Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Pentecostal gibberish is still gibberish

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Morefish
    started a topic Pentecostal gibberish is still gibberish

    Pentecostal gibberish is still gibberish

    They may CALL it 'tongues' but of course it is NOT language at all. There is NO 'private prayer language' ANYWHERE IN THE BIBLE. When they say that is what they are doing, it is still. . .GIBBERISH.
    gibberish

    [jib-er-ish, gib-] See synonyms on Thesaurus.com noun
    1. meaningless or unintelligible talk or writing.
    2. talk or writing containing many obscure, pretentious, or technical words.
    It's just gibberish. Gibberish may make them FEEL GOOD, but is FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST about 'self' FEELING GOOD? Naah.

    It is about loving GOD and my fellow man, and SERVING BOTH, NOT about 'getting God to make me FEEL GOOD. . .'

  • Conqueror
    replied
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, ........... .
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
    ............. Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...


    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    You treat my posts the same way you read scripture...
    I respect the Apostolic word of God.

    I have no respect for someone who contradicts himself
    and then turns on me to defend that absurdity.





    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post











    Thanks for the input.

    I agree that the contradiction in terms is absurd.


    .
    You treat my posts the same way you read scripture...Your own misunderstanding could not be better represented than you do here...all in one post. Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • Conqueror
    replied

    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post


    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, ...........


    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    .................... Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...



    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    Wahahahahaha!

    Thanks for the input.

    I agree that the contradiction in terms is absurd.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post




    Deceiver exposes himself.


    .
    Wahahahahaha! You treat my posts the same way you treat scripture, and truncate those pesky passages that belie your claim, relying only on that which is convenient to your singular invention.

    Let's repeat for comedy's sake, that part of my post you chose to ignore: ..but as you've erased Luke, you have absolutely no established authority at all.

    Don't quote Paul, if you cannot prove that he's an apostle without referring to the evangelist you've despised, and the inspired word you've chosen to ignore.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conqueror
    replied
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post


    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, ...........


    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    .................... Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...


    Originally posted by Morefish View Post
    It would appear that EVERYONE is a 'deceiver' except YOU in your own mind.
    Support your confused mate, but leave me out of it.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • Morefish
    replied
    Conqueror replied
    02-20-19, 12:02 PM
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, ...........
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
    .................... Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...
    Deceiver exposes himself.
    It would appear that EVERYONE is a 'deceiver' except YOU in your own mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conqueror
    replied
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post


    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, ...........

    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    .................... Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...
    Deceiver exposes himself.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post



    You have no case,
    since your beloved Luke he Greek
    establishes Paul as an apostle.
    Why on earth are you using my argument against me? Of course Luke the Greek, the inspired evangelist to which all of contemporary history attests, and Paul himself, establishes Paul's apostleship beyond all doubt...

    ...but as you've erased Luke, you have absolutely no established authority at all.

    Don't quote Paul, if you cannot prove that he's an apostle without referring to the evangelist you've despised, and the inspired word you've chosen to ignore.

    Your entire argument has become wind by virtue of the eraser you've used.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conqueror
    replied
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    That "apostolic commandment" was written by one whose only claim to apostleship is his own word. It's not a commandment according to your standards.
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    .Luke establishes Paul's apostleship very clearly,
    You have no case,
    since your beloved Luke he Greek
    establishes Paul as an apostle.




    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post





    It would be nice,
    if that apostolic commandment was understood.

    However the response indicates that it isn't.


    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post





    It would be nice,
    if that apostolic commandment was understood.

    However the response indicates that it isn't.


    That "apostolic commandment" was written by one whose only claim to apostleship is his own word. It's not a commandment according to your standards.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post

    I am not here to argue about your opinion sir.

    Have it your way.


    .
    ...you'll sure have it yours. Have a great day...see you next time around, when your logic fails. Always there to help you see.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conqueror
    replied
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

    Paul is no apostle.

    Let's suppose that Luke's writings are not authoritative..
    I am not here to argue about your opinion sir.

    Have it your way.


    .

    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post




    You made the claim that Luke's Pentecost is the word of God.

    I have properly refuted that deception with scripture.

    I won't hold my breath for there aren't any witnesses to Luke's fable.


    .
    Let's suppose that Luke's writings are not authoritative...Let's suppose that you have to make up a basis for the authority and the history of the church...You have absolutely no basis at all to claim any authority to even discuss the scriptures. You have have robbed yourself of any NT claim...Paul was not an apostle, but by Luke's claim.

    He has no basis of claim for himself...and if you pretend Peter's use of "difficult to understand writings" suddenly makes Paul authoritative, you have no basis either. It was the Roman church that, after much dispute, accepted Peter's epistle as authoritative. They also accepted Revelation, despite the rampant grammatical error in both.

    Everything you post here is based on your whimsy and guess...the scriptures you choose don't even back you, when you claim Paul as authoritative. In doing that, you're merely begging the question...

    Let's go further...Mark was not one of the twelve. Only the Romans claim that Mark was in some way associated with Peter. So...Mark is out. So that only leaves you Matthew and John, for which we only have the testimony of the Roman Catholics to claim that they are in any way associated with any apostles, foundational or otherwise. As John's Greek is so good in the gospel, it's clear that John was not the writer. So what authority do you have to claim any gospel?

    Paul was not an apostle, not even by Peter's claim, who merely furnished a review of the difficulty his "writings" produced. So Paul's letters are out. Hebrews is obviously out, having no author. James was not an apostle. He was merely Jesus' brother, and any authority he had in the church can only be corroborated in the Greek Luke's testimony, so James is out.

    What does that leave you for a new testament? And by what authority, since the RC's made all the claims?

    I'm just curious...You're still the only one I've ever met to make such baffling, spurious, unfounded and dubious claims, and to stand on them as if you stand alone in a mind boggling discovery...no wait...

    Joe Smith did make similar claims.
    Last edited by tbeachhead; 02-18-19, 01:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbeachhead
    replied
    Originally posted by Conqueror View Post



    Whom have I added
    to the foundational apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20)?

    Substantiate your empty allegations.


    .
    It's not a 'WHOM" it's simply a what...There is no such thing as "the foundational apostles" unless you go with your invention. Paul never uses the adjective "foundational" to describe anyone. He uses the noun "foundation", as in that which was clearly laid down, and which you are so dead-set bent on ignoring...and you have no authority but your own, because there is no foundation for the church in your limp canon but your imagination, which vies with Joe Smith's as most imaginative.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X