07-10-2005, 12:27 AM
You and your text have already been refuted Dave, and you need to accept it. I know your trying to destroy the source, but the source is scripture here.
What Paul and I focused in on was scripture. I took ploughman's examples because they were focused in on scripture sections that agreed within the NT.
Just like his test here:
Completely valid discernment of scripture. It rightly divides.
We could have used your method instead, and tried to look for implications or those "possibilities" that so many others get caught up in, but that is easily pronounced as heretical, and does not give credence to The Lord in the process, it is selfish instead, and very untruthful to the audience.
I know it's hard to realize how the very scripture that you have adhered to all these years has had a mistake. It must be quite the eyeopener also for you to realize that all the articles and such that you have promoted over this syriac text as being original, are now false.
I know if I was in your position, I would be trying to do the same thing that you are currently doing, change the topic and work that until I can break those who challenge me down, look for ways to refute the source and create doubt on the challengers part. Refuse to accept defeat at all costs, etc, etc, etc.
As I said, the source is scripture, and you, yourself, have not a leg to stand on, unless you wish to lie to yourself here, which I fully expect you to shortly.
And that is it, the only thing that is against you is scripture Dave. The very fact that we even have a quote that aligns with scripture to make the current scripture section show it's "out-of-place-ness" if you will, is remarkable, but a treasure for those looking.
What Paul and I focused in on was scripture. I took ploughman's examples because they were focused in on scripture sections that agreed within the NT.
Just like his test here:
Quote:2. The Test of Frequency
Is the phrase "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" used elsewhere in the scripture? Not once.
Did Jesus use the phrase "in my name" on other occasions? Yes, 17 times to be exact, examples are found in Matt. 18:20; Mark 9:37,39 and 41; Mark 16:17; John 14:14 and 26; John 15:16 and 16:23.
Completely valid discernment of scripture. It rightly divides.
We could have used your method instead, and tried to look for implications or those "possibilities" that so many others get caught up in, but that is easily pronounced as heretical, and does not give credence to The Lord in the process, it is selfish instead, and very untruthful to the audience.
I know it's hard to realize how the very scripture that you have adhered to all these years has had a mistake. It must be quite the eyeopener also for you to realize that all the articles and such that you have promoted over this syriac text as being original, are now false.
I know if I was in your position, I would be trying to do the same thing that you are currently doing, change the topic and work that until I can break those who challenge me down, look for ways to refute the source and create doubt on the challengers part. Refuse to accept defeat at all costs, etc, etc, etc.
As I said, the source is scripture, and you, yourself, have not a leg to stand on, unless you wish to lie to yourself here, which I fully expect you to shortly.
And that is it, the only thing that is against you is scripture Dave. The very fact that we even have a quote that aligns with scripture to make the current scripture section show it's "out-of-place-ness" if you will, is remarkable, but a treasure for those looking.