“The History of Christian Doctrines”

I am curious what your post has to do with Berkhof's book?

 

I agree with the OP. Nothing to add (except that I hope that "Reformend Baptist's" avatar is not a self-portrait - that dude needs a shave!).

 

Actually, I am striving to look that guy. He's cool.

 

http://www.wholesomewords.org/biography/biorppaton.html

That's the guy..

 

Sigh. My husband went through the "freaky" beard phase many years ago. His looked almost like that avitar. I HATED it!!!!!!!!!

Please don't do that to your poor wife. :smilewinkgrin:

Mrs. Reformed, you have my sympathies. :laugh:

 

That doesn't mean they welcomed it. They would be maligned by self-conceited brethren. That is true, and it was. But such malignity and self-conceit is sin. This is not the place for it.

It is insulting for a poster to connect one's ideas to some other theologian when there is no connection. The connection is only in the poster's mind, and in no one else's. It is insulting when this is done over and over again even when the recipient of such a post tells one to stop. Such posts become abusive and immature. To say that such discussion is mature is far from it. If you have in mind to discuss a Biblical topic then discuss it from the Bible's point of view. If you wish to reference another authority then do so, but don't do it with accusation, tying in another poster with another theologian or reference.
It is somewhat like saying: So you believe 1 + 1 = 3.
Haven't heard anyone say that yet.
But the inference is always there.
If you are going to quote someone, quote him for your good, not the other person's.

 

I have had facial hair all our marriage, beard and goe tee, but mostly a goe tee. But I wonder what I would look like with a long patriachial beard!

 

Like a scraggly old man! :laugh: I warn you, you will lose stuff in that beard. :laugh:

My hubby has always had facial hair too. He has the goe tee thingy now. He has a full beard in winter because he works outside. But that foot long hairy thing is just, well.....yukky!

 

Looks Orthodoxy to me...I like it.

In XC
-

 

Amen! :thumbsup:

I hold to the doctrine called OSAS. I came to this conclusion without ever reading one sentence printed by Calvin. The only thing I knew about Calvinism at the time was that he believed and taught that people had no choice in salvation.

HP wants to preach that OSAS began and continues with Calvinism. That without Calvin no one would even consider such a thing.

I received my understanding of OSAS from prayer, Greek and Hebrew concordance and scripture. I refered to some commentaries, but never read any commentary that refered to Calvin as the source of OSAS.

You see HP, you like to use Calvinism as a dig to those holding the view of OSAS, but I personally know that one does not need Calvin's writings to come to such a view. So please don't link me to Calvin nor say that he is the cause of everyone's OSAS views.

God Bless! :wavey:

 

Steaver, I had my OSAS coming out of freewill! I had to live through radical change. I know both sides from life-experience and absolute assurance 'I am right'! Today it is only OSAS -- OSAS itself, overcame freewill, proved it wrong; yea, let me tell everyone this day, proved it sinful! One CANNOT sort it out for oneself; God in his Mercy shall do it or forget it! The Holy Spirit through the Scriptures speak of the Son in the Body of Christ's Own the Church. Without anyone of these 'factors', one is unable to understand or believe or love, OSAS. O the joy, the peace, the rest, the strength and life: Once Saved, always, Saved! Thank God!

 

Thank God indeed! If it ever becomes I, I will be found in hell!

God Bless! :wavey:

 

The Body and the Word

May I respectfully add my understanding of these things?

The LORD has given us both the ekklesia, (the called out ones - His body of believers), and His Word, (in written form).

The ekklesia is built upon the the Word(s) of God, it is built by all His servants and proclaimed in full view of all the apostles and prophets.

Christ did leave His Word(s) to guide His ekklesia, and He still has living men empowered by His Spirit.

 

GE:
dfj, I know what is coming for you after this! Ask me, AD came back heavily on me before; let's wait and see.

 

Reasoning Together

-The LORD has given us both the ekklesia, (the called out ones - His body of believers), and His Word, (in written form).

-The ekklesia is built upon the the Word(s) of God, it is built by all His servants and proclaimed in full view of all the apostles and prophets.

-Christ did leave His Word(s) to guide His ekklesia, and He still has living men empowered by His Spirit.

I'm not sure which of these statements will be of concern but frankly, I find that most here are really not inclined toward real discussion unless it is of a more intellectual type such as Translations.

Believe me, after many years of debate I just long for a pleasant discussion; even regarding the most controversial of our opinions.

Alas, perhaps there are some who might be willing.

Thanks for you comment Gerhard, may the Lord be ever with you.

Dave Jones

 

History

After thinking about our long and arduous struggle to find the truth that all of us feel the Lord would truly have us understand; and after considering how far we have strayed from His Command to truly love one another, I wonder if we can ever really learn to reason together.

I do enjoy a good discussion regarding the Word(s) of God and His Precepts.

For me, the Bible is the mind of God, to be cherished, loved and honored.

The one who truly knew this wrote a Psalm to the LORD he loved. Psalm 119, a testament to the Wisdom of God.

"church doctrine", will never replace the Precepts of God. If it could we would never be so divided

 

GE:
Don't despair, Doctrine has been given the Church for our exercise in the faith. It is necessary and good for us. Sure it is going to divide - which also is very necessary for the refining of the Church.

Just follow your concordance to the word 'doctrine' and see the splendid results!

I love doctrine - "SOUND doctrine"; but how shall we know whether it is 'sound' or not without testing it? That's what so good - and enjoyable - about 'doctrine'.

 

Hi djf, the point to my signature is to show that the Bible (I agree the Bible is the written form of God’s Word), as you and I know it today in 2008 was AFTER the physical establishment of the NT Christian Church.

Sure, Christ instructed His Apostles verbally during His earthly ministry and you do in fact make a good argument, one of which being an Orthodox Christian I agree with, that it was Christ’s verbal instructions (Tradition) that jumpstarted the NT Christian Church.

Therefore, the subject matter of my signature is the Bible…the written form of God’s Word, which in fact the Church was responsible for and it was the Church that wrote the Bible. Since it’s generally understood that the NT Christian Church was started at Pentecost, which was before the Apostles began to pen the pages that eventually made up our NT.

In XC
-

 

The Early church

I appreciate what you are saying. It is difficult, sometimes, to visualize just what happened to the Word of God in the early years of the church (ekklesia).