Pentecostals

[lilmissmontana]

seems appropriate ... from the above stickied link to the rules

House Rules-
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

 

[andreha]

and she looks like she's doing well very pretty smile ... that that comes in God's time, eh?

So true - He knows the perfect time indeed.

 

[BarryK]

Barry,

An interesting response you make at post #59.

First, you note that my post on experiencing the divine is actually blasphemy --- but it appears you are using Scripture to note my assertion is incorrect.

i have never accused you of blasphemey, i simply said thet by attributing divinity to what is carnal, is blaspheney, and i went out of my way to state that that i percieved that was not your intent

Thus, you advocate Scriptural confirmation. Thus, it appears you pick and chose when a person can base new truth on personal experience and when it must be based on Scripture.

i have never jettiosoned Scripture. I am interested in learning where you came about with that idea

You can note by personal experience when something is divine, but no one else can.

where have i stated that?

Second, this is not the first time you reference blasphemy in my disagreeing with you in posting. However, you use a straw man argument – I never attributed divinity to her, that is something you forced on my posting. Actually, the recipe is from the local supermarket, and I can assure everyone, that no employee there is divine. I merely recognized the recipe was divine by experience. Still, it appears as a device on your part to manufacture methods of making the accusation of blasphemy by someone who disagrees with you, and it serves as a way to ignore making a proper response to objections raised.

ok then, no employee ther is devine, your wife is not divine ( and again i in no way intend to disparge your beloved) but the carnal can no createt that which is divine, only divine can creat divine, and when we assign divinity to that which is carnal, what would you call it aside fronm blasphemey?

(unless you belive that carnal can indeed creat divinity)

Third – in post #24 you refuse to respond to a rebuttal I made, on the basis – “I have no interest in refuting or debating anybody here..”

yep, i have bee known to change my miond about a matter every now and then. have you ever experenced such a thing in your life?

But now you note you have posted a rebuttal – which relates to other matter.

what other matter might that be?

So you debate what you want when you think you can hack an answer together on something, but you note your lack of interest in debating, when you know you cannot hack an answer together.

would you please clairify what you mean by your use of the term "hack", it seems to me that this could constitute a flame, but i believe that is not you intention, so a clairifacation would be appreciated

You routinely ignore my responses to your positions,

which direct responsed did i ignore? please point them out to me and i will address them

but when I answer your rebuttal, which I actually did, you claim I ignored your rebuttal. Your rebuttal is not ignored on my part, but answered.

I have never claimed that you willfully ignored anything, here is what i said in post #59 of this thread:

this is one of the several points i made in my rebuttal of your post that you have for some reason chosen not to respond to. Was this non-response, by choice, or did you merely overlook it?

i merely asked a question, somehow you have decided to make the claim that I have ignored you. why is this so?

and yes, there were several points you missed, here are some of them again, from post # 50 of this thread:

Originally Posted by MPaul

Placing personal experience above the Word of God only leads to error --
​

the last time i checked Jesus Christ is my personal saviour, and he personaly hung on the cross for me, My salvation (Sozo) is a Personal experence, so if you want to follow out your own line of reason to its logical conclusion, my personal experence of salfation by the personal work of Christ Jesus in His personal act of obiedence to his persoanl Father is the start of error


Originally Posted by MPaul

unless a person has the qualifications of a prophet,
​

what are the qualification of being a Prophet?
as far as i know they are not listed anywhere in scripture, perhaps I am wrong, if I am give us the scriptural refference for these qualifacations


Originally Posted by MPaul

who can add to Scripture,
​

please provide the book, chapter and verse for this as well


Originally Posted by MPaul

which as I noted has not occurred for about 2,000 years.
​

actually 1675 is a more accurate number, that is when a councel of men, at Nicea, decided that God wrote a book and then rolled over and went to sleep


Originally Posted by MPaul

We come to know Christ because of the witness of the bible --
​

please be careful of your use of "we" here, you do not speak for all of us Christians. I, for one have not copme to know Christ Jesus by the witnessof the Bible, but by Witness of The Holy Spirit


Originally Posted by MPaul

our personal experiences are confirmed by the bible
​

true, but my God is not limited to doing only what He has allready done, He is not bound by predecent


Originally Posted by MPaul

By focusing on the bible, believers will have richer personal experiences with the one who wrote it.
​

by focusing on The One who wrote the Bible, believers will have a richer personal experence reading the Bible


Originally Posted by MPaul

But it is error to over ride the bible and shape it according to our personal experiences.
​

just as it is error to overide the Bible and shape it according to some theologians personal experences


Originally Posted by MPaul

Using personal experience to determine what the bible is saying only leads to new religions,
​

ignoreing what God is saying and doping right now in your personal experence only leads to RELIGION
What Father wants is RELATIONSHIP


Originally Posted by MPaul

and then, usually there is only one person from a community of such believers who can say how it is done...
​

indeed, who was it that taught you this?



Originally Posted by MPaul

such as the Pope. So even in the Catholic church your position would have difficulties.
​

I am not to concerned about my standing with our Catholic breatherns, or any other mre men as well, but thanks for your concern

However, your rebuttal was again like your accusing me of blasphemy – merely trying to go down a bunny trail, rather than dealing with actual objections made. And however, it may be you simply do not actually read my responses, which would seem to be one possible valid explanation of your posting in making response to me.

i am sorry if you percieve it this way, my intent was a point by point response to you post. Would you please point out whch points in this post, and the above quoted post I am ignoreing, not dealing with , and taking down the bunny trail? Which direct responses do you percieve that i have either not read or ignored?
please be specific

Fourth, you note the Father is not bound by precedent, which actually would mean he could use barbecued chicken for something new in revelation, which is exactly the type of thing your position would lead to.... but to get around admitting such an example represents how totally flawed your position is, you manufacture a way to call it blasphemy.

and again, as i explained in post #59 of this thread, and several times in this post, ONLY DIVINE CAN CREATE DIVINE You attributed creation of divinity to you beloved ( whom by no means i wish to disparage) thus attribuiting divinity to her, which amounts to blasphemey. again, please explain to me how attribuiting divinity to the carnal is not blasphemey

Fifth, you began posting in this thread at post #5, asserting that there are people who only claim to be “a seeker of truth,” (an obvious reference to me, by the title I use, and my post of #4),.but who merely seek to conform truth to predisposed thought, (an indirect but obvious device to make reference to my being deficient as a believer).

those are some serious accusations of slander, please either back them up with irrefutable evidence of the thoughts and intents of my heart, or rescind the accusation

In post #13, you note that while I am a Protestant who follows man made rules and regulations, you are a Christian who follows the Holy Spirit.

as a matter of fact you confirmed that you are indeed a protestant, and you do indeed follow those man mande rules of homoletics, hueruemtics, etc, etc, and you have never accused me of not being a Christian who follows the Holy Spirit, so i am glad to see that we are in agreement here brother.

It is obvious it was your objective in posting in this thread to degrade me personally – to lower me in status as a Christian.

two ponts heer, first, this is another serious accusation, please either provide irrefutable evidence of the thoughs and intents of my heart, or rescind the accusation. second, how can i or any other mere man lower you status in The Kingdom of God, and your relationship with the Son?

That's OK -- I welcome the opportunity to defend what I am, and I acknowledge that rebuking is a standard and essential part of the Christian faith. We all should be ready to defend our beliefs and the integrity of how we follow and serve Christ

rebuking is essential? that impies that the need for rebuking is essential, that implies that error is eseential.
rebuking is unfortunatly necessary, but not essential.

where is the alledged rebuking that you reffer to here?

 

[MPaul]

OK, Barry. You win. Inasmuch as you accuse me of rule violation, you know very well I have no choice but to delete all the content of all my posts in the thread. I have deleted everything I have posted in the thread. I would appreciate anyone who has quoted my posts to delete those quotes.

Take care now.

 

[DanuckInUSA]

Wow. That was intense.

 

[BarryK]

OK, Barry. You win..

I win? what did i win? im not here to win anything. i have no idea where you got the notion that i am out to win somthing here. would you please let me know where that came from. perhaps we may look to james and john, argung about who will sit where, ( and sending their mother to sek favor on thier behalf no less)and Christ rebuked them for even consdering such an idea

Inasmuch as you accuse me of rule violation, you know very well I have no choice but to delete all the content of all my posts in the thread. I have deleted everything I have posted in the thread. I would appreciate anyone who has quoted my posts to delete those quotes.

Take care now .

where did i accuse you of rule violation?,
iis it possible that you decided that the folowing is somehow an accusation

Originally Posted by MPaul

So you debate what you want when you think you can hack an answer together on something, but you note your lack of interest in debating, when you know you cannot hack an answer together.
​

would you please clairify what you mean by your use of the term "hack", it seems to me that this could constitute a flame, but i believe that is not you intention, so a clairifacation would be appreciated

If this is what you percieve as an accusation, i encourage you not to percieve it that way

 

[MPaul]

those are some serious accusations of slander, please either back them up with irrefutable evidence of the thoughts and intents of my heart, or rescind the accusation

Barry, no matter what I post, you respond to it as saying something different than what it says, and when I correct your response on what I have said, you respond as if the correction was never made. I now do not believe you simply are not reading my responses, but that this is just one more method of ignoring the objections I make.

The above quote by you is an accusation of rule violation, and other statements you combine with it appear as piling on.

PS -- I have rescinded, and therefore, I request you honor my prior request of deleting all your quotes of my posting, as any post is a matter of interpretation under review. I will then return and delete my last two posts.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

Closing this for a cool down....
maybe a clean up.

​