Map displaying counties and regions as used here in the Oklahoma category of the Open Directory Project.

Stream_Haze@yahoo.com wrote...
>
> "entropy" wrote in message
>
> > gepsmith@cablespeed.com wrote...
> >>
> >> entropy wrote:
> >>
> >> >How is 'works' supposed to be defined?
> >>
> >> George Smith says:
> >>
> >> An excellent question! I think that there are as many answers as there
> >> are people in the world. Every action you take, every word you say,
> >> every word you write comprises your "works".
> >
> > I sincerely appreciate your answer.
> >
> > But if works are whatever we do anyway, then why is the verse not
> > "works without faith are dead" rather than the other way around?
> >
> Because the focus of the sentence is "dead faith" not "dead works".

Oh, I completely agree. It just doesn't follow from what what said
about works being just any old thing we do anyway.

> Evidence of a dead faith is without good works.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

lsenders@hotmail.com writes:
>Stephen M. Adams wrote:
>> "basicallyblues" writes:
>> >Stephen Adams wrote:
>> >
>> >>As notted, Here's the exchange between 'skw' (a JW) and me:
>> >
>> >It's too long to read and I don't see the point.
>>
>> Funny, you post very lengthy articles expecting us to read them.
>> But you don't read a lengthy article that shows a long exchange
>> that debunks one of the theories that you are trying to pass off.
>>
>I think some of problem revolves around the fact that the doctrine of
>the Trinity is an implicit biblical testimony. There are those who
>require explicit testimony. Those who do so are usually of the mind
>that perspicuity of Scripture means that all the primary or essential
>doctrines are stated with absolute clarity in the Bible.
>
>In the fall edition of the "Master's Seminary Journal" (15), Larry
>Pettegrew lists eight aspects of true perspicuity.



But this is non-responsive and doesn't address the fact that the
Scriptures don't support "sola Scriptura" as taught by Master's
Seminary.

>8) every believer has the right to read and interpret the Scriptures
>for him/herself.

Which means anarchy. It means that in the end, Sola Scriptura is
useless.

-Stephen
--
Space Age Cybernomad Stephen Adams
malchus842SP@AMgmail.com (remove SPAM to reply)

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Matthew Johnson wrote:
> In article <104.55.05.05.2