Henry Neufeld's blog on Inerrancy

[JohnT]

You sadly are not objective, and have a tract record of not understanding information and drawing unwarranted conclusion. To learn from you how to be systematic would be like taking flying lessons from a barnyard pig.

Wow! I am impressed by your scholarship, as seen above. Instead of dealing with an issue, you are content making insulting remarks. That is very adult-like, you know.

Still, you did not tell me what you in particular believe, other than the fact that you do not agree with Anselm. For the third time, what exactly do you believe?

Let me also ask you also if you believe in Adamic sin.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Wow! I am impressed by your scholarship, as seen above. Instead of dealing with an issue, you are content making insulting remarks. That is very adult-like, you know.

We are done!

 

[JohnT]

We are done!

We were done the second you posted rude remarks.

You can dish it out, but when someone returns your rudeness, you run.

Only if you wish to act more adult-like can this thread continue.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

If only you could read what you write, without your imposed blinders one, how much different your perspective would be.

 

[JohnT]

If only you could read what you write, without your imposed blinders one, how much different your perspective would be.

If only you could post without being rude.

Be careful, or else a mod may spank you for being rude and inflammatory

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I am not really worried about by spanked for being rude sense I have been far less rude then you have been. But the final straw with you was because you had the opportunity to deal with issues but you constantly refused. When you said the following about my article on what is wrong with the Substitutionary atonement instead of cutting and pasting quotes from my article I realized that you have not intention of being objective and have trouble with inserting your own ideas into what you read from other people.

You are correct, I did not read it entirely.

You quote SDA sources, and the pseudo book of Enoch as sources. Your chronology is way off 14 centuries until Anselm. He died in 1109. And you completely disregard the doctrine of imputed, Adamic sin.

You also use a contemporary song to "prove" an old concept???

Yeah, it is OK, but severely lacking. That is why I suggested that we begin by looking at the Bible says, first.
http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=42582361&postcount=19

You then followed that statement which had no accuracy at all with this:

OOPS! You don't believe in inerrancy, either! But you certainty cite portions of it out of contest, and ignore other clear sections of Scripture that I wrote to you about,

Hmmm, maybe you did not read the Bible references, Ya think? Or is the Bible inerrant only it supports what Ellen says what it says?

Your statements make it clear that you are not objective or systematic and that you draw unwarranted conclusions and cannot deal with the issues involved. So you can keep calling me rude, because I use a simile of learning (when pigs fly, which apparently you did not grasp) to fly from a pig. I am sure you think that I called you a pig, but that is normal for your method of interpretation which is not to deal with what is written but to insert your own meaning just as you did with the opening Adventist Perspective article where you merely focused upon Ellen white.

And now you simply continue to bait me by calling me rude. I am sure it is also an offense to you that I take the high ground on this also, but I can't continue with someone who acts the way you do.

Update: I have to add this because I was thinking what SDA sources did I cite in my article. So I checked it out and the only SDA sources quoted were in the Section where I argue that Jesus did not suffer the Second death.

Did Jesus Die The Second Death​

While it is a common concept in the substitutional theory of the atonement that Christ paid our debt or our penalty for sin, the Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) church has carried the idea even farther. As one of the SDA quarterlies recently said: "At the cross, Jesus died the "second death" (Rev. 20:14; 21:8)..." (Nov 26 2001 Adult Sabbath School Bible Study Guide).


Prominent in the SDA church is the concept that Christ died the second death, and God poured out His wrath on Christ on the cross. The book Seventh-day Adventists Believe..A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines (The Ministerial Association Review and Herald Pub. Ass. 1988) writes as follows on page 111:
"Christ's self-sacrificing is pleasing to God because this sacrificial offering took away the barrier between God and sinful man in that Christ fully bore God's wrath on man's sin. Through Christ, God's wrath is not turned into love but is turned away from man and borne by Himself." (the book is quoting from Hans K. LaRondell, Christ Our Salvation p. 26,27)

The section about Enoch that John mentioned was the appendix article Could the Scapegoat be Christ. Which also argues against the Ellen White and SDA postion that the scapegoat represents Satan.