scripture question

[adrift]

So I must ask how is this out of context?

.

I don’t have much time and I will answer the rest later.
from footnotes

[9-10] The words of those who ridicule Isaiah. The Hebrew of Isaiah 28:10 by its very sound, conveys the idea of mocking imitation of what the prophet says, as though he spoke like a stammering child: SAU LASAU, SAU LASAU, CAU LACAU, CAU LACAU, ZE’ER SHAM, ZE’ER SHAM. But in v 13 God repeats these words in deadly earnest, putting them in the mouth of the victorious pagan army.

It has nothing to do with how to teach doctrine.

So, you do acknowledge that the crowd are disciples.

Because I quoted the scripture that the DISCIPLES walked with Him no more is not an acknowledgment that they are the crowd. You cannot even say that they became the crowds because they were no longer with Him.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

I don’t have much time and I will answer the rest later.

Don’t bother. I can see there’s no point in me continuing to answer this nonsense. Have a nice day.

 

[adrift]

Here is the original exchange:
Quote:Adrift
If they perceived wrongly He would have explained and corrected it.

According to Matt 13 He wouldn’t because “this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”

Please explain how this is a misapplication of scripture…

Matt was talking about the crowds which is not the same as the disciples that is why it is a misapplication.

This

is the misapplication of scripture.

Jesus said He would give Himself as food and drink. At the last supper He says He does it. No misapllication but a great gift.

So, I guess I,m now answering bishop Brom as well as you.

The Bishop gave an imprimateur which says that nothing is contrary to faith. He didn’t write it so NO you are not answering Bishop Brom.

So, the fact that he confuses the two definitions for flesh?

The article has not confused nor clouded anything but pointed out the obvious falicy of the argument which has not been refuted.

Richard Kastner Don’t bother. I can see there’s no point in me continuing to answer this nonsense. Have a nice day

I agree you have taken an indefensible position time to bow out.

 

[Soutane]

Jesus said He was the Door.

Jesus said He was the Bread.

Jesus said He was the True Vine.

He is all those things metaphorically.

He did however say "This IS My Flesh…This IS MY Blood."NOTHING metaphoric about THAT.Even the disciples who left Him Knew He wasn’t speaking metaphorically,else why would they express their absolute disgust and leave Him.

Checkmate.