We Who? - time to end?

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>From the Computer (being sensitive to those less fortunates that have
Macs :oP) of Bro Berger:

>If you can offer some substantial reasons anyone is wrong, yes you are
>correct. Otherwise, you are just slamming anyone. The anyone in this
>instance showed full Christian character and never attacked back for
many
>months, until he finally had enough. It nearly brings out a message of
>bitterness.


Brother I need some clarification here....Last night in pray this
thought came to me...what is "substantial reasons"? You see I feel that
I/we have been trying to do this, not so much to show that someone is
wrong but to show that I am right (something each of us should do if we
are challanged as it is part of "studing to shew thyself approved"!).
This may seem like a fine line, but it is a line that was placed before
me and has tried to discredit many of the beliefs I have with
generalizations and philosophical ideals. This is not what I would call
"substancial reasons". Philosophy is man's' wisdom as is modern thinking
and while they might offer some credence to an arguement they (IMHO)
should never be the brunt of the proof when one deals with matter of the
Lord. So back to my question, since my multiple posts in the past that
lay out scripture for matter of discussion in these matters is not
"substantial" I would like you tell me a reference that would be
"substantial" so that we can get this discussion going in a positive
manner. You see the fact is that we seem to have two sides that hold to
different value the referances that they have been quoting, we need to
simplify the system or resolution will not occur!

>
>I guess not one of Bro Starcher's critics has yet to show how that- a
person
>who has experienced what we define as salvation, yet attends another
church
>is lost. I read to the contrary that in the last days, all flesh will
>receive this like gifts. I have seen many demoninal members who were
Holy
>Ghost filled, who were yet hungry to know more of what God wanted for
them.


In the same thought pattern I guess I need to see some "substantial"
proof of this claim that just because you are not UPC (let's drop the
generalities and talk specifics) you are not saved.  Just like my claim
to know the stance of the moderators is not provable (I will not talk
about private emails in the list) so I retracted the statement and
apologized for it. So if a statement about me is not substantiated it
should be retracted.

There have been many claims about one side, to say that there was never
"an attack back" bothers me as I have seen the entire thread as an
intellectual attack of generalities and word smithing on the fundamental
views that I hold, that in fact were nothing but opinion with no proof
other than the words of the accuser. Now when I try to get into an
intelligent, Christian dialogue I was denied for many reasons: "holding
to my fundamental biases", "showing my protestant influence", and others
of the same fold. So when I try to dig deeper in to his ideas and get
good proof of what he says...he refuses to get into an intellectual
discussion for personal reasons. I really have the feeling that the list
is not a forum for open discussion but a platform to spread his new
ideas.

Lord Bless;
Bill Clifton

PS: This post is the thoughts of the author and the author alone, no
assumption is made to speak for any other person, living or dead,
Apostolic, or not...just me  :o|


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Get Your Own Free Pop or Web Based Email and a
10MB Web Site for FREE at: http://www.nettaxi.com!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=