Why didn't Yeshua stone the adulteress then?
.
Because he had mercy and forgave her.
Posts: 2911
Threads: 11
Joined: July 20, 2012
Reputation:
16
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:31 pm
No, that doesn't support inerrancy nor infallibility. It supports forgiveness, righteous judgement and calling out the scribes, Moses and Pharisees on their bullshit lies.
Nice try though. Try again?
.
Posts: 6851
Threads: 76
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
31
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:37 pm
(February 5, 2013 at 2:31 pm)catfish Wrote: No, that doesn't support inerrancy nor infallibility. It supports forgiveness, righteous judgement and calling out the scribes, Moses and Pharisees on their bullshit lies. I agree.
Quote:Nice try though.
Er, I didn't introduce that passage. You did.
Quote:Try again?
.
The verses I already gave support infallibility quite clearly. There's no need to try again.
Posts: 2911
Threads: 11
Joined: July 20, 2012
Reputation:
16
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:39 pm
(This post was last modified: February 5, 2013 at 2:42 pm by catfish.)
(February 5, 2013 at 2:37 pm)John V Wrote: (February 5, 2013 at 2:31 pm)catfish Wrote: No, that doesn't support inerrancy nor infallibility. It supports forgiveness, righteous judgement and calling out the scribes, Moses and Pharisees on their bullshit lies. I agree.
Quote:Nice try though.
Er, I didn't introduce that passage. You did.
Quote:Try again?
.
The verses I already gave support infallibility quite clearly. There's no need to try again.
Bolded by me above. ^^^
Cognitive dissonance? I believe so...
Thank you, come again...
.
Posts: 6851
Threads: 76
Joined: October 17, 2012
Reputation:
31
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm
(February 5, 2013 at 2:39 pm)catfish Wrote: (February 5, 2013 at 2:37 pm)John V Wrote: I agree.
Er, I didn't introduce that passage. You did.
The verses I already gave support infallibility quite clearly. There's no need to try again.
Bolded by me above. ^^^
Cognitive dissonance? I believe so...
Thank you, come again...
.
There's no cognitive dissonance. You introduced a passage which doesn't speak one way or another on infallibility. Most verses don't. You seem to be taking "doesn't support" as "opposes," but that conclusion isn't warranted.
Posts: 2911
Threads: 11
Joined: July 20, 2012
Reputation:
16
RE: new testament, matthew chapter 2
February 5, 2013 at 2:51 pm
(This post was last modified: February 5, 2013 at 3:04 pm by catfish.)
I also want to point out the blatant LIE of you claiming that I introduced that passage, just sayin...
stupid fucking socks...
.
(February 5, 2013 at 2:50 pm)John V Wrote: (February 5, 2013 at 2:39 pm)catfish Wrote: Bolded by me above. ^^^
Cognitive dissonance? I believe so...
Thank you, come again...
.
There's no cognitive dissonance. You introduced a passage which doesn't speak one way or another on infallibility. Most verses don't. You seem to be taking "doesn't support" as "opposes," but that conclusion isn't warranted.
Dude, you agreed that those didn't support infallibility, then you claim it did.
You presented 2 separate statements that conflicted with your beliefs, which of course, makes you a liar...
We're done here...
.
So John V... Is it a sin to drink gin?
.
|
