R.W. Beaulieu: A prophet among us?

[NightEternal]

Meet Ronald William Beaulieu, self-proclaimed messenger successor to EGW:

http://members.tripod.com/omega77/AAAEXP.htm

Crackpot or the real deal? What say ye?

 

[djconklin]

He is at least very uninformed and hasn't researched or thought things through. In his page about the origin of the Bible he says:

"I repeat: to preserve His word, JEHOVAH the LORD God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel must needs ensure that accurate copies of the inspired masters be made; else His promise that 'the Word of the Lord abideth forever' was meaningless - if not false."

We know for study that this isn't the case. The best resource I can think of off hand is Metzger's book on the transmission of the NT in which he details the kinds of errors that can creep in unwittingly when anyone copies a text. I can also add that had read somewhere that you cannot copy more than 20 lines of text without making a mistake.

 

[mva1985]

He is at least very uninformed and hasn't researched or thought things through. In his page about the origin of the Bible he says:

"I repeat: to preserve His word, JEHOVAH the LORD God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel must needs ensure that accurate copies of the inspired masters be made; else His promise that 'the Word of the Lord abideth forever' was meaningless - if not false."

We know for study that this isn't the case. The best resource I can think of off hand is Metzger's book on the transmission of the NT in which he details the kinds of errors that can creep in unwittingly when anyone copies a text. I can also add that had read somewhere that you cannot copy more than 20 lines of text without making a mistake.

DJ,

I think that the scribes had very strict practices & policies when handling the Scriptures. So I feel we have a fairly accurate Scripture handed down to us today.

Just an opinion.

 

[sentipente]

Meet Ronald William Beaulieu, self-proclaimed messenger successor to EGW:

http://members.tripod.com/omega77/AAAEXP.htm

Crackpot or the real deal? What say ye?

[bible]Hebrews 1:1-2[/bible]Prophets are all in the past. Why claim to be something that is no more?

 

[mva1985]

[bible]Hebrews 1:1-2[/bible]Prophets are all in the past. Why claim to be something that is no more?

So are you saying that there are no more prophets after this Heb.1 text?

 

[sentipente]

So are you saying that there are no more prophets after this Heb.1 text?

Is it that difficult to understand that this is what that text is saying? We can throw it out if we wish and keep our opinions but we will have to stop calling ourselves "people of the book."

 

[NightEternal]

I can see where this is heading...

 

[sentipente]

I can see where this is heading...

Like a beacon in the night sky.

 

[mva1985]

Is it that difficult to understand that this is what that text is saying? We can throw it out if we wish and keep our opinions but we will have to stop calling ourselves "people of the book."

It is a question as to whether you believe if there were prophets after this text was written.

By the way you haven't answered.

 

[mva1985]

If the two of you can see where this is going then just post an answer. I would appreciate it.

Thanks

 

[sentipente]

It is a question as to whether you believe if there were prophets after this text was written.

By the way you haven't answered.

When I asked if it is that difficult to see that this is what the text is saying I meant that this is what the text is saying. In times past He spoke through the prophets. In these days He speaks through His son. The text does not say that there will be no more prophets but it does strongly suggest that God would not be speaking through them after His Son arriived. I really don't care for jobs that have been made redundant.

 

[mva1985]

When I asked if it is that difficult to see that this is what the text is saying I meant that this is what the text is saying. In times past He spoke through the prophets. In these days He speaks through His son. The text does not say that there will be no more prophets but it does strongly suggest that God would not be speaking through them after His Son arriived. I really don't care for jobs that have been made redundant.

So do you believe that EGW was a messenger sent from the Lord?

 

[sentipente]

So do you believe that EGW was a messenger sent from the Lord?

I know of only one messenger who was sent from the Lord. Every other messenger is the result of a union between a man and a woman. But I do believe that EGW was a messenger of the Creator. You'd be amazed at the great number of messengers He has commissioned.

 

[mva1985]

I know of only one messenger who was sent from the Lord. Every other messenger is the result of a union between a man and a woman. But I do believe that EGW was a messenger of the Creator. You'd be amazed at the great number of messengers He has commissioned.

Thanks for squirting the question.

 

[sentipente]

Thanks for squirting the question.

You mean to tell me you did not see the direct answer to your question in all those words? Don't disappoint me.

 

[djconklin]

I think that the scribes had very strict practices & policies when handling the Scriptures. So I feel we have a fairly accurate Scripture handed down to us today.

The key is your use of the words "fairly accurate." I agree with that but Beaulieu (sp?) wouldn't--he has to have it perfect with no errors.

 

[djconklin]

You mean to tell me you did not see the direct answer to your question in all those words? Don't disappoint me.

Clear to me.

 

[TrustAndObey]

There has been a serious outbreak of AlphaMale-itis on several threads here tonight.

The only cure is....the book of James.

 

[awesumtenor]

Meet Ronald William Beaulieu, self-proclaimed messenger successor to EGW:

http://members.tripod.com/omega77/AAAEXP.htm

Crackpot or the real deal? What say ye?

Crackpot; he not only thinks he has taken up EGW's mantle, he believes that his writings are scripture.

But I believe that there are now drugs that can cure that...

In His service,
Mr. J