Saying it doesn't make it so, Frodo! Saying it very simply doesn't make it so.
So very disappointing.
I don't care what you think. What you think is precisely the problem. It certainly isn't what determines correct doctrine!
This is how big a deal this issue is...
If your reading of these passages is correct then the bible is false - by its own standard.
If the bible is false, Jesus is not who He claimed to be.
If Jesus is not who He claimed to be then Christianity is false and we are all here wasting our time.
Ideas matter, Frodo! They have real consequences. If the bible contradicts itself then we are all fools.
How is it that you say you want good bible teaching out of one side of your mouth but out of the other reject purely logical arguments out of hand as if nothing of any substance was said at all? If someone's disagreement with your doctrine is all it takes for you to close your mind to anything they might say, then why do you care who is or isn't a good bible teacher? It means that your definition of "good bible teacher" is "Whoever comes closest to teaching the stuff I already believe."
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool." —
Richard Feynman
Though originally said in a scientific context, this principle has profound theological relevance. After all, getting our doctrine right is at least as important as any scientific endeavor and spiritual truth is not just a matter of intellect, it’s a matter of the heart, which the scripture warns, is deceitful above all things.
We all have a tendency to see what we expect to see, to hold fast to what we’ve long believed, especially when those beliefs feel settled or familiar because everyone around us believes them. But as Feynman put it,
we must bend over backward not to fool ourselves. That means we must approach our understanding of God, of Scripture, and of doctrine with humility. Not the kind that weakens conviction, but the kind that keeps us open to correction.
Loving the truth means being willing to ask...
“Is what I believe actually what the text says, or have I possibly imported something into it without realizing it?”
That question isn't an accusation, it’s a safeguard. It protects us from replacing faithfulness with familiarity.
The call here is not to doubt everything, but to examine everything,
to hold fast that which is good (I Thessalonians 5:21). That’s the heart of spiritual integrity: not just believing what is true, but being willing to search for it with the courage to admit if we’ve missed something along the way.
There is no such thing as a GOOD scientist or theologian who doesn't have this mentality, nor any good bible teacher who doesn't exemplify and teach it to his students. I know with certainty that Bob did so, did Les?
Ultimately, whether Les Feldick was a better or worse bible teacher than Bob Enyart comes down to who's doctrine turns out to have been more correct. Time will tell.
And as for you and I, of the two of us, which is more likely to be fooling themselves; the one that makes actual arguments and gives OBJECTIVE reasons for their doctrine or the one who blindly accepts proof-texting as actual proof and blows off anything anyone says to the contrary for no reason other than that they disagree with the conclusion?
