Battle Royale IX ideas....
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
I think you are confusing Bob Enyart with Bob Hill.
The site you were on was www.biblicalanswers.com which is Bob Hill's web site not Bob Enyart's.
And while it is unknown why that thread got cut, I can assure you, it isn't because Pastor Hill or anyone associated with him was unable or even unwilling to answer your questions.
If I recall you and I went back and forth for about a month before I figured out what you question was in the first place. I'm sure that they would not have wanted to go through that same process with you, they are way too busy over there for that sort of protracted process of figuring out what the question is.
As I recall, your question (as they understood it) was answered in some depth and then when you began the second iteration of the communicating the question process, they just assumed that you had ignored their rather lengthy answer and repeated yourself.
It wasn't until you made a third attempt that they just shut it down and gave up on it.
Further, you have absolutely no basis whatsoever to suggest that "he spreads a lot of misinformation based on little theological background". The arrogance of such a statement is almost beyond my comprehension! Both Bob Enyart and especially Bob Hill have been studying the Bible for, I'm sure, longer than you have been alive.
Pastor Hill is fluent in both the Hebrew and Greek languages and has translated the Bible from the original languages himself. Not to mention his years of pastoring and teaching under which Bob Enyart sat and learned for years.
If you wish to understand their basis for the Open Theism which they teach, then I strongly recommend you get a hold of a copy of
The Plot and actually read it! And in addition to that, read any number of hundreds of articles and various other postings on www.biblicalanswers.com. If you do so with even a half way open mind, you might actually come to understand and agree with them. The theology is not that difficult or complex, in fact its simple eloquence is one of its most compelling attributes.
Resting in Him,
Clete
add yasaf
New member
Oh my fault it was Bob Hill! OOPS!! BIG OOPS!!
Clete quote - If you do so with even a half way open mind, you might actually come to understand and agree with them. The theology is not that difficult or complex, in fact its simple eloquence is one of its most compelling attributes.
Wow, Clete! I am surprised to hear you say this! We have been talking for a long time and you clearly saw how an open mind was not my problem. Just to give you you a taste. I havewritten on Jesus being capable of sinning, and how if he did, what would have happened (many would consider just the thought of this heresy), and second I discussed how Biblical Inspiration and Mistakes in the bible are compatible. - Not something a closed mind would want to venture out into.
Clete quote - If you do so with even a half way open mind, you might actually come to understand and agree with them. The theology is not that difficult or complex, in fact its simple eloquence is one of its most compelling attributes.
Wow, Clete! I am surprised to hear you say this! We have been talking for a long time and you clearly saw how an open mind was not my problem. Just to give you you a taste. I havewritten on Jesus being capable of sinning, and how if he did, what would have happened (many would consider just the thought of this heresy), and second I discussed how Biblical Inspiration and Mistakes in the bible are compatible. - Not something a closed mind would want to venture out into.
Yes, after rereading it, my wording does comunicate a tone which I didn't intend. I wasn't trying to suggest that closed mindedness is common with you at all. I was simply making the point that Enyart's and Hill's stuff is pretty easy to reject if one doesn't aproach it with an attitude that is conducive to learning.
Indeed, it was my intention to suggest that you are one who is likely to understand and appreciate the eloquence of the arguments and teachings in Bob's book and thereby come to agree with its conclusions. Which, I, for one, would consider to be very cool!
The only thing I wanted to give you a hard time about was the crack about Pastor Hill's lack of theological background, which was unfounded.
Resting in Him,
Clete
add yasaf
New member
Clete Pfeiffer quote - Which, I, for one, would consider to be very cool!
I have always thought the OV to be possible, and never once thought it heretical, and I certainly appreciate its emphasis on God's imminence, but have yet to fully embrace it based on the Scripture verses we talked about a while ago, which I am, or should I say was, talking to 1Way about recently. My opinion has nothing to do with Greek philosophy and everything to do with Scripture. I hope you can appreciate that.
Clete quote - The only thing I wanted to give you a hard time about was the crack about Pastor Hill's lack of theological background, which was unfounded.
I will say that theology is easier than other subjects to become proficient at just by reading a lot of books. But through his posts Pastor Hill showed a lack of knowledge about the Ancient Near East cultural background behind the full meaning of first-born son, which was crucial to my argument, and he dismissed it, ultimately because he was deficient in his ANE culture.
Also, esp. with Greek and Hebrew, I have done both, the learn it on my own thing and take it in class, and I cannot express hw much more beneficial and how much I learned through the classes than simply from the books. The differenc ebetween Machen's Greek Grammar for first year students and Walace's Beyond the Basics is in many ways staggering. The axiom is true - A little knowledge can be worse than nothing at all.
Just an example - "In the Greek New Testament there is no indefinite second person as there is in colloquial English. (By indefinite I mea use of the second for either the first or third person). In English here is an example - suppose the son of a University of Texas alumnus asked him, "how do you become an Aggie?" the father might respond, "You must first train yourself in exercising bad judgement" In such an interchange, neither the father nor son would be referring to each other directly.
The Greeks, however, would use the appropriate person to express what we colloquially say with the second person. Older English and literary English are quite similar. So the point is, when you come across a second person in the Greek NT, you must think on a literary level.
i.e. - John 4:11 - Where then do you keep this living water? The woman is not asking, "Where does one get this living water?" Rather she is asking Jesus directly, "Where have YOU got this living water?"
This can be very significant for those like Sozo who insist that many verses in the NT are just showing a scenario that would never happen in a Christian's life.
So a verse like John 15:4 has more punch to it - "Neither can YOU bear fruit unless you remain in me" (Wallace - Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics)
I don't know that Bob has that level of Greek knowledge is all I am saying. If he does more power to him.
I have always thought the OV to be possible, and never once thought it heretical, and I certainly appreciate its emphasis on God's imminence, but have yet to fully embrace it based on the Scripture verses we talked about a while ago, which I am, or should I say was, talking to 1Way about recently. My opinion has nothing to do with Greek philosophy and everything to do with Scripture. I hope you can appreciate that.
Clete quote - The only thing I wanted to give you a hard time about was the crack about Pastor Hill's lack of theological background, which was unfounded.
I will say that theology is easier than other subjects to become proficient at just by reading a lot of books. But through his posts Pastor Hill showed a lack of knowledge about the Ancient Near East cultural background behind the full meaning of first-born son, which was crucial to my argument, and he dismissed it, ultimately because he was deficient in his ANE culture.
Also, esp. with Greek and Hebrew, I have done both, the learn it on my own thing and take it in class, and I cannot express hw much more beneficial and how much I learned through the classes than simply from the books. The differenc ebetween Machen's Greek Grammar for first year students and Walace's Beyond the Basics is in many ways staggering. The axiom is true - A little knowledge can be worse than nothing at all.
Just an example - "In the Greek New Testament there is no indefinite second person as there is in colloquial English. (By indefinite I mea use of the second for either the first or third person). In English here is an example - suppose the son of a University of Texas alumnus asked him, "how do you become an Aggie?" the father might respond, "You must first train yourself in exercising bad judgement" In such an interchange, neither the father nor son would be referring to each other directly.
The Greeks, however, would use the appropriate person to express what we colloquially say with the second person. Older English and literary English are quite similar. So the point is, when you come across a second person in the Greek NT, you must think on a literary level.
i.e. - John 4:11 - Where then do you keep this living water? The woman is not asking, "Where does one get this living water?" Rather she is asking Jesus directly, "Where have YOU got this living water?"
This can be very significant for those like Sozo who insist that many verses in the NT are just showing a scenario that would never happen in a Christian's life.
So a verse like John 15:4 has more punch to it - "Neither can YOU bear fruit unless you remain in me" (Wallace - Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics)
I don't know that Bob has that level of Greek knowledge is all I am saying. If he does more power to him.
Chileice
New member
I think that A would wind up being a lot like a current thread which is discussing the same topic between Lee Merrill and Acts 9-12 out, among others. I just don't think the topic would be strong enough to generate lots of interest. I know the last one seemed to fizzle. It seems "in-your-face-evangelism" vs. "polite" evangelism would stir up interest, but it might be all smoke and no fire. Maybe a discussion about what happens to the soul immediately upon death. That would interest people from off the site as well, I expect. It is a topic everyone wants to know something about since we will all share that same experience one day. Whatever you choose, I hope it is spirited but "clean".
Mustard Seed
New member
How about the answer I've been trying to get for a while.
"Was it dishonest for God to command Abraham to deceive?"
Don't know who you'd chose to participate but I think it's an interesting topic.
"Was it dishonest for God to command Abraham to deceive?"
Don't know who you'd chose to participate but I think it's an interesting topic.
Mustard Seed
New member
Has anyone ever thought of having a "tag team" Battle Royal? Don't know exactly how you'd get it to work but it might generate a bit more interest.
I don't know how he learned the Greek language but I do know that the Greek classes that he teaches are taught IN Greek, except for maybe the first year classes, I'm not sure.
I don't know you personally so I can't say with certainty but I would bet my house that he knows Greek and Hebrew at least as well, if not better than you do.
At any rate, its not that big a deal. I just wanted to make sure that Pastor Hill was given the credit he deserves.
Resting in Him,
Clete
cur_deus_homo
New member
That's a good idea.
:chuckle: LOL.
- Status