On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:07:34 -0700 (PDT), Feather
<feather@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly:
>On May 9, 3:20 am, Pastor Dave
><ananias917_@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 6 May 2008 12:36:45 -0700 (PDT),
>> Feather <feat...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> spake thusly:
>>
>> >On May 5, 10:15 pm, Pastor Dave
>> ><ananias917_@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> >IF Jesus could appear to not only SAUL/PAUL,
>> >but also SPEAK to Ananias after His resurrection
>> >nd ascension, then why NOT to people today -
>> >as long as (as I stated) it's in ACCORD WITH
>> >WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE?
>>
>> 1) That would still be within the 1st century.
>>
>> 2) Ananias did not write Scripture.
>
>No, but Luke recorded Ananias' experience in
>the book of Acts.
Which happened in the 1st century and was not
recorded by Ananias. You're being stubborn,
because you don't want to hear it!
>> 3) People today, do not live back then,
>> before the close of the Scriptures.
>
>If the Scriptures are 'closed' then we have
> absolutely *nothing* to gain from their
>study or reading of them, if we follow this
>line to its seemingly implied conclusion.
And there it is!
"If the Bible is not all about us today,
then what good is it?"
By this logic, the prophecies can never be fulfilled,
since once they are, God's word is useless. And
yet He said that His word would stand forever.
If that's true, then "following this line to its
seemingly implied conclusion", the prophecies
can never be fulfilled.
But hey, you're right. If the Scriptures are closed,
then we have nothing to gain from reading them.
After all, of what use are things like salvation,
the Kingdom of God within us, which means
a real relation****p with God while on Earth,
eternal life with Christ in Heaven, etc..
Yea, not worth reading at all! I guess they're
only worth reading if the prophecies are all
about you today, which of course, means that
all of those generations before you that were
wrong, wasted their time reading the Bible,
because it wasn't all about them.
Oh but wait! That's right! They got to look
forward to your time, right?! But hey, there's
no vanity on your part, right?!
>> 4) If it is in accord with what we have today,
>> then it does not qualify under what is
>> being discussed here, which is about
>> people claiming that God is giving them
>> new revelations today.
>
>I agreed with you that there are no NEW revelations.
You keep saying this, but it's not what you're
really saying. Once again, the discussion was
and is about someone saying that not everything
that God has to say is found in the Bible and they
are claiming that God is giving the world a message
through them. And when they speak about events
today, they are seeking to add to what Scripture
has to say.
You cannot say that the Scriptures aren't closed
and say that no new revelations can be added.
That is a contradiction!
So how many books should we add to the Bible?
Let me guess... The book "It's all about me today"!
You have indeed said many times in agreement
to many people that the canon is closed and yet,
when you realize that it is ridiculous to assume
that it is all about us today, when the Scriptures
were closed in the 1st century, then, all of the
sudden, you claim that they aren't closed and
think that no one notices, because you're in
usenet! The ridiculousness of the Futurists
and the foolishness of what they post, as if
everyone has blinders on that make them see
only what the Futurist poster wants them to see,
never ceases to amaze me! <chuckle>
>> That the Bible isn't all there is.
>
>But you and I *both* know, the Bible *is*
>all there is for prophecy, instruction and
>HOW TO LIVE OUR LIVES in the present.
That cannot be true, since if the canon is closed,
the Bible is of no use.
You see, you think I don't know what you're doing.
But I do. You are trying to play a word game!
You lost this argument and so, as is typical in usenet,
you are trying to play a word game and pretend that
what you said, isn't what you were saying!
I.e., "Gee Dave, when I said that the Scriptures
aren't closed, I didn't mean that the canon
isn't closed!"
But that is exactly where you ended up and trying
to dance around it won't help you! You actually
trapped yourself and no, I'm not going to let you out!
You Futurists need to face up to the fact that when
you keep ending up in these self made traps, that
instead of trying to weasel out of your own words,
you should be thanking God that He has shown
you that something in your belief system doesn't
make sense! But instead, you Futurists would
rather place your doctrine above anything and
everything else, the truth be damned! (:
And why? Because your attitude is...
"If the Bible is not all about me today,
then it is a useless waste of paper!"
....and this is shown in your comments!
FEATHER: "If the Scriptures are 'closed' then
we have absolutely *nothing* to
gain from their study or reading
of them."
Like I said, I guess to you and the rest of
the Futurists, salvation, the Kingdom of God
within us and the security of eternal life with
Christ in Heaven, are of no gain at all to you!
And just forget about the resurrection that
we already have and focusing upward and
not horizontally!
"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things
which are above, where Christ sitteth on the
right hand of God." - Col 3:1
But wait, that's right! You Futurists do hypocritically
claim that you keep your focus vertical and not
horizontal. Except that is, when it comes time to
talk about eternity and then it's all about the horizontal,
or "there is nothing to gain from reading the Bible"! (:
>> You did say... "My point is that if Jesus spoke
>> to Paul on the Damascus Road, why wouldn't
>> He choose to speak to someone today?"
>
>Yes, I did. And why wouldn't He?
You're such a deceiver! You know damn well
we're talking about revelation being given and
you are trying to pretend, after being told twice
already, that this is just about Jesus saying hi
to someone!
>> Now I know that you also said, "as long as it's
>> in accord with Scripture", however, that does
>> not mean that you're denying new revelation!
>
>TELL me how I am NOT denying new revelation
>when I VERY clearly stated "THERE ARE NO
>NEW REVELATIONS."???
See above.
>> The fact is, that you knew that I was responding
>> to Lawrence's claim that he receives new revelation
>> today, that is not found in the Bible and so, when
>> you say, "why wouldn't He choose to speak to
>> someone today", then whether you think so
>> or not, you are defending what Lawrence said
>> is happening and in that context, all your other
>> words "as long as it's in accord with Scripture"
>> means that you are saying that new revelations
>> today may be in accord with the general
>> principles stated in Scripture.
>
>AGAIN: HOW did I KNOW you were responding
>to LAWRENCE's claim if I DID NOT READ what
>he said?
Because you saw it quoted and because I told you
twice! Unless you wish to claim that you have been
responding to my words without reading them?
--
The Last Days were in the first century:
"And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom
of heaven is AT HAND." - Matthew 3:2
|
