|
|
USER COMMENTS BY “ R. K. BORILL ” |
|
|
| Page 1 | Page 8 · Found: 500 user comments posted recently. |
|  | |  |
|
|
 4/6/14 9:49 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | |  |  |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
UPS writes, You're are a elder, you have to work with the people to whom you minister, you of necessity make judgments about their spiritual state. Ways contention is we have no way of knowing the visible church, and I would say both Scripturally and experimentally that he is incorrect in his view. RK responds, We have a responsibility to protect the church from scandalous behavior and false doctrine, In either case The Lord is telling his disciples to judge false prophets, Ye shall know them by their fruits, i.e, their false doctrine and those who are deceived by their doctrine. Regarding the visible church, we do not know who the elect are perfectly. We may have our doubts about some of our members outwardly but we must defer our judgements to The Lord who is able to look upon the heart. Even when members may be over taken in a fault we must be careful in judgement.
Galatians 6:1 KJV
[1] Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. |
|
|
| 4/6/14 9:11 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Lurker writes,These is nothing logical about love fulfilling the Sabbath but it's a biblical fact (Gal 5:14). I'd be interested to read a biblical argument demonstrating that Holy Scripture is logic as you state. Are you up to it? RK responds, Love is perfectly logical first of all because it comes from God who is love and perfectly logical, It's the hatred of man that is irrational, Second, the first law of logic is the law of contradiction which states that no two opposing statements can be in agreement at the same time. Scripture is all logic because all it's statements are in perfect agreement from Genesis to Revealtion. Notice for example James' use of logic to establish the irrationalism of contradictory speech: James 3:10-12 KJV
[10] Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. [11] Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? [12] Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh. Notice the premise followed by logical arguments then a conclusion, |
|
|
| 4/6/14 9:05 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Lurker writes,These is nothing logical about love fulfilling the Sabbath but it's a biblical fact (Gal 5:14). I'd be interested to read a biblical argument demonstrating that Holy Scripture is logic as you state. Are you up to it? RK responds, Love is perfectly logical first of all because it comes from God who is love and perfectly logical, It's the hatred of man that is irrational, Second, the first law of logic is the law of contradiction which states that no two opposing statements can be in agreement at the same time. Scripture is all logic because all it's statements are I perfect agreement from Genesis to Revealtion. Notice for example James' use of logic to establish the irrationalism of contradictory speech: James 3:10-12 KJV
[10] Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be. [11] Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? [12] Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh. Notice the premise followed by logical arguments then a conclusion, |
|
|
| 4/6/14 8:39 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Way writes, Tell me Ups, what was it Jesus perceived in them to reject them? RK responds, Way, it's interesting that he asks a question and you answer with scripture proof that he requested. Yet, he completely avoided your question. I'll help him. They were rejected because they were not justified by grace through faith alone. They gave evidence of this by attempting to justify themselves by what they perceive as "good works". Notice how they say, "have we not DONE". . . |
|
|
| 4/6/14 7:34 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Troll Droppings writes, What a stupid comment! Understandable coming from someone in a reformed church. And a minister to boot. You make no difference between logic in the Divine mind and your own impoverished logic! Can you attain to Divine Logic?! You exalt your sin ridden logic above Scripture and think that this is legitimate? Or is logic the only faculty that is not affected by sin? Sure explains a great deal about your posts RK responds, I do not recall anywhere in this discussion where I spoke of myself. We were talking about your accusing me of elevating logic above scripture. (An accusation by the way in which you failed to provide evidence). I merely pointed out the impossibility of elevating logic above that which is logic. Are you now suggesting that I have such an ability or that I am implying that I have this ability when I have already said this is impossible. Speaking of which, if we are created in the image of God which you now say has a logical mind, is it possible for his creatures to think logically? |
|
|
| 4/6/14 6:29 PM |
| R. K. Borill | | Baton Rouge, Louisiana | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Troll writes,
Something as tenuous as the word 'logic' comes from 'Logos' is sufficient for Borill to claim that the verse he quoted makes his point. This is called logic! It would be laughable if it were not so sad! R. K. responds, What is funny is someone who disparages logic to attempt to prove his point with what - logic. Try again Troll Droppings. You affirm the cosequence that scripture is not logic or logical, but you give no evidence. This makes your argument a fallacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
