[George]

Originally Posted by ericwgreene

Hey George,



We will have to agree to disagree on the "context" issue. I know what my KJV says and I stand by it, so you must be wrong.

Concerning Mr. Ruckman, Chette777 mentioned something negative about him. I would encourage you to get with him about spreading rumors against Mr. Ruckman.

Just as Mr. Ruckman guides many of you, I choose other teachers whom I believe are better Bible teachers.

I hope that helps resolve any confusion.

Thank you for the welcome to the board!!!

ericwgreene,

A perfect "sophistical" answer: I demonstrated from scripture the "context" - you "preferred" to ignored the context and privately interpreted the verse to support a preconceived conviction, and then added to the Holy words of God to suit your own purposes.

I was dealing with what you said - not with what brother Chette said. You can try to "misdirect" (another device used by "sophists") my criticism, but you criticized a fellow brother in Christ and that was the issue I was dealing with - which you artfully chose to ignore.

If you read my Post - I not only never said that brother Peter Ruckman was my "guide", I made it perfectly clear (for anyone with a minimum of reading comprehension) that I rely solely on the Holy Spirit as my guide when it comes to spiritual understanding. I don't rely on any man (living or dead) to "guide" me through the Bible.

And so we are still left with the fact that in your first three "Posts" on this Forum, you as a "newcomer" - took the only scripture you cited (in all three of your posts) out of context; slyly "intimated" that we all are "ignorant"; have "preconceived assumptions"; that we have embraced "error"; have the "wrong interpretations"; and are full of "pride" and "arrogance"; and have clearly demonstrated by the rest of your Posts since your initial posts, that you have a "preference" for which ever Bible suits your purposes for the moment and have a preference for dead Calvinists (and possibly some that are alive) privately interpreting the Holy Scriptures for you.

So the charges still stand, although you "skillfully" tried to deflect them, and make them of no importance, and ignored 90% of the rest of my comments. Nothing has changed. You have come here to stir up trouble and to "argue" with whoever will engage you, and at some point when you find out that you are unable to persuade us to your "preferences", you will silently fold your tent and slip away into the darkness from which you came.

I don't debate Humanists or Sophists - there is "no profit" in it!

2 Timothy 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by Luke

The Evidence Bible -

I owned one, so I can testify that this is actually what is written in it as the commentary for Matthew 7:21-23

"These are perhaps the most frightening verses in the Bible. Vast multitudes of professing Christians fit into the category spoken of here. They call Jesus 'Lord,' but they practice lawlessness. They profess faith in Jesus, but have no regard for the divine law. They tell 'fibs' or 'white' lies, take things that belong to others, have a roaming eye for the opposite sex, etc. They are liars, thieves, and adulterers at heart, who will be cast from the gates of heaven into the jaws of hell."

Basically, in order for Jesus to know you and not cast you into hell, you have to be sinlessly perfect.

What any Christian is doing being judged at the judgment of the nations I have no idea, but Comfort doesn't rightly divide.

Having said that, there are literally HUNDREDS of REALLY GOOD notes in the evidence Bible, but stuff like this just makes it a waste and is poison amongst the good stuff.

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

Originally Posted by Luke

Our dear brother Stephen is a mennonite and loves God dearly, and while he has had heated discussion with the forum over certain issues, he has done it in a manner of grace and love that is uncommon amongst many Christians.

You're way to kind. I've been a royal pain in the rear! George, and Chette are witness to that. I have a lot to learn. I just don't always see it that way, lol. This certainly is a good place to do it.

Peace and Love,
Stephen

Originally Posted by Luke

Is there room(time wise, or theologically) for the Great Commission?

Or any point, since all the elect will be saved...

Actually, I teach folks at my church to how to do evangelism... The funny thing is that all of the non-Calvinists I know are pretty much apathetic about evangelism while claiming Calvinists don't evangelize. Whereas many of the Calvinists I know are much stronger on evangelism.

I find that most non-Calvinists only read books about Calvinism by other non-Calvinists. I think it would be helpful if people read books about Calvinists written be Calvinists. It might give them a greater appreciation for Calvinism.

Originally Posted by George

ericwgreene,

A perfect "sophistical" answer: I demonstrated from scripture the "context" - you "preferred" to ignored the context and privately interpreted the verse to support a preconceived conviction, and then added to the Holy words of God to suit your own purposes.

I was dealing with what you said - not with what brother Chette said. You can try to "misdirect" (another device used by "sophists") my criticism, but you criticized a fellow brother in Christ and that was the issue I was dealing with - which you artfully chose to ignore.

If you read my Post - I not only never said that brother Peter Ruckman was my "guide", I made it perfectly clear (for anyone with a minimum of reading comprehension) that I rely solely on the Holy Spirit as my guide when it comes to spiritual understanding. I don't rely on any man (living or dead) to "guide" me through the Bible.

And so we are still left with the fact that in your first three "Posts" on this Forum, you as a "newcomer" - took the only scripture you cited (in all three of your posts) out of context; slyly "intimated" that we all are "ignorant"; have "preconceived assumptions"; that we have embraced "error"; have the "wrong interpretations"; and are full of "pride" and "arrogance"; and have clearly demonstrated by the rest of your Posts since your initial posts, that you have a "preference" for which ever Bible suits your purposes for the moment and have a preference for dead Calvinists (and possibly some that are alive) privately interpreting the Holy Scriptures for you.

So the charges still stand, although you "skillfully" tried to deflect them, and make them of no importance, and ignored 90% of the rest of my comments. Nothing has changed. You have come here to stir up trouble and to "argue" with whoever will engage you, and at some point when you find out that you are unable to persuade us to your "preferences", you will silently fold your tent and slip away into the darkness from which you came.

I don't debate Humanists or Sophists - there is "no profit" in it!

2 Timothy 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

So you have placed yourself as prosecutor and judge... I think it is clear who your final authority is... YOURSELF. Violation of the 1st and 2nd Commandment.

Reformed Baptist is an Oxymoron. I'm having a hard time making sense of the rest of these statements. This is quite an amalgam of "many different perspectives". I call it ecumenism, or compromise.

How is it an oxymoron? How is it compromise? Just because someone disagrees with you does not make it compromise. Compromise is a buzzward like Obama's "change". It is empty of meaning unless clearly explained. How have I compromised?

[Debau]

Originally Posted by ericwgreene

How is it an oxymoron? How is it compromise? Just because someone disagrees with you does not make it compromise. Compromise is a buzzward like Obama's "change". It is empty of meaning unless clearly explained. How have I compromised?

Claiming any Baptist distinctives while holding the tenets of Reformed Theology in light of history's accounts of persecution of Baptists by the Reformers-Calvinists, and theological disparities is for lack of better(worse) words, an oxymoron-compromise. You could put hypocrite in there also. Kind of like professing Christianity, and voting for "change"-Obama.

Compromise a "buzzword"??? Only if you're not clear on your convictions.

e.g., quotes by ericwgreene

"I know what my KJV says and I stand by it"

"Personally, I prefer the ESV."

"I myself am a Reformed -Baptist"

"my convictions have changed"

"I choose to reference the works of many different theological perspectives to deepen both my own convictions but also to understand the perspective of others."

A review of true history will reveal to you that Baptists were largely reformed at the outset. Only at the end of the 19th century did they really begin to change. By and large - non-reformed Baptists either become liberal (Liberty University) or legalistic (IFB movement).

Secondly, compromise is having convictions but ignoring them to be accepted by others. Changing a conviction is not compromise. Only those who have never learned have never had a change of heart/mind on any matter. Truly, all people rejected Christ before receiving Him. Therefore all of us must be compromisers if the definition of compromise is change of conviction.

[peopleoftheway]

Originally Posted by ericwgreene

So you have placed yourself as prosecutor and judge... I think it is clear who your final authority is... YOURSELF. Violation of the 1st and 2nd Commandment.

I think you will find he used HOLY SCRIPTURE! as final authority and Judge.
you have Judged a brother by "yourself" and not by scripture.

Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
Brother George admonished with scripture, he did not JUDGE of himself, but through ALMIGHTY GOD'S written word.
Your posts on this forum have been the very underlined, join a forum, post contention, then leave.
Romans 14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
You straight out judged a brother of the two most important commandments without any scripture!

Originally Posted by ericwgreene

I am not here to be a jerk. I would like to share some things I have come across in my own pilgrimage. I am sure I will not be here for a long time, but as I am passing through I appreciate the hospitality.

Thats wonderful that you can share things from your own pilgrimige, but please use the "search" feature on the forum. But what you are sharing has been raised in many posts on this forum, and I for one am tired of the contention it brings.

You asked me in a previous post what my understanding of "lordship salvation" was, my understanding is this.
Lordship salvation, is the teaching that a sinner must forsake their sins to be saved
Your site follows the "way of the master" teaching of Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron the following is a statement from Ray Comforts site.

Do you see God’s great love for you? Do you see your need for His forgiveness? Do what He commands and “Repent…that your sins may be wiped out and times of refreshing may come from the Lord.” (Acts 3:19) You must turn away from sin and turn to God. Desire to have NOTHING to do with sin, and surrender your life to the One who can save you. Jesus died to set you free, and then he rose from death to be your Lord. Jesus said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” If you will confess and forsake your sins (repent) and trust in Jesus Christ as your Savior and Lord, God will forgive you and you’ll pass from death to life.

If you are not sure how to pray, read and make it your prayer.

What does it mean to "put your faith in Jesus Christ?" It means to personally trust in Jesus the same way you’d trust in a parachute if you had to jump 25,000 feet out of an airplane. You wouldn’t just "believe" in the parachute; you would put it on! In the same way, the Bible says, "Put on the Lord Jesus Christ..." and you will be saved. There are millions of people who "believe" Jesus exists . . . but they have not put on the Savior—there’s a BIG difference. And the difference will be obvious when you “jump” through the door of death.

Today, with all your heart—turn away from sin, and surrender your life to Jesus Christ. Please don’t put it off till later. You may die today and then it will be too late. You may not yet have all the answers to your questions, but better to put on the parachute first and then ask questions, then to pass through the door unprepared, grasping for the parachute when it’s too late. You can pray something like this—"Dear God, today I turn from all my sins (name them), and I put my trust in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior. Please forgive me, and grant me your gift of everlasting life. Amen." There is nothing magic about these words—it is the attitude of your heart that God cares about.

Source: http://www.livingwaters.com/good/022.shtml

Do you sin? Did you forsake your sins to be saved? Do you live a sinless life?
On the same webpage Ray Comfort calls salvation the "free gift of eternal life" yet his words add works to that "free Gift"


Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Your agenda here is strife and contention, its obvious from your posts. In case you didn't realise, this forum is for KJB Believers! why even bother posting on such a site if you don't hold the KJB as the inerrant word of God?

The problem with following the teaching of Ray Comfort is, in most things he is spot on regarding scripture, but when it comes to salvation and eternal salvation , he is way of the mark.
I will agree with you that we do, of course need pastors, evangelists, teachers
Ephesians 4:11,12 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
BUT notice that the Apostle Paul says straight afterward

Ephesians 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
I personally don't take much to do with "celebrity" Christians, never have done, I concentrate on the Bible and my instruction from the Holy Spirit of God, however, I do take on board the instruction of learned brothers, who have made themselves of NO reputation

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:


If you wish to follow Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, that is your business, but please do not come onto this forum and propogate their teaching. This forum consists of a bunch of sinners from all walks of life and all areas of God's Glorious earth and we are all just trying to get by as best we can through our Saviour's Grace and written word until our LORD comes for us or calls us home.

Ecclesiastes 10:1 Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour.

[George]

SOPHISTRY & CASUISTRY

{Dictionary Definition - Underlines by G.A.}

Aloha to all on the Forum,

If you will – please read the following definitions and see if they don’t apply to certain people who have joined this Forum over the past few months:


Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
soph·ist·ry - noun, plural -ries.

1. a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
2. a false argument; sophism.


American Heritage Dictionary
soph·is·try - n. pl. soph·is·tries

1. Plausible but fallacious argumentation.
2. A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument.

WordNet
sophistry – noun

a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone [syn: sophism]


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Sophistry

Soph"ist*ry\, n. [OE. sophistrie, OF. sophisterie.]
1. The art or process of reasoning; logic. [Obs.]
2. The practice of a sophist; fallacious reasoning; reasoning sound in appearance only.

The juggle of sophistry consists, for the most part, in using a word in one sense in the premise, and in another sense in the conclusion. --Coleridge.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
cas·u·ist·ry – noun, plural -ries.

1. specious, deceptive, or oversubtle reasoning, esp. in questions of morality; fallacious or dishonest application of general principles; sophistry.

2. the application of general ethical principles to particular cases of conscience or conduct.


American Heritage Dictionary
ca·su·ist·ry
n. pl. ca·su·ist·ries

1. Specious or excessively subtle reasoning intended to rationalize or mislead.
2. The determination of right and wrong in questions of conduct or conscience by analyzing cases that illustrate general ethical rules.

WordNet
casuistry - noun

1. argumentation that is specious or excessively subtle and intended to be misleading
2. moral philosophy based on the application of general ethical principles to resolve moral dilemmas


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Casuistry

Cas"u*ist*ry\, a. 1. The science or doctrine of dealing with cases of conscience, of resolving questions of right or wrong in conduct, or determining the lawfulness or unlawfulness of what a man may do by rules and principles drawn from the Scriptures, from the laws of society or the church, or from equity and natural reason; the application of general moral rules to particular cases.

The consideration of these nice and puzzling question in the science of ethics has given rise, in modern times, to a particular department of it, distinguished by the title of casuistry. --Stewart.

Casuistry in the science of cases (i.e., oblique deflections from the general rule). --De Quincey.

2. Sophistical, equivocal, or false reasoning or teaching in regard to duties, obligations, and morals.


Our “friend” (I use the word “loosely”) ericwgreene fits the above description perfectly, and that is why I called him a “Sophist”. I try not to use words carelessly or make accusations lightly, BUT, there comes a time to “call a spade a spade” and let the cards fall where they may.

People, like ericw, do not come to this Forum to “edify” or to “learn” – they come to debate and argue (as evidenced by the number of Posts they post per day). Our “friend” ericw has an astounding 14+ posts per day! It is a sad and tragic fact of life that the U.S.A. has become a nation of Sophists (due to the government school system & media), which simply means that practically everyone is their own FINAL AUTHORITY in all matters.

After dealing with Sophists and Casuists for 50 years, I have discovered that there is NO “cure” for Sophistry & Casuistry, and there is NO “changing” a Sophist! You CANNOT win an argument with a Sophist, and unless God intervenes they will remain that way their entire lives.

Once I find out a man (or woman) is a Sophist I cease dealing with them (there is NO PROFIT in endless debate or arguments) and once they find out that I refuse to engage them, they move on seeking their next “victim” to mislead and deceive.

A SOPHIST: {Dictionary Definition}

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
soph·ist - noun

1. often initial capital letter! Greek History.

a. any of a class of professional teachers in ancient Greece who gave instruction in various fields, as in general culture, rhetoric, politics, or disputation.

b. a person belonging to this class at a later period who, while professing to teach skill in reasoning, concerned himself with ingenuity and speciouseffectiveness rather than soundness of argument.

2. a person who reasons adroitly and speciously rather than soundly.

3. a philosopher


American Heritage Dictionary
soph·ist – n.

1. 1. One skilled in elaborate and devious argumentation.
   2. A scholar or thinker.
2. Sophist Any of a group of professional fifth-century B.C. Greek philosophers and teachers who speculated on theology, metaphysics, and the sciences, and who were later characterized by Plato as superficial manipulators of rhetoric and dialectic.
3. 
   [Middle English sophiste, from Latin sophista, from Greek sophistēs, from sophizesthai, to become wise, from sophos, clever.]

Online Etymology Dictionary
sophist

1542, earlier sophister (c.1380), from L. sophista, sophistes, from Gk. sophistes, from sophizesthai "to become wise or learned," from sophos "wise, clever," of unknown origin. Gk. sophistes came to mean "one who gives intellectual instruction for pay," and, contrasted with "philosopher," it became a term of contempt. Ancient sophists were famous for their clever, specious arguments.


WordNet
sophist

1. any of a group of Greek philosophers and teachers in the 5th century BC who speculated on a wide range of subjects

2. someone whose reasoning is subtle and often specious [syn: casuist]

A CASUIST: {Dictionary Definition}

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
cas·u·ist – noun

1. an oversubtle or disingenuous reasoner, esp. in questions of morality.
2. a person who studies and resolves moral problems of judgment or conduct arising in specific situations.


American Heritage Dictionary
ca·su·ist – n.

A person who is expert in or given to casuistry.


Online Etymology Dictionary
casuist
1609, "one who studies and resolves cases of conscience," from Fr. casuiste, from L. casus (see case (1)). Often in a sinister or contemptuous

"Casuistry ... destroys, by distinctions and exceptions, all morality, and effaces the essential difference between right and wrong." [Bolingbroke, 1736]

WordNet
casuist - noun

someone whose reasoning is subtle and often specious


Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
Casuist

Cas"u*ist\, n. [L. casus fall, case; cf. F. casuiste. See Casual.]

One who is skilled in, or given to, casuistry.

The judgment of any casuist or learned divine concerning the state of a man's soul, is not sufficient to give him confidence. --South.

sense. Casuistry is first attested 1725.

Our "friend" ericw is a Calvinist Philosopher, who will not be "persuaded" of the truth, even if we were to spend the whole of the remaining year trying to show it to him. He will persist with his heresies and false teachings as long as we persist in dealing with him. Remember: We cannot change a Sophist; and we cannot win an argument with a Sophist! They have no interest in the TRUTH, their only interest is to "argue" and "debate"!

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" [Jeremiah 17:9]

[atlas]

George,

I was just about to post that Eric was a troll, I'll guess you hit the nail on the head about times with your last post.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]

I thought I might as well add this to the list.

As an example this topic is called the Ruckman Reference Bible. Do you guys see how far Eric the troll has took this and other post off topic. Not only is Eric a troll, he is an apostate troll. The most vile of all trolls.





Atlas