Replies

I'm curious, are you part of a paid ministry?

(No, not employed by a "paid ministry")

Other than that, the rest of your post assumes & presumes much without making any case for that.

Go ahead...show us which post specifically is hateful, mocking, ridiculing, belittling? Other than that, your post sounds like you'd be a parent who would discipline a child of yours -- and never tell 'em why (specifically)...other than they "offended" you as a parent in some way.

And the Apostles continued it: Acts 5:37-38 37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

Say what? Are you this off-base -- to the point that your basic reading skills are now exported to the world for all to see?

The source for the statement you cited in Acts 5:37-38 isn't the apostles at all! The source was Gamaliel -- a teacher of the law!

So are you telling us that as Christians are we going to take our cultural cues from teachers of the law and Pharisees...???? Really?

Another FREEPER a little over a year ago tried a similar thing in citing Acts 5:35 ... not bothering to mention that he chose a teacher of the law to try to lecture me on...

Tell us all, Meonthebeach...how do you interpret passages from the apostle Paul like Titus 1:9 and 2 Cor. 10:4-5? Here Paul was discussing qualifications of an elder with Titus: 9 He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and REFUTE THOSE WHO OPPOSE IT. (Titus 1:9)

If you don't want anybody to live out Titus 1:9, ya better start advocating that everybody take some scissors to that verse and snip it out!

2 Cor. 10:4-5: 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. ???

What do you do with that passage MeontheBeach? Do you rewrite v. 4-5 to say: "The weapons we fight with are no weapons at all...we pacify strongholds. We tolerate arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God..."

And then we have Jesus' half-brother, Jude: 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly CONTENDcontend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.. (Jude 3, KJV)

What does that word "contend" mean Meonthebeach? Think of any athletic competition dear to your heart...now think of a coach you know in that sport...now offer to go in and give a "pep talk" to them...let's say if it was football or basketball...your "pep talk" could consist of something along the lines of: "Now, gentlemen. I know you're competitive. But I don't want you to contend for whatever goals or prizes the coaches have discussed with you. Instead, just keep away from the opposition...leave them alone...don't cover or guard them; don't keep an eye on them; if their game plan is of a humanistic coach, hey, it will come to nothing on its own...believe you me."

You know, Meonthebeach, it's one thing to not be exposed to these kind of New Testament passages...that's understandable...it's another to hit the lecture circuit and export your assessment of the NT missing such passages...all with a wagging finger and scolding tone to boot.

We have no right to publicly attack anyone. Jesus commanded: Matthew 15:14 14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Once again, you commit the error of wresting verses out of context. The context of Matthew 15:14 is that the disciples were commenting to Jesus that Jesus' previous statement had offended the Pharisees!!!! Exactly the opposite of what you try to pass off here for Biblical knowledge!!!

10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.” 12 Then the disciples came to him and asked, “Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?”

Just wow, MeontheBeach!!!

Oh, and for further evidence re: your "publicly attack" comment, does that mean that Paul shouldn't have disputing as he did in public???

And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. 9 But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. (Acts 19:8-9, KJV)

[Me] I'm curious, are you part of a paid ministry?

[You] (No, not employed by a "paid ministry")

I didn't ask if you were employed. I asked if you were a part of a "paid ministry".

Nice job at trying to make the thread all about me. Calling me by name, ranting on and on. I don't think even the nastiest Pharisee couldn't have been so condescending. Congrats.

However, despite the obvious red herring, this doesn't change the facts raised by my question to you.

I'll repost it to get us back on track.

From what I can see your post creates a false dilemma, then a straw man, and then you attack your own straw man.

You haven't addressed the "why". Why are they getting the stipend? Is the stipend for "preaching" or is it for non "preaching" related activities. This makes or breaks your whole argument.

You're trying to show the Mormon Church as "lying" about a lay clergy. Ok, then as the reader I say "prove it". You have this big frigg'n black hole in your argument which you haven't addressed.

Now, I will address some of your rant. Your conclusion is a prime example of the logical fallacy of "Cherry picking". Well, ok, that's one of several. But we'll leave it at that for now.

You rationalize your methods by cherry picking some scriptures and draw a conclusion as to the intent of the author. Then you completely ignore scriptures that would temper or even completely change your conclusion. IMO, that's intellectually dishonest.

Paul taught the gospel of Christ and then defended it. His method would have been consistent with the teaching of all the other prophets and Apostles and especially Jesus Himself.

Remember, Paul was not at war with the Pharisees. He was trying to convince them of the truthfulness of the gospel of Christ. To save them not to hate them.

Paul taught his doctrine and vigorously defended it. But he had to do it from a stand point of charity, love, brotherly kindness, long suffering, patience, and humility. Because that's what Christ commanded all men to do and in EVERY thing they did. Paul would have had to have been doubly so because of his position in the Church. Paul went about teaching the people the doctrine of Christ, he most assuredly did not go about trying to poison the minds of the people.

So, if you're trying to be like Paul, when are we going to see some charity, love, brotherly kindness, long suffering, patience, and humility?