Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Would you explain your action? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 6010 | ||
EdB, Truly can I sense your concern about the voting matter involving the person who calls himself orthodoxy. While you may be right in your assessment that it was, in your view, unwarranted -- I come not to address the merits or demerits of this question -- I submit that the the voting process is, and of right ought to be, by secret ballot, a procedure we hold dear in the United States. Were it otherwise and each voter were to be compelled to "sign his name" to his vote, it would create an atmosphere that no one, I believe, wants to see on this forum. Here's the scenario: A casts an unfavorable vote on B. B then does the same for A. C, D, and E think A is being unfair to B, so they gang up against A and give him more bad votes. Before you know it, we have a voting war raging. Lockman has chosen, and I think wisely, to set up the rating system by secret ballot. I do not know who the voter (or voters) was in this instance and would in no wise publish it on this forum even if I did, because it would do no good and merely result in ill-will and dissention, neither of which we covet in any manner. I believe the ratng system that Lockman has installed can be good provided it is used fairly and judiciously. No one should vote out of spite, vindictiveness, or in anger at another forum user. Neither should one cast an unfavorabe vote merely on the basis that what was said was not necessarily wrong, but it did not parallel the voter's personal view of the issue. But one should not hesitate to cast an unfavorable ballot to a posting that is clearly meant to incite divisiveness, promote and abet false doctrine, or in any manner seek to blaspheme God or His holy word. EdB, I hold you in esteem as a Christian man of honor; I respect your viewpoint on this issue and empathize with you in your frustration. But nonetheless I think that calling for the voter (or voters) to come forth and "fess up" would not serve the best interests of the voter, orthodoxy, or this forum.....The issue at hand is in regard to unfavorable votes, but please let me say a word about favorable votes also. They have a place too. I think I've voted only about three times. Two were favorable and the other was unfavorable on a posting that I saw as an outrageous attempt to incite divisiveness. But the two favorable votes I've cast -- and there should have been more -- were one way to express my thanks for a particularly well-prepared, accurate and lucid answer or note. Perhaps a favorable vote may be better in some instances than a pat-on-the-back posted note. And lastly, EdB, I quite agree with you, everyone carries some denominational bias -- everyone, at any rate, who professes to belong to any church. And isn't it remarkable the number of Christians who are willing to admit, in all humility of course, that theirs is, after all, the right view? --Hank | ||||||
2 | Should they be red flagged? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6022 | ||
Hank I don't really care who did it, although it appears it was done vindictively, in that they have flagged all of Orthodoxy's updates. What I care about is the closed ignorant mind, such a mind is ripe for deception. Revelation is a book with many views of it’s interpretation, of which there are four major, Historicist, Preterist, Futurist, and Spiritual. Most Futurist are dispensational and pre millennial, and either pre trib or post trib, I fit into that category and I have never really appreciated the Preterist view. In the Bible study on revelation I had asked a question of who would go into the millennium? Disappointingly all the responses I received were the standard futurist answer that are easily rebuffed. Orthodoxy made a Amillennial observation which I was trying to understand when someone that has no appreciation for knowledge tried to disrupt the study with the use of the red flags. By challenging that person to identify themselves I was trying to open their eyes that just maybe they don’t have all the answers to Biblical questions? That there are people of equal intelligence who are honestly on both sides of many issues. I consider John MacArthur and Jack Hayford as two brilliant minds yet they stand at opposite ends of the spectrum as far as Bible interpretation on issues such as gifts of the spirit, once saved always saved, women in ministry and the list goes on. Is either a heretic? No. Is either unbiblical? No. Is either bad? No. Then look at MacArthur and RC Sproul both look at Revelation differently is one a heretic? No. Is either unbiblical? No. Is either bad? No. I believe in the case of these three men they have all have made a honest attempt to answer questions that doesn’t seem to have one answer. Should they be red flagged? |
||||||
3 | Should they be red flagged? | Bible general Archive 1 | wist ye not | 6027 | ||
It might be worth ya'll's while to read Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John by Frederick J. Murphy. It takes Revelation chapter by chapter, verse by verse. Yours in Christ Jesus, Wist ye not | ||||||