Bart Goddard wrote:
> wrote:
>
> >> Indeed, apart from
> >> this perspective, the writing holds little meaning in terms of the
> >> stern warnings given for turning one's back on "having once been
> >> enlightened, and having tasted of the heavenly gift, and being
made
> >> partakers of the Holy Spirit" (Heb. 6:1-6).
> >>
> > CONTEXT!  Who is the writer speaking directly to?
>
> The fact that you're shouting proves that you know that
> both your logical and theological grounds are non-existant.
>
> Theologically, the Holy Spirit is the author of Scripture,
> and _all_ Scripture is given for _our_ learning.  Each verse
> of Scripture is written "directly to" the reader.
>
Dragging that red herring all over aren't we!

This is exactly why we have so many different "opinions" about what the
bible in general is teaching or what a particular passage is teaching.
You completely dismiss hermeneutical principles.  You and Brenda ought
to start some sort of mutual admiration society.  What you are
presenting is nothing short of pure mysticism.  It produces nothing
short of confusion.

Q.  Ever been to a charismatic church where "prophets" are allowed to
speak.  Most interesting.  What is interesting is that often they
contradict one another.  This is exactly what you are left with.  You
have no means to verify error.


> Trying to remove Scripture from the mouth of the Holy Spirit
> is not an argument, but "spin".  (And spin is more than lying;
> it is, rather, contempt for the truth.)
>
My hands are in the air.  How does anyone reply to such a response?
>
> > A poor argument, yet no worse than the one you are presenting
because
> > both disregard the context.
>
> There's context and then there's context.  If someone gets
> a deeper understanding of Scripture because he learns some
> more about what a shepherd's life is like, then swell.
>
> But you're using "context" as an excuse to separate yourself
> from Scripture:  If one narrows the "context" sufficiently,
> then no verse and no story and no lesson in Scripture can
> apply to anyone.  It makes Scripture useless.  (Which is,
> of course, what you're trying to do.)
>
Then you do exactly what I warn against, you do not make any allowance
for the distinction between interpretation and application.  And to
argue via extremism, any body can make anything look absurd.

Again, if we actually seek to understand what God is actually teaching
(you do agree that scripture is propositional truth?), then, like
reading any other book, context must be seen as foundational if truth
is to be gleaned.

BTW, you didn't prove any rebuttal to my argument.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/16/05 9:24:27 PM ---