Post by Gods Messenger on Sept 15, 2006 7:41:52 GMT -5
360.yahoo.com/coljtc
these men do not believe the word of God.
but they both LOVE money.
money is good, but they WORSHIP money.
just like sex is good with proper usage.
Q-boro books publishes Satanic Scriptures
Matthew 28:18-20
Mark 16:16
Luke 24:47
John 3:3-5
Acts 2:38-41
Acts 6:7
Acts 10:47-48
Acts 19:1-5 & Ephesians 2:5
Romans 2;13
Romans 6:3-6
Romans 10:16{NKJV}
1st Cor 12:13
2nd Cor 7:10
Galatians 3:27
the 7 X 1= 7{PERFECTION} of Ephesians 4:4-6
Colossians 2:11-13
1st Thessalonians 1:3
1st Corinthians 7:19 & Galatians 5:6
2nd Thessalonians 1:8
1st Timothy 6:3-11
2nd Timothy 4:3-4
Titus 3:4-8
Philemon 23-24
Hebrews 10:22-31
James 1:21-27
James 2:19-26
1st Peter 1:20-25
1st Peter 3:18-22{NKJV}
1st Peter 4:16-18{NKJV}
2nd Peter 2:14-22
1st John 3:7-13
1st John 5:1-15
Jude
Revelation 1:3-9
and much more of the word they do not believe.
I will not "move on"
I will continue to fight the war against infidels{2nd Cor 10:3-6 & Psalm 41:9 55:12-14}
360.yahoo.com/the_nation_of_Jesus
Entry for July 28, 2006
gggggGunit member MARK ANTHONY HOLSEY responds to Erik Powery. MARK ANTHONY HOLSEY BOASTFULLY & PROUDLY CONFESSES...
"Since I have to finish this book for gggggGunit
and then finish enjoying my vacation.
How about this?
How about I say you're right and I'm wrong. You
win and I lose. You're going to heaven and I'm
going to hell. I "left" licoc to chase money and
riches at ccc. I'm delusional. You know sound
doctrine and I do not know sound doctrine. Your
beliefs and practices are right and mines and ccc's are
wrong. You're not religous and I am. You only
read the credits of my book out of curiosity and all
else is out of love and curiosity. You don't
check for me when you're in NY. You have to believe
and be baptized for the remission of sins or you
are not saved. I am a hypocrite and only after
money cars and houses. God will not bless me. Even
what I have now is only temporary and not eternal.
I am wasting my talents on the world. I have no
plan for a future and if I do God is definitely
not included in them.
I think we can both agree that after that there
is nothing else to say. And I am sure you would
agree with me on what I just wrote. You can
continue to email me and pray for me and ccc and all the
other religous people. I encourage you to do so
but please do not get offended by my future lack
of response. I think you would agree that that is
fair".
One love. To my brother in Christ'.
Holz!!!!!
"Sent via BlackBerry powered by Sprint"
Friday July 28, 2006 - 02:38pm (CDT) Permanent Link |
the death of a friendship{the man who baptized me into Christ 11-16-1997}
What's up E?
Thanks for the email but Politics ain't my thing. Politicians have to compromise their beliefs to stay popular with their constituients (I ain't into that). I'm focused like a laser....Plus I have way more influence than a politician because with my books that I write and my publishing company, I reach more people. (By the way. I'm still waiting for you to send me that scripture. Whenever you get a chance shoot it over to me. I'm going to Miami and Orlando so send it to Mark@qborobooks.com so it can reach me on my blackberry.)
Research this when you get some time: It's called the Fallacy of Negative Inference
Mark 16:16
Notice that Mark 16:16 seems to add baptism as a requirement for salvation:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)
If we use Mark 16:16 (above) to claim that baptism is necessary for salvation then we are making a common error which is known as the Negative Inference Fallacy. This fallacy can be stated as follows:
"If a statement is true, we cannot assume that the negation (or opposite) of that statement is true."
To illustrate the Negative Inference Fallacy, consider this conditional statement:
IF a person lives in Texas
THEN the person lives on earth
According to the Negative Inference Fallacy, if the above statement is true then we cannot assume that the negation (or opposite) of that statement is true. To see why, here is the negation of that statement:
IF a person does not live in Texas
THEN the person does not live on earth
It is easy to see that this is not a true statement. Again, if a statement is true, this does not automatically mean that the negation of that statement is true. The above example only has one condition, so now let's look at an example of the Negative Inference Fallacy using two conditions:
IF a person lives in Texas
AND the person is male
THEN the person lives on earth
This is a true statement which tells us something about people in Texas who are male, but notice that it does not address females (non-males) at all. We cannot assume anything about females from this statement. What the Negative Inference Fallacy tells us is that even though we can phrase the negation (or opposite) of the above statement in three different ways, we cannot assume that any of these negations will be true. Here are the three negations of the above statement:
IF a person does not live in Texas
AND the person is male
THEN the person does not live on earth
IF a person lives in Texas
AND the person is not male
THEN the person does not live on earth
IF a person does not live in Texas
AND the person is not male
THEN the person does not live on earth
Notice that all three of these negations are false statements. What this demonstrates is that if a statement is true, we cannot assume that a negative inference (a negation) from that statement is also true.
Now let's examine the first half of Mark 16:16 in light of the Negative Inference Fallacy:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
Based on this verse we can make the following conditional statement:
IF a person believes
AND the person has been baptized
THEN the person will be saved
This is a true statement which tells us something about believers who have been baptized, but notice that it says nothing about believers who have not been baptized (compare this with the example of people in Texas who are male, which says nothing at all about people in Texas who are not male). As in the previous example, we can phrase the negation of the above statement in three different ways, but we cannot assume from Mark 16:16 that any of these negations are true. Here are the three negations of the above statement:
IF a person does not believe
AND the person has been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
IF a person believes
AND the person has not been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
IF a person does not believe
AND the person has not been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
As the Negative Inference Fallacy shows, we cannot assume that any one of the above statements is true (unless we have more information, as we'll see in a moment). To help us understand this better, let's compare Mark 16:16a with the example of people in Texas who are male:
"Whoever lives in Texas and is male lives on earth"
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
Both of these statements are true. Notice that the first statement tells us nothing about people in Texas who are not males, and in the same way, Mark 16:16a tells us nothing about believers who have not been baptized. If we try to make an assumption about females in Texas or about unbaptized believers based on the above statements then we are making an error in our thinking:
"Whoever lives in Texas and is not male does not live on earth"
"Whoever believes and is not baptized will not be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
This is the error that some people have made. They have assumed that since Mark 16:16a says that baptized believers will be saved, this must mean that unbaptized believers will not be saved. By making this assumption, they have fallen victim to the Negative Inference Fallacy.
The important thing to understand is that just because Mark 16:16a contains two conditions relating to salvation, this does not mean that both conditions are requirements for being saved. To help make this clearer, let's use three conditions instead of only two conditions. For example, if I believe in Jesus and I have received a Christian baptism and I live in Texas, I am saved, right? Now we have three conditions relating to salvation, and everyone who meets these three conditions is saved. However, these three conditions are obviously not all requirements for salvation because we know that people who believe in Jesus and have received a Christian baptism and live in Australia are saved as well. So just because we have three conditions relating to salvation, this doesn't mean that they are all requirements for being saved. Now, if we can find a passage in the New Testament which says something like, "whoever does not live in Texas is condemned," then we would know for certain that living in Texas is a requirement for salvation. This point is easy to understand when we're talking about a condition such as living in Texas, but the same point applies to the other two conditions as well (belief and baptism). In other words, if we can find any passages in the New Testament which are direct negations of these two conditions (belief and baptism) then we would know for certain that belief and baptism are requirements for receiving salvation. It is easy to demonstrate that belief is a requirement for salvation because Jesus specifically gave us the negation of belief:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)
We can see that Jesus has given us both the positive condition of belief ("Whoever believes...") and the negative condition of belief ("whoever does not believe will be condemned"). Therefore, we can say with absolute certainty that belief is a requirement for salvation. Now, notice in Mark 16:16 (above) that Jesus has given us the positive condition of baptism ("Whoever...is baptized..."), but nowhere does the New Testament ever give us the negative condition of baptism (such as, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned"). Therefore, we cannot say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. If we claim that baptism is necessary for salvation based on Mark 16:16 then we are making the error which is known as the Negative Inference Fallacy.
Acts 2:38
Now that we understand about the Negative Inference Fallacy as it relates to Mark 16:16, we can see how the same principle applies to Acts 2:38:
Mark 16:16a: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved"
Acts 2:38: "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins."
Both of these verses are favorites among those who believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, but the Negative Inference Fallacy demonstrates the error that they are making. Both of these verses are true, but we have seen that we cannot assume that the negations (or opposites) of these verses are true. In the case of Acts 2:38 (above), the basic conditional thought can be expressed as:
IF a person repents
AND the person is baptized
THEN the person's sins will be forgiven
Just as in Mark 16:16a, there are two conditions here (repentance and baptism in this case). As the Negative Inference Fallacy shows, we cannot take the above true statement and assume that the negation (or opposite) must also be true. In other words, it is erroneous to conclude from Acts 2:38 (above) that we are not saved unless we both repent and receive baptism. That would be a false conclusion. There are numerous Scripture passages which say that if we believe in Jesus then we will be saved (such as John 3:36, as we saw above), and therefore belief is a "condition" which relates to a person's salvation. But there are also Scripture passages which say that if we do not believe then we will not be saved, such as Mark 16:16 ("whoever does not believe will be condemned"). Since the New Testament specifically gives us the negation of belief, we can therefore state with absolute certainty that belief is a requirement for salvation. This is not true of baptism, however. There are no passages in the New Testament which give us the negation of baptism (such as, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned"), and therefore we have no valid basis for claiming that baptism is a requirement for salvation.
In Acts 2:38, the apostle Peter did not say that unbaptized believers can't receive forgiveness of sins, and therefore Acts 2:38 does not contradict other statements that Peter made concerning the forgiveness of sins:
"Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord" (Acts 3:19)
"All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name." (Acts 10:43)
In these statements, the apostle Peter said that everyone who has a repentant, believing heart will receive forgiveness of sins. He did not list baptism as a requirement for receiving forgiveness here, and these verses harmonize well with Acts 2:38 (above) because we cannot assume that Acts 2:38 is making baptism a requirement for receiving forgiveness.
The New Testament specifically says that unbelievers are condemned (see for example Revelation 21:8), and therefore belief is a requirement for salvation. However, the New Testament never says that "the unbaptized" are condemned, and therefore we cannot say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. The New Testament sometimes refers to Jews as "the circumcised" (as in Romans 4:9), it sometimes refers to Gentiles as "the uncircumcised" (as in Romans 4:9), it sometimes refers to Christians as "the believers" (as in 1 Timothy 4:12), and it sometimes refers to the unsaved as "unbelievers" (as in Revelation 21:8), but the New Testament never refers to Christians as "the baptized," and it never refers to the unsaved as "the unbaptized." Baptism is commanded in Scripture, which means that it is an important act of obedience, but it is not a requirement for receiving salvation.
Something to chew on....
Holz
www.qborobooks.com
www.myspace.com/qborobooks
"He who believes and is NOT baptized shall be saved"(Mark 16:16)
these men do not believe the word of God.
but they both LOVE money.
money is good, but they WORSHIP money.
just like sex is good with proper usage.
Q-boro books publishes Satanic Scriptures
Matthew 28:18-20
Mark 16:16
Luke 24:47
John 3:3-5
Acts 2:38-41
Acts 6:7
Acts 10:47-48
Acts 19:1-5 & Ephesians 2:5
Romans 2;13
Romans 6:3-6
Romans 10:16{NKJV}
1st Cor 12:13
2nd Cor 7:10
Galatians 3:27
the 7 X 1= 7{PERFECTION} of Ephesians 4:4-6
Colossians 2:11-13
1st Thessalonians 1:3
1st Corinthians 7:19 & Galatians 5:6
2nd Thessalonians 1:8
1st Timothy 6:3-11
2nd Timothy 4:3-4
Titus 3:4-8
Philemon 23-24
Hebrews 10:22-31
James 1:21-27
James 2:19-26
1st Peter 1:20-25
1st Peter 3:18-22{NKJV}
1st Peter 4:16-18{NKJV}
2nd Peter 2:14-22
1st John 3:7-13
1st John 5:1-15
Jude
Revelation 1:3-9
and much more of the word they do not believe.
I will not "move on"
I will continue to fight the war against infidels{2nd Cor 10:3-6 & Psalm 41:9 55:12-14}
360.yahoo.com/the_nation_of_Jesus
Entry for July 28, 2006
gggggGunit member MARK ANTHONY HOLSEY responds to Erik Powery. MARK ANTHONY HOLSEY BOASTFULLY & PROUDLY CONFESSES...
"Since I have to finish this book for gggggGunit
and then finish enjoying my vacation.
How about this?
How about I say you're right and I'm wrong. You
win and I lose. You're going to heaven and I'm
going to hell. I "left" licoc to chase money and
riches at ccc. I'm delusional. You know sound
doctrine and I do not know sound doctrine. Your
beliefs and practices are right and mines and ccc's are
wrong. You're not religous and I am. You only
read the credits of my book out of curiosity and all
else is out of love and curiosity. You don't
check for me when you're in NY. You have to believe
and be baptized for the remission of sins or you
are not saved. I am a hypocrite and only after
money cars and houses. God will not bless me. Even
what I have now is only temporary and not eternal.
I am wasting my talents on the world. I have no
plan for a future and if I do God is definitely
not included in them.
I think we can both agree that after that there
is nothing else to say. And I am sure you would
agree with me on what I just wrote. You can
continue to email me and pray for me and ccc and all the
other religous people. I encourage you to do so
but please do not get offended by my future lack
of response. I think you would agree that that is
fair".
One love. To my brother in Christ'.
Holz!!!!!
"Sent via BlackBerry powered by Sprint"
Friday July 28, 2006 - 02:38pm (CDT) Permanent Link |
the death of a friendship{the man who baptized me into Christ 11-16-1997}
What's up E?
Thanks for the email but Politics ain't my thing. Politicians have to compromise their beliefs to stay popular with their constituients (I ain't into that). I'm focused like a laser....Plus I have way more influence than a politician because with my books that I write and my publishing company, I reach more people. (By the way. I'm still waiting for you to send me that scripture. Whenever you get a chance shoot it over to me. I'm going to Miami and Orlando so send it to Mark@qborobooks.com so it can reach me on my blackberry.)
Research this when you get some time: It's called the Fallacy of Negative Inference
Mark 16:16
Notice that Mark 16:16 seems to add baptism as a requirement for salvation:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)
If we use Mark 16:16 (above) to claim that baptism is necessary for salvation then we are making a common error which is known as the Negative Inference Fallacy. This fallacy can be stated as follows:
"If a statement is true, we cannot assume that the negation (or opposite) of that statement is true."
To illustrate the Negative Inference Fallacy, consider this conditional statement:
IF a person lives in Texas
THEN the person lives on earth
According to the Negative Inference Fallacy, if the above statement is true then we cannot assume that the negation (or opposite) of that statement is true. To see why, here is the negation of that statement:
IF a person does not live in Texas
THEN the person does not live on earth
It is easy to see that this is not a true statement. Again, if a statement is true, this does not automatically mean that the negation of that statement is true. The above example only has one condition, so now let's look at an example of the Negative Inference Fallacy using two conditions:
IF a person lives in Texas
AND the person is male
THEN the person lives on earth
This is a true statement which tells us something about people in Texas who are male, but notice that it does not address females (non-males) at all. We cannot assume anything about females from this statement. What the Negative Inference Fallacy tells us is that even though we can phrase the negation (or opposite) of the above statement in three different ways, we cannot assume that any of these negations will be true. Here are the three negations of the above statement:
IF a person does not live in Texas
AND the person is male
THEN the person does not live on earth
IF a person lives in Texas
AND the person is not male
THEN the person does not live on earth
IF a person does not live in Texas
AND the person is not male
THEN the person does not live on earth
Notice that all three of these negations are false statements. What this demonstrates is that if a statement is true, we cannot assume that a negative inference (a negation) from that statement is also true.
Now let's examine the first half of Mark 16:16 in light of the Negative Inference Fallacy:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
Based on this verse we can make the following conditional statement:
IF a person believes
AND the person has been baptized
THEN the person will be saved
This is a true statement which tells us something about believers who have been baptized, but notice that it says nothing about believers who have not been baptized (compare this with the example of people in Texas who are male, which says nothing at all about people in Texas who are not male). As in the previous example, we can phrase the negation of the above statement in three different ways, but we cannot assume from Mark 16:16 that any of these negations are true. Here are the three negations of the above statement:
IF a person does not believe
AND the person has been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
IF a person believes
AND the person has not been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
IF a person does not believe
AND the person has not been baptized
THEN the person will not be saved
As the Negative Inference Fallacy shows, we cannot assume that any one of the above statements is true (unless we have more information, as we'll see in a moment). To help us understand this better, let's compare Mark 16:16a with the example of people in Texas who are male:
"Whoever lives in Texas and is male lives on earth"
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
Both of these statements are true. Notice that the first statement tells us nothing about people in Texas who are not males, and in the same way, Mark 16:16a tells us nothing about believers who have not been baptized. If we try to make an assumption about females in Texas or about unbaptized believers based on the above statements then we are making an error in our thinking:
"Whoever lives in Texas and is not male does not live on earth"
"Whoever believes and is not baptized will not be saved" (Mark 16:16a)
This is the error that some people have made. They have assumed that since Mark 16:16a says that baptized believers will be saved, this must mean that unbaptized believers will not be saved. By making this assumption, they have fallen victim to the Negative Inference Fallacy.
The important thing to understand is that just because Mark 16:16a contains two conditions relating to salvation, this does not mean that both conditions are requirements for being saved. To help make this clearer, let's use three conditions instead of only two conditions. For example, if I believe in Jesus and I have received a Christian baptism and I live in Texas, I am saved, right? Now we have three conditions relating to salvation, and everyone who meets these three conditions is saved. However, these three conditions are obviously not all requirements for salvation because we know that people who believe in Jesus and have received a Christian baptism and live in Australia are saved as well. So just because we have three conditions relating to salvation, this doesn't mean that they are all requirements for being saved. Now, if we can find a passage in the New Testament which says something like, "whoever does not live in Texas is condemned," then we would know for certain that living in Texas is a requirement for salvation. This point is easy to understand when we're talking about a condition such as living in Texas, but the same point applies to the other two conditions as well (belief and baptism). In other words, if we can find any passages in the New Testament which are direct negations of these two conditions (belief and baptism) then we would know for certain that belief and baptism are requirements for receiving salvation. It is easy to demonstrate that belief is a requirement for salvation because Jesus specifically gave us the negation of belief:
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (Mark 16:16)
We can see that Jesus has given us both the positive condition of belief ("Whoever believes...") and the negative condition of belief ("whoever does not believe will be condemned"). Therefore, we can say with absolute certainty that belief is a requirement for salvation. Now, notice in Mark 16:16 (above) that Jesus has given us the positive condition of baptism ("Whoever...is baptized..."), but nowhere does the New Testament ever give us the negative condition of baptism (such as, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned"). Therefore, we cannot say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. If we claim that baptism is necessary for salvation based on Mark 16:16 then we are making the error which is known as the Negative Inference Fallacy.
Acts 2:38
Now that we understand about the Negative Inference Fallacy as it relates to Mark 16:16, we can see how the same principle applies to Acts 2:38:
Mark 16:16a: "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved"
Acts 2:38: "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins."
Both of these verses are favorites among those who believe that baptism is necessary for salvation, but the Negative Inference Fallacy demonstrates the error that they are making. Both of these verses are true, but we have seen that we cannot assume that the negations (or opposites) of these verses are true. In the case of Acts 2:38 (above), the basic conditional thought can be expressed as:
IF a person repents
AND the person is baptized
THEN the person's sins will be forgiven
Just as in Mark 16:16a, there are two conditions here (repentance and baptism in this case). As the Negative Inference Fallacy shows, we cannot take the above true statement and assume that the negation (or opposite) must also be true. In other words, it is erroneous to conclude from Acts 2:38 (above) that we are not saved unless we both repent and receive baptism. That would be a false conclusion. There are numerous Scripture passages which say that if we believe in Jesus then we will be saved (such as John 3:36, as we saw above), and therefore belief is a "condition" which relates to a person's salvation. But there are also Scripture passages which say that if we do not believe then we will not be saved, such as Mark 16:16 ("whoever does not believe will be condemned"). Since the New Testament specifically gives us the negation of belief, we can therefore state with absolute certainty that belief is a requirement for salvation. This is not true of baptism, however. There are no passages in the New Testament which give us the negation of baptism (such as, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned"), and therefore we have no valid basis for claiming that baptism is a requirement for salvation.
In Acts 2:38, the apostle Peter did not say that unbaptized believers can't receive forgiveness of sins, and therefore Acts 2:38 does not contradict other statements that Peter made concerning the forgiveness of sins:
"Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord" (Acts 3:19)
"All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name." (Acts 10:43)
In these statements, the apostle Peter said that everyone who has a repentant, believing heart will receive forgiveness of sins. He did not list baptism as a requirement for receiving forgiveness here, and these verses harmonize well with Acts 2:38 (above) because we cannot assume that Acts 2:38 is making baptism a requirement for receiving forgiveness.
The New Testament specifically says that unbelievers are condemned (see for example Revelation 21:8), and therefore belief is a requirement for salvation. However, the New Testament never says that "the unbaptized" are condemned, and therefore we cannot say that baptism is a requirement for salvation. The New Testament sometimes refers to Jews as "the circumcised" (as in Romans 4:9), it sometimes refers to Gentiles as "the uncircumcised" (as in Romans 4:9), it sometimes refers to Christians as "the believers" (as in 1 Timothy 4:12), and it sometimes refers to the unsaved as "unbelievers" (as in Revelation 21:8), but the New Testament never refers to Christians as "the baptized," and it never refers to the unsaved as "the unbaptized." Baptism is commanded in Scripture, which means that it is an important act of obedience, but it is not a requirement for receiving salvation.
Something to chew on....
Holz
www.qborobooks.com
www.myspace.com/qborobooks
"He who believes and is NOT baptized shall be saved"(Mark 16:16)