Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

OK, I'll bite - to the Serpent Seed "people" here
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Rafael, Ramona, Ca is the place your looking for BlessedinMsTn
There is a beautiful campus on the river,, where many believers study Gods Word,,, perhaps one day they will all get to your level.

www.vision.edu

You say that I have not responded to your question, I have made 80 post on this one subject,, does it ever end?
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/23/06 11:00 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Rafael, Ramona, Ca is the place your looking for Rafael D Martinez
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
There is a beautiful campus on the river,, where many believers study Gods Word,,, perhaps one day they will all get to your level.

www.vision.edu

You say that I have not responded to your question, I have made 80 post on this one subject,, does it ever end?


I don't follow every post you do. I had no idea this was such an issue here. And you don't have to be ugly about the standard of Biblical interpretation. Why is that such a sore point for you?

I sure hope they do know how to do basic Biblical interpretation when students leave from there.

The question you haven't responded to is found in my post on Revelation 2:7 and Genesis 2:9.
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
5/23/06 11:14 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Isnt this pot....... caseyleejones
Quote:
And you don't have to be ugly about the standard of Biblical interpretation. Why is that such a sore point for you?
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11788
5/24/06 7:47 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Rafael, Ramona, Ca is the place your looking for Kenny L Flaming
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
There is a beautiful campus on the river,, where many believers study Gods Word,,, perhaps one day they will all get to your level.

www.vision.edu

You say that I have not responded to your question, I have made 80 post on this one subject,, does it ever end?


Blessed

At one point you stated you went to school over sea's not in CALIFORNIA?
_________________
Pastor of Cross Pointe
Abbeville LA.,
http://www.crosspointe-church.net

Formerly "WardlinePastor"
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1360
5/24/06 7:53 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Wardline, the school is in California here in America BlessedinMsTn
I completed my studies at the Australian campus while doing mission. I was just giving Rafael the US location
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/24/06 9:18 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: I do not post under my real name, Kenny L Flaming
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
to it on this board is uncalled for and a violation of this board......


OH But You Do Brother Blessed .

BlessedinMsTn wrote:
This is Pastor Vaughn and I am thrilled to be able to write this post myself instead of via my precious wife.
...


It was OK for you to call yourself by your name- But now it is a big secret..
_________________
Pastor of Cross Pointe
Abbeville LA.,
http://www.crosspointe-church.net

Formerly "WardlinePastor"
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1360
5/24/06 11:59 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post I had never really heard of this before....(L) SkyPilot
don't know why but I had not. I have read this thread with great interest. I did some minor research simply by Googling the term "Serpent Seed". Here is a sample of what I found.

http://www.serpentseed.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_seed
http://rmillevo.tripod.com/serpent_bar.htm
http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum2=52
http://www.stargods.org/SeedArticles.htm
http://www.sherryshriner.com/

I am astounded at the absolute absurdity of this heretical doctrine. I am amazed at what I read in some of these web-sites. I am dumbfounded that a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ would become a party to this perversion of Scripture. This doctrine is held by people that are into alien stuff, racism, sexism, conspiracy theories of every kind. They are so into this doctrine and the side issues it brings that they have lost any focus on the Cross of Jesus Christ, the center and hallmark of our faith.

Blessed.....I do not know who you are, this is not personal on that level. You have not presented one shred of evidence that supports any claims of the Serpent Seed Doctrine within the framework of any orthodoxy.

If we are to rightly divide the Bible we must realize that there are standards and parameters for that division and that the brothers and sisters that have gone before have explored and helped us in establishing the "right and left limits" of Biblical interpretation. This doctrine so completely evades any concept of orthodoxy. To insinuate that somehow your theology is the only right theology and your revelation is the only right one, in the face of many witnesses is folly of the greatest sort and the beginning of cult-like behavior.

I have been accused of having an "extra large tent". In other words, I can be at peace with many different interpretations of scripture. In my tent are Pentecostals, Baptists, Methodists, Anglicans and even Orthodox and Catholics. I am one of the most ecumenical of ministers. I cannot, though, have any place with people who hold to a doctrine so blatantly heretical as the Serpent Seed. It is a vehicle of manipulation, racism, sexism, cult-like behavior and Gnostic/Manichean dualism.

I know I have offended you. For that I am truly sorry, but sometimes the offense is what gets our attention and turns us from a dangerous path and puts us back on the path of righteousness. I hold you in my prayers, I pray that you turn from this wicked and heretical doctrine. Prayer is all that I can give you as it is difficult, if not impossible, to convince you of your error when the Scriptures I would bring to you are the very ones you have twisted beyond recognition.

Quote:
May God bless and keep you
Turn his face to you and be gracious to you
Look you in the face and grant you peace.

_________________
Pax,

Skypilot
Acts-celerater
Posts: 849
5/24/06 1:07 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post WOW Bulldawgbishop
Was checking out the sites the last poster provided and....WOW...especially that Sherry Shriner person...talk about a whack job...these sites support everything from blatant racism to alien abduction...Shriner even has an article calling the Apostle Paul a snake and a fraud....if that is "revelation"...hmmm...I have no doubt what the source of this is....what a twisted mind Acts-celerater
Posts: 755
5/24/06 1:54 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: WOW Kenny L Flaming
Bulldawgbishop wrote:
Was checking out the sites the last poster provided and....WOW...especially that Sherry Shriner person...talk about a whack job...these sites support everything from blatant racism to alien abduction...Shriner even has an article calling the Apostle Paul a snake and a fraud....if that is "revelation"...hmmm...I have no doubt what the source of this is....what a twisted mind


WOW-

This thread was hopping a few days ago.

Looks like some folks did some research and found out that some of the other purveyors of the this doctrine were WACKO and now all is quiet!....

Has blessed conceded this too but with out telling us?
_________________
Pastor of Cross Pointe
Abbeville LA.,
http://www.crosspointe-church.net

Formerly "WardlinePastor"
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1360
5/26/06 3:14 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post A coupla points of interest, Blessed SKT
Blessed,

I've got a few questions for you. I promise not to attack your responses.

It was alluded to, if not asked, by another poster, but I did not see an answer from you. I'll ask it again at the risk of being irritating...

You have said that the 'eating' by Eve of the forbidden fruit was actually the physical act of intercourse between Eve and Satan (foregoing the 'missing link' piece for a moment), and that Satan was the Tree of Knowledge - either literally or by type.

You have said that Jesus was/is the Tree of Life and, through what I believe is sound reasoning, have added that we are to 'eat' of Him in a spiritual sense.

We, being the offspring of Eve, are supposed to 'eat' His flesh in accordance with John 6:51.


So, am I understanding you correctly when I summarize your statements below?

1. In this discussion, the verb 'eat' actually doesn't mean to consume physical food through the mouth.

2. The fleshly meaning of 'eat' is actually sex.

3. The spiritual meaning of 'eat' means neither consuming physical food nor sexual intercourse.

Please check my understanding of your statements so far.

-----------------------------------

Regarding the 'missing link' issue:

You have continually defended a belief that Adam was genetically different than modern humans, but the only 'proof' that you have offered so far is that Adam was God's son.

1. Do you know whether Jehovah (or Satan for that matter) has DNA? I ask this because you appear to be arguing that Adam's DNA was different because Adam's DNA came from God as opposed to Satan.

That may prove to be a pointless question, but I found myself thinking that perhaps it would lead you to expound on this, yet uncovered, territory.

Quote:
there IS A MISSING LINK,,, there was indeed an animal, a mammal that connected humans and animals,, because SOMEHOW we wound up with animistic attributes in our DNA


2. I admit having been irritated at your insistence that the 'missing link' is "proven." While I am not so naive as to suggest that you made up the missing link bit, I stand with all who have thus far stated emphatically that no such proof exists. To your point, some scientists assume that such a link must have existed and can even show its possibility in genetics. This, however, is a far cry from proof. Please refrain from using the word "proven" when attempting to shore up credibility for a possibility.

Just a thought...

When God created, He called everything He created 'good'. Why do you condemn what you call the 'animistic attributes in our DNA'?

Come to think of it, I might start reasoning the other way on you...

You would say that Satan is perverted, would you not? It stands to reason, then, that if straight sex is perverse, then bisexual acts would be even more so. As such, perhaps the body that Satan possessed to proposition Eve was a female missing link. And, subsequent to seducing her, Eve offered the missing link to Adam too - it says that Eve 'gave also unto her husband' right? The Bible doesn't say that the missing link never bore children, so maybe the male children that she bore to Adam mated with animals. That would explain how human DNA got into animals.

I didn't compose that because I'm being hateful. I'm just demonstrating the frustration that I see in many of those opposing you. The missing link theory begins with an assumption, yet you insist that it is 'proven'.

-----------------------------------

Another question that was asked... I can't recall that you answered it, so I'm asking it again. Feel free to direct me to your answer if you have already provided one.

Gen 2:9 says, "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."

Both trees were 'good for food'. I am having a hard time explaining this phrase within the context of allegory. If fleshly eating is actually sex and spiritual eating is neither sex nor the consumption of physical food, how can both be 'good for food'? Are you saying that God crossed three metaphors in one scripture? I have to say, that's a difficult pill to swallow.

------------------------------------

Almost done now....

Ok, the tree thing is the last sticking point for me.

You have mentioned that the tree of life was/is Jesus Christ with us being the leaves that heal the nations, and the tree of knowledge was/is Satan.

So help me understand how Satan can be a figurative tree in the garden AND possess the literal missing link at the same time.

I believe that you are suggesting that Gen 3:6, "And when the woman saw that the tree [was] good for food, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat" actually implies that both the tree and the fruit were the missing link possessed by Satan.

If that were to be true, then why do you break the consistency of the allegorical metaphor here by saying that Jesus is the tree but we are the leaves? If Jesus isn't the whole tree, then how is Satan?

One minor point here... Does sex make one wise? Or is 'wise' a metphor for something else?

I have some more to discuss, but in the interest of space and your being swamped in this thread, I will save the rest.
Hey, DOC
Posts: 58
5/26/06 3:55 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post so far it seem that .. Rafael D Martinez
With the exception of one pretensive Serpent Seed adherant and Blessed, the deafening silence of their willingness to step out and own their beliefs is quite telling.

Wayne Lee's entries were completely evasive smoke screens that drolly promised "proof" that was too powerful to be defiled by something as low as actually allowing it to be examined. He deleted his entries here. One has to wonder why ..

BlessedinMsTn's attempt to defend the doctrine have been entirely based upon what he's read into the Bible text and the assumptions/associations he's created from his own interpretation, which appear to have been drawn from the unbiblical traditions of those who believe this teaching .. NOT the Bible itself.

As many have pointed out here, the doctrine is advanced by many on the Internet with a very bad and even warped theology that is out of touch with reality, let alone the Bible. Reliance on bogus and junk science as well as high pressure haranguing against biblical Christian absolutes on the nature of sin, the fall of man and man's depravity is what underlies this foul and disgusting teaching.

Beyond this, no other Seed folk have stepped up to spell out their views. If so many people claim this to be true, why are they ashamed of it?

Why? Because it CANNOT BE PROVEN AND IS A FALSE DOCTRINE.

Why the persistent belief in it? The reasons are many .. I think the main ones are combinations of both fear and pride. Fear of being seen as questioning "the Message" and therefore the "anointing" of the "messengers" whom they extol as God's "men" for the hour and fear of finally realizing how off they are in other doctrines. And pride that refuses to admit that they may be wrong and be perceived as unlearned, when in fact they really just need to read the Bible and learn the TRUTH and move on (after tossing out the tapes, books and videos of false teachers whom they've been seduced by).

I'm singularly amazed at how many views this thread has incurred. I hope it's helped someone somewhere and the email I've gotten says it has. All I had asked for is proof of this doctrine from the Bible .. not a doctoral dissertation. What we've seen so far is a great illustration of how bad doctrine is spread around .. through suggestion and not Scripture. If you can't prove it from Scripture, don't teach it. If you do, you make yourself a false teacher, no matter how good your intention or truly zealous you may be. That is why the Biblical language I use in my admonitions here still must be used ... REPENT!

agape

rafael
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
5/27/06 5:26 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: so far it seem that .. SKT
Rafael D Martinez wrote:
All I had asked for is proof of this doctrine from the Bible .. not a doctoral dissertation. What we've seen so far is a great illustration of how bad doctrine is spread around .. through suggestion and not Scripture. If you can't prove it from Scripture, don't teach it. If you do, you make yourself a false teacher, no matter how good your intention or truly zealous you may be. That is why the Biblical language I use in my admonitions here still must be used ... REPENT!



Now, to be fair, this is an utterly hypocritical challenge. It is the equivalent of saying, "All I wanted was the impossible, he has yet to provide it. Therefore what he believes is false."

If you were genuinely desiring to discuss this odd system of belief, you would have at least acknowledged Blessed's attempts to answer your challenge. However, you have shown that you seek only to discredit what he believes without a thought for the man who holds the beliefs. In this conversation, you are the snob. You have sought to establish your throne and preside in judgment over the beliefs of another - elevating yourself above the position of a brother to that of an inquisitor. You've demanded proof but set the standards for that proof far beyond those upon which you pin your own beliefs. Anything that Blessed has offered has been rejected with a simple 'that's-not-good-enough' comment coupled with more challenges meant to silence Him.

To me, Raf, that's not good enough. According to scripture, we are to use just balances. It's not enough to say that something doesn't measure up. You've got to add the appropriate weights to your side of the balance to show the problem. You are not obligated to do so, but neither was Blessed to offer his side.

I, for one, respect the fact that Blessed has not caved to your huff and fluff intimidation tactics. I agree with almost nothing he has said, but, as a whole, it hardly bears the 'mindless drivel' label that you keep trying to force on it. Oh ok, I'll give you the missing link stuff... Wink

Additionally, I would enjoy reading your humble, reasoned, scripture laden approach defending what you believe against what Blessed believes. In good faith, Blessed answered your challenge with what he thought was a reasonable exposition. Could you not do the same?
Hey, DOC
Posts: 58
5/27/06 7:26 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: so far it seem that .. Rafael D Martinez
SKT wrote:
Rafael D Martinez wrote:
All I had asked for is proof of this doctrine from the Bible .. not a doctoral dissertation. What we've seen so far is a great illustration of how bad doctrine is spread around .. through suggestion and not Scripture. If you can't prove it from Scripture, don't teach it. If you do, you make yourself a false teacher, no matter how good your intention or truly zealous you may be. That is why the Biblical language I use in my admonitions here still must be used ... REPENT!



Now, to be fair, this is an utterly hypocritical challenge. It is the equivalent of saying, "All I wanted was the impossible, he has yet to provide it. Therefore what he believes is false."

If you were genuinely desiring to discuss this odd system of belief, you would have at least acknowledged Blessed's attempts to answer your challenge. However, you have shown that you seek only to discredit what he believes without a thought for the man who holds the beliefs. In this conversation, you are the snob. You have sought to establish your throne and preside in judgment over the beliefs of another - elevating yourself above the position of a brother to that of an inquisitor. You've demanded proof but set the standards for that proof far beyond those upon which you pin your own beliefs. Anything that Blessed has offered has been rejected with a simple 'that's-not-good-enough' comment coupled with more challenges meant to silence Him.

To me, Raf, that's not good enough. According to scripture, we are to use just balances. It's not enough to say that something doesn't measure up. You've got to add the appropriate weights to your side of the balance to show the problem. You are not obligated to do so, but neither was Blessed to offer his side.

I, for one, respect the fact that Blessed has not caved to your huff and fluff intimidation tactics. I agree with almost nothing he has said, but, as a whole, it hardly bears the 'mindless drivel' label that you keep trying to force on it. Oh ok, I'll give you the missing link stuff... :wink:

Additionally, I would enjoy reading your humble, reasoned, scripture laden approach defending what you believe against what Blessed believes. In good faith, Blessed answered your challenge with what he thought was a reasonable exposition. Could you not do the same?


Welcome to the reality of discussion, SKT. Deal with it.

You may want to review the contents of this thread. I don't think you've been reading it. My replies have engaged what Blessed was saying about it. Are we reading the same thread? I've not discussed Scripture? I've been a "snob" because I asked for proof? What kind of backsass is that?
What Scripture about "balances" are you talking about which in your "humble" opinion show how terribly I've missed the mark?

The Bible was always the standard to meet upon. Period. If you've got another one in mind, you and I are going to be in very obvious disagreement. Call me all the names you want, but I make no apologies. In case you hadn't noticed, it seemed like most everyone else on this thread might not post in the same way I might but everyone else seems to be asking the same direct question: where is this loathesome teaching found in the Bible?

If it's "impossible" to find there, as you say, which it is .. where can this discussion go? How much parlay do you want before you can say we've "discussed" it before we meet with your entirely arbitrary discussion standard? I have asked Blessed to prove what he says from the BIBLE. That sounds pretty clear to me but apparently not to you. When he quotes a Scripture verse, he then says in effect "this is what it REALLY means. He then has proceeded to teach out of the completely SILENCE on the claim, or worse read INTO it what isn't there. He's been told this and he just keeps on keeping on pushing this unbiblical angle. You may not see that from your end as anything vaguely relevant to reasonable discussion and that's fine, but it's the absolute bottom dollar of Bible study. I've been pointing this out to him and you see it as "huff and fluff" and "hypocrisy." Pshaw.

Anyone who pushed this teaching was welcome to come in and discuss it and open the Scriptures up as to this doctrine. The discussion quickly turned to the unbiblical standards Blessed holds about this doctrine - his interpretation. If you cannot see that, this discussion isn't going to mean anything to you. How can a "reasonable" discussion be held on the Bible when the standard itself isn't even being paid proper attention to? This thread then opened up to everything under the sun but Scripture.

So if you have a child holding their hands over their ears who believes it's ok to play hopscotch out on the freeway along the centerline because no cars drive on it, I should just hand them the chalk to go out and imperil themselves? How long would I have to discuss it to them before in your estimation they've been "informed"? This whole post is strange .. I'm not getting your messy missive.

You may call me a snob and some so mean as to push ducks into the water. But am I wrong? Show me where. Try again.

agape

rafael
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
5/28/06 7:22 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: so far it seem that .. SKT
Rafael D Martinez wrote:
Welcome to the reality of discussion, SKT. Deal with it.


You live in a strange reality.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
You may want to review the contents of this thread. I don't think you've been reading it. My replies have engaged what Blessed was saying about it. Are we reading the same thread? I've not discussed Scripture? I've been a "snob" because I asked for proof? What kind of backsass is that?


I’ve read this thread completely. I’m struck by the disrespect you are showing a brother in the Lord. I understand the frustration you may be experiencing. You are observing that brother embrace what you feel/know/think is a perverted doctrine – at least, I hope that’s the source of your frustration. However, you will not make any headway with him by simply disqualifying his thought process as ‘not enough’.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
What Scripture about "balances" are you talking about which in your "humble" opinion show how terribly I've missed the mark?

The Bible was always the standard to meet upon. Period. If you've got another one in mind, you and I are going to be in very obvious disagreement. Call me all the names you want, but I make no apologies. In case you hadn't noticed, it seemed like most everyone else on this thread might not post in the same way I might but everyone else seems to be asking the same direct question: where is this loathesome teaching found in the Bible?


And that is a reasonable request. To his credit, Blessed attempted to give you that for which you asked. Even if it is not up to your standards, it was full of scripture. You should have, and should now, take what he gave you and refute it. He gave you plenty of opportunity to discredit the SS doctrine using scripture, yet you found it more opportune to attempt to discredit Blessed.

The problem is that you went beyond asking for scriptural support to asking for a single scripture that proves the belief. Individual scriptures will never prove anything to someone who disagrees, nor should any doctrine be based on a single scripture.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
If it's "impossible" to find there, as you say, which it is .. where can this discussion go? How much parlay do you want before you can say we've "discussed" it before we meet with your entirely arbitrary discussion standard? I have asked Blessed to prove what he says from the BIBLE. That sounds pretty clear to me but apparently not to you. When he quotes a Scripture verse, he then says in effect "this is what it REALLY means. He then has proceeded to teach out of the completely SILENCE on the claim, or worse read INTO it what isn't there. He's been told this and he just keeps on keeping on pushing this unbiblical angle. You may not see that from your end as anything vaguely relevant to reasonable discussion and that's fine, but it's the absolute bottom dollar of Bible study. I've been pointing this out to him and you see it as "huff and fluff" and "hypocrisy." Pshaw.


So prove him wrong Biblically. That’s your double standard. You expect him to only speak in KJV with references, yet you are permitted to simply wave your magic wand and decree that all of what he just said is wrong. I say, prove it. Show him his error using the same standards that you’ve required of him to show his belief.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
Anyone who pushed this teaching was welcome to come in and discuss it and open the Scriptures up as to this doctrine. The discussion quickly turned to the unbiblical standards Blessed holds about this doctrine - his interpretation. If you cannot see that, this discussion isn't going to mean anything to you. How can a "reasonable" discussion be held on the Bible when the standard itself isn't even being paid proper attention to? This thread then opened up to everything under the sun but Scripture.


Exactly my point. The standards you set at the beginning of this thread were far too stringent to be adhered to. You could not live up to those standards if I asked you to prove the trinity or any number of beliefs that we hold dear. If you wanted to turn this brother from his error, then show him the right way. Don’t just call him a fool.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
So if you have a child holding their hands over their ears who believes it's ok to play hopscotch out on the freeway along the centerline because no cars drive on it, I should just hand them the chalk to go out and imperil themselves? How long would I have to discuss it to them before in your estimation they've been "informed"? This whole post is strange .. I'm not getting your messy missive.


So Blessed is a child? Sorry, that doesn’t wash. You are both grown men. Just because his discernment doesn’t get a passing score from you, it doesn’t grant you the right to spank him. Again, show him the right way. If he belongs to Jesus, he will eventually see the way.

Rafael D Martinez wrote:
You may call me a snob and some so mean as to push ducks into the water. But am I wrong? Show me where. Try again.


If the source of your hostility is an understanding that I think you are doctrinally wrong, you’ve misread my post. In fact, I called Blessed’s doctrine odd and mentioned that I disagreed with almost everything he has said so far, but I have yet to try to show you where you are doctrinally wrong. That said, you’re approach will not have the desirable effect of turning a brother from deception.

As for me personally, the SS stuff is easily discredited in light of the doctrine of Spirit, Soul and Body. When one understands from scripture that the incorruptible seed is planted in a man’s spirit and that the seed of Satan is deposited in a man’s soul, it is easily understood that physical heredity is not the source or the vehicle of either.
Hey, DOC
Posts: 58
5/29/06 9:31 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post My silence has not been defeat, simply Out of Town BlessedinMsTn
We just returned from preaching a teen challenge conference in California,, so I have been away from my computer and my wife forbade me from bringing my laptop as she wanted all of my attention when I wasn't preaching . . .So here we are

I will respond to my dear Brother Rafael this evening if possible, there is much to refute. Also, to SKT, thanks for your sense of balance and fairness,,, your a rare breed in religious circles.
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/29/06 10:55 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: My silence has not been defeat, simply Out of Town Cletus COG
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
We just returned from preaching a teen challenge conference in California,, so I have been away from my computer and my wife forbade me from bringing my laptop as she wanted all of my attention when I wasn't preaching . . .So here we are...


Again somethings doesnt ring true here

I looked at your website and it says you were in "beautiful state of Mississippi where we are seeing such a dramatic move of God in the churches where we are travelling. What wonderful days these days are before the coming of the Lord. This past Sunday we saw three miraculous healings before our eyes as well as several people ...."

How is it that you are in Mississippi Preahing and in Californmia Preaching...?

I also notices a couple of times this past weekend when I looked to see if you replied to this thread I saw you had logged on....
_________________
CLETUS COG
Your Incognito Friend
__________________
Friendly Face
Posts: 115
5/29/06 9:06 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: so far it seem that .. Rafael D Martinez
Quote:
However, you will not make any headway with him by simply disqualifying his thought process as ‘not enough’.


Where did I "disqualify his thought process?" Excuse me? Again, if disagreement with how someone arrives at their conclusions is too much for you to handle objectively, you're clearly not getting what's been going on here. Your indignation seems to be arising out of your conclusion that I'm somehow dissing Blessed's rationale as "not enough." I've not dismissed his reasoning as beneath my ability to consider - I've objected to his interpretation as being erroneous and flawed.

Quote:
And that is a reasonable request. To his credit, Blessed attempted to give you that for which you asked. Even if it is not up to your standards, it was full of scripture. You should have, and should now, take what he gave you and refute it. He gave you plenty of opportunity to discredit the SS doctrine using scripture, yet you found it more opportune to attempt to discredit Blessed.


That's pretty slick, SKT .. making it sound like I was making this personal with this man. The rhetorical temperature arises, Blessed hollers how mean I am and you cluck your tongue and agree. You're making this out as a personal vendetta against the man. How childish!

See, here's the problem with your own line of thinking of how I should be responding - you not only want to take me to task for not following your line of reasoning on this, one which I am seeing I have to categorically reject but you want to make it personal and make it appear as if I'm out to "get" Blessed. Friend, you're just not getting at where I'm coming from.

Let's try this AGAIN: Listen up ..

I have established a clear principle of interpretation that obviously you cannot stomach and neither can he - it's called ESTABLISHING THE TEXT.

In sound Biblical study, establishing the text is to so expound upon a verse so as to FIRST describe what it SAYS before trying to draw out what it MEANS. The letter "A" can mean NOTHING unless you first grasp that it is one of the 26 letters of the alphabet. It's not going to do those learning the alphabet any good to not get it straight that A is not B, and vice-versa.

Blessed was asked to explain several times how his view that verse A actually means F or even X, or some other abstract idea not even describable by the alphabet. He has ducked this question again and again.
How can you possibly discuss this issue unless you first deal with the content of what the verse is saying FIRST before doing anything else. You cannot.

What you want to have done to meet your own warped standard of propriety in the matter is for me just to start quoting verse after verse and go from there to "refute" him. Wrong. I'm not going to do that because such an approach is fundamentally flawed since we can't even agree upon what we are talking out to begin with. What would my citing verse B do to help Blessed if to him, it teaches H or even X?

I don't know how many more times I can explain that to you or him. How much clearer do I have to make this?

Quote:
The problem is that you went beyond asking for scriptural support to asking for a single scripture that proves the belief. Individual scriptures will never prove anything to someone who disagrees, nor should any doctrine be based on a single scripture.


Aha. Finally I am getting where you think I'm being so mean. The "single Scripture" canard is one you think is too "stringent" to prove truth claims.
Again, I reject what you are insisting here: you seem to be saying that you cannot read a verse of Scripture and not glean from it a teaching or truth that can stand on its own. While I do agree that doctrinal teachings are supported by a series of verses taken in proper context, I contend fully that Biblical truth claims that teach sound doctrine can be drawn explicitly from one verse in and of itself that can stand alone to teach it.

Have you never heard of the 10 Commandments? The Proverbs? Do you really want to go there?

Let me ask you your take upon the example I quoted in this thread to Blessed : What can we learn from John 3:16?

If you can't tell me we can't learn anything from that verse, and that being Biblical doctrine, apart from other Biblical verses that echo the same thought, then we're never going to see eye to eye.

Quote:
So prove him wrong Biblically. That’s your double standard. You expect him to only speak in KJV with references, yet you are permitted to simply wave your magic wand and decree that all of what he just said is wrong. I say, prove it. Show him his error using the same standards that you’ve required of him to show his belief.


As I've said, you're not getting at what I just said about establishing the text. I started out to - as you say - "prove him wrong Biblically" in at least one post and then explained why I stopped. You must have missed that in the posts. You must have.

And I've never demanded he stay in the KJV to answer the question. Where are you getting THAT? Get the facts straight - Blessed is a big boy and can take care of himself. No one has given me a mandate to be the Exclusive Defender Of The Faith who can decree who lives or dies here, so enough with your rather tired rhetoric about "waving my magic wand." It's becoming quite absurd.

It seems like quite a few other people are asking the same type of questions .. so what's your beef with me personally?

Quote:
Don’t just call him a fool.


Where have I called him a fool? You are becoming a false witness. Tell me where I've labelled him as such. If not, you owe me an apology.

I don't generally ask for that. In fact, I never do ask for apologies from people on this board who go off on me for anyone of a hundred reasons and never have. I think you'd be the first person since my years on the Net whom I think I actually have to request that of.

Not that I really expect one .. mind you .. But you ought to consider it.

Quote:
Just because his discernment doesn’t get a passing score from you, it doesn’t grant you the right to spank him. Again, show him the right way. If he belongs to Jesus, he will eventually see the way.


Try reading this again:

Titus 1:13

This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

Titus 2:15

These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.


I'm doing what Scripture says. You got a problem with that, take it up with the Author.

I care about Blessed's error enough to call him out on it if he cannot defend it from Scripture. You have the Consitutional right to despise and name call me all you want. You just don't have any Scriptural leave to do so. That's fine with me. Talk to the Lord about it.

Quote:
If the source of your hostility is an understanding that I think you are doctrinally wrong, you’ve misread my post.


Yes, your first post just dripped with brotherly love, SKT. How could I have missed that?

This has nothing to do with whether you agreed with his doctrine or not. Let's get that clear. You have an important issue about how I've delineated my challenge. I understand that you feel I'm needing to be rebuked and told how to conduct myself in this discussion. It's a free country and this is an open board.

I hear what you are saying. I just don't agree with much of it all, however. And if you want to perceive my own protests as "hostility", let the chips fall where they may. I have no axe to grind with you, and you can let fly all the flames you want.

I detect your own concern for Blessed and that is good. However, I concede none of your smarmily communicated "admonitions" for reasons which I have made clear. I and others here have given him more than enough time to describe his doctrine for us. It's not happening, and it never will. I'm not faulting your approach .. go in peace. But don't cloud up the air here with emotionally-charged accusations of how I'm going about it that don't wash.


agape

rafael
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
5/29/06 10:49 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Cletus, we were in Cali Fri night & Miss Saturday & BlessedinMsTn
My wife and I flew from CALI to Mississippi Saturday,,, and why am I even answering such a statement.
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/29/06 10:58 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: My silence has not been defeat, simply Out of Town Rafael D Martinez
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
I will respond to my dear Brother Rafael this evening if possible, there is much to refute. Also, to SKT, thanks for your sense of balance and fairness,,, your a rare breed in religious circles.


Refute anything I say if you want to, Blessed, but as you set forth to do battle, I hope you don't duck the central question AGAIN ..

WHERE in the Bible can we find a verse that tells us Eve had sex with the serpent?

It's a simple request and can have simple answer .. a VERSE .. if it is true.


agape

rafael
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
5/29/06 11:03 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Rafael, oh Rafael I trust that if we ever met in person BlessedinMsTn
our tones to one another would be different than this board.

Evidently I have failed miserably in meeting your test. Although I have posted close to 80 times on this very subject giving it my best shot.. In your mind I failed,, in my mind nothing has changed we still don't see eye to eye,, in that there is no sin and in that there is no argument.....

Of course if I wanted to keep this ranting going on,, which is has gone on much too long already I would bring to the attention of this board that you never ONE TIME dealt with any of the bulleted list I presented to you and asked you to refute.

You never told this board who the CHILDREN or the SEED of Satan was that God said would be enemies with the SONS of Adam....

You never explained to this board why of all the Old Testament characters ONLY CAIN was mentioned as the SON OF SATAN... Not once did you give a better rendition of why we MUST BE BORN AGAIN, why was our first birth so sinful?

You never told this board why Cain was totally removed from the lineage of Christ.... You never told this board why all the SONS of CAIN were evil men such as Nimrod and those whose hearts were never towards the Lord and yet SETH'S sons were the patriarch who were humble men who had faith and proved they were of the righteous seed.

You never told this board why after this sin Adam & Eve immediately are focused on their nudity, their sexuality!

You never told this board why GOD CURSED EVES WOMB.... of all the thing he could have cursed what did he hate about her womb so much that he cursed every woman's woman with this agonizing PAIN, WHY did God do this? Oh I'm sorry, I remember, its because Eve failed the LORD, she ate an apple that God didn't want her to eat,, how elementary!!!!

For you and I fail the Lord everyday, in his foreknowledge he KNEW we would fail him and he provided a way,, he doesn't CURSE us when we fail him,,,, Was EVE hated of God?

Why did God curse a poor little animal called the serpent,, why did GOD HATE THIS ANIMAL? Then turn to him and CURSE HIS CHILDREN, in the New Testament he even told them, all those religious men who like CAIN were religious but had no revelation of Christ,, he told them they were of their FATHER, the DEVIL..... Cain was religious he brought his offering to the Lord,, but it was ABEL who by REVELATION knew that the sin in the garden was a BLOOD SIN and therefore by revelation brought a BLOOD SACRIFICE and GOD LOVED HIS OFFERING and hated CAINS,,, you see, here's religion without revelation,,, its in all of Cains children

UNTIL WERE BORN AGAIN and we put off that CORRUPTIBLE SEED and put in the INCORRUPTIBLE SEED OF CHRIST,,,

Also, you didn't address why God must destroy the earth with FIRE.. if this evilness in man is spiritual as you claim then surely you cant BURN evilness out of the earth,, you cant destroy a SPIRIT OF EVIL... but if that EVIL was started in the FLESH, in the working of fleshly desire,, then ALL FLESH MUST BE BURNED WITH FIRE . . . .

However, since I do not wish to keep this argument on forever, I wont bring out all of the things that have not been fairly discussed, I will just bow down to the great Rafael and declare you the victor and for the sake of argument I will sit back and listen to you continually rant and rave over something that is neither here not there for our salvation... It is simply an understanding of original sin,, an understanding that I cherish as truth,, evidently you do not, I am gentleman enough to accept that,,, you act as if this is a threat to the cross of Christ to believe this... When we all get to heaven it wont matter then which one was right or wrong will it,,, hopefully there you and I will have forgotten this disagreement and I will find you in the corner of the glory world having it out with an angel or something,,,,, wont it be something if our personalities do not change,, that should be interesting

If you will remember, you invited me into this discussion, I came at your request, you told me that all you wanted was to hear my scriptures I have 32 of them in total in this debate,,, none of them to your satisfaction.. I have never nor will I ever try to convince anyone to believe in the doctrine of Original Sin,, if you ask me if I believe it, I will say Yes, if you do not it shan't be mentioned again,, its just the kind of man I am.
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/29/06 11:20 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.