Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
No, it is plausible at least and you have not followed your own "ground rules" of an acceptable test. Let me remind you what you defined as the "acceptable test" in the OP:
"Acceptable tests to prove validity of statements include Bible verses (plural) and actual “church life” testimonials".
This seems an acceptable test to me given that Scripture could be considered "theory" and testimonies could be considered "observations" or "data gathering". Yet you have made your decision without considering Scripture.
It seems one needs both Scripture and testimony to be able to call the myth busted or confirmed. Given that I have provided solid foundation of scripture then the myth is at least plausible because no scripture can be found to deny the plausibility.
I provided a plurality of scripture as you requested, and no other poster so far has provided such a thing and in particular, nothing which refutes or denies the Scripture I posted. Every other poster so far has provided only running commentary and opinions, not personal testimony. This is not empirical evidence from experimental observations, this is opinion. On the real TV show they never confirm or bust a myth based only on the collective opinion of the group.
Here's a little challenge for you all:
Please provide a plurality of Scripture verses which defines Grace as "unmerited favor". Since I know you would not be able to find such a definition in the Scripture I cannot see how the myth can be busted. It is at least plausible and with the addition of general support from the idea found in Christianity leads to it possibly being confirmed.
|
Sorry in my rush to get to work I didn’t explain my reasoning for considering the original statements as Busted Myth. And, EV you are right the second of the two part statement “unmerited favor is too low” wasn’t thoroughly reviewed.
I loved that EV provided multiple scriptures to prove Grace is associated only with the person of Christ. However, I agreed based on multiple personal testimonials of actual local church events (also allowed by the rule) that “to be enjoyed by us”, which no one gave scriptural support for, was indeed supported by actual events to be too subjective versus the attributes of the person of Jesus we saw lived out in Jesus and His apostles “who went about doing good”, healing and raising the dead.
OK I’m not the only judge on this. I’m open to other assessments. But hate beating a dead
