Graybeard Outdoors banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
williamlayton said:
Bob is correct and Whinney is whinneing--he understood.
Blessings

You start a thread with the subject line of "Re: ? ? ? ?" and ask others to not only guess what you might mean but tell you where it's going? Never mind where "this thing" is going Billy, we don't even know where you've been (outer space?). And no one yet knows what you mean - do you? That's not whining, that's ROFL! :p ;D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Well, at least this thing has not been stopped/moved.
Again---where is this thing going ? I understand what Dee was trying to do but I don't think he understood what he is trying to do.
I LIKE the forum but it seems that it is falling apart.
Blessings
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
Well, not that you'll understand William, I have listened for years to others saying they would like to have a place to discuss scripture in the Bible, where "church dogma", cult doctrine, and "literature" other than the Bible have no voice.
A place where participants rely solely on the Bible, and their understanding of it. A place to compare Biblical interpretation, without interference, or reference, from outside the Bible teachings, or writings.

To have such a place RULES HAVE TO BE ENFORCED as some will turn it into what they say they don't want.

Now! Your "career" as my critic is totally understood by myself, as is your inability to reference scripture to your endless opinions hyphenated with "vagueness", and so, your lack of "understanding my intent" is of no surprise to myself. This thread of yours is proof of both your critical attitude of the most minute detail, and lack of comprehension. Your method of starting the thread in the manner you did however, was to draw attention to what you see as "failure" on my part. Again, nothing new from you.

Now, I must admit, that on establishing this "refuge of Biblical Study", the response has been less than overwhelming. My own reasoning is that many "prefer a free for all", anything goes, cults, denomonations, insults, outrageous conclusions, and in your case, "continual opinion backed by "Biblical vagueness".

In other words. Even though folks "claim" they want such a place, they really prefer to argue, and in some cases, don't know, or understand enough of said Bible to discuss in the first place, yourself being an example of the latter.

Now, since this thread "for the moment" hasn't in "Williams words" been "stopped or moved", does anyone have anthing of a "Biblical nature" to inject into this discussion started for no other reason than "critical strife"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,172 Posts
Of course this isn't a non-denominational Bible study thread but where should a thread titled "Re: ? ? ? ?" be moved to?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Dee
I do understand what your saying.
The big disagreement we have often had is that folks pull one sentence out of s scripture and build a mountain on top of it when the sentence is completely out of context with what was being discussed in the rest of the scripture surrounding it.
The scriptures tell a story and that story can be told without quoting it directly.
The story of salvation and how it obtained can be said in many ways--it is not legal jargon that reaches people. It is the simple story told and the work of the Holy Spirit that brings it to life.
Blessings
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
This thread is lookin like "religious discussion maybe?" sorry William, but that's where you'll find it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
I figgered as much but have no disagreement Dee.
I have been looking at what I said and can find nothing that is hard to understand.
I'll let the comment stand without further commentary.
Blessings
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23,845 Posts
As I said William, the Bible Study will pass or fail given participation, or lack there of. If one looks at the threads or posts in it, they will notice no interference on thoughts, or interpretations from me. One will also notice, that there is no "outside influence" by denomonational dogma", "cultism", or "literature reference" from some author.
I recently deleted a post because the poster, whose post was a valid thought to the thread, inadvertently referenced "Strong's" concordance. I agreed with his thought, and Strong, but if I edit his post, I must edit everyone's. On the Bible Study, we must "self discipline ourselves", and "edit ourselves" to keep it clean from any outside influence other than our own interpretations. Yes, we read others writings, and are many times influenced in our understanding of scripture, myself included, but we state our views of that scripture, in our own words.

However, as I said, it may as a forum "make it, or not". To discuss, one must be willing to "dig into the Bible".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,405 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Then it is OK to use Strong's as long as you don't give reference to it ?
I am not disagreeing with how you handle it--I am wondering how anyone cannot admit that they don't have original thoughts.
As I have said continually the scriptures report and different words can be used to pass on what is being reported.
Much of my thought is original but I also find that I was not the first one to have this thought. That is to say that I am not so influenced by what others think as I am with the agreement they have with mine.
Blessings
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Top