The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Thread 162
TNS Archives

[dignan3]

you have freepmail

[Invincibly Ignorant]

I like to think I entertain opposing ideas ... before I smote them with my superior firepower. :-)

That's what Kordell Stewart keeps tellin' us.

[al_c]

Never ceases to amaze me how little regard the RCC and it's followers have for the word of God.

Care to expand on this, Havoc?

[Havoc]

Intellectual dishonesty would involve something like making up bogus quotations from non-existant sources, or refuing to apply reasonable logic to given data, or refusing to accept commonly accepted data. Anti-intellectualism is to simply refuse to entertain any information which might cause you to re-think your position. To rely solely upon one's own understanding of "Truth" and to be afraid to subject it to reason at all.

The pharisees applied logic and reason and had the OT laws all screwed up - God fired 'em for it. Yet here you sit tellin us by inferrance that their method is the preferred method. If you were arguing "preferred if you want to get fired" I'd say you're right. But the word says trust in the Lord and lean not on your *own underdstanding.* Ultimately, rather than admit to a leading of the Holy Spirit which you have no ability to discern, anyone who doesn't agree with your lofty intellectualism based on reason is by definition employing their own reason only. If you can't discern and can't understand scripture because you don't have the leading, you can't know if your leaders are doing what they're supposed to be doing. They can bald faced lie to you and you'd be clueless - which point ya'll readily have demonstrated in the last 10 threads.

[SoothingDave]

Although I think with the advent of the printing press and the increase in literacy, something similar would have been inevitable, even had the church been free of corruption.

Very astute, angelo. And very sadly so. We see the enormous benefits of the individualism released by the Enlightenment but few see the downside, how it has separated us. How it has destroyed the oneness of community we once had. The barbarians invade every generation and it is very tempting to dismiss everything that came before us as bunk.

SD

[SoothingDave]

That's what Kordell Stewart keeps tellin' us.

Check the standings, baby! Who's that riding high in the AFC Central? Them Stillers, baby! :-)

SD

[hopefulpilgrim]

3 Beloved, being very eager to write to you of our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.

Hmmm. I see your point. You think that a faith "delivered once" to the saints couldn't possibly develop in undertanding.

Yes, the Christian Faith was given in its entirety by the time Jude wrote. The Good News had come: the Messiah had arrived and accomplished the work which would translate those who received Him from the kingdom of darkness into HIS kingdom. The disciples of Jesus Christ had learned all that was needed from the Head of the Body, the Church, and they were spreading His word, making disciples, baptizing, and teaching them to observe all that the Head commanded them.

It isn't that this faith "delivered once" to the saints couldn't possibly develop in understanding. No, our understanding, our comprehension grows ever brighter as we walk with God. "The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn that shines brighter and brighter until the full day" (Prov. 4:18) The body of truth given by God does not grow or change over time; it needs no embellishment; it is perfect AS IS. What develops is our understanding of it (and obedience to it).

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Check the standings, baby! Who's that riding high in the AFC Central? Them Stillers, baby! :-)

Ya mind if I keep checkin' them?

[dadwags]

#821
havoc, i understand you to define necromancy as a sort of two-way communication between living and dead .
However, praying to Saints, asking them to intercede with God on our behalf is ONE WAY communication . If our prayers are answered, it is by God, not the intercessor .

[SoothingDave]

Ya mind if I keep checkin' them?

It would be expected. Hey I was a surprised as anyone else on Monday morning when I saw it,I had to mention the division leading Steelers sometime this week. :-)

SD

[Invincibly Ignorant]

It would be expected. Hey I was a surprised as anyone else on Monday morning when I saw it,I had to mention the division leading Steelers sometime this week. :-)

Well. Ya already did once. But I suppose two aint bad. I've only mentioned the Broncos once and it wasn't positive.

[hopefulpilgrim]

I haven't seen anyone on this thread claiming inerrancy! Congratulations, you've won Sentence of the Day!

OK, back up your "stupid sentence of the day" choice with evidence to the contrary. Cough it up---------8^ P

[SoothingDave]

It isn't that this faith "delivered once" to the saints couldn't possibly develop in understanding. No, our understanding, our comprehension grows ever brighter as we walk with God. "The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn that shines brighter and brighter until the full day" (Prov. 4:18) The body of truth given by God does not grow or change over time; it needs no embellishment; it is perfect AS IS. What develops is our understanding of it (and obedience to it).

Then it seems that we agree that our understanding can grow. Now let's discuss this "needs no embellishment."

If the body of truth does not change, but our understanding does, are we forbidden to try to capture this better understanding? To write it down, classify, clarify, define it? If something is true by revelation or true by deduction isn't it still true? If we name a concept of this understanding, even if the name isn't in Scripture, isn't it still true?

If it needs no embelishment, why do we type these words? Why do we make textbooks for our children? Why do we print study guides and concordances?

SD

[dadwags]

#836
"...over 50 per cent support abortion ..."
Steven, you may be right, but I sincerely hope and pray that you are mistaken in your statistics .

[SoothingDave]

OK, back up your "stupid sentence of the day" choice with evidence to the contrary.

hopefulpilgrim, meet Havoc; Havoc, hopefulpilgrim.

Havoc here speaks the Word of God.

SD

[al_c]

I've only mentioned the Broncos once and it wasn't positive.

I'll just stay quiet on this topic ...

[malakhi]

Was looking for something in an old thread, and came across your name. Just thought I'd flag you and say hello. How are you doing?

[the808bass]

Mornin' bass. Any progress on the employment front?

I got a couple leads. Nothin more, nothin less.

[malakhi]

Ya mind if I keep checkin' them?

Are you suggesting there might be some "development"? ;o)

[the808bass]

The passage is Genesis 1:1-4.

I thought that I could at least get the first word right. I was right. Hooray. After that I was lost... :( So much for two semesters of Hebrew.