What blasphemy!

[Watchman]

Does 'at' mean 'after'? Show us where he said the appointment was 'after' as you claimed he did.

Are you bored? Wanting to argue? Can't you come up with something better than disputing what "at" means? You are being ridiculous.

 

[DR74minus]

According to David Splane there was no FDS for almost 2000 years...

He was right about there was no FDS. What he does not know is that there still is no FDS. At least not until the faithful slave has been identified.

 

[Cristo]

I'm not arguing anything. I pointed out where your conversation with Alan went awry, and was trying to be nice about it when I said

I don't see that claim anywhere in what Alan wrote. I think you two need to define exactly what it is you are discussing because it seems as though you are both talking about different things.

You made a statement regarding what Alan supposedly claimed, and I was trying to clarify that he didn't say 'after', but that 'at' can be easily construed differently by others, which after this debacle clearly shows is true.

Based off of your misunderstanding with him, you brought up apostolic succession, which had NOTHING to do with what he was saying. When I tried to, I thought in a kindly way, tell you two that you were misunderstanding what each was saying, and asked both of you to define your arguments more clearly, you doubled down on Alan and said this:

You have implied that. You have claimed that the first appointment took place after Jesus' departure. And somehow, according to your claim, there must be an appointed slave all down through history, even when there was no recognizable Christianity. That is similar to apostolic succession.

Neither of the statements you make were true. He never implied it, and he never claimed it, yet even after somebody suggested there was a misunderstanding between you two, you decided to force the issue of what you thought he said, which he didn't. Now, you are attacking me for calling it out, and trying to stop it from happening, so you forced me to play my hand, which was to have you show us where Alan said 'after'. Now I'm the obtuse one, because I am pointing out your error, which had you not forced my hand, and actually defined your arguments would never have come to this.

Somebody once said "It is not rocket science but it does require a truthful heart to be receptive to simple truth."

 

[Watchman]

I'm not arguing anything.

Like I said, you are being ridiculous.