missmuffet Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 7, 2017 16 minutes ago, Churchmouse said: Agreed. Also that word came from somewhere other than God, which makes the person themselves false. Yep, and Satan loves it when a person is deceived Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 28 minutes ago, Churchmouse said: Why is it necessary to start a thread only to say that? 'Cuz I felt like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 7, 2017 Just now, Rick_Parker said: 'Cuz I felt like it! Feelings are frivolous. Emotions don't lead anyone anywhere beyond their own intransigence. What is it that you wish to do with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 7, 2017 There was a post claiming that Dr. Charles Stanley was a false teacher. What is wrong with posting that Dr. Charles Stanley is not a false teacher on a different thread? Why does this have to stay within the previous thread that Dr. Charles Stanley is a false teacher? I say think outside the box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewels7 Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 713 Content Per Day: 0.27 Reputation: 351 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/10/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Redemption79 said: a few off teachings does not make one false teacher Extremist Fundamentalism would tend to disagree. However, that track is very hard to defend using the new testament. One issue of contention for some that are opposed to Stanley are those that in my experience turn out to be atheists. Or, nominal xtians. Eternal Security. I've met with and shared what Christian belief encompasses with people who will argue till they're red in the face that ES is not true. It isn't scripture. It isn't in the Bible. The reason these people are deemed nominal Christians in my view is because after all that I recall their lifestyle. And how they live when they get behind the wheel of that car that has a Jesus sticker on it. But they live like Hell hounds. No wonder they don't feel secure in Christ. They're not! Quote We do not have a creed or specialized doctrinal stance that we are trying to sneak in under the guise of biblical preaching. People know that when they watch "In Touch," they are going to receive a practical lesson right out of the Scriptures. Yet I reject the notion that eternal security is just a Baptist doctrine. As you read, I believe it will become apparent that this doctrine is fist and foremost a biblical one." Charles Stanley excerpted from his book, Eternal Security - Can You Be Sure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, missmuffet said: There was a post claiming that Dr. Charles Stanley was a false teacher. What is wrong with posting that Dr. Charles Stanley is not a false teacher on a different thread? Why does this have to stay within the previous thread that Dr. Charles Stanley is a false teacher? I say think outside the box. Anything said by any that can be proven false in scripture needs to be looked at diligently so that evil and those who spread it can be removed from our consultations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Churchmouse said: Anything said by any that can be proven false in scripture needs to be looked at diligently so that evil and those who spread it can be removed from our consultations. But that does not address my question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 7, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, missmuffet said: But that does not address my question. Yes it does. This thread does not defend anything. It is a rant without substance. If you came upon this thread without knowledge of any previous thread, would you understand it from anything found here? I asked as simple question of the OP, in that he makes no argument nor does he direct anyone to any account of his opposition. What I said was the only response I could come up with that anywhere near covers my feelings towards that which I assumed was the underlining point in all of this. Edited March 7, 2017 by Churchmouse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted March 7, 2017 39 minutes ago, Churchmouse said: Yes it does. This thread does not defend anything. It is a rant without substance. If you came upon this thread without knowledge of any previous thread, would you understand it from anything found here? I asked as simple question of the OP, in that he makes no argument nor does he direct anyone to any account of his opposition. What I said was the only response I could come up with that anywhere near covers my feelings towards that which I assumed was the underlining point in all of this. Yes, it would have made a statement which I would have understood. No other information would have been necessary. I think you are complicating this whole thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Churchmouse Posted March 7, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,216 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 1,014 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/29/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/02/1958 Share Posted March 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, missmuffet said: Yes, it would have made a statement which I would have understood. No other information would have been necessary. I think you are complicating this whole thing Details never complicate anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts