Jason likes to use strawmen arguments. He also makes fallacious appeals to emotion. "How loving is God to ........ people on a technicality?" The same argument is used by atheists and pagans against any form of Christianity.
Jason also has no answer for
Acts 22:16. He doesn't know if Paul was saved before, or after those words were told to him. Jason's doctrine cannot account for that verse. Regardless of WHEN Paul got saved, that verse is incomprehensible in Jason's doctrinal system, as pointed out already.
The doctrinal system espoused by Jason is therefore not the same doctrine taught by or believed by the early church. Now, if a doctrine concerning salvation is NOT that which was taught by the early apostolic church, then that doctrine is FALSE DOCTRINE. Can anyone be saved by false doctrine?
Rather than sticking to Scripture, and what the BIBLE says, Jason appeals to emotion, and history. This might sway the unlearned and unstable, but DISCIPLES stick to scripture alone as the source of teaching, belief, and practice. Jason's penchant for fallacious appeals to emotion, bandwagon fallacies, appeals to authority, and legalism (good works) proves his doctrinal system is NOT the system taught or practiced by the apostles. and therefore is not biblical.
Threaded Mode
