Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | EdB | 94502 | ||
Graceful While it wasn't me that filed an abuse report I can see where the abuse could be justified. You have repeatedly come onto a Christian Forum and supported Word of Faith teaching that has universally been declared cultic and false teaching. There is a difference between disagreeing and supporting doctrine that has been declared cultic. When faced with overwhelming evidence that the position you support is non scriptural you repeatedly ignore it and keep voicing it. In this last thread your supporting Copeland's teaching that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is an “EMANCIPATED LITTLE WORMY SPIRIT” that was taken to hell by Satan and tortured there for 3 days. You try to justify what he said by saying the worm is the sin of the world but there is no support for this either in what Copeland said or Biblically. I can clearly see how someone reading your support for calling our Lord a Worm could be considered justification for an abuse report and now that I have reread the thread will say I’m glad someone did get the thread restricted. Both Radioman2 and I have repeatedly posted rebuttals providing scripture showing you where this teaching is heresy and you ignore and post a three part lesson on Hades that contained the points we had already discussed and did not support your position Biblically at all. EdB |
||||||
2 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | gracefull | 94594 | ||
"When faced with overwhelming evidence that the position you support is non scriptural you repeatedly ignore it and keep voicing it." Then you said...Both Radioman2 and I have repeatedly posted rebuttals providing scripture showing you where this teaching is heresy and you ignore and post a three part lesson on Hades that contained the points we had already discussed and did not support your position Biblically at all." ACTUALLY as soon as I did post a scriptural apologetic discussing my position, after repeated requests from you I might add, the thread was restricted and you refused to discuss it. Let's look at the event just prior to the thread being restricted... When I left you and began answering other's who had questions or responses you pursued me... Actually, the foundation calls it 'stalking'. You posted this to my post to someone else... So why are you going out in this direction or are you trying to deflect the standing questions?? You have been asked to take the posted comments of Copeland's and biblically show them to be correct. Or you are asked to admit Copleand has taught heresy. EdB Then you posted this to a post to someone else... graceful Then you posted this to a post I directed to someon else... Once again it does not say Jesus was tortured by Satan EdB To which I responded with the three part apologetic which seemed to be a good basis for an intellegent Biblical discussion...What happened? At which time I posted the apologetics for your comments…(In response to your ‘stalking’ which IS actually discouraged by the Foundation). Now Ed, was it my insistence to defend WOF that prompted the apologetic?..No. It was your persistent challenge to produce some scriptural basis for the teaching of Jesus suffering in Hell. You don’t see a problem with this? No one sees a problem with this? Because of the hardness of your hearts. You demand a scriptural discussion and then refuse to actually have a scriptural discussion. Matthew 11:16 But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, 17 And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented. I submit that regardless of whether my position is correct or not, you refuse to hear. Ed, your heart is hardened and that makes you unteachable and bitter. God bless |
||||||
3 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | EdB | 94611 | ||
Graceful One I never stopped nor refused to discuss this issue with you either before or after the thread in question became restricted. Let us speak in truth. What you posted in no way supported your position, either scripturally or otherwise, that Jesus was tormented in Hell by Satan, or to secure our salvation Jesus had to go to Hell, or that anything other than the cross was necessary for our salvation. Issues that you brought up and both Radioman2, John the Reformer, DarcyA, myself and many others took exception to and asked for you to provide scripture support for. Furthermore to each of your three part posts I posted the standing question. That question is, where does it say anywhere in what you posted that Satan tortured Jesus in Hell, or that Jesus was a emancipated worm dragged into hell? Or that Jesus had to go to hell to secure our salvation? This is the theology you have been supporting. Your idea of Biblical discussion is seen in your explanation of the use of the word WORM to refer to our Lord. Your argument as I understand it was based on this, since sin is referred to being scarlet in the Bible and since worms are scarlet as defined in a dictionary we have to assume the use of the word worm really means sin. So calling Jesus a WORM really is saying Jesus carried the sins of the world. Deep stuff and so theologically sound. You did provide psalm 22:6 to prove your point. However when we pointed out there was no connection to sin or the premise you were making in Psalm 22:6 you just ignored the evidence and danced on by. As to your accusation of stalking, since the discussion was contained in the same thread it isn't like I chased you anywhere. However any of us have a duty and obligation to bring correction where correction is needed. Anytime a person wants to add to scripture they certainly can't expect to do so unopposed. However you have a history of making comments that sound really good except they contain just a slight error. When that error is exposed you simply clam up and wait your chance to expound it again. Anyone doing a search on your name and reading through the threads can see this. As for my insistence for scriptural basis to something you said, no I don't see a problem with it. If you make a statement you should either be prepared to back it up scriptually or state it as only your opinion. If you state it as your opinion and someone then shows you that your opinion is wrong you should be gracious enough to admit you were wrong. What you call the hardness of my heard is the refusal to accept unscriptural diatribe as factual theology. The men and women you quote invent things that tickle the ear and insure the listener will tune in next week so they can work their pocket books to raise more cash to feed their flesh. Their false teachings have and are exposed by many good and Godly men and organizations. Instead of you accepting the proof you claim foul, refusing even to read the documentation to see it the accusations are correct or not. Whose heart is harden here? You submit whether your position is correct or not that I refuse to listen. That is just not true again anyone doing a search on your name and reading the threads will see that in many instances I have agreed with you, not challenged you, or even on occasion thanked you for pointing something out. The only time I have ever challenged you is when you taint your post with some false doctrine. And each and every time I do challenge you I refer you not only to scripture but try to get you to at least examine the other side of the coin. I have repeatedly listed books and resources that could help you find the truth and you have refused to even consider them. In fact you declared them false without even have looked at them yourself. Some of these resources have been written by dedicated and committed Christians that are known for their sound Biblical positions. Who is closed minded, biased and hard hearted. Incidentally I have read nearly every book by the WOF teachers you hold to, while you have refused to read any written by authors that have an opposing point of view. Can you honestly say your looking for the truth when you won’t even consider reading something that would reveal the lies you exposed to? If you have any WOF teaching you want to discuss from a Biblical perspective and are willing to do it without adding to or subtracting from scripture or making some outlandish connection such as you did with the “worm and sin” there are many of us on this forum that would love to discuss them with you. However if all you want is to be able to post WOF heresies on this forum you can expect to be confronted with sound Biblical teaching. EdB |
||||||
4 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | Radioman2 | 94627 | ||
EdB: "Strange how first-class, super-Christians, who would have us believe they are tapping into divine revelation, can do all things in Christ, except successfully defend their damnable doctrines of demons." (Paul R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher (http://www.pfo.org/preacher.htm)) Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
5 | What constitutes 'abuse' on the forum? | Acts 17:11 | EdB | 94679 | ||
Radioman2 E-mail me you e-mail address I think I have an old one for you that isn't working. I have sent you a lot of mail lately that you haven't responded to. EdB |
||||||