Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18089 | ||
Ed: I think that there are very few seekers that frequent this virtual establishment. There is not going to be a consensus of opinion, no matter what. I have even been called an arrogant know-it-all here for holding to such radical ideas as the idea that God is uncreated and the sufficiency of Scripture to reveal God to humanity and justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. I think you misunderstood the rest of my post. I was actually agreeing with you that a "neutral summation" is impossible. I also am not keen on "agreeing to disagree," as you yourself can personally attest. There does come a time when a debate is exhausted, but is one person's annoyance the basis for terminating discussion? I hold that this forum is not primarily evangelical in nature, but exists primarioly to spur one another on...to challenge and edify fellow believers. What I was saying is that the inability to convince one another of our opinion should not be a deterrent to presenting ones view and (here's the key:) SUPPORTING IT WITH SCRIPTURE. If I had a dime for every time a person cried "foul" or attacked my motives or character when I asked a simple rebuttal question based on a Scripture passage, I could finance my own Bible translation! --Joe! |
||||||
2 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18274 | ||
Dear Reformer Joe and EdB, Thanks for your thoughts on these issues as well. If I understand correctly, you both agree with the second idea, that we should be more commited to staying focused on the topic of the original question in a thread. It also seems that you agree that we should be more selective in responding to "primary" questions. I completely agree with your ideas about how when we get to far away from the scripture itself, we move into very dangerous waters. The one disagreement that I picked up on was the idea of ending threads with a summary statement. I'm glad that you also see the value in this EdB, and would like to provoke a couple thoughts for you Reformer Joe. You mention that it is impossible to come to consensus when we have such different ideas about many subjects. However, let me give you an example of how it is possible. A recent thread asked whether one could lose their salvation. Those who agree mainly with Reformed theology said no, and those who agree mainly with the Arminian theology said yes. However, in the midst of all that there was a common idea held by both sides, and that was to not risk it. One poster said it best when they said, "This 'debate' is not about initial salvation it is about living after salvation. It comes down to a debate on what I can and can not do and still remain saved. All I'm saying is that is not how a Christian should approach salvation, A Christian should shoot for the best and let grace cover everything else." Therefore, if I was writing a consensus statement of that thread, I would focus on two things. The first would be the ideas that almost all of the posts agreed with (whether I agree with it or not). The second would be how that topic could be applied to our lives. Then as a final note, I would just mention any significant minority opinions. This would be in my opinion a fair, relatively unbiased (as much as possible), and most of all extremely helpful way to end a thread. The final point that I would like you to think about is that although you do not think there are many "seekers" who visit our forum, couldn't there be another explanation. Perhaps there are actually a large number of these visitors, who come, but because of the way that they observe us responding to people they decide to not post, or even leave completely. |
||||||