Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
No.
|
No you say? Then how can you believe that Pastor John Doe would even consider B.Smith? Don, once again, you have proved you are a walkin' contradiction, partly truth and partly fiction. You answered no, imagine that, but out of the same mouth you want B. Smith to have a word serving position?
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
But now you're actually going in the right direction, Dom. Kudos to you. Here you are actually tackling my conclusions in attempts to disprove the reasons why my conclusions are wrong. You go boy! Keep going in this direction. I've been waiting long time for this. See if my reasonings are faulty and lay it out for us all to see. Stop the nonsense you usually provide when deriding my character instead of deriding my views.
|
Don, I've been going in the right direction on your baloney since day one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
Funny that. You say I see everything wrong in church. But yet, here I am - writing only about one thing - Ro14 - and not about the 'everything wrong' you say I see.
|
Don, the title of this thread isn't
Romans 14. It is Discrepancy in Church Practice. The first post we have the author of the thread tell us the readers how all his Christian life he has been encouraged to contend earnestly for the faith. We are then told about the organization of the UPC, how they licence ministers who are not in agreement with doctrines concerning head coverings.In short the author of this thread (you) believe the UPCI is accepting false doctrines by giving ministers a pass, by giving them a license.
You then introduce us to the saints who cannot get a word serving position because they don't believe as the leadership on head coverings. Then you grace us with the example of Pastor John Doe, and the protagonist B. Smith. We aren't even introduced to
Romans 14, and 15 until the end of your first post. You are asking the readers if we would comment on the pastor and the saint relationship concerning different views of doctrine. Hey, if you wanted us to only discuss your blasphemous beliefs concerning the book of Romans. Then Don, you should of named the thread applicably. Instead of crying and moaning about how I haven't refuted your nonsensical teachings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
That I resist your baiting, to change the topics of discussion, shows I do not wish to talk about every wrong.
|
Go to post 1.
I'm right on topic. You just should've made better choices before you came to a public forum to belly ache about how your pastor won't make you the bishop. All because you believe crazy things about the Pauline epistles. I still find it hypocritical that since you believe that Paul just wanted us all to agree to disagree you refuse to cut the pastor any slack. It's your way or the highway. The way you won't let go of this discussion only proves you must be a fly in the church ointment.
I'm bored, I'm just repeating myself. Don, anything else you have to add to this discussion was probably already wrestled. But, you are such a burr in the saddle, you won't bring anything valuable to this discussion.