Joe:<br><br>I've "enjoyed" it too, sort of. I wondered how long it would be before you guys ganged up on me [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]. You make some good points and I don't have time to go into all of your points right now, but I would simply remind both you and Pilgrim that neither of you have yet addressed the point I made in my last post directly and so I will restate it again here:<br><br>"I don't believe that my characterization of the ministry of the men that I have pointed to, and I purposely did not include all "of the older writers" because some of them were just as much in error as the men of this day, is inaccurate with respect to their desire to correct the deadness of the church of their day, and their approach to do so as I have described it, because they themselves in their writings stated it clearly and plainly, as did the editors who put together their works. See the preface to Owens' works on the Holy Spirit and Edwards and Philpots letters to friends and fellow pastors, etc. So, sorry, that arguement just doesn't wash. Would you care to address the arguement I made, and these men themselves made in their letters and writings and their editors made directly?"<br><br>Briefly, what you and Pilgrim seem to be saying is that you are agreeing to disagree with me, and these men, about the correct way to reinstate balance into an out of balance situation. Thats ok if you want to disagree, but lets not attribute the problem to my error or poor manner of presenting it unless you are willing to disagree with the men I have stated and their editors, because I am perfectly capable of bringing those references to the discussion given enough time. <br><br>Peace, and I love and respect you both, I just don't agree with you and I don't think the men I have cited would either.<br><br>In Him,<br><br>Gerry<br><br>
