"Chris Bell" <cbell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:OYtVj.37$IK1.15@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chuck Stamford wrote:
>> "**Rowland Croucher**" <rccroucher@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> message news:48223b55$0$30466$afc38c87@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>>Chuck Stamford wrote:
>>><>
>>>
>>>>Given those two statements, and taking them as making literally true
>>>>statements, unless you can find Billy Graham saying he believes all
come
>>>>to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, what you've got here isn't
really
>>>>all that strong a case for him being a universalist like Rowland is;
>>>
>>>Where have I said categorically that I'm a universalist?
>>
>>
>> Where have you categorically ever said that you are anything? It takes
>> integrity to make a categorical statement of one's beliefs, integrity
to
>> say, this is what I believe, and then stand and defend it against its
>> challengers,
>
> Nonsense. Anyone can parrot off a statement of beliefs, without actually
> believing a word of it. Integrity is the living out of those beliefs,
even
> while not necessarily believing them.
Integrity is acting on beliefs you don't have??? Have you gone 'round the
bend, Chris?
Besides, who said anything about "parroting" a statement of beliefs. I
said
it takes integrity to make one's TRUE beliefs KNOWN, and then defend them
against all comers.
>
>>
>> No, Rowland, you've never "categorically" stated you are a
universalist.
>> You've just taken every op****tunity you ever had to either argue for
that
>> belief yourself, or provide article after article by others who either
>> do, or express sympathy for that belief. That makes you worse than a
>> universalist, Rowland, for a universalist is "either warm or cold"
(they
>> TAKE A STAND), and you are neither.
>>
> See above. Rowland takes many "stands" as you call them, and I would
never
> call him either warm or cold. He is definitely in the "hot" category!
Easy to say, Chris. Give me an example of Rowland making a firm, clear
expression of a belief he has, and then justifying it against its
challengers.
I can cite you example after example where he has simply thrown a panoply
of
differing beliefs at people who were truly seeking guidance in their
search
for truth. Is that your idea of what a minister of the Gospel is supposed
to do?
>
>
>>
>> Chuck Stamford
>>
>>
>
> Chris
|
