Frank

Well, I guess I am in good company after all, Cheryl. It’s great to know there are so many members in our illustrious club! But all kidding aside, I appreciate the words of empathy and support. I think the hardest thing for me in those debates was that, among the Theonomists who opposed me, were some who had been fellow Bible college students and close friends up until that time. I can’t adequately express, in words, the feelings of betrayal and desertion I felt then

And you are correct Cheryl that, in contending for the truth, I argued and reasoned from the Scriptures to the best of my knowledge and ability. It amazed me that when I was disputing with them about the Law and the Gospel, the Theonomists never really interacted with what I had said nor demonstrated where I had failed to properly interpret the Scriptures. And yet in the second debate, as I look back now, they nailed me to the wall primarily because of my failure, as they saw it, to adequately deal with 1 Tim. 2:12-15. And on this point, as much as I might hate to admit it, they were right. I did not deal with certain key points of that text with the degree of consistency and thoroughness that Cheryl has done in her debate with Mike Seaver.

However, I learned my lesson; I learned to be more thorough and consistent in my study of different interpretations of texts, the biblical and rational basis of theological constructs, etc. So there’s nothing with making mistakes in our initial contending for truth, provided that we quickly recognize them, quickly correct them, and not repeat them in later presentations.