tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post1140825592334636610..comments2024-03-17T03:12:26.931-04:00Comments on Reformed Reasons: The Apostate Emergent: Friend or FoeEd Dingesshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-73027699616384298892015-04-08T17:47:49.785-04:002015-04-08T17:47:49.785-04:00You are a member of a cult that is pseudo-Christia...You are a member of a cult that is pseudo-Christian at best. A group of you went out, like the secessionists in 1 John, and decided you would ignore 2,000 years of orthodox Christianity, the creeds, the confessions, and even sacred Scripture and sat up your own cult community. Please do not post on this site any longer as your posts will be deleted. I will not give you a platform to push your God-hating deception. Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-39912818979953620212015-04-08T08:05:16.914-04:002015-04-08T08:05:16.914-04:00on the other hand, if you can understand me, using...<i>on the other hand, if you can understand me, using simple rules of language and you can determine certain facts about me and my beliefs based on my communication with you, then I can do the same with you, </i><br /><br />Two points:<br /><br />1. We are able to misunderstand each other. You, for instance, in spite of multiple corrections and clarifications from me, STILL are wrongly interpreting about 90% of my positions. Ed, if you can't understand my words, written in the same language and same culture and time you're from, on what basis do you think you can rightly understand the Bible? You have demonstrated a profound inability to understand words.<br /><br />2. Nonetheless, even though we are able to incorrectly interpret the written word, we DO have the option of clarifying by asking the author, "Did you mean...?" You can't do that with Paul.<br /><br />You are simply factually and logically wrong on this point. Your own words undo you.<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-56316629211473434812015-04-08T06:13:02.133-04:002015-04-08T06:13:02.133-04:00Dan, your dealing with YOUR interpretation of my p...Dan, your dealing with YOUR interpretation of my position. You can't really know for sure what my opinion is. Hence, everything you say and believe, since it is your meager interpretation comes down to being just your opinion. You cannot escape the logically necessary clutches of the self-defeating end of your thought. <br /><br />But, on the other hand, if you can understand me, using simple rules of language and you can determine certain facts about me and my beliefs based on my communication with you, then I can do the same with you, and with others. I can even know things about people that are written in the past. And I can know things about Paul, Peter, Luke, James, John, and Jude. I can know things about Jesus. I can know facts about them. Paul was converted to Christ on the road to Damascus. I can know that the writers of the NT thought they were writing in God's place because they all from the standpoint of explicit authority. The use of the word Apostle carries the sense of representing the divine authority of God with them. Our argument about Scripture has to be from Scripture itself. I gave you examples that would correct any objective person's perspective, but my theology says there is no objective person. Everyone is either loving God, His holy Word, His divine commandments or they are despising God, perverting His holy Word, and rejecting His divine commandments. Keeping God's commandments does not save us. God saves us. Keeping the commandments is loving God. Those whom God saves, love God. Therefore, they keep His commandments. His commandments are His Word, the Scriptures, the Bible. To deny the authority of God is to deny the right God has over your life. It is the epitome of arrogance and is an outrageous act of blasphemy.<br /><br />You want Galatians to be Paul's opinion and you want it to be at least authoritative enough to bail you out. You are a walking contradiction.<br /><br />Paul told the Churches in Galatia that those who practice the works of the flesh will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.<br /><br />Paul told the Corinthians that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God. Who are the unrighteous? Those who are idolaters, fornicators, adulterers, homosexuals, thieves, covetous, drunks, revilers, and swindlers. Also, back in Galatians, he said heresy is included in the works of the flesh. A heretic is one who REJECTS apostolic tradition, and seeks to convince others to do the same.<br /><br />You are part of a blasphemous pseudo-Christian group that has rejected the teachings of the churches of Jesus Christ in preference for your own views about God and Christ and with an ethic that is anything but having its source in God. Your defense of your existence is entirely arbitrary. You did what YOU wanted to do and you will continue to twist the Scriptures, deny their right to rule over you, and impugn the Righteous Judge until He either saves you or eternally damns you.<br /><br />I hope God grants you repentance. Until he does, I hope true Christians will lovingly hold you in contempt for the things you teach and believe.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-9727186853641326172015-04-07T21:01:33.756-04:002015-04-07T21:01:33.756-04:00No, it's not just my opinion. That your opinio...No, it's not just my opinion. That your opinion IS in fact your opinion is a fact. That, if you can't prove a claim is a fact, that your opinion is not a proven fact (by you) is also a fact. <br /><br />I'm dealing with facts, here, Ed. You're dealing with opinions.<br /><br />Ed...<br /><br /><i>I will answer this last question, but then, we are finished with this conversation. </i><br /><br />So then, you just flat out lied when you gave your word that you would answer my questions? Does that not bother you? You object - sight unseen and lives unknown - to my church family and my faith, but you have no problem blatantly lying, bearing false witness, slandering and making false and unsupported charges?<br /><br />Have you no decency? Do you not see the irony or pathos or hypocrisy in your position?<br /><br />Repent, brother Ed. This arrogance only undermines you, to the point that I fear that you do not even see your hypocrisy or arrogance. I would just remind you of Paul's words you quoted about the Judaizers... those who'd try to push the Galatians into a salvation by works heresy. Read and learn, brother.<br /><br />If you ever do repent and decide to be honorable and live up to your word, let me know.<br /><br />May God grant us wisdom and grace,<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-66233499770784320682015-04-07T20:45:45.804-04:002015-04-07T20:45:45.804-04:00Why would a straight, married man attend a gay and...Why would a straight, married man attend a gay and lesbian church? I had to look into you a little more Dan because your comments were just not adding up. Life at Jeff Street Baptist tells a story for sure.<br /><br />Just because a group of people gather together and talk about Jesus (whoever they might mean by that symbol), that does not mean you have a church.<br /><br />There is no such thing as a gay Christian and there is no such thing as a Christian affirming a gay Christian. <br /><br />It is clear to anyone that typically reads this blog that your views are views that contradict biblical Christianity top to bottom. Your affirmation of gay sex and gay marriage are affirmations that arrogantly reject divine fiat. You want to debate views that you are obligated to believe. <br /><br />I will answer this last question, but then, we are finished with this conversation. <br /><br />Do I believe there are facts that exist about God's will that are known facts but that I cannot prove? <br /><br />My philosophy professor said that proving God's existence is both the easiest thing to do and the most difficult thing to do. It depends Dan. It depends on one's criteria for epistemic justification. I believe that humans have minds, but if asked to prove this by means of empirical verification, I could not do so. But since I am not an empiricist, I reject the idea that empirical verification is necessary in order for proof to exist. By the way, I will remind you that you are the one that said you do not have a philosophy of fact.<br /><br />Now, can something be known as a fact without the person knowing it being able to provide proof? Another problem is that providing such proof requires certain skills that that person may lack. So their inability to be persuasive has nothing to do with their having proof that a thing is known even though they cannot effectively articulate their proof(s). <br /><br />So here is your conundrum: what will you offer as a standard for proof? In other words, you may claim that known facts can only be known if there is proof for them. But isn't that statement claiming to be a known fact? If so, where is its proof? And where is that proof's proof...ad infinitum...ad nausea. <br /><br />What facts do I claim to know that you think are absent any proof? Well, I suppose my claim that the Bible is the Word of God, or that it is infallible, binding, self-interpreting, etc. The only evidence that can be offered for a self-authenticating document is the document itself. Otherwise it is not self-authenticating. <br /><br />Here is the known fact that I believe: The Scriptures are the infallible Word of God, self-authenticating, fully inspired, God speaking in written form. <br /><br />Here is my proof: My proof that God is speaking to me in Scripture itself, is the binding of the sacred text to my heart through the miraculous and necessary work of the Holy Spirit. The proof for my fact is Scripture itself. Christianity teaches that only the Work of the Holy Spirit can convince you of this truth Dan and only the Holy Spirit can open your heart to understand these truths.<br /><br />You will say that this is just my human opinion, the same as you said of Paul, which you probably evenly apply to all the writers of Scripture. Every ancient Christian community would have excommunicated you Dan. Every one of them. So too would my church. Your claim to genuine faith would be tested and rejected based on your views.<br /><br />Additionally, I would answer that it is just your opinion that this view of Scripture is my opinion and you have no objective reference by which to measure it. You have nothing to refute my statements other than your own arbitrary opinion. However, for me, there is the Scripture. There is thousands of years of ancient Judaism followed the ancient Christianity up through the reformation to the present day. Whether you believe it is authoritative or not, it certainly presents itself as such and only a cavil could miss that.<br /><br />Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-61320382379594557902015-04-07T18:53:53.048-04:002015-04-07T18:53:53.048-04:00So much for your claim to be a "pretty good r...So much for your claim to be a "pretty good read of people..." I'm a straight guy, happily married to one woman for 30 years, the father of two children. <br /><br />http://throughthesewoods.blogspot.com/2010/05/happy-25th-anniversary.html<br /><br />Thus, you are NOT a good reader of people, so far as I can see and not only that, but your fixation with my sexual orientation is a bit weird. AND, I notice that you still have not answered my questions. <br /><br /><i>I have answered your questions Dan. If you mean have I answered them in the way that you lik</i><br /><br />? No, Ed, you have not. And it has nothing to do with me "liking" your answers. You factually have not directly answered the questions that I asked you. You may have responded, as I noted earlier, with a response wholly unrelated to my actual question, but you have not as a point of fact answered my questions.<br /><br />But here, Ed, I'll give you a final chance to demonstrate that you are an honorable man and not a blatant liar. I'll paste one of my questions. All you have to do is paste your direct answer to that actual question and you can demonstrate that you have answered it.<br /><br /><b>do you think that there are some "facts" that exist (about God's Will, for instance) that you can't prove, but are somehow "known facts..."? If so, based on what, if it can't be demonstrated/corroborated?</b><br /><br />I'll wait.<br /><br />~DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-67948068131819277002015-04-07T18:22:42.492-04:002015-04-07T18:22:42.492-04:00Here is what I think, and I am a pretty good read ...Here is what I think, and I am a pretty good read of people. I think your a homosexual man. I think you grew up in a conservative Church and changed your views because they rejected your lifestyle. I think you have spent years trying to come up with as many twisted arguments as you can to ease your conscience because you know in heart that such a lifestyle immoral.<br /><br />Now, not only am I a good profiler, I am also a good researcher. Either tell me to truth or I am going to go find out for myself.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-83148403234554212342015-04-07T17:57:05.183-04:002015-04-07T17:57:05.183-04:00I have answered your questions Dan. If you mean ha...I have answered your questions Dan. If you mean have I answered them in the way that you like, the way that paint you in the most positive light, or the way a cross-examiner would prefer, well, no. I prefer to answer that questions in a way that provides a defense of my answer at the same time I give the answer. Perhaps I missed one or two, if so, I would be happy to come back to them.<br /><br />I would like to know your sexual orientation Dan. Are you a homosexual? I see a pattern of reasoning here that raises the question. Maybe you are not, but I would NOT be shocked if you affirmed that you are a homosexual. Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-49213872710481886842015-04-07T17:51:56.273-04:002015-04-07T17:51:56.273-04:00I have another question for you, Ed. Are you an ho...I have another question for you, Ed. Are you an honest man?Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-62191092104873199052015-04-07T16:32:31.442-04:002015-04-07T16:32:31.442-04:00I am sure you have all sorts of questions for me, ...I am sure you have all sorts of questions for me, Ed. And I have demonstrated a great willingness to answer your questions.<br /><br />You, on the other hand, mostly have not. Now, you have given your word that you WILL answer my questions and I am still waiting. <br /><br />Ed, if you are not a man of your word - if you fear these questions or if you are just douche-y enough that you refuse to answer questions to be argumentative and lazy, or if you refuse to answer because you recognize that your answers will undermine your positions... if you are not a man of your word, then I will end this conversation.<br /><br />I don't mind that you disagree with me, I don't mind that you make all sorts of false and unsupported charges against me, but I do expect Christians to behave with at least at a minimum level of honor and trustworthiness. <br /><br />It's time for you to answer questions, Ed. Live up to your word or this conversation is over (and it will be clear to all who was loving, respectful, polite, courteous, helpful and prepared to answer questions, and who was not... again, you are only undermining your own arguments...)<br /><br />In Christ,<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-32057174337621366712015-04-07T16:21:28.109-04:002015-04-07T16:21:28.109-04:00In His mind, he believed he had the right and the ...<i> In His mind, he believed he had the right and the authority to bind his teachings upon the Churches in the Region of Galatia, and to every audience he wrote to as far as that goes. </i><br /><br />? Do you TRULY think you can read Paul's mind and speak authoritatively for Paul, 2,000 years after his death and without the ability to verify? <br /><br />Do you recognize the level of megalomania and delusion this seems to indicate on your part? I don't say that as an insult, but out of concern for you, brother Ed. <br /><br />If you can authoritatively speak for Paul, tell us what Paul INTENDED and what his motives were, please provide some data to support it. Saying "I read the Bible, therefore I 'know' I am interpreting it correctly" is not sufficient because I, too, have read the Bible.<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-63347710720520591042015-04-07T16:17:17.953-04:002015-04-07T16:17:17.953-04:00How do you know that I can't establish what Pa...<i>How do you know that I can't establish what Paul was thinking? Are you certain of that or is that just your opinion? If it is just your opinion, then you could be wrong about it...<br /><br />If you can't know what others are thinking based on what they are writing, then you should not be able to interact with me.</i><br /><br />The argument is not self-defeating, of course. With you, I can in theory ask you questions to get you to clarify what you mean (it remains to be seen if you'll actually answer them, but in theory...). You do not have the option of asking Paul what he meant nor of asking God if Paul accurately summarized what God thought.<br /><br />Again, what is and isn't verifiable? But by all means, Ed, verify that you "know" what Paul was thinking. NOT simply what he wrote (I can read the words he wrote) but Paul's <i>intentions, motives, meanings</i> beyond what he wrote.<br /><br />If you can demonstrate it, then you can make your case. If you can't demonstrate it, then you can't make your case.<br /><br />Ball's in your court.<br /><br />Dan<br />Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-53683379156825667552015-04-07T16:16:49.195-04:002015-04-07T16:16:49.195-04:00And that view Dan, is not based on anything object...And that view Dan, is not based on anything objective or transcendent. It is arbitrary wishful thinking on your part because you have an idea of who you want God and Jesus to be, what you want Scripture to be and to say, how you want to live your life and so forth. Your approach is based entirely on an arbitrary hermeneutic adopted to support your uncritical philosophical assumptions.<br /><br />I have another question for you Dan. Are you a homosexual?Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-29867515718341492942015-04-07T16:13:45.068-04:002015-04-07T16:13:45.068-04:00That analogy fails Dan because it assumes people w...That analogy fails Dan because it assumes people will not do their historical critical homework. If they look at more than just the picture, say read a sermon from that era, read things about that sort of church or that particular church, they can get to the truth and that without much difficulty. We do that very thing with Scripture today. That is part of the interpretive process.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-28412802135621035852015-04-07T16:09:05.414-04:002015-04-07T16:09:05.414-04:00How do you know that I can't establish what Pa...How do you know that I can't establish what Paul was thinking? Are you certain of that or is that just your opinion? If it is just your opinion, then you could be wrong about it. If you are certain about it, then you can know what others are thinking based on what they are writing. After all, you seem to know what I am thinking based on what I am writing just fine. Your view is self-defeating Dan.<br /><br />If you can't know what others are thinking based on what they are writing, then you should not be able to interact with me. If you can interact with me, then you can know what I am thinking based on simple straightforward interpretations of what I am writing. And if that is possible, it is possible to know Paul was thinking based on what he was writing as well.<br /><br />If you can't know what others are thinking, then you cannot know that I cannot know what Paul was thinking. But if you can know, then your statement that you can't know is false.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-30683666259012273992015-04-07T16:04:00.558-04:002015-04-07T16:04:00.558-04:00From this I conclude that your interpretation of G...From this I conclude that your interpretation of Galatians has nothing to commend it. Specifically, your understanding that Paul was only sharing his opinion is the product of your philosophy, your view of Scripture top to bottom and that view is not informed by divine revelation. There is simply no reason for me to think Paul thought this was just his opinion.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-47899317922978434432015-04-07T16:00:47.380-04:002015-04-07T16:00:47.380-04:00First, Paul claims he was sent by God not man nor ...First, Paul claims he was sent by God not man nor through the agency of men. To say God sent me is to claim the highest authority.<br /><br />Second, Paul is pronouncing an anathema on anyone preaching a gospel that is at variance with his gospel. If Paul is only sharing his opinion, what basis would he have to pronounce a curse on them? Clearly Paul does not think he is merely sharing his opinion. If he does, then he is mad.<br /><br />Third, in v. 12, Paul says what he teaches he received from Jesus Christ Himself. Why would he make such a claim if he thought he was only sharing his opinion?<br /><br />The reason I wanted us to get into the details is so that people reading this can experience your true beliefs and see not only how ungodly they are, but how downright illogical and foolish they are.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-18434181698009139252015-04-07T15:55:07.850-04:002015-04-07T15:55:07.850-04:001 Thessalonians 2:13 (NASB95)
13 Fo...1 Thessalonians 2:13 (NASB95)<br /> 13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.<br /><br />Paul made repeated claims that his writings and preaching were the Word of God. These writings make up what we have come to call the Bible. Therefore, the contents of the Bible claims that the Bible is the Word of God.<br /><br />What in this text allows you to interpret Paul to be sharing his mere opinion? Grammatically, there is nothing in Gal. 1:6-8 to support any interpretation that does not conclude that Paul was writing from a standpoint of absolute authority. In His mind, he believed he had the right and the authority to bind his teachings upon the Churches in the Region of Galatia, and to every audience he wrote to as far as that goes. Now, you may think that Paul was wrong. You may deny that Paul had any such authority that Paul was like any other human giving his opinion of the gospel. But you cannot possibly interpret Paul himself this way based on his writings. And if you do, you reveal a level of extreme bias or incompetence or both. Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-69594192695355240122015-04-07T15:46:23.766-04:002015-04-07T15:46:23.766-04:00I understand your equivocation very well Dan. You ...I understand your equivocation very well Dan. You tactic is to reduce the most basic teachings of Christianity to mere human opinion and then proceed to dispense with them at your own whim because, after all, they are all mere human opinion.<br /><br />I also understand that you hate it when I call it unbelief. Well, that hatred is an excellent example of how you feel about the God revealed in Scripture, both the Old and the New Testaments. I understand that Romans 1 describes you perfectly:<br /><br /> 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.<br /> 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,<br /> 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.<br /> 1:21–23.<br /><br />That is what I understand.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-91634163852884750932015-04-07T15:40:20.223-04:002015-04-07T15:40:20.223-04:00The principle Regula Fidei is the logically necess...The principle Regula Fidei is the logically necessary outworking of the view that Scripture is the inspired Word of God. By what standards do we measure Scriptural claims? By Scripture itself. We interpret one text through a harmony of other texts. This approach is the only approach that preserves the nature of Scripture as the Word of God and guard against postmodern idiots who claim Scripture contradicts itself. If we interpret a text in way that our understanding clearly contradicts another, less complex and more plain text or number of texts, we must correct our interpretation so that it harmonizes with the clearer more evident teachings of Scripture. <br /><br />Any other approach invokes an external authority over Scripture, a standard that is not God-given, a schema that is the product of biased men with a proclivity to hate God and pervert His truth. That sort of a standard can never be trusted. <br /><br />Hence, my source for the principle that Scripture is self-interpreting is the only source it could be logically speaking: Scripture. If it were any other source, I would be making a logical blunder now wouldn't I.Ed Dingesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14007054168398086809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-43360310288457465902015-04-07T13:55:20.312-04:002015-04-07T13:55:20.312-04:00Interestingly, that is how your arguments (as pres...Interestingly, that is how your arguments (as presented thus far) appear to me: As if they were based on nothing but the whim of Ed, with no data to support it whatsoever. That you have no consistent criteria by which you interpret the Bible, but rather that your bible study is riddled with eisegesis... with you reading into the text that which is not there and then insisting that what you read into the text is equivalent to God's Word or "fact..."<br /><br />I think if you answer the questions that are being asked of you, you will yourself reveal the whimsical and ungrounded nature of your opinions... that they are ultimately an appeal to your own authority or, at best, to tradition or numbers. But we know that appeals to tradition and numbers are logical fallacies, right?<br /><br />Here's hoping you'll get around to answering the questions... who knows? You may surprise me and make a solid case and have some actually rational and/or consistent reasons why you think what you do.<br /><br />I'm just saying that at this point, I don't see it.<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-29538942364670464422015-04-07T12:02:18.319-04:002015-04-07T12:02:18.319-04:00Another question for you. You stated as a matter o...Another question for you. You stated as a matter of fact...<br /><br /><i>Christianity holds the Scripture to be self-interpreting.</i><br /><br />Source? Says who? On what basis?<br /><br />Jesus never made this claim and I am a follower of Jesus (ie, "Christ-ian," literally), so how is this claim that's NOT from Jesus part of "Christianity?"<br /><br />You can't just assert claims and demand that they be accepted as facts. The "self-interpreting" thing appears to come from an 18th century theologian, John Brown, not from the Bible or Jesus.<br /><br />What is your source for this claim?Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-12000819270084423762015-04-07T11:33:25.139-04:002015-04-07T11:33:25.139-04:00Do you hold that one has to be able to speak Hebre...Do you hold that one has to be able to speak Hebrew/Greek to understand the Bible? Is speaking Hebrew/Greek necessary for salvation, in your opinion? Is that another rule you are adding to what it takes to be saved, according to Ed?Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-56366934256378426012015-04-07T11:32:18.958-04:002015-04-07T11:32:18.958-04:00Regarding our education:
No, I don't read Heb...Regarding our education:<br /><br />No, I don't read Hebrew or Greek. I have not attended a seminary. Just read the Bible all my life (52 years, now... of course, I only had it read to me the first 5 years of my life...)<br /><br />Is your degree (do you have a degree?) from an accredited school or from some online Bible college with no accreditation?Dan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4201628496305035793.post-78051972915541856692015-04-07T11:12:20.348-04:002015-04-07T11:12:20.348-04:00I've answered dozens of your questions, Ed. I&...I've answered dozens of your questions, Ed. I'll let you take a turn. You did assure me that you would answer my questions and I am confident you are a man of your word, so, once you catch up a bit (being true to your word), I'll take another turn at your questions.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />DanDan Trabuehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14303597141397042669noreply@blogger.com