Stupid website

[nightmare sasuke]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

[love_magnified]

http://thekingdomcome.com/confronting_universalism_complete_5_part_series?PHPSESSID=633dcdf8f807a073c0318e5c7654cfee

See how many strawmen you can find in this one. My jaw dropped at some of the logic.

[hillsbororiver]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

Hi Nightmare, I read this a few months back and was amazed then at how little scripture this guy used in his "refutation" it had a real "denominational church" feel about it, about as dry and uninspiring as a Jonathon Edwards paper.

Joe

[hillsbororiver]

http://thekingdomcome.com/confronting_universalism_complete_5_part_series?PHPSESSID=633dcdf8f807a073c0318e5c7654cfee

See how many strawmen you can find in this one. My jaw dropped at some of the logic.

LM, so true, here is just one example (I cut and pasted this from "The Kingdom" article).

“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.â€? â€" 1 Cor 15:22

The first question that must be asked is HOW… How did people become IN ADAM and how do people become IN CHRIST? It would seem obvious that ALL men are born in Adam via natural birth, but NOT all men are born in Christ.  Does this contradict the text?  Not in the least bit.  The text is NOT saying all who are in Adam will be in Christ, but rather it is contrasting that all that were in Adam were under death, and thus all who are in Christ (which is not everyone) will be made alive.


See how the author changes the order of the scripture to change it's meaning?

The scripture does NOT read "all in Christ" will be made alive.

It reads; IN Christ all will be made alive.

Tricky but transparent.

Again, like Jonathon Edwards, little scripture, much supposition.

Joe

[shibboleth]

I was in a Presbyterian church and asked the pastor if Adam and Eve were saved. He said yes they were because God had provided them coverings for their sins. Something about what he said was unsettling to me. I couldn't pinpoint it at the time, but knew there was a key that in what he said that only God could unlock.
After I left the church, one day God showed me that if all people were with Adam when he was clothed in unrighteousness, then all people were in Adam when he was clothed with righteousness. This was the first universalist truths I learned, although at the time I didn't know enough to refute ET.
Over the past year, I have learned more and more about our great and wonderful God. By the way, back in ET days, I didn't think God was so great and wonderful. I was just afraid of Him and what He would do to me if I didn't measure up. Well guess what, I CAN'T MEASURE UP! My yardstick is too short.
I read some of Jonathan Edwards and Charles Spurgeon and now I realize they both didn't understand grace at all, as most preachers don't

[Sorin]

http://thekingdomcome.com/confronting_universalism_complete_5_part_series?PHPSESSID=633dcdf8f807a073c0318e5c7654cfee

See how many strawmen you can find in this one. My jaw dropped at some of the logic.

LM, so true, here is just one example (I cut and pasted this from "The Kingdom" article).

“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.â€? â€" 1 Cor 15:22

The first question that must be asked is HOW… How did people become IN ADAM and how do people become IN CHRIST? It would seem obvious that ALL men are born in Adam via natural birth, but NOT all men are born in Christ.  Does this contradict the text?  Not in the least bit.  The text is NOT saying all who are in Adam will be in Christ, but rather it is contrasting that all that were in Adam were under death, and thus all who are in Christ (which is not everyone) will be made alive.


See how the author changes the order of the scripture to change it's meaning?

The scripture does NOT read "all in Christ" will be made alive.

It reads; IN Christ all will be made alive.

Tricky but transparent.

Again, like Jonathon Edwards, little scripture, much supposition.

Joe

They who are of The Synagogue of Satan will do anything to pervert The Scripture. As your example clearly shows how decieving these people are.

Alot of people would not catch that and believe these Liars.

If " As in Adam all die " then " In Christ ( That Same, not another) " ALL "  Will be made Alive then how is it possible to believe that it's not the same " All
" but rather a Christian 98% of all? 98% all???

note: I got that " 98% of all " from a Christian detractor of Ray. :lol:

98% equals all? UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

](*,)  ](*,)  ](*,)  ](*,)  ](*,)

[lilitalienboi16]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

I didn't find one quote of scripture in that article.

Not worth readnig... NEXT!!!

Hehe

[ertsky]

i'm getting a vision of all these guys wandering around after the second resurrection saying stuff like


ohhhhhh so that's what the bride of Christ means

ohhhhhhh so that's what UR is all about

ohhhhhhhh so that's what a great white throne judgement is

ohhhhhh so that's what the lake of fire means

ooouuuuuuchhhhhhh so that's what chastening grace means

ohhhhhhh we really didn't have a clue did we

LOL!

which is funny because that's what i'm like now

 :lol:

[Gill]

Hahaha, Frank ...so true  :lol: .

[rvhill]

i'm getting a vision of all these guys wandering around after the second resurrection saying stuff like


ohhhhhh so that's what the bride of Christ means

ohhhhhhh so that's what UR is all about

ohhhhhhhh so that's what a great white throne judgement is

ohhhhhh so that's what the lake of fire means

ooouuuuuuchhhhhhh so that's what chastening grace means

ohhhhhhh we really didn't have a clue did we

LOL!

which is funny because that's what i'm like now

 :lol:

something tell me I will still be doing these things :shock:  #-o  ](*,)  [-o<

[Harryfeat]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

Hello nightmare,

I read the article and found it interesting.  It basically is a treatise on greek translation and grammar with emphasis on what was used to support their opinions. Hell wasn't even the main focus.

I found some of the arguments compelling especially including authors of the period to see how they used the meaning of words.  I have always found idiomatic phrases and common usage language interesting.  

There certainly was not a lack of quoted scripture, even though it was only examples from Ray's text.

Just for the record, I don't believe in eternal torture.

Let us know how your refutation goes.

feat

[ertsky]

What church are you affiliated with? Tekton is an independent ministry. I attend a Southern Baptist church but would be comfortable just about anywhere where the Bible was honored as the Word of God.

i found this quite humourous

them southern baptists are known far and wide for their honouring the word of God don't you know LOL!

f

[hillsbororiver]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

Hello nightmare,

I read the article and found it interesting.  It basically is a treatise on greek translation and grammar with emphasis on what was used to support their opinions. Hell wasn't even the main focus.

I found some of the arguments compelling especially including authors of the period to see how they used the meaning of words.  I have always found idiomatic phrases and common usage language interesting.  

There certainly was not a lack of quoted scripture, even though it was only examples from Ray's text.

Just for the record, I don't believe in eternal torture.

Let us know how your refutation goes.

feat

"Certainly not a lack of scripture" !!?? He was using supposition to refute scriptural witnesses presented by Ray. Much of the Greek he defined was influenced by modern usage not the original definition of the time it was written. All languages have been influenced by Latin first and English now, that is one reason the French have been so vigilant in attempting to keep foreign influence from "tainting" their language, although it will prove to be a futile attempt.

Joe

[Harryfeat]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

Hello nightmare,

I read the article and found it interesting.  It basically is a treatise on greek translation and grammar with emphasis on what was used to support their opinions. Hell wasn't even the main focus.

I found some of the arguments compelling especially including authors of the period to see how they used the meaning of words.  I have always found idiomatic phrases and common usage language interesting.  

There certainly was not a lack of quoted scripture, even though it was only examples from Ray's text.

Just for the record, I don't believe in eternal torture.

Let us know how your refutation goes.

feat

"Certainly not a lack of scripture" !!?? He was using supposition to refute scriptural witnesses presented by Ray. Much of the Greek he defined was influenced by modern usage not the original definition of the time it was written. All languages have been influenced by Latin first and English now, that is one reason the French have been so vigilant in attempting to keep foreign influence from "tainting" their language, although it will prove to be a futile attempt.

Joe

I was simply reacting to the statement above that said "I didn't find one quote of scripture in that article."

I also stated that they only cited from Ray's text.

Initially, you also stated that there was some scripture quoted yet you didn't say anything more about the scripture quoted.

I am not a language scholar and I don't know whether your knowledge or the author's knowledge is any better or worse than mine. It makes a lot of sense to me to use every tool you can to find the etymology of the words used.  In my view,  common usage in other writings at the same period could be more compelling case for acceptance in that regard. That's also why I found the article interesting.  

I do know that it is important for me  to keep a healthy skepticism about whatever anyone  interprets as the truth.  I don't necessarily agree with the author on the whole but then I don't agree with a lot of things people write.  I just take them for what they are worth.

Does that help answer your question marks?

feat

[ertsky]

# As a preterist I believe Satan is now bound and not doing anything.

another classic from tekton

LOL! this tekton guy is a classic

f

[hillsbororiver]

Someone wrote an article supposedly refuting Ray:

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/smithlr01.html

I plan on reading his article about Hell and writing a counter argument against it. How would you like that: "refuting those that try to refute but are not - Nightmare Sasuke"

Hello nightmare,

I read the article and found it interesting.  It basically is a treatise on greek translation and grammar with emphasis on what was used to support their opinions. Hell wasn't even the main focus.

I found some of the arguments compelling especially including authors of the period to see how they used the meaning of words.  I have always found idiomatic phrases and common usage language interesting.  

There certainly was not a lack of quoted scripture, even though it was only examples from Ray's text.

Just for the record, I don't believe in eternal torture.

Let us know how your refutation goes.

feat

"Certainly not a lack of scripture" !!?? He was using supposition to refute scriptural witnesses presented by Ray. Much of the Greek he defined was influenced by modern usage not the original definition of the time it was written. All languages have been influenced by Latin first and English now, that is one reason the French have been so vigilant in attempting to keep foreign influence from "tainting" their language, although it will prove to be a futile attempt.

Joe

I was simply reacting to the statement above that said "I didn't find one quote of scripture in that article."

I also stated that they only cited from Ray's text.

Initially, you also stated that there was some scripture quoted yet you didn't say anything more about the scripture quoted.

I am not a language scholar and I don't know whether your knowledge or the author's knowledge is any better or worse than mine. It makes a lot of sense to me to use every tool you can to find the etymology of the words used.  In my view,  common usage in other writings at the same period could be more compelling case for acceptance in that regard. That's also why I found the article interesting.  

I do know that it is important for me  to keep a healthy skepticism about whatever anyone  interprets as the truth.  I don't necessarily agree with the author on the whole but then I don't agree with a lot of things people write.  I just take them for what they are worth.

Does that help answer your question marks?

feat

Hello feat,

Not all of them but it is a start, this man from tektonics has taken it upon himself to attempt to demolish Ray's writings with clever sidetracking and supposition, again, "very little scripture" is used to refute Ray, actually I do not remember any from him.

Clever word games are his tool, for instance, can you see a difference between immortality and eternal? The tektonics guy attempts to blend them into one and the same, if you or I were to be given our new spiritual bodies today we would be given "immortality" only God is eternal, without beginning, without end. We (all creation) would always have a beginning.

I am not sure about "always having a healthy skepticism about whatever anyone interprets as the truth" as being a good road to growing in the Lord, through faith obtaining understanding, gaining the fruits of the spirit. Would you apply that to what Paul wrote or understood to be truth? Or any of the men guided by the Spirit who recorded God's Word? Do you have a healthy skepticism that Jesus walked the earth, had an earthly ministry, died for all of our sins and was resurrected?

I certainly would agree that we should "be as the Bereans" and check the witnesses, verify the scripture's quoted or referenced to make sure we are not being deceived or believing falsehoods. I had shown an example in a previous post about how some people cleverly change the order of words to promote their own ideology;

(Joe in bold)

LM, so true, here is just one example (I cut and pasted this from "The Kingdom" article).

“For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.â€? â€" 1 Cor 15:22


The first question that must be asked is HOW… How did people become IN ADAM and how do people become IN CHRIST? It would seem obvious that ALL men are born in Adam via natural birth, but NOT all men are born in Christ. Does this contradict the text? Not in the least bit. The text is NOT saying all who are in Adam will be in Christ, but rather it is contrasting that all that were in Adam were under death, and thus all who are in Christ (which is not everyone) will be made alive.


See how the author changes the order of the scripture to change it's meaning?
The scripture does NOT read "all in Christ" will be made alive.

It reads; IN Christ all will be made alive.

Tricky but transparent.

Again, like Jonathon Edwards, little scripture, much supposition.

Joe


feat, I pray you don't take this the wrong way, my motivation is to reason together, gain understanding together.

Since I "stumbled" onto Ray and Mike's sites I am no longer looking to the outside physical, carnal world to verify what God has planned for us, their articles have shown me (through the Spirit) that the greatest miracles are taking place within me, you, and all that are called to Him. I had no clue as to what this was before, but displacing the beast within me with the Spirit of Christ has become my supreme goal, not waiting for a rapture or watching out for the European Union to produce a charismatic leader or any of the physical signs so many are looking for. Is, was & will be, within all of our lives, each generation.

This is one reason I feel so obligated to speak up when I perceive the principles of BT are being watered down or questioned, be it blatant or subtle.

Brother, I have no animosity toward you at all, I hope you take this in the spirit it is given.

Peace,

Joe

[Harryfeat]

Does that help answer your question marks?



Hello feat,

Not all of them but it is a start, this man from tektonics has taken it upon himself to attempt to demolish Ray's writings with clever sidetracking and supposition, again, "very little scripture" is used to refute Ray, actually I do not remember any from him.


What other questions do you have?


Clever word games are his tool, for instance, can you see a difference between immortality and eternal? The tektonics guy attempts to blend them into one and the same, if you or I were to be given our new spiritual bodies today we would be given "immortality" only God is eternal, without beginning, without end. We (all creation) would always have a beginning.

I am not sure about "always having a healthy skepticism about whatever anyone interprets as the truth" as being a good road to growing in the Lord, through faith obtaining understanding, gaining the fruits of the spirit. Would you apply that to what Paul wrote or understood to be truth? Or any of the men guided by the Spirit who recorded God's Word? Do you have a healthy skepticism that Jesus walked the earth, had an earthly ministry, died for all of our sins and was resurrected?


I certainly would agree that we should "be as the Bereans" and check the witnesses, verify the scripture's quoted or referenced to make sure we are not being deceived or believing falsehoods. I had shown an example in a previous post about how some people cleverly change the order of words to promote their own ideology;

I completely disagree with you that being skeptical of what men teach and say is an unhealthy road to spiritual truth.  If you blindly accept what men say then it is my opinion that you are probably mentally lazy and will end up in some sort of organized religious cult.  Maybe even a catholic.

If you agree with we should be as the bereans then you should also understand what I mean by healthy sketpticism.  I have no wish to blindly accept what someone tells me is the "truth" regardless of who it is.  I would ask you about how your faith was shaped before you found BT or even began to realize what a load of crap you got from organized religion.  If you had maintained a berean attitude all along, perhaps what you found at BT would not have been such a dramatic change for you.

There is not much new at BT that the early Christian didn't believe. Check it out.



feat, I pray you don't take this the wrong way, my motivation is to reason together, gain understanding together.

I don't think I took your original post the wrong way.  If your aim was gaining an understanding together then your initial  post might not have had all the markings of a lecture.

Since I "stumbled" onto Ray and Mike's sites I am no longer looking to the outside physical, carnal world to verify what God has planned for us, their articles have shown me (through the Spirit) that the greatest miracles are taking place within me, you, and all that are called to Him. I had no clue as to what this was before, but displacing the beast within me with the Spirit of Christ has become my supreme goal, not waiting for a rapture or watching out for the European Union to produce a charismatic leader or any of the physical signs so many are looking for. Is, was & will be, within all of our lives, each generation.

This is one reason I feel so obligated to speak up when I perceive the principles of BT are being watered down or questioned, be it blatant or subtle.

I think its is appropriate to speak out.  It is the manner that causes concern.

Brother, I have no animosity toward you at all, I hope you take this in the spirit it is given.

I have a lot to learn and probably need to be more careful about how I state things.  I appreciate your effort to educate me.  I can only assume that the your efforts were in the spirit of brotherly love.

Peace,

Joe

If you have anything else you wish to point out, I would very much appreciate it.



feat

[hillsbororiver]

Does that help answer your question marks?


Hello feat,

Not all of them but it is a start, this man from tektonics has taken it upon himself to attempt to demolish Ray's writings with clever sidetracking and supposition, again, "very little scripture" is used to refute Ray, actually I do not remember any from him.


What other questions do you have?


Clever word games are his tool, for instance, can you see a difference between immortality and eternal? The tektonics guy attempts to blend them into one and the same, if you or I were to be given our new spiritual bodies today we would be given "immortality" only God is eternal, without beginning, without end. We (all creation) would always have a beginning.

I am not sure about "always having a healthy skepticism about whatever anyone interprets as the truth" as being a good road to growing in the Lord, through faith obtaining understanding, gaining the fruits of the spirit. Would you apply that to what Paul wrote or understood to be truth? Or any of the men guided by the Spirit who recorded God's Word? Do you have a healthy skepticism that Jesus walked the earth, had an earthly ministry, died for all of our sins and was resurrected?

You never answered this question.


I certainly would agree that we should "be as the Bereans" and check the witnesses, verify the scripture's quoted or referenced to make sure we are not being deceived or believing falsehoods. I had shown an example in a previous post about how some people cleverly change the order of words to promote their own ideology;

I completely disagree with you that being skeptical of what men teach and say is an unhealthy road to spiritual truth. If you blindly accept what men say then it is my opinion that you are probably mentally lazy and will end up in some sort of organized religious cult. Maybe even a catholic.

Where exactly did I say to "blindly accept what men say"? Here we go with the "cult" business thrown in for good measure.


If you agree with we should be as the bereans then you should also understand what I mean by healthy sketpticism. I have no wish to blindly accept what someone tells me is the "truth" regardless of who it is. I would ask you about how your faith was shaped before you found BT or even began to realize what a load of crap you got from organized religion. If you had maintained a berean attitude all along, perhaps what you found at BT would not have been such a dramatic change for you.


Did I not say we should be as the Bereans? Again, I never said blindly follow anyone. The progression of my faith is documented in the Testimony section of the forum.

There is not much new at BT that the early Christian didn't believe. Check it out.

I agree emphatically that we should shed the man made add ons to the faith, I may be considered ancient by some but I was not around in the first century, it took BT (through the Spirit) to open my eyes.

feat, I pray you don't take this the wrong way, my motivation is to reason together, gain understanding together.

I don't think I took your original post the wrong way. If your aim was gaining an understanding together then your initial post might not have had all the markings of a lecture.



My original post was a paragraph in response to your statement about "certainly no lack of scripture" how does that qualify as a lecture?


Since I "stumbled" onto Ray and Mike's sites I am no longer looking to the outside physical, carnal world to verify what God has planned for us, their articles have shown me (through the Spirit) that the greatest miracles are taking place within me, you, and all that are called to Him. I had no clue as to what this was before, but displacing the beast within me with the Spirit of Christ has become my supreme goal, not waiting for a rapture or watching out for the European Union to produce a charismatic leader or any of the physical signs so many are looking for. Is, was & will be, within all of our lives, each generation.

This is one reason I feel so obligated to speak up when I perceive the principles of BT are being watered down or questioned, be it blatant or subtle.

I think its is appropriate to speak out. It is the manner that causes concern.


Please be specific, what is the "manner" you speak of?

Brother, I have no animosity toward you at all, I hope you take this in the spirit it is given.

I have a lot to learn and probably need to be more careful about how I state things. I appreciate your effort to educate me. I can only assume that the your efforts were in the spirit of brotherly love.

We all need to be careful, myself included maybe especially. The written word is a two dimensional form of communication, the facial expressions, body language and tone of voice are all missing and sometimes words on paper can take on a more aggressive tone than intended.

Peace,
Joe


If you have anything else you wish to point out, I would very much appreciate it.

Please feel free to do the same with me, I learn from everyone. Thank you.

Joe

feat

[Gill]

We all need to be careful, myself included maybe especially. The written word is a two dimensional form of communication, the facial expressions, body language and tone of voice are all missing and sometimes words on paper can take on a more aggressive tone than intended.

Peace,
Joe

So true ~ i've had to learn this the hard way.  These days, if in doubt ...i hit delete.

[ertsky]

# As a preterist I believe Satan is now bound and not doing anything.

when i found that statement on the the guys website i immediately thought

why would i waste another second here ?

anyone who believes Satan is not doing anything at the moment obviously hasn't been getting out much LOL!

anyways sooner or later every knee will bow

i'm just trying to fall into compliance with the plan of God to get my knee and tongue into the plan sooner rather than later God willing.

f