[geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Nevile

  • From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 14:02:40 -0700 (PDT)

1.Nevile, there is no contradiction in any of those verse.. what in the world 
are you talking about?...... A exclusion of a fact or event in one verse or a 
different set of recorded events does not constitute a contradiction in the 
other..that is ridiculous! You can?t have a contradiction via an omission.
2. There is no point in Phillips or your remarks regarding scripture except 
that you do not accept what they say when you are shown them.. As of yet no one 
has provided an authority for doing That.. The Burden of proof is on you not Me 
or Ja.. Making assertions based on your interpretation proves nothing except 
that none of you have authority to do so? All you are doing is asserting and 
offering excuse for why you don?t have to believe or accept scripture, that is 
all you are doing. You have yet to establish what authority you base your 
arguments on. Until you can do that You have no Point and no case at all. If it 
is not in Scripture then you must establish the authority of your 
Interpretation.

3.If scripture is the authority for your argument then the burden of poof is on 
you to demonstrate how I have not handled scripture improperly?claiming 
ignorance or deferring to a book or somebody else may make their point but not 
yours.1. I have already demonstrated your arguments as circular, self-defeating 
and without any foundation on which to rest. Every one of your supposed 
supporting points underline and highlight those points??.. which are mine not 
yours.

1 Peter 4: 11. If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; ?What is 
that??

1 Chorinthians 4:6. And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred 
to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think 
of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one 
against another. 7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast 
thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou 
glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

1 Timothy 4:6. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou 
shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith 
and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained.

2 Timothy 2: 14. Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before 
the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting 
of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth 
not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 16. But shun profane and 
vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

Romans 15:4. For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our 
learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have 
hope.

1 John 5:13. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of 
the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may 
believe on the name of the Son of God.

Galtians 1:6. I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you 
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7. Which is not another; but 
there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8. But 
though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that 
which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9. As we said before, so 
say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have 
received, let him be accursed.

Ephesians 3:8. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace 
given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of 
Christ; 9. And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which 
from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by 
Jesus Christ: 10. To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in 
heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, 11. 
According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: 
12. In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Matthew 7:7. Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, 
and it shall be opened unto you: 8. For every one that asketh receiveth; and he 
that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

1 Peter 3:15. But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to 
give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you 
with meekness and fear:

4. If these cannot be understood then, "writing them so that we would believe" 
and "putting people in remembrance of them", and giving instructions for how to 
use them is meaningless!.. If they can be understood then they are absolute in 
definition and in their meaning, external of what anyone thinks about them or 
interprets. If you obey them instead of asserting excuses for willful ignorance 
and why you do not have to search, study and obey then discussions on 
interpretation would not yield so much division. The division is intrinsic to 
the wisdom of man not in the "difficulty" or application of scripture.

5. Your logic and use of scripture is identical to Neville namely self or 
someone?s interpretations of scripture. You might as well join Neville and crew 
because your arguments in fact are weaker than his. However, in both cases your 
arguments and his use scripture the same way, inconsistent and or outright 
ignore it, and attempt to justify by this by asserting that scripture is either 
arbitrary in the first place or that your privet interpretation is correct one. 

6. Finally what part of these scripture do you not understand?

Romans 6:17. But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have 
obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 

Jude 1:3. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common 
salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye 
should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the 
saints?.

1 Timothy 4: 1. Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times 
some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and 
doctrines of devils; 2. Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience 
seared with a hot iron;??What faith? ?.What doctrine?

2 Thessalonians 2:15. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions 
which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. ??..What epistle 
what traditions?

Jesus not peter is Identified in scripture as the rock.. you have yet to show 
how I have mishandled scripture


"Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
My responces are in red
 
Philip has stated the point well regarding Bible interpretation, so I don't see 
a reason to add to that . His position is the same as any atheist or liberal 
christian. That the bible is too contradictory. The atheist uses that to say it 
isn't true. The Liberal uses it to excuse whatever he already wants to believe. 
(pardon me for using the "liberal" word but I needed some descriptor for what I 
was saying.) Yes, it is true that someting difficult may need research like 
reading other verses or looking up definitions for words in original languages 
or perhaps some othe rmethod. But Phillips point of trying to determine who 
"they" were is moot. It is an arguement that does not contradict the point he 
is trying to contradict. If the verse does not say who they are than it doesn't 
say. If some other scripture elsewhere in the bible describes the same event 
and says who they are, than it do es. What is so difficult about that? How does 
that violate reading the scriptures as plainly 
 as
 possibly?
 
Sorry, ja, but you are mistaken on many fronts here. It is certainly not a 
"moot" point, it is an extremely important point. Who exactly was Yeshuwa' 
asking his Father to forgive? You have to have knowledge of the meaning of the 
true scriptures, reasoning power and Holy Spirit in order to answer this 
essential question.
 
You also need to address the issue of why you have the "Bible" on your 
bookshelf in the form that it is in. Who decided which books to include and 
which to exclude, particularly from the so-called "New Testament"? You will 
find that, as Nick and Philip will rightly tell you, it was the Roman Catholic 
Church. Their argument would then be, if the Catholic church was commissioned 
to decide which books should be there, it seems reasonable to presume that it 
would also be given the wisdom to interpret the scriptures contained therein. 
This aspect of Nick's argument is completely bona fide, in my opinion, and you 
would need to seriously address it.
 
You also need to ask yourself why scripture appears contradictory, which it 
most certainly does. Do not call me either an atheist or a "liberal," but 
rather examine the evidence for yourself. As a simple example, consider the 
following:
 
(Mat 27:38 KJV)  Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the 
right hand, and another on the left.
(Mat 27:39 KJV)  And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads,
(Mat 27:40 KJV)  And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it 
in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the 
cross.
(Mat 27:41 KJV)  Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes 
and elders, said,
(Mat 27:42 KJV)  He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of 
Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
(Mat 27:43 KJV)  He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have 
him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
(Mat 27:44 KJV)  The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same 
in his teeth.
 
as opposed to:
 
(Luke 23:39 KJV)  And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, 
saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
(Luke 23:40 KJV)  But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou 
fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
(Luke 23:41 KJV)  And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our 
deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
(Luke 23:42 KJV)  And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest 
into thy kingdom.
(Luke 23:43 KJV)  And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt 
thou be with me in paradise.
 
As for your, "It is an arguement that does not contradict the point he is 
trying to contradict," what can I (or anyone else) say?!
 
Neville.




---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail 

Other related posts:

  • » [geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Nevile