Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136858 | ||
How is that illogical to the discussion of 2 Cor 4:4? (You're side-stepping my sincere question.) You said you found the rebuttal illogical and not rational. Please provide detailed examples, as this is what fosters healthy Bible discussion and understanding. Your reply has nothing to do with "the meat" of the discussion around 2 Cor 4:4 contained in the 'Clarke's rebuttal' post. Certainly you must have specifics - unless you didn't read all the responses and Bible references in your own copy of the Bible? How else can one prove who 'the god of this world' is unless they use the Bible as the authority? I trust that is what people on this forum want - scriptural support of any purported understanding. I'm sure this would be a worthwhile scriptural discussion, if you would only provide some detailed examples of what you found specifically to be illogical and irrational in the rebuttal dealing specifically with Clarke's commentary on why he feels God - and not Satan - is "the god of this world". What specifically in the rebuttal was illogical? Thank you. |
||||||
2 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | srbaegon | 136896 | ||
Hello pcdarcan, I gave you an example. Personal attacks on Clarke side-steps the issue he brings forth. Steve |
||||||
3 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136954 | ||
Did you read the whole response or did you get turned off, not by a personal attack, but more of an observation about his choice of terms "rooted prejudice"? - I explained logically why this didn't apply to all those in this forum as everyone has supplied "scriptural evidences" NOT based on "rooted prejudice". In my book, that's just a "set-up" phrase for his adherents. May I ask, 'What do you read that was so disagreeable or personal?' To set matters right, the Clarke rebuttal response is not at all a personal attack on Clarke himself, which is what you make it sound like in your post. It's a detailed crafted response to each assertion of Clarke, using scripture (the Bible) to explain the disagreement. And, I ask again, what part of the response to Clarke's commentary on 2 Cor 4:4 did you find illogical? You did read it all, yes/no? And, reference all the cited scritures? - after all, this is a Bible Study Forum and specific Bible verses are very relevant to any Bible discussion. |
||||||
4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | srbaegon | 136993 | ||
I will address your postings directly rather than through this thread. Steve |
||||||
5 | 2 Cor 4:4 | 2 Cor 4:4 | pcdarcan | 136996 | ||
Good idea... this will help others to follow the logic of the threads leading out of the Clarke rebuttal post, thus making it easier to look up the scriptural references... thank you Steve. | ||||||