Vince Massi said:
On one occasion, you slipped up and referred to the Word of God as "empty" and "vapid.
No, Vince, I referred to
your theology as vapid and shoddy. If you are incapable of telling the difference between an attack on the Scriptures and one on yourself, it doesn't speak highly of your comprehension skills, does it? (And I didn't use the word "empty," either, which means you are seeing what is not there.)
Or, perhaps, you think a critique of your teaching
is an attack on the word of God? If so, how incredibly arrogant of you.
Either way, you do not come across as fit to teach.
To be fair, Ransom, your belief that God's promises of answered prayer are "vapid BS" is not dishonest--God does not answer your prayers.
To be fair, Vince, you have absolutely no standing whatsoever to tell anybody whether or not God answers their prayers. It is merely one more proof of your arrogance that you presume to do so.
Your theology is shoddy because it is obviously poorly reasoned.
It is vapid because it lacks scriptural substance. You base it on your personal anecdotes about supposed answers to prayer but dismiss counterexamples as proof of scorning. (There's that arrogant spirit in evidence again, Vince. You realize God hates that, right?)
And, yes, it is
empty. Nearly 170 posts in, and you
still haven't said anything remotely memorable or useful.
When you're stuck in a hole, Vince, you stop digging. I guess Joe Combs and the other hacks at Hyles-Anderson never got to that lesson, eh?