You miss my point. I am amazed that anyone still clings to vpw's doctrines given that his life never came close to matching the lofty ideals he espoused.
You can't judge a book by its, just open the pages and see what's inside.
As for my beliefs on the Trinity and other issues, those came from reading and studying the Word. I have stated previously that I was non-Trinitarian before I joined TWI and while I was in.
A few years after I left, I started looking that Bible afresh. I saw the Word in a new light and for me the answer was simple.
If you have a different conclusion, so be it. I hope God has mercy on both our souls.
The veracity of the Trinity OR the veracity of Biblical Unitarianism rises or falls on the doctrine, not on the integrity of those who espouse it. That's what Goey was saying, and it appears that you are saying the same thing.
quote:You miss my point. I am amazed that anyone still clings to vpw's doctrines given that his life never came close to matching the lofty ideals he espoused.
Nope, you missed mine.
Def, I submit that you still cling to many of "VPW's doctrines". Didn't VPW teach that Jesus died and then rose from the dead? Didn't he teach many other more mainstream doctrines? Have you abandoned all of these becasuue of VPW's ungodly behavior? Of course not.
VPW's doctrines encompass more than just non-trinitarianism and the law of believing or twisted private teachings about adultry.
When we mention "VPW's doctrines" I think is is probably a good idea to distinguish what particular doctrines we are are refering too rather than making sweeping statements like the one above.
A natural reading of the post quoted above and the one that I first responded to, pretty much implies that folks should not believe (cling to) VPW's teachings (doctrines -plural) because VPW personal life was a sham.
Granted, VPW's chartacter, plaigerism, and sloppy research are reason to question just about everything he taught, but not reason to reject them all outright. Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then.
Again my point was simply that VPW's sins do not make his teachings wrong or unworthy of being believed. Each teaching/doctrine stands or falls on it's own merits.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
12
7
6
7
Popular Days
Jun 4
38
Jun 2
21
Jun 3
13
Jun 1
12
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 12 posts
Goey 7 posts
def59 6 posts
Refiner 7 posts
Popular Days
Jun 4 2004
38 posts
Jun 2 2004
21 posts
Jun 3 2004
13 posts
Jun 1 2004
12 posts
Raf
Def,
That's not what he said. You're grossly misrepresenting what Goey wrote.
By your standard, anything taught by Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart should be dismissed, including the Trinity, life after death, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Goey
You miss my point. I am amazed that anyone still clings to vpw's doctrines given that his life never came close to matching the lofty ideals he espoused.
You can't judge a book by its, just open the pages and see what's inside.
As for my beliefs on the Trinity and other issues, those came from reading and studying the Word. I have stated previously that I was non-Trinitarian before I joined TWI and while I was in.
A few years after I left, I started looking that Bible afresh. I saw the Word in a new light and for me the answer was simple.
If you have a different conclusion, so be it. I hope God has mercy on both our souls.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Ok, that's much better:
The veracity of the Trinity OR the veracity of Biblical Unitarianism rises or falls on the doctrine, not on the integrity of those who espouse it. That's what Goey was saying, and it appears that you are saying the same thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
I just read Raf's reply so I am retracting this post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
So
Raf, How's the job? I am wrapping up for the weekend.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Aww, I wanna see what you originally wrote!
But I'll be okay.
Job's fine. Just a tad off topic.
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Nope, you missed mine.
Def, I submit that you still cling to many of "VPW's doctrines". Didn't VPW teach that Jesus died and then rose from the dead? Didn't he teach many other more mainstream doctrines? Have you abandoned all of these becasuue of VPW's ungodly behavior? Of course not.
VPW's doctrines encompass more than just non-trinitarianism and the law of believing or twisted private teachings about adultry.
When we mention "VPW's doctrines" I think is is probably a good idea to distinguish what particular doctrines we are are refering too rather than making sweeping statements like the one above.
A natural reading of the post quoted above and the one that I first responded to, pretty much implies that folks should not believe (cling to) VPW's teachings (doctrines -plural) because VPW personal life was a sham.
Granted, VPW's chartacter, plaigerism, and sloppy research are reason to question just about everything he taught, but not reason to reject them all outright. Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then.
Again my point was simply that VPW's sins do not make his teachings wrong or unworthy of being believed. Each teaching/doctrine stands or falls on it's own merits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paradiseden
Ex......I do not know who told John. Next time I see him, I will try to remember to ask him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.