Tam At The Top - Top Thanked
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
Yeah! That stone cold hard look.
Can cause folks to cry uncle just from the look.
Ahhh, the glory days.:think: Is it time for me to trot out the old, "I once broke the rep ceiling...twice" shtick?
No?
Well...it was something.lain:...this is nice too though.
Where is GloryDaz anyway????
I bet she's playing with grandkids.
Or napping from playing with grandkids!
I'm practicing my Chip/Ernie Douglas routine right now, Mayor.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Guess who I saw on an episode of Gomer Pyle early this morning?
Yes sir, I saw Rowena, and also John Masters.
Well, I don't know about you, Mayor. All that workin' out has seemed to turn your head into "mush," "Paper Chase" fella. It is Ramona, whom Ernest T. always calls "Romeeeena."
Am I getting through to you, Breen-ite? Good.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You lost me after Paper Chase...it made me think of the most beautiful woman ever born, Lindsay Wagner.
And she shore was fast, in slow motion, like Steve/Lee.
Pretty soon TOL will change to TAM
Don't pat yourself on the back, as you lack integrity, credibility, and balanced truth.A wrong assumption leads to wrong conclusions, and more wooden literalism. It is a challenge to not retain preconceived ideas that cloud our understanding of all the relevant anecdotal evidences, not just your unbalanced proof texts.You throw the baby out with the bathwater because of your myopic, negative, immature experience.
Have you ever read a Greek grammar (e.g. Mounce or Wallace) cover to cover?
I'm pretty sure I'm taller.
lain:
I am not incorrect to point out the emphasis on studying Scripture, etc. for truth. The Spirit of Truth does lead us into truth, but you have to explain why so many sincere, godly believers have such a myriad of divisive, doctrinal views despite the same indwelling Holy Spirit, same sincerity, same prayerful study of Word, etc. (hint: noetic effects of sin; bad teaching; subjective, fleshly impressions mistaken for the Spirit, etc.)
Classic proof texting out of context. You have no credibility as an exegete.I reject your specious view, not the Word of God. The Bible Knowledge Commentary does not agree with your deterministic view. God is not a robot.
You cling to a wrong anecdotal and theological view and are impervious to a more biblical one.The question is if it is the most biblical view. I contend it is far from it. You are not infallible nor do you have the official version of balanced truth, and demarcations.
As well, we must formulate a chronology based on all the relevant verses.Look at all relevant verses without a wrong paradigm.
You are a nutball amateur, on the wildwest of the internet. It amazes me that a few here scornfully reject those who know biblical languages and have studied with discipline for years (not to mention great minds in church history for centuries) in favor of their partially informed opinions (and then make it a salvific issue?!). Experts are not always right, but they are not always wrong.Some have a thinly veiled arrogance in their pontifications.
Have you considered taking a 2 week summer course in exegeting/exegezing the Greek?
etc.
You underestimate the caliber of scholars that God has raised up to keep the sheep from falling for false teaching and ignorance on important subjects. Why should I trust you as an expert on things, and reject those with proven track records and godly character/insights? Eph. 4:11-13 vs internet wannabees with no training or accountability. Why, pray tell?!.... What school did you go to again?... I went to Bible College in the early 80s, but have no scholastic club except TOL (which is not very scholastic)
A.T. Robertson's Word Pictures commentary correctly deals with the Greek/interpretation in context...he is a Greek master, not a KJV only...sometimes it does make a difference, dudes. You are simplistic to think it is a matter of what the Bible says when you interpret and twist to fit a preconceived idea. It is arrogant to assume that godly, capable, great thinkers through the centuries who reject MAD (new doctrine anyway) are clueless or without the leading of the Spirit.
We cannot have our cake and eat it too (unless we chose determinism and its problems of making God responsible for heinous moral evil.My position is a minority view in Christian circles, even considered heretical, but 30 years later, I am convinced it is the most biblical/coherent.My ideas are mainstream free will Deismtheism/Arminian, Wesleyian-ism. Your views are held by some, but not the historic, orthodox church. You are making our views diametrically opposed, when they are actually close (apart from difficult believism, and greasy law-ism,which is a different issue than salvific paradigms. Paul Crouch and Benny Hin differed on cessationalism, yet both strongly affirm Holy Ghost bartending.. The problem is your inability to think and lack of theological sophistication, not my view itself. You are clearly confused about our position because you are importing your wrong, shallow understanding and superimposing it on our views, which is not what you are claiming it is. Be balanced, and think biblical hermeneutics, in context.
Many people feel like you when they join a cult, instead of accepting the historical view. Sincerity or subjective experience does not create truth. This is the semantical problem, as proof texts used are actually exegeted in a better way in evangelical circles. The traditions in Scripture are biblical, truthful traditions, not spurious ones added later in church history that are contra/extrabiblical. Cults have traditions, but they lack truth. Sound exegesis confirms this as well,as a metaphor, not a wooden literalism. A blind acceptance of traditions of men is not acceptable.Avoid the pseudo-Christian cults. Reading the Church Fathers, they could not agree on many things and had some heretical beliefs due to their propensity to try to retain pagan Greek philosophy with Christian concepts. Doctrinal development, even in the pages of the Bible, was not automatic since the canon of Scripture was not formalized a day after the Resurrection and the variety of leaders who were not scholars with hundreds of years of reflection during church history. Again,tradition does not trump revelation, and sound exegesis, in context, without proof texting, and preconceived assumptions, and mainline, orthodox Christianity.
etc.