Hi Dave,
I echo the sentiments of Mike when he said, "I wish we could continue to dialog, respecting the fact that all have declared allegiance to the same Lord."
It's taken me a bit longer to come to the conclusion you already reached, but I see the futility in continuing.
Dave, as always, I appreciate your wisdom and thoughtfulness.
Selah.
Selah?
-
_Mort_Coyle
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:28 am
- Location: Seattle, WA
The idea of a "truce" was mine.
What I was trying to get at was something like: Both sides acknowledging on what points we disagree for the purpose of going on to new topics. In other words, agree to disagree on what had been covered so far---and move on.
But I do see a problem with such "truce" in that we really don't agree about anything when it comes to universalism.
2 Camps: Universalists and [verus] Non-Universalists.
So I guess a truce wasn't such a good idea after all....
Anyway,
Rick
What I was trying to get at was something like: Both sides acknowledging on what points we disagree for the purpose of going on to new topics. In other words, agree to disagree on what had been covered so far---and move on.
But I do see a problem with such "truce" in that we really don't agree about anything when it comes to universalism.
2 Camps: Universalists and [verus] Non-Universalists.
So I guess a truce wasn't such a good idea after all....
Anyway,
Rick
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
“In Jesus Christ God ordained life for man, but death for himself” -- Karl Barth