Subject: What about so-called revelation knowledg |
Bible Note: "would take a verse out of context, a verse whose only function was to add shock value, and quote it to smear another person" That is NOT what I said.....I said "The problem I was illuding to would be more the matter of not listening to a teaching in it's entirety and only picking and choosing certain statements that rub the 'orthodox theology' language the wrong way." This disappoints me a lot Ed. Do you see anywhere in this statement where I said SCRIPTURE or VERSE? No, I said 'statements'....statements that are 'theological terms'doctrinal conclusions' NOT SCRIPTURE. "If your allegation was true don't you think the one who used the quote would have his socks sued off? If nothing less do you not think the speaker which already has a public forum would address the issue and set the record straight if it weren’t true?" No, Brother Copeland has made it clear that his teaching is readily available for anyone to read, study and compare. He believes it is the Holy Spirit's ministry to reveal truth to open hearts. No, he would never sue, especially not another brother. This, too, is a a credit to his ministry. "Graceful I’m afraid you have refuse to be convinced and that is a very dangerous position to be in. Unless you want to see the truth you can never be shown it." I feel the same way about you....But I must make one small comment....SCRIPTURALLY noone has made a viable argument. How much of this thread was scriptural discussion and how much was it 'theological commentaries' and opinions? Read this thread from beginning to end...Especially winstonchurchill's post. He stated it well. Noone who is an objective thinker and who relys on the Holy Spirit for truth would be convinced by such a debate. God bless |