:first:Bob Enyart said:Myshrall, I'm interested in the issue you raise about which side focused more on Scripture. I have a suggestion on how to determine that objectively. Copy the debate into two files, one titled Sam's Posts Only, and the other titled Bob's Posts Only, and from those files, delete the oppositions posts (I've done this from the beginning. It is extremely helpful in remembering and carefully analyzing Sam's arguments. And by the way, I also have files that contain, for example, only the Q&A that Sam and I have traded, and files that collect everything either of us have written, say, on Roosters, or Christ emptying Himself, or JONAH, etc.). Now that you have Sam Only, and Bob Only, then from each file delete everything except for the biblical material. If you leave only the quoted scriptures and verse references, which side do you think relied most heavily on Scripture? (Hint: the answer is inversely related to which side appealed heavily to extra-biblical authority [which Sam answered correctly, by the way, all though most people read his answer exactly backwards. Did you?].) Now, if that's too unfair a test, then try this: delete everything except quoted scriptures, verse references, and comments made directly on and about the text. And then see which side relied most heavily on Scripture! Now if these tests seem unfair to the Settled View side (I have no doubt), then don't declare the winner of these contests by word count (since the Open View has been far more willing to expound on it's position), but rather, divide the biblical material into the total argument presented by each side, and the winner will be the side with the lowest score! Now, I can already hear the Calvinists criticizing this entire scheme, saying, "Bob thinks that if you quote more words from the Bible, you're being more biblical! Ha!" Well, Myshrall, you criticized my posts complaining that, "Sam was led to believe this would be a true debate centered on Scripture." Well, what if you find out that I did quote and reference and directly comment on more Scripture than Sam, and also as a greater percentage of my argument? I perceive that regardless, you would still assert that Sam's posts were more centered on Scripture than were mine! And how would you come to this conclusion? Because you disagreed with my position. So, perhaps you can identify a weakness in the argument of this paragraph, but if not, this is what you first criticism translates into: I will judge whatever side that disagrees with me as not being centered on Scripture.MyshrallBayou said:
Of course, that attitude would set you up in your own mind as an authority over the Bible, which I'm sure you would not intentionally do. So... I'll accept a "thanks Bob for pointing that out to me," either in this thread, or when we meet in heaven.
Regarding cutting and pasting, Myshrallm, I guess that's an insult? If I had these posts written earlier, I WOULDN'T HAVE KEPT IT A SECRET! My ministry struggles financially to reach more people. We would have been selling this just like we sell The Plot manuscript! And while I'm at it, I was somewhat suprised when Sam wrote, "Rev. Enyart continues to want to smuggle in whatever paper he has written about Greek philosophy..." Smuggle in? Anyone who has read this debate has also read Sam's 2001 paper on Openness and the Historical Jesus, from which he copied and pasted much into BR X (in rounds 1, 3 and 5). And interestingly, just a couple sentences after Sam accused me of this, he copied lengthy swaths of that paper into Round Five! Huh! Myshrallm, this was your second criteria on which to judge the debate. So, after a bit more reflection, which side wins in the category of Least Smuggled Material?
See 2B [BEA-]SLQ3! You could comment on it!Myshrallm said:
Myshrallm: you give false religions too much credit. Firstly, they are all either pagan, polytheistic, pantheistic, or atheistic (except for the monotheistic religions which are perversions of the biblical revelation of the God of Abraham). What other religions acknowledge one true creator personal God who offers to save men from His own righteous judgment of the wicked? (This is what you jsut claimed I might have stumbled upon wading through some false religion not based on the Bible.) But even this does not sufficiently expose your confusion. Because my criticism of immutability and Christian fate is NOT that they are similar to Greek culture and philosophy -- but that they are DEMONSTRABLY IMPORTED from the Greeks.Myshrallm said:
And are you saving their identities to be used as a secret weapon in the future?Myshrallm said:
Yes. And would you agree that He is not lower than man? Or are you one of the many who think that a homosexual sodomizing a young boy gives pleasure and glory to God?Myrshrallm said:
-Pastor Bob Enyart
Denver Bible Church (.org)
context
