Why do we continue to hound those who are clearly

[Oakspear]

Perhaps the way I stated my position was unclear:

I am not in support of posters who attack and harrass other posters who like some or all of PFAL. While I am not a fan of "the class", I get that some folks like it and have derived benefits from it. Nor do I think that anyone who is a PFAL fan is in any way obligated to defend their position, any more than anyone else.

What I have observed is that while those who disagree with PFAL more often than not cite the bible to back up their disagreement, while PFAL supporters more often than not, do not. Not that they can't, just that they don't. What we frequently get is a "discussion" like this:

anti-PFAL: VP taught ABC, but hey, look at this bible verse, it contradicts it

pro-PFAL: truth needs no defense

anti-PFAL: ABC is based on a false premise, a mistranslation of verse X, so ABC is not accurate

pro-PFAL: look, I applied ABC and it works for me

anti-PFAL: but what about applying those "keys"?

pro-PFAL: you just hate Wierwille, don't you?

and on it goes...

I know I'm painting with a broad brush, and this characterisation doesn't apply to all PFAL fans, but it's a generalization that I have seen here time and time again.

From what I remember from PFAL, we were taught to think for ourselves and learn to understand the bible for ourselves, not parrot what a man said.

Oakspear: I think it would be refreshing if you would rationally defend your atheist position. You believe there is no God. That there is no intelligent design behind the so called creation. The human body is not man made, yet it generally lasts much longer than anything that IS man made. The sun is 93 million miles from earth. If it was 88 million miles from earth we'd all burn up. If it was 98 million miles from earth, we'd all freeze. But it just HAPPENS to be 93 million miles from earth and helps to sustain life here. C'mon. Rationally argue with me about why you believe there is no God who intelligently designed all this stuff.

Oakspear's not an atheist.

Oakspear also freely discusses his beliefs and has engaged and participated in numerous discussions about why he thinks the way he does.

Thank you Mark & Belle.

Correct. I'm not an atheist, and I do discuss and defend my positions. Often. This isn't a thread where I'm going to do that. And I'm not asking PFAL fans to do it here on this thread either. Just making an observation.

[dmiller]

Oakspear: I think it would be refreshing if you would rationally defend your atheist position.

You believe there is no God.

If I recollect correct, *agnostic* would be the better word here. :)

[Oakspear]

If I recollect correct, *agnostic* would be the better word here. :)

You recollect correctly.

And to further clarify, I'm not suggesting that the PFAL fans be lined up against a wall and be required to defend their doctrine, just that in a discussion of doctrine, it would make sense for them to give reasons, rather than just telling everyone else that they're wrong.

Okay...they should be run off and shot!

disclaimer (attempt at humor based on previous misreading of the word "throughly"...I mean, the word "shut")

Edited May 9, 2006 by Oakspear

[WordWolf]

WW: Paul "reasoned with them out of the scriptures". That's what PFAL does. Paul didn't have to rationally argue with anybody about whether or not the scriptures were the word of God; both parties agreed that the scriptures were the standard for truth. That is not the case here. Oh, and of course there's no way God was working in those peoples' hearts while Paul was speaking to them, right? That never happens does it?

"Truth needs no defense."

Eh, chapter and verse, please.

What I found was a different story...

Acts 17:1-3

"Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica,

where there was a synagogue of the Jews:

And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned

with them out of the Scriptures,

Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from

the dead; and that 'this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ'."

Acts 18:4

"And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the

Jews and the Greeks."

Acts 18:19

"And he came to Ephesus, and left them there: but he himself entered into

the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews."

Seems the apostle PAUL disagreed with you.

Who you gonna believe-the apostle Paul, or....?

Looks like Paul would STILL disagree with your statements.

You said what Paul did was what PFAL does.

PFAL is a class. It sits there. PEOPLE have to be dynamic and actually

DO stuff.

Paul went into the synagogues and discussed Scriptures,

held for positions, and supported them with Scripture.

Positions like "Christ must needs have suffered"

and that "this Jesus..is Christ".

A class sits there. We're having discussions HERE. PFAL, last

I checked, has not logged on and posted here.

By comparison, Paul would have posted in the Doctrinal or

About the Way forum, supporting his positions.

So, claiming "that's what PFAL does" when discussing what

Paul did is just silly.

----

No, Paul didn't discuss the rationality of whether or not

The Scriptures were the Word of God-

not when he was in the synagogues.

He DID have to do that on Mars' Hill and when he debated

in the Agora.

(I can fetch the verses if you've forgotten them.)

However,

many of the discussions here are different Christians

discussing positions and doctrines.

So, the connection between Christians supporting their

statements from Scripture before other Christians,

and Paul supporting his statements from Scripture

before "other Jews",

should be obvious.

(Let me know if you need it spelled out.)

As for God working in peoples' hearts, that's a non-issue.

God expects you to open your mouth, and speak.

(I can fetch the verses on that one as well-

they're in Romans 10.) Him working in hearts is NEVER

an excuse for shirking your duties to speak.

(Or, in this case, to type.)

C'mon, this is not difficult to see. I KNOW you can see

this easily enough. (And no, that's neither a personal

attack nor an excuse for one.)

Edited May 9, 2006 by WordWolf

[templelady]

"Hounding", an interesting word, it implies that a group of posters (-PFAL)is determined committed to harassing and berating another group of posters (+PFAL).

It evokes an image of +PFALers quietly going about their business and suddenly a pack of ravening -PFALers charges over the hill, horns blowing red frock coats gleaming in the sun and begins to chivvy and surround the unsuspecting, defenseless and terrified +PFALers

IN actuality the +PFALers have been busy nipping at the heals of the -PFALers, skulking around the chicken coop, popping up to tease +PFALers and disappearing on a consistent basis making any response by the +PFALers a response to -PFALer action rather than an organized hunt designed to bag a defenseless trophy

[johniam]

So the -PFALers are the chickens in a coop? Do their heads ever come off?

[templelady]

So the -PFALers are the chickens in a coop? Do their heads ever come off?

SOME-PFALers might be so characterized, as for their heads coming off, if they don't it isn't due to lack of effort on the part of SOME +PFALers.

[dmiller]

~~~~~

Edited May 10, 2006 by dmiller

[johniam]

quote: as for their heads coming off, if they don't it isn't due to lack of effort on the part of SOME +PFALers.

So I "deserve" to get hounded? Gee, I thought us +PFALers were the ones who thought that way.

[templelady]

johniam, What I said were SOME +PFALers and SOME -PFALers. I never mentioned names or alluded to any specific posts from anyone. The fact that YOU have decided that you are one of the people my posts allude too, says volumes about how you perceive yourself and your agenda. IF the shoe fits....

[Sunnyfla]

I personally could care less of what others believe as far as the ministry, just the same as when I was in the ministry, never payed attention to those who hated me for being in.

People still believe in the works of VP. Oh well... to each his own. I don't have to live their life anymore. But, of course, if they wanted help, we here on GS would be there right?? :)

xoxo