God expects us to live up to the light we have.

In the posts you are diligently ignoring the point is made that the CHRIST said that HIS view of the scripture is exegetically sound as compared to the TRADITIONS of the Pharisees.

In the posts you are diligently ignoring it is SHOWN that the REFORMERS also argued against the RCC that THEIR views were the ones exegetically sound and based sola-scriptura on the right interpretation of scripture.

in the posts you keep diligently ignoring - is the response to you point above.. and that is getting increasingly obvious to the reader.

Why use such tactics?

 

I don't see how you conduct a debate thread without actually dealing with the points IN the posts....

Just posting the obvious here ...

In Christ,

Bob

 

Interesting post 66 -

 

Facinating Post 68 -

In John 16 Christ said "I have many more things to tell you but you can not receive them now"

He also states that the Spirit is given as the "Spirit of truth" and He GUIDES us into ALL truth. The Spirit is as much the author of scripture as He is the one who guides us into all truth. We are relying on one and the same member of the trinity when we READ scripture and also pray to God the Holy Spirit to REVEAL truth to us.

It is not the case that ALL humanity is open to the SAME truth when they read Rom 2:11-13 -- some are down right opposed to what it says - while others embrace it.

There is no way to deny this.

Also your "most of us do not agree with you" argument is the same one the Jewish leaders had to use against the Apostles. It is not a form of Bible Exegesis. But be that as it may - this is WHY I often appeal to NON-SDA Bible commentators showing that EVEN THEY agree with key points being denied here by those who are either opposed to Christ's Sabbth or Lev 11 or some other portion of scripture.

John 16

12 ""I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
13 ""But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
14 ""He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you.
15 "" All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.

This is not the Calvinist spin "I will not LET you see truth for some strange reason" it is the much more obvious "I have MORE to tell you but YOU are not ready".



Quote:

That would be the disciples of John 16 who had ALREADY been sent out as evangelists in Matt 10.

So "yes" we are talking about Christians and we are speaking to the obvious point (for example) that while there ARE saved Christians in both the Lutheran and RC denominiation they STILL do not agree on all points and the RCC actuallly opposed truth violently in the dark ages.

NOT because God blinded them but because the NT church over time CHOSE error.

This is not a question of "SAVED vs not Saved" as I pointed out ...

 

Quote:
In the posts you are diligently ignoring the point is made that the CHRIST said that HIS view of the scripture is exegetically sound as compared to the TRADITIONS of the Pharisees.

Amazing empty claim - well done! The "whole point" of a debate thread is to SHOW that you have a point - simply claiming to have one while ignoring the inconvenient facts in thie posts to the contrary merely SHOWS that your argument has failed.

Your argument that Christ' model (which you condemn here on this thread) is NOT TO BE FOLLOWED by NT saints - REMAINS to be proven!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Quote:
In the posts you are diligently ignoring it is SHOWN that the REFORMERS also argued against the RCC that THEIR views were the ones exegetically sound and based sola-scriptura on the right interpretation of scripture.

Hard to believe that you will accept NEITHER the Reformers NOR the RCC members as having any NT saints among them!!

What about Apollo instructed by Priscilla??

is there ANYTHING you will not simply ignore?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Which is the very thing you condemn on this thread.

You make the RC argument "well you intepret one way - and I another" against anyone using the sola-scriptura model of reformers.

Is there any limit??

Is it your argument Luther was DENIED the Spirit of Truth promise of John 16.

OR do you deny that God the Holy Spirit "is from above"??

Is there any limit in your wild ranging positions on this topic?

In Christ,

Bob

 

You make these wild assertions while avoiding the inconvenient details IN the texts IN the posts --

The whole point in this kind of thread is to SHOW you have a point - simply making empty claim after empty assertion SHOWS nothing but a failed argument.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I guess I get to keep doing this since you keep ignoring the posts --

In the posts you are diligently ignoring the point is made that the CHRIST said that HIS view of the scripture is exegetically sound as compared to the TRADITIONS of the Pharisees.

In the posts you are diligently ignoring it is SHOWN that the REFORMERS also argued against the RCC that THEIR views were the ones exegetically sound and based sola-scriptura on the right interpretation of scripture.

in the posts you keep diligently ignoring - is the response to you point above.. and that is getting increasingly obvious to the reader.

Why use such tactics?

 

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Instead of avoiding this post -- address post 69 showing that you oppose the very methods used by the reformers. http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=940065&postcount=69

The same is shown in post 72 and 73 -- you simply ignore what you can not answer and then repeat some bogus argument nobody has MADE here!!
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...7&postcount=72

And I am guessing we can add
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...9&postcount=89

To the list of unnanswered posts...

Not to mention the example we have with Peter in the NT - REPOSTED here
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...&postcount=107

How in the world does that "SHOW" anything but the failure in your own position?

Just a thought.

 

actually stever,

you would never realize or acknolwdge this is one of those verses that talk about how you are responsible for the light that is given you but I'll put it here anyway:

Mt:11:21:"Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shall be brought done to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee."


each city was responsible for the amount of light they had been given.

I just accidentally came across that a minute ago while doing something else..

 

ugh! Not even going to bother with this anymore from this point on.


Claudia