Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [M & B] DBWillis, is that a "one-way" street, "two-way", or what?

Expand Messages
  • Charles Weston
    Of course, Willis will want to decide what is a correct interpretation. Charles ... From: rlbaty50 Subject: [M & B] DBWillis, is that a
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 29, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Of course, Willis will want to decide what is a "correct" interpretation.

      Charles

      --- On Tue, 6/29/10, rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...> wrote:

      From: rlbaty50 <rlbaty@...>
      Subject: [M & B] DBWillis, is that a "one-way" street, "two-way", or what?
      To: Maury_and_Baty@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 11:50 AM







       









      Sounding very much like someone who understands and accepts the "Goliath of GRAS" and the claims I have made for it, DBWillis just posted the following to that other list that has been taken over by Goldsmith:



      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coCBanned/message/22908



      > From: DBWillis, NI preacher

      > To: coCBanned@yahoogroups.com

      > Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010



      > Subject: Re: Absolution payments (Is

      > Pope a source of divine revelation?)



      > (excerpts)



      > Pi:



      >> My comment has consitently been

      >> that God speaks to us thru His

      >> creation as well as the Bible.



      > We both agree that the Bible and

      > the creation are ways God reveals

      > things.



      > We also agree that only if the

      > interpretation of the creation

      > is consistent with the Bible,

      > can that interpretation be

      > correct, right?



      I'll be looking forward to see how Pi handles that question.



      Did DBWillis leave out the following, or does he not agree with it:



      > If the interpretation of the

      > Bible is not consistent with

      > the creation, that interpretation

      > cannot be correct.



      >> Agree: DBWillis ????



      I realize it may be just more wordplay from DBWillis whose comment above might have been more properly stated as:



      > If your interpretation of the creation

      > is not consistent with my interpretation

      > of the Bible, then your interpretation

      > of the creation cannot be correct.



      >> Agree: DBWillis ???



      Sound familiar?



      See the "Goliath of GRAS"!



      What is DBWillis thinking?



      I think DBWillis is just reformulating his position which remains, briefly stated:



      > I, DBWillis, have my interpretation

      > of the text regarding the real world

      > and that trumps any real world

      > evidence to the contrary; any

      > contrary evidence simply being an

      > indication that God can make things

      > look older than they are.



      >> Affirm: DBWillis



      And so the game plays on, with my "Goliath of GRAS" still king of the hill.



      Sincerely,

      Robert Baty

























      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.