<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bottomMargin=0 leftMargin=3 topMargin=0 rightMargin=3>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Quite honestly based off your own sentence, how can you claim to be right?
At least Rev Ev and Lance are using <STRONG><U><EM>Bible
quotes</EM></U></STRONG> only to disprove your <STRONG><U><EM>personal
opinions</EM></U></STRONG>. Now in debate that declares you at a loss, because
you have nothing backing you up. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>IF Peter has no authority, then God would not have him in the Bible. The
Bible is God's message to us, how can you claim what Peter says is false? By the
same preface as saying Peter is false we could argue that ALL written books are
false because "how the hell" can we trust them? Luke 10:18 Jesus says: "I saw
Satan fall like lightning from Heaven". Admitted, it doesn't say into Hell. And
there are more references of Satan being cast into the pit. Sadly none of us
know what "the pit" is.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We've all had our ego's punctured by Jesus, to claim just because Peter
learned the hard way (which means your ignore that Christ called him Peter =
Petra = Rock) makes him refuteable, then it makes us ALL and EVERYONE in the
Bible (and the world since yesterday, today and tomorrow)worthless.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If you refute one person in the Bible, then you refute them all. For the
Bible is take all or nothing. My guess, you'll take it all.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>God bless you,</DIV>
<DIV>Dajas</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On Sat, 22 May 2004 22:17:43 -0500 <A
href="mailto:gcfl-discuss@gcfl.net">gcfl-discuss@gcfl.net</A> writes:<BR>>
Dear Jeff,<BR>> <BR>> I don't want to beat a dead horse -- we all know we
are going to <BR>> continue<BR>> to disagree about this subject -- but how
the hell (pun intended) <BR>> did<BR>> Peter know what God did with any
angels whatsoever? Its not part of <BR>> the<BR>> Jewish scriptures that
were later assembled as the Old Testament. It <BR>> was<BR>> not discussed
by Jesus. Peter was not taken up into heaven before <BR>> he<BR>> wrote
his letters. Jesus had to puncture Peter's ego several times, <BR>>
and<BR>> then Peter denied Jesus three times. What authority is Peter on
<BR>> this<BR>> subject?<BR>> <BR>> As to revelation -- I won't
dredge up Martin Luther's opinon that<BR>> Revelation was not prophetic, or
the many debates when the anthology <BR>> of<BR>> accepted scriptures
known as the Bible was first assembled (many in <BR>> the<BR>> early
church believed it should not be included), but just taking it <BR>>
as<BR>> is, what is meant by "written in the book of life." God may have
<BR>> many<BR>> reasons for writing people in the book of life.<BR>>
<BR>> Your last paragraph: I don't find in the Bible that that is God's
<BR>> plan.<BR>> Anyone who thinks they can sum up God's plan in a
sentence, or a<BR>> paragraph, or a doctrine, should take a look at Job 38:
"Where were <BR>> you<BR>> when I laid the foundations of the earth? Who
has laid the measures<BR>> thereof, if you know, or who has stretched the
line upon it?" It is <BR>> a<BR>> good reminder for the most advanced
astronomer, the most learned<BR>> theologian, and the most sincerely devout
Christian.<BR>> <BR>> Siarlys</DIV></BODY></HTML>