Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: theAmbassador; CCWoody; xzins
Now, I'm willing to be civil in a discussion...

Your actions often speak louder than your words.

I merely said that Woody's argument was weak. I thought he could do better.

And, if I've learned anything here on these threads, it's that I'd much rather cast my lot with a bunch of pew-jumping holy rollers than (most of) the Calvinists that frequent these threads.

45 posted on 10/29/2002 1:55:57 PM PST by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Corin Stormhands; CCWoody; Jean Chauvin; RnMomof7; jude24; Wrigley; sola gracia; sheltonmac; ...
I merely said that Woody's argument was weak. I thought he could do better.

A Principle of Literal Bible Interpretation What you are really saying is that arguing that a doctrine should NEVER BE BASED ON ~ONE~ PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE, that is ~NOT~ established on at least 2 witnesses, is a ~WEAK~ argument. This is despite the fact that the "Principles of Literal Bible Interpretation" say that this is wrong and the Bible itself demands that a word be established on by 2 or 3 witnesses. And that argument you are calling weak.

Yet, the reason that all of you Premillennialists said that Woody's argument was weak is precisely because it is so sound and it absolutely makes an iron clad argument against Premillennialism. The Premillennialists is a hypocrite for BASEING A DOCTRINE ON ~ONE~ PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE when he tells us about the 1000 year reign of Christ on this earth before the new heavens and new earth.

If you dispute this, then take the Woody challenge: And, if I've learned anything here on these threads, it's that I'd much rather cast my lot with a bunch of pew-jumping holy rollers than (most of) the Calvinists that frequent these threads.

Fine with me!
49 posted on 10/29/2002 3:24:22 PM PST by theAmbassador
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: Corin Stormhands
I like pew-jumpers even though I've never seen one.

Charismatic doesn't bother me as long as the bible is correctly interpreted.

I think that Charismatics are among the few groups that are told by conservative Christianity that they must "practice correctly" or get out of Dodge. Why do we say that to Charismatics but not to Baptists?
60 posted on 10/29/2002 5:35:07 PM PST by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson