Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BATTLE TALK ~ BRX (rounds 4 thru 7)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Bob Hill? What about Bob Hill? He's an aquaintance of mine... but how did he get into this discussion? LOL (Altho he is a biblical scholar who is a fantastic proponent of the Open View, granted...)
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by elected4ever
      Nothing except I wasn't alive when these folks were. They didn't tell me anything. Except maybe you are a paranormal or something.
      Psst... dont' tell anyone this, but..... Darby died a century ago!!! He didn't tell me anything, either!



      In fact, I've never read a single word he wrote!
      1 Corinthians 13:2
      And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by RightIdea
        Bob Hill? What about Bob Hill? He's an aquaintance of mine... but how did he get into this discussion? LOL (Altho he is a biblical scholar who is a fantastic proponent of the Open View, granted...)
        I don't know . I didn't wright the book
        Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

        The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by RightIdea

          In fact, I've never read a single word he wrote!
          Yea you did if you read the Schofield Bible. He is the one that made the notes that Schofield used.
          Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

          The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by elected4ever
            Yea you did if you read the Schofield Bible. He is the one that made the notes that Schofield used.
            The problem with this, I don't have a Skolfield Bible. Secondly, I don't read notes in any bible. Thirdly, Verify everything and PRAYFULLY request God's truth on the matter. Not Darby's, not Calvins, not Skolfields. Maybe that is what you are doing and don't even realize it.
            The state — whatever its particular forms — always expresses itself as a collective form of property ownership. All political systems are socialistic, in that they are premised upon the subservience of individual interests to collective authority. Communism, fascism, lesser forms of state socialism, and welfarism, are all premised upon the state’s usurpation of privately-owned property. Whether one chooses to be aligned with the political "Left," "Right," or "Middle," comes down to nothing more than a preference for a particular franchise of state socialism.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by elected4ever
              Yea you did if you read the Schofield Bible. He is the one that made the notes that Schofield used.
              I've never so much as cracked open a Scofield Bible. (My last name is Schofield, his last name is Scofield. However, it's very likely we're related distantly, because families back then typically when they would split, one side would change the spelling of the family name slightly.)

              So, sorry again, but no, I've never read the Scofield Bible, and I don't even agree with Scofield anyway. I think he was way off on a number of things.
              1 Corinthians 13:2
              And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by RightIdea
                So, sorry again, but no, I've never read the Scofield Bible, and I don't even agree with Scofield anyway. I think he was way off on a number of things.
                The state — whatever its particular forms — always expresses itself as a collective form of property ownership. All political systems are socialistic, in that they are premised upon the subservience of individual interests to collective authority. Communism, fascism, lesser forms of state socialism, and welfarism, are all premised upon the state’s usurpation of privately-owned property. Whether one chooses to be aligned with the political "Left," "Right," or "Middle," comes down to nothing more than a preference for a particular franchise of state socialism.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by elected4ever
                  He proceeds at his own risk as do you and the rest of us.
                  Spoken like a true OVer!

                  -Bob
                  The Bob Enyart Live talk show airs at KGOV.com weekdays at 5 pm E.T. Also, same time, same station, check out Theology Thursday (.com) and on Fridays, Real Science Radio (.com) a.k.a. rsr.org. All shows are available 24/7 and you can call us at at 1-800-8Enyart.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by elected4ever
                    You would not have your view if not for Darby. That does not make it right or wrong. Just a point of view.
                    Oh, now Darby is the father of Openness too? Pretty soon you'll guys will have him as the author of the Pentateuch!

                    -Bob
                    The Bob Enyart Live talk show airs at KGOV.com weekdays at 5 pm E.T. Also, same time, same station, check out Theology Thursday (.com) and on Fridays, Real Science Radio (.com) a.k.a. rsr.org. All shows are available 24/7 and you can call us at at 1-800-8Enyart.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bob Enyart
                      Spoken like a true OVer!

                      -Bob
                      Will you guys please make up your mind as to what I'm supposed to be. I may be a little like Paul. I am all things to all men that I might win some.
                      Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                      The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bob Enyart
                        Oh, now Darby is the father of Openness too? Pretty soon you'll guys will have him as the author of the Pentateuch!

                        -Bob
                        I really don't know that if he did or not but it is just as true as what the CVers are accused off.
                        Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                        The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                        Comment


                        • MK??? are you going to respond to my last post.. if not i dont have to check this thread then!
                          "The devil is a better theologian than any of us and is a devil still."
                          - A. W. Tozer



                          Comment


                          • Bob said:
                            Also, the Open View would be more difficult to defend if God had stated or showed, “I created time,” but then this would create tension with the whole Bible, including God’s being eternally relational, and things like His planning “before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1:4) to establish the Body of Christ.
                            Actually,if one could demonstrate that God created time then this would prove that the “open view” is true.

                            If “time” does not exist in the “eternal” state then that would mean that the Lord God only lives in the “present”.There is no such thing as “foreknowledge” with God because all things exist in the “present” for Him.

                            Then someone will ask,”How do you explain the passages in Scripture that speak of God’s ‘foreknowledge’?”

                            The answer is simple.These passages are written in “phenomenal” language.This is a “figurative” language that is not to be taken literally,but instead it is describing how things appear to man.For instance,the Scriptures speak of the sun “rising” but the sun does not acually rise but instead it only appears to rise.

                            The following verse uses “phenomenal” language:

                            God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth”(2Thess.2:13).

                            The Christian is chosen by God through “belief in the truth”.In “time” that does not occur until one actually believes the gospel.But since the Lord is outside of time and all things with Him are in the “present” tense then it could be said that with Him that things that are happening now also happened from the beginning.At least that is how it appears to man.

                            The Calvinsts make the mistake of taking the verses that speak of His “foreknowledge” literally instead of figuratively.

                            In His grace,--Jerry
                            ”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
                            http://gracebeacon.net/studies/shuga...made_easy.html

                            Comment


                            • Speaking the Truth in Love

                              I was genuinely intrigued by Mr. Enyart’s personal views on “suggestion” and “manipulation,” as stated in his “Post 4B.” For example, while enlightening his readers on the “power of suggestion,” he writes: “Scripturally, God, demons, and people all use *THE POWER OF SUGGESTION.” A bit further along in the same paragraph, he adds, “ . . . *WE CAN ALL RELATE TO HOW EASILY WEAK MINDED PEOPLE ARE MANIPULATED.”

                              In this post, as well as his three previous ones, I believe I could perceive quite a number of times when he was good enough to provide clear illustrations of how easily he himself is able to wield this “suggestion/manipulation” tool, to gain his point. For example, in his discourse on whether “ . . . even the dictionary can distinguish between the meanings of such passages*2 . . . . “ he declares: “The only way to adjudicate this is by submitting the meaning to the constraints of the true nature of God, and not the expert lexicographer, but *THE CAREFUL STUDENT OF GOD’S WORD IS MOST QUALIFIED TO DECIDE THIS. Context is so compelling that, forgive the hyperbole, you should know the meaning of even a completely foreign word in a sentence.”

                              So, the “careful student” (who, by the by, is “*MOST qualified to decide such matters”) would be best advised, in his study of the Scriptures, to base any thorny linguistic decisions on “context” -- not on data gleaned from leading authorities in the ancient [Koine] Greek language. Very nice. By using this method, the aforementioned “careful student” can avoid a lot of dry, laborious research; can secure the praises of an individual he admires and looks up to; and can make the Holy Bible support the Open View or any other theology which tickles his itchy, little ears. (Another delicious side effect of this phenomenal method of study is that a person can become proficient in any language whatsoever, so long as “context” is available, to direct his progress.)

                              But I’m left to wonder: this type of guidance (based, as it is, on what I would have thought was the weakest and most obvious flattery) wouldn’t perchance fall into the category of “suggestion” and/or “manipulation” of weak-minded people, now would it?

                              *1. Emphasis mine.
                              *2. Passages about which Greek scholars “remain non-committal on whether Peter indicated Judas’ action [the betrayal of Jesus] was required by “divine destiny,” or [was] merely “fitting.”

                              MK
                              http://twilight-tales.com
                              Always remember that you're unique, just like everybody else.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by theo_victis
                                MK??? are you going to respond to my last post.. if not i dont have to check this thread then!
                                I apologize for my delay in responding to your last post. I can see you put some time and effort into clarifying your position. For that reason, I’ve been inclined to reply to your major points. On the other hand, the fact that you seem to be as firmly entrenched in your views as I am in mine has caused me to hesitate . . . I would not like to think that either of us might be expending our time on a fruitless effort.

                                Psalms 40:16 Let all those that seek [God] rejoice and be glad in [Him]: let such as love [His] salvation say continually, The LORD be magnified.

                                MK
                                http://twilight-tales.com
                                Always remember that you're unique, just like everybody else.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X