SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : General Topics : Rodney Howard-Browne: A Critical Examination of his Theology and Practice

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Todd... first off, I must have missed your "conditions". If I didnt respond or confirm, then dont assume.

Secondly, I explained why I posted what I did. It was merely to kick off the thread because of my own personal time restraints. If you are going to wait for me to put something together for you right at this point... you have a long wait. Football season is starting for me in 1 week.

Anyway... I didnt agree to your conditions for how proof was to be conveyed. Not that they are necessarily bad conditions... just that I wont be limited to that.

Krispy

 2005/7/15 14:50









 Re:

Yep... I went back and looked... I did not expressly agree to those conditions you just laid out. Please dont come after me like that publicly like I violated some kind of law. That should have been done privately, my friend, so I could have corrected you privately and no one else would have seen this discourse.

Krispy.

 2005/7/15 14:54
todd
Member



Joined: 2003/5/12
Posts: 573
California

 Re:

Krispy,
Wow, I'm really sorry that I came off that way. Let me respond...

Quote:
"Todd... first off, I must have missed your "conditions". If I didnt respond or confirm, then dont assume."

Woops! I think I might have made a false assumption! Again, sorry about that. I didn't even think that you might have missed those conditions. My bad.

Quote:
"Secondly, I explained why I posted what I did. It was merely to kick off the thread because of my own personal time restraints. If you are going to wait for me to put something together for you right at this point... you have a long wait. Football season is starting for me in 1 week."

Hey man, I totally understand if you don't want to make the time commitment to engage in a discussion like this in a fair and decent manner. I think it does take much time and patience to do so. It can be quite a time commitment. If you feel like you don't want to engage in this discussion right now, that's totally fine with me.

Quote:
"Anyway... I didnt agree to your conditions for how proof was to be conveyed. Not that they are necessarily bad conditions... just that I wont be limited to that."

Ok. Again, sorry man. I just assumed...
However, if you are unwilling to abide by those conditions, then, like I said, I am unwilling to engage in the discussion because I don't think it will work.

Quote:
"Yep... I went back and looked... I did not expressly agree to those conditions you just laid out. Please dont come after me like that publicly like I violated some kind of law. That should have been done privately, my friend, so I could have corrected you privately and no one else would have seen this discourse."

Once again, I am sorry about this. You are probably right, I should have written you privately first. I will try and correct that best I can at this point.

 2005/7/15 15:18Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

There is a lengthy extract online of a Book by a representative of the UK's Evangelical Alliance. The relevent chapter deals with the [url=http://www.eauk.org/contentmanager/content/acute/torontochronology.pdf]chronology of the Toronto Blessing[/url] in its impact on the UK. Searching for key players is possible through the usual pdf search facilities. It is a fascinating read.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/15 15:26Profile









 Re:

Todd... it's cool. Let's forgive each other and move on with this... Unfortunately it will be tomorrow before I can get back on here.

But yes, I now accept you conditions... under one condition... you let me get away with bending the rules every now and then... ok?

Were brothers... I love ya. I just dont take kindly to being called out like that in public. But like I said.. all is forgiven. Moving on now...

Krispy

 2005/7/15 15:35
todd
Member



Joined: 2003/5/12
Posts: 573
California

 Re:

Krispy,

Ok, glad to hear it. Moving on...

Philo,

This is just the kind of thing I am hoping to avoid. This is why I wanted to make my conditions very clear before openning up a thread like this. I know I ultimately can't control what you or anybody else wants to post, but I don't want to take any responsability for it.

[b]Please, everyone, if another thread is begun like this one, don't post links like this. This is a prime example of violating conditions 2 and especially 3. However, it is also a prime example of keeping with condition 1[/b].

It simply won't work to try and include 179 page articles whose relevance is based on a general connection to the topic at hand. We must be much more focused if such a discussion is to work properly.

Philo, you're free to do what you want here, but on the potentially upcoming thread I ask that you, and everybody else, don't post links like this. In the meantime, I just want to use this as an example in case we do start another thread on a topic like this.

[b]For everyone[/b], I want to restate my conditions for starting a new thread like this one. I don't want to come across as assuming some kind of authority I don't have on this site, I'm simply giving my conditions that I would be willing to engage in discussion under. Otherwise, I am not willing to open a door like this. I don't want it on my head. Hopefully that is understandable.

For the record, here's my conditions as I've stated them:

[b]1. The "proof" you use must be accessible and available to look at in context. Your response seems to indicate you already recognize the importance of that.

2. We stay focused on one thing at a time. For example, if you have a quotation or evidence that you feel proves a teacher to be false, we stay with that piece of evidence unitl it is exhausted before moving on to another.

3. You don't just copy large amounts of information and give links to articles and other information. If you feel something is relevant, copy and comment on the specific part you think is relevant. This will minimize any potential overgeneralizing.

4. If you are using Scripture to support your position, state plainly the connection- don't just flash a verse. You know what I mean?[/b]

Krispy is the one who issued the challenge and I am hoping that the potentially upcoming thread will be a discussion primarily between me and him, though of course this is a public forum and anybody can join in.

 2005/7/15 16:23Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
3. You don't just copy large amounts of information and give links to articles and other information. If you feel something is relevant, copy and comment on the specific part you think is relevant. This will minimize any potential overgeneralizing.


Do you want me to go through this whole chronology extracting references to Howard=Browne and then commenting on them? I am willing to do this, if that is what you want.

Krispy has provided a list of items. We could go through this list and provide rational explanations for each one of them, explaining why a true servant of God might have said or done this in some circumstances, but this will fail to register the acculmalative effect of the list. I think some of Krispy's items are 'strained' but the overall picture is clear enough.

I suppose we have all made up our minds about the Toronto Blessing and we will see Howard-Browne as a hero or culprit depending on our prejudgements. In the end we are providing evidence for our settled opinions, and ultimately we end up with 'my discernment is as valid as yours'. What do we do then when faithful brethren have different 'witnesses' to the rightness or wrongness of a particular phenomena? We examine the phenomena and the participants and compare both against the biblical record.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2005/7/15 17:42Profile









 Ron Bailey

That's a fascinating read all right, but as I'm reading do you know what occurs to me? God isn't IN the whole thing, it's all about the carnal machinations and plotting of MAN.

Did you get that also?

 2005/7/15 17:43
todd
Member



Joined: 2003/5/12
Posts: 573
California

 Re:

Philo,

Quote:
"Do you want me to go through this whole chronology extracting references to Howard=Browne and then commenting on them? I am willing to do this, if that is what you want."

If we were to continue with this discussion here, according to the conditions I have set forth, yes, that is exactly what would be necessary. But I believe that this thread is a big mistake and I wish it hadn't been started. Hopefully this discussion will stop on this thread and if Krispy ever decides to start a new thread about it then it may continue. Of course you are free to continue discussing it if you want, I'm just not sure if I do. I think to make such a discussion work I would need to be dialoguing primarily with one other person. So will it be you or Krispy? Are you willing to make the commitment that it would take to discuss a topic like this decently and fairly?

I think we should wait to see what Krispy wants to do before moving on. If he wants to be the one to start the other thread, then I think I am obligated to go into it with him being the primary one I am discussing it with. If he decides he is not willing to go through with it at this time, then I might be open to doing it with you. Please give me a little time to think about it and in the meantime hopefully Krispy will get back to us.

Quote:
"Krispy has provided a list of items. We could go through this list and provide rational explanations for each one of them, explaining why a true servant of God might have said or done this in some circumstances, but this will fail to register the acculmalative effect of the list."

I think it was a mistake to post that list in the first place, and as I've indicated I take on the responsability for it at this point. It totally violated all the conditions I had set forth but which Krispy didn't see before posting it.

I believe that what you referred to as "the acculmalative effect of the list" is easily subject to the huge problem of overgeneralization in these things. This is why I am unwilling to go at it like this.

Quote:
"I suppose we have all made up our minds about the Toronto Blessing and we will see Howard-Browne as a hero or culprit depending on our prejudgements. In the end we are providing evidence for our settled opinions."

Hopefully this is not the case. I don't think it is on my part. I am confident about what I believe on many issues like the one brought up here, but I wouldn't say I am absolutely settled. And hopefully nobody else who would want to engage in the discussion is. I don't think the discussion would be worth it if that was the case.

Quote:
"What do we do then when faithful brethren have different 'witnesses' to the rightness or wrongness of a particular phenomena? We examine the phenomena and the participants and compare both against the biblical record."

Well put. That is exactly what I would be interested in doing.

[b]Again, I can't force this, but I am asking that this thread be shut down now. It was because of a mistake that it was started, and now I would like it shut down. Please do not post on here anymore.

If anyone wants to continue discussing the topic as it now has evolved into, I simply ask that you begin your own new thread to do it.[/b]

I wipe my hands clean of this thread.

 2005/7/15 18:07Profile
ZekeO
Member



Joined: 2004/7/4
Posts: 1014
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

 Re:

Quote:

todd wrote:
I wipe my hands clean of this thread.

Gee dude, whats up? :-?

You were going along so nicely.


_________________
Zeke Oosthuis

 2005/7/15 18:17Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy