|
Re: How many times did you ask God for the Holy Gh
Quote:
Originally Posted by noeticknight
Your response reminds me of a famous quote from Sun Tzu, "So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak..." Are we trying to change the terrain now?
Of course, my original thoughts on this did stem from proper/improper interpretation of the scriptures. I do not concede to your assertion that my main point of contention here is the "abuse" of tongues. The inherent qualities of this teaching, and how they play out in the real world are, imo, definitely game for discussion. So yes, A. "Initial Evidence" could be incorrect Biblically. And B., "Initial Evidence" may be causing harm and damage.
Subjectivity doesn't necessarily invalidate a claim, and on the flip side, objectivity doesn't necessarily validate it.
|
My point is that objectivity is how we ascertain doctrine. Our foundation is the Word, not people's experiences. You mentioned holes in the initial evidence doctrine, but never stated what they were, and felt to emphasize the subjective angle of the issue. Though you may claim the doctrine is full of holes scripturally, what are they? Who really cares about subjective experiences in the end?
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
|
Threaded Mode
