THAT is exactly what Perry Mason always did!
Robots or Free Will
- Thread starter Musicmaster
- Start date
- Status
THAT is exactly what Perry Mason always did!
Isn't "Pinching" not allowed in the rules?????...
Agreed, yet you went on for another 20 sentences some of which raised further questions, hence the'pinching graphic'.
Pinching could lead to slapping!
Speaking of slapping..........I was so ugly when I was born that the doctor slapped my mother.
Interestingly, when two big name, heavyweight theologians claim to be right, and they both have large followings behind them, and their views are not consistent with one another, Those outside those two camps can either join up with one or the other, or we can remain outside their camps because of our realizations that only one of them can be right, or they can BOTH be wrong.
That dichotomy drives many, such as myself, to remain outside the boundaries of their definitions for a following, and thus rejecting the labels.
What is today called "Calvinism" is not completely consistent with what Calvin actually believed and wrote about, and yet it's called "Calvinism" nonetheless...almost like an indictment.
D. James Kennedy was labeled, and may have even identified openly about such, as being a "Calvinist," even though I greatly admire the man and his courage to stand up against the world wide evils in culture and society, including the lives of his own following down there in Florida. I will not, however, be numbered among his followers.
This is all to say that, where some may read what I have come to understand about election and predestination, any current or future attempts to pin a label upon me, such as my allegedly being Arminian in my beliefs, that is an exercise in futility, given that I do not agree with all the tenets of that system of dogmas, or any other. As biblicists, we tend to find themselves standing outside the plethora of dogmatic encampments, looking only to scripture and the Spirit of the Lord for understanding.
Blessings to you all.
MM
That dichotomy drives many, such as myself, to remain outside the boundaries of their definitions for a following, and thus rejecting the labels.
What is today called "Calvinism" is not completely consistent with what Calvin actually believed and wrote about, and yet it's called "Calvinism" nonetheless...almost like an indictment.
D. James Kennedy was labeled, and may have even identified openly about such, as being a "Calvinist," even though I greatly admire the man and his courage to stand up against the world wide evils in culture and society, including the lives of his own following down there in Florida. I will not, however, be numbered among his followers.
This is all to say that, where some may read what I have come to understand about election and predestination, any current or future attempts to pin a label upon me, such as my allegedly being Arminian in my beliefs, that is an exercise in futility, given that I do not agree with all the tenets of that system of dogmas, or any other. As biblicists, we tend to find themselves standing outside the plethora of dogmatic encampments, looking only to scripture and the Spirit of the Lord for understanding.
Blessings to you all.
MM
I like your phrase turning.
There is a lot of "barking" at those dogmatic encampments.
Just bouncing something off of you, are you saying there needs to be a surrender involved in saving? Not just calling on the name of Jesus?
He is only flaunting his education at us by using them big words!I like your phrase turning.
There is a lot of "barking" at those dogmatic encampments.
That is a really nicely stated answer to say..........."No matter what some men may say, "I" will stand with what God actually did say".
I do not know if you will agree with me, I am pretty sure you will thought, the objections I have seen and heard to Biblicism are often accompanied by charges that Biblicists want to use the Bible as a universal textbook.
However, In reality, very few people I know like me want such a thing. Instead, A proper view of Scripture recognizes the purpose and intent of the Bible but also recognizes that principles from the Bible can be applied to an unlimited range of subjects.
For example, the Bible is not a soccer text; reading the Bible will not improve one’s corner kick.
But the Bible’s instructions on self-control, integrity, hard work, humility, and perseverance can certainly be applied to one’s performance on the soccer field. The Bible can guide a soccer player in becoming a better person, on and off the field.
The very same thing can then be applied to a brain surgeon, a police officer, a school teacher, a Preacher, a candle stick maker and so and so on!
Biblicism, YOU/ME do not automatically reject the creeds and confessions of the ancient church. Rather, we as Biblicists test the creeds, whatever their origin, against God’s Word, the Bible. This is what the Reformation was all about. If not for the Reformers’ insistence on sola scriptura, we would still be buying indulgences and kowtowing to the pope.
Biblicists do not ignore context. To the contrary, and the opposite, a literal hermeneutic involves considerations of a passage’s historical, cultural, and literary framework. Any interpretation must agree with the context of the Bible as a whole, since the Bible—the authoritative Word of God—is its own best commentary.
Am I in the ball park??????
In a manner of speaking, yes. I agree that the Bible does not and cannot serve as the roadmap to brain surgery and other specific activities , situations and conditions. It serves as a foundational guide for the right and proper ethics and morals that govern all of life, both secular and sacred.
However, the Bible is only a beginning; with it being more of a roadmap, or sign post if you will, pointing the the One, true Lord, King and God over all creation. Where the scriptures are good for teaching, rebuke, correction and instruction in righteousness, the substance of it all rests solely in relationship with the One whom inspired it, and who empowers the written words He has written in our hearts.
SHOCK ALERT!
There's an ugly, dark side to all this as well:
There are many famous name dudes out there who stand so vehemently unmoving upon their strange and dogmatic teachings that they do not budge when confronted with resistance to some of their more outlandish doctrines. They are viewed as godly men, and yet are inflexible. Now, I'm not talking about going to the point of compromise, and thus the extreme of compromising the absolute truths of God's word in the wicked spirits behind ecumenicalism/universalism. There are indeed dogmatic, absolute truths from which we should never deviate, and many of those men are wrong even when it comes to some of those core, absolute truths, and yet have a very large and faithful following.
When one is wrong, and teaches their error as truth, they are false teachers. Personally, I say to people to read the scriptures themselves, pray about it all, and decide for themselves on the basis of what Holy Spirit directs, and the very hard and damaging to pride aspect of what we receive from Holy Spirit, even when others who are wrong will say Holy Spirit told them otherwise...someone is lying, and is therefore a tool of Satan. There's the shocker many experience when their icon comes crashing down to the ground upon revelation of some sexual sin (which is very common, as you all know), or the individual eventually becomes enlightened by Holy Spirit (or perhaps the Spirit through another individual) about the errors of the one, or those, who held the brightest glitter in their eyes.
Some are likely to be thinking to themselves, "Who among any man has a handle on ALL truth, and therefore has no flaws in their theologies?"
Well, any man who laid claim to that is a charlatan.
Romans 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
The one Lord who binds all truth-seekers together into a bond of fellowship is the only way we are ever in touch with absolute Truth, especially considering that Truth is a Person, not a collection of right and proper doctrines. It is He alone who HAS and IS Truth, not anyone else on this earth.
MM
You know, it would be an interesting study to collect all the things said as to salvation. Jesus said some things, the apostles said some other things, and yet they are not at all diametrically opposed. Collectively, they paint for us a more holistic portraiture for understanding.
Are you up to the task?
MM
I am in total agreement.In a manner of speaking, yes. I agree that the Bible does not and cannot serve as the roadmap to brain surgery and other specific activities , situations and conditions. It serves as a foundational guide for the right and proper ethics and morals that govern all of life, both secular and sacred.
However, the Bible is only a beginning; with it being more of a roadmap, or sign post if you will, pointing the the One, true Lord, King and God over all creation. Where the scriptures are good for teaching, rebuke, correction and instruction in righteousness, the substance of it all rests solely in relationship with the One whom inspired it, and who empowers the written words He has written in our hearts.
SHOCK ALERT!
There's an ugly, dark side to all this as well:
There are many famous name dudes out there who stand so vehemently unmoving upon their strange and dogmatic teachings that they do not budge when confronted with resistance to some of their more outlandish doctrines. They are viewed as godly men, and yet are inflexible. Now, I'm not talking about going to the point of compromise, and thus the extreme of compromising the absolute truths of God's word in the wicked spirits behind ecumenicalism/universalism. There are indeed dogmatic, absolute truths from which we should never deviate, and many of those men are wrong even when it comes to some of those core, absolute truths, and yet have a very large and faithful following.
When one is wrong, and teaches their error as truth, they are false teachers. Personally, I say to people to read the scriptures themselves, pray about it all, and decide for themselves on the basis of what Holy Spirit directs, and the very hard and damaging to pride aspect of what we receive from Holy Spirit, even when others who are wrong will say Holy Spirit told them otherwise...someone is lying, and is therefore a tool of Satan. There's the shocker many experience when their icon comes crashing down to the ground upon revelation of some sexual sin (which is very common, as you all know), or the individual eventually becomes enlightened by Holy Spirit (or perhaps the Spirit through another individual) about the errors of the one, or those, who held the brightest glitter in their eyes.
Some are likely to be thinking to themselves, "Who among any man has a handle on ALL truth, and therefore has no flaws in their theologies?"
Well, any man who laid claim to that is a charlatan.
Romans 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
The one Lord who binds all truth-seekers together into a bond of fellowship is the only way we are ever in touch with absolute Truth, especially considering that Truth is a Person, not a collection of right and proper doctrines. It is He alone who HAS and IS Truth, not anyone else on this earth.
MM
When i get to Romans 3:4 I will expound on just that!
Hello Musicmaster, I'm hoping to finally have the time to reply to a few things that you've said (I apologize for the delay).
So, please tell us where we can find the Reformed teaching that you just pointed out for us above (in bold type). IOW, which official Reformed creed, catechism, confession, or even just denominational, statement of faith, etc., told you that this is what "much of Reformed Theology gravitates in the direction of"? I ask because I've never found this to be true in my studies of Reformational teaching.
IOW, Reformed soteriology never teaches that God sends ~anyone~ to Hell, much less "most of humanity", who truly loves Him and wants to be with Him in Heaven when they die, and on the New Earth with Him in the eternity to come (at least not that I've found so far anyway ... this is not to say that some individual somewhere might not do so, but an individual's obscure beliefs/teachings should never be used to redefine and replace what is official or orthodox teachings, Reformed or otherwise, yes?).
Thanks for your help with this
God bless you!!
--Papa Smurf
.
Last edited:
Hello again Musicmaster, if God forced people to sin against their will, and then He judged and condemned them to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire for doing so, I agree with you, that would make Him a monster, not our loving, heavenly Abba. I also agree that there are those, especially out here in Christian Cyberland, who believe such things, but to say that their beliefs are not the Calvinist norm would be to make an understatement of incredible proportions
Just to be clear, that is NOT what Calvinism teaches, nor is God dragging people into Hell ~OR~ into Heaven against their will (kicking and screaming, so to speak) what mainstream or orthodox Calvinism teaches (unless I've missed it somehow?).
--Papa Smurf
Hello Musicmaster, I'm hoping to finally have the time to reply to a few things that you've said (I apologize for the delay).
So, please tell us where we can find the Reformed teaching that you just pointed out for us above (in bold type). IOW, which official Reformed creed, catechism, confession, or even just denominational, statement of faith, etc., told you that this is what "much of Reformed Theology gravitates in the direction of"? I ask because I've never found this to be true in my studies of Reformational teaching.
IOW, Reformed soteriology never teaches that God sends ~anyone~ to Hell, much less "most of humanity", who truly loves Him and wants to be with Him in Heaven when they die, and on the New Earth with Him in the eternity to come (at least not that I've found so far anyway ... this is not to say that some individual somewhere might not do so, but an individual's obscure beliefs/teachings should never be used to redefine and replace what is official or orthodox teachings, Reformed or otherwise, yes?).
Thanks for your help with this
God bless you!!
--Papa Smurf
.
No problem PS. I know exactly what you mean about time constraints that bury us at times like an avalanche.
The best illustration I can give as to the proportions of the human population throughout time is this, right from the words of Jesus Himself:
Matthew 7:13-14
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Now, when I speak of "reformed theology," that's not necessarily the teachings of the "reformation" leadership since some of the beliefs held within reformed theology dates back to Augustine.
Sproul is a good example of the modern brand of "reformed theology." He starts out his dissertation pointing to SOME of the words of Jesus in the following:
John 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
I totally believe that, but Sproul conveniently left out the previous verse, which says:
John 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
That is a vastly important precursor that Sproul left out, either by slight of hand machinations on his part, or by ignorance. I prefer the latter as I have always had some admiration of his teaching ability and stance on many other doctrinal issues.
If you have the time, please watch the following:
Hello again Musicmaster, if God forced people to sin against their will, and then He judged and condemned them to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire for doing so, I agree with you, that would make Him a monster, not our loving, heavenly Abba. I also agree that there are those, especially out here in Christian Cyberland, who believe such things, but to say that their beliefs are not the Calvinist norm would be to make an understatement of incredible proportions
Just to be clear, that is NOT what Calvinism teaches, nor is God dragging people into Hell ~OR~ into Heaven against their will (kicking and screaming, so to speak) what mainstream or orthodox Calvinism teaches (unless I've missed it somehow?).
--Papa Smurf
PS, as a clarification, what I've shared doesn't point to God forcing anyone to sin, especially against their will.
You see, when the Reformed Theology teachers state in their dissertations that no man can recognize their sin, and thus desire crying out to the Lord for salvation in the midst of the realization of their lost state, they teach that only the Lord gives anyone the ability to recognize their sinful state, all because of all mankind allegedly being in a state of "total depravity" and there allegedly being "limited atonement" available to mankind.
Scripture teaches that the Lord did indeed give to ALL men the ability to recognize their sin, and to cry out to Him for salvation. If that were not the case, then it makes no sense where the Lord stated:
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men...
and
1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
For the Lord to offer only limited atonement and only to the few who He allegedly empowers to see their sinful state and call out to Him for salvation, that utterly contradicts His own words and His perfect will stated in the above verses, and it therefore makes Him into a moral monster, because that philosophy leads to the logical conclusion that the Lord intentionally created most men to populate Hell. It paints a portrait of the Lord punishing the lost for a choice He never empowered them to make, and the Reformed Theologians defend against that analysis by laying it all at the feet of God's Sovereignty, and therefore allegedly NOT making Him out to be a moral monster who punishes men eternally for His own pleasure.
As always, I encourage others to read the scriptures for yourselves, and to seek the Lord for His truth in all this, as is stated in 1 John 2:27.
Reformed theology leads to the following:
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make some men in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Oops! No? You're right. Genesis does NOT say that! It actually says:
Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Does the image of God portray total depravity to the extent that there is no conscience, except that the Lord give conscience to some men, and therefore the ability to see the state he is in? Folks, that's just too hard a pill to swallow for me. What scripture actually says throughout the entire Bible, as can be seen through a systematic study, is that God's Justice is such that He only punishes those who consciously reject Him and His offer of salvation.
Reformed Theology teaches that man having the ability to see his sinful state, and act accordingly steals away from God, and allegedly forces Him to have to wait on men to see their fallen state and reach out to Him for salvation at the point each man chooses in his life. Ok, so what's the problem with that? The one question the Reformed Theology thinkers have never been able to answer is:
How is God's sovereignly allegedly violated by His having chosen to give to mankind the ability to see and recognize his own lost state, and to cry out to the Lord for salvation that only He can give?
Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that [were] on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
Those are not the inspired words from a Sovereign who makes that choice for men, in the place of their own decision processes the Lord empowered each one to make, and to reward or punish each one accordingly.
Does that make sense?
TULIP has falsehoods in its interpretive foundation.
MM
i find this interesting years ago i belonged to carm forum. pardon my expression but there is some diehard Calvinist/reformed there. many times i was told certain people are designated from Birth to go to hell. ,
what amazes me if one disagrees its called arguing. but if they do it its called speaking the truth. . any way i found your reply interesting
as well with other doctrine beliefs .. southern and few other baptist doctrine teach that your %100 secure in HIm no matter what you do. the general and free will teach your not. there is always diehards in every denominations
Hello again Musicmaster, if God forced people to sin against their will, and then He judged and condemned them to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire for doing so, I agree with you, that would make Him a monster, not our loving, heavenly Abba. I also agree that there are those, especially out here in Christian Cyberland, who believe such things, but to say that their beliefs are not the Calvinist norm would be to make an understatement of incredible proportions
Just to be clear, that is NOT what Calvinism teaches, nor is God dragging people into Hell ~OR~ into Heaven against their will (kicking and screaming, so to speak) what mainstream or orthodox Calvinism teaches (unless I've missed it somehow?).
--Papa Smurf
I agree. You know, just as in any denomination, there are those who take an extreme view of the obvious.
If God forces some one to sin then He would in fact be Satan and not a saving God. MM would be 100% correct in that would then make God a monster!
There are some things in the Calvinst teaching i do not agree with, but in fact there is a lot I do agree with!
I would probably be a 4 on the TULIP scale! Actually I am more of a ROSE than a TULIP!.
R = Risen with Christ
O = On my way to glory
S = Saved from my sins
E = Eternally forgiven
I love how Paul put it:
Colossians 1:27 To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
MM
This thread has been reported for including items on the CFS "Topics Which My Not Be Discussed" Item # 4.
The items on that list have caused angry responses and tense arguments in past years and that list is enforced.
This thread may end up being edited and reopened or closed permanently.
`
The items on that list have caused angry responses and tense arguments in past years and that list is enforced.
This thread may end up being edited and reopened or closed permanently.
`
- Status