I guess ol' David Goldsmith really played Terry W. Benton for the "fool" this time around; despite our efforts to warn Terry.
Fools rush in...
There has, indeed, been a rash of disappearances observed over at the DebunkingEvolutionism list recently, as you allude to.
I think Terry, as you suggest, is trying to propose that a rejection of young-earth creationism is a rejection of God, the Bible and the need for salvation.
Of course, Terry has the perfect defense mechanism and position regarding such:
> I, Terry W. Benton, have my
> interpretation of the text and
> that trumps any evidence to
> the contrary.
If he ever gets off that high-horse, we have some arguments waiting for him to discuss.
While you properly note Terry W. Benton has again committed libel as to us, it is unlikely he is going to be appearing any time soon to admit, explain and correct his error as to that.
As you know, I've been trying to get Terry to admit, explain and correct his similarly false and libelous claims against me regarding a simple mistake I made that was corrected before he addressed it and his false claim about me striving to deny the truth of Psalm 14:1.
It seems Terry and his kind are just determined to keep digging their holes deeper and deeper, putting them in greater and greater darkness, while we strive hard to get them to "come out" into the light!
Subject: [M & B] Benton "talking out of school" about "fools"
Date: Friday, August 1, 2008 12:36 AM
Luckily I got this one before it was wiped:
Terry Benton wrote:
> Re: The Church of Christ
> Tin, or whatever your name is,
> Those guys [Robert, Todd -- heck,
> me, too, for all I know] did not
> reject the doctrine of salvation.
> They doubted the very premise of
> the need for salvation by denying
> that the Bible is true in regard to
> Therefore, it cannot be true in
> regard to the need for salvation.
> Do you not see that these guys
> would have broken away from you
> because of what you teach about the
> If you do not see that, then I am at
> a loss as to how to reason with you.
> If you want to discuss whether I
> teach the truth on salvation, then
> let us set up a proposition and
> some rules for the debate on the
> matter and go for it, but your
> accusation that churches of Christ
> put out atheists and teach falsely
> regarding salvation is itself a false
> Terry W. Benton
I think what Terry is saying here is that if the Earth is more than a few thousand years old, then there is no need of salvation.
Is that it, Terry?
I think there just might be a few people in the world who would consider that "falsely teaching regarding salvation". There might even be a few logicians out there who would question your reasoning:
> ...by denying the Bible is true in
> regard to origins... Therefore, it
> cannot be true in regard to the
> need for salvation.
Additionally, you are bearing false witness against Robert (and me, too, I presume). Neither of us deny the Bible is true in regard to origins. But I think it is safe to say that we would both deny *Terry Benton's young-earth interpretation* of Genesis is correct.
And it seems safe to say that Terry is making his erroneous interpretation of the creation account a salvation issue.
Worldwide Church of Latitudinarianism
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]