1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why...

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by skypair, May 13, 2007.

  1. donnA

    donnA Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are people who do not care what is true and what isn't, only what they think is true, whether or not it actually is.
     
  2. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    And, of course, everybody thinks it's the other person who is guilty of this.
     
  3. donnA

    donnA Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2000
    Messages:
    23,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I actually care if I believe something not true, don't you, haven't you ever changed something you believed because you found out it wasn't true?
    There are people who refuse to do this, no matter what scripture says.
     
  4. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow! I didn't know by "resigning" I would be opening myself for such vicious attacks! And "fairly?" By whose standards? I believe I deal with the words of scripture more "fairly" -- more honestly, at least -- than someone who can say "all" means "all classes, kinds, etc. but not universal 'all'" in situations where God says "but that ALL should come to repentance."

    If that is "fair" and "honest," where do you get your standard. Larry? God would have known how to say "all kinds," don't you think??

    My "own thinking." Like no Christian agrees with me. Like there is no theologian who believes in free will.

    I guess you did think I was "resigning." Always best to discredit someone behind his/her back, isn't it.

    I'm sorry you couldn't "get in the mood" of the OP where we start with our salvation and grow toward "the unity of the knowledge and faith of Christ."

    skypair
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    There was nothign vicious about it. I simply stated what you have demonstrated here often.

    You are incorrect.

    Yes, he does know how to say all kinds and he did it in many places. You simply deny it. As for 2 Peter 3:9, I tend to agree with you on that verse, but there is a good exegetical case that can be made for the other side. But in other places, the same construction of 2 Peter 3:9 clearly means "all kinds."

    There certainly are, but again the test is Scripture, not agreement with each other.

    I wasn't discrediting you behind your back. This is public knowledge and you are still here.

    I am very much "in the mood" for unity in the knowledge and faith of Christ. That is what I consistently argue for. But unity is hte knowledge and faith of Christ, and you do not agree about that.
     
  6. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    donnA, npeterely,

    Believe me, donnA. I've "been to the edge" of Cavlinist belief, "looked over the edge," and almost "slipped."

    Total depravity is very seductive with its accompanying "born in sin" corollary."

    Perserverance of the saints is very comforting and at least partially if not wholly true, also.

    That God controls everything (rather than seeing any of God's plans being frustrated) was also very believable until I realized that He totally controls the outcomes and consequences, not our wills.

    But that Calvinists can't distinguish between soul and spirit was unsettling. See, scripture reveals a division of soul and spirit and this has HUGE implications for sotierology.

    And TULIP fall right into that "gap" in knowledge between T and P. :tear: Calvinist theologians can teach their theology as "systematic" and complete whilest still having "gaps" like "I don't know why God chooses whom He chooses to save" (Do you think maybe people have to believe for God to choose them) or "I don't know how sin entered into creation" (Do you think maybe Satan's fall was a "clue" or that "free moral agency" might?).

    Can we work our way through these issues as Christians or do we have to continue in our DISunity in knowedge and faith?

    skypair
     
  7. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, David -- both sides are surely trying to "wash each other's feet."

    There is always a suspicion when another text exists. Calvinists rebelled against the same thing with Catholicism -- Bible + tradition. I visited with a Mormon elder years ago and it was "the Bible as interpretted by "The Book of Mormon." It is almost impossible to have a cogent theology without finding these seemingly godly inputs. I mean, even I have pastors I trust and ones I don't. Originally, it was because I wasn't doing my own "spadework" in the scriptures.

    I, for one, realize it is more complex than that. In fact, as I think about it now, it seems to center mostly on the "sovereignty" issue coming to a "fate vs free will" interpretation of scripture. All else seems to be constructed to "explain" these.

    Can't answer to that one. I think we all agree with that.

    "Hesitant" isn't a good descriptor. In speaking of the early Reform church, I think there was an issue of "deadness" that Jesus told John about (Rev 3:1) where the falatlist aspects of the Bible were more predominant than now. Plus, they were going through a "sacralist" era in which "religion" was trying to separate itself from "state" in accordance with the Bible paradigm of there being "composite state" where all religions are accepted equally and none "drive" the state agenda.

    Today Calvinism at least has focused on a better motive for evangelizing. It's not THE motive scripture gives (to reach those who haven't heard since, if they are "elect" they will "hear" anyway and if not "elect," they can't).

    Does all this seem to be what you see, David?

    We definitely "need a map" to get where we want to go! What do you find incorrect about my observations above?

    skypair
     
  8. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Skypair. I think the difficulty I have is with what you say in the sentence, "There is always a suspicion when another text exists," if by "another text" you mean something in addition to the bible, by which (as you see it) those Christians who differ from you measure their beliefs. If that is the case, I must underline in the strongest terms that I believe as I do not because Calvin (or Spurgeon or the 1689 Confession or anyone/anything else) taught it, but because that is what I understand the bible to teach. I'm keeping this short, as I might well have misunderstood what you meant by "another text". Perhaps you could tell me whether I have got your meaning correct. Thanks.
     
  9. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Another text such as "Institutes" or the "Westminister Confession." The latter is perhaps more distinct as to the line between truth and heresy (the latter which no one, especially no students of scripture, wish to commit). Does that not draw our faith toward one view as against another? Sure it does! It even condemns the other's thoughts by exclusion, right? Do you disclaim such denominational influence in your Christian growth?

    But if that gave you pause, you didn't read far enough to consider this apparently -- "In fact, as I think about it now, Calvinism seems to center mostly on the "sovereignty" issue thereby coming to a "fate vs free will" interpretation of scripture. All else seems to be constructed to "explain" these." Is anything and everything only done by the will of God? Does He, then, will that we sin after we are saved?

    Yet in reading my devotional yesterday, I come across this -- Col 3:10, "And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:" Isn't this what we should strive for in this forum? not to "restrict" salvation either in mind or in practice by any human creed but to bring the gospel to ALL in the belief that God wills all to be saved.

    This lost one over here is NOT like Eodipus, of Greek mythology, having no choice but to carry out the fate of his unseen god.

    And in this saved one over here -- God has not released His perfect will into his life else he'd sin no more. He still has the residuals of the free will he had before he was saved that needs also to be renewed in "knowledge and faith of Christ."

    skypair
     
  10. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, I do! Remember? It was me who started this thread.

    Where shall we start then, Pilgrim? Our salvation? Our original unity? "One Lord," right? Did He want you to be saved? Did He ever present Himself to you as not wanting you to be saved? Is there someone else that God told you that He wasn't going to save? Does that person look much like you before you were saved? Col 3:5-7 -- "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
    6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
    7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them."

    Where do you come up with the idea that there are some whom God has outright condemned without a trial? without a chance of righteousness? Without a determination of innocence or guilt?

    skypair
     
  11. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, Skypair, it seems we are just arguing in circles. You say that my beliefs come from outside Scripture. I try to explain that they don't. You then reply with the suggestion that I must have been drawn to those views by reading works other than the bible. But both "sides" on this issue have works written by their proponents. Just because people have written books about the doctrines of grace/ reformed doctrines, that doesn't automatically mean that those doctrines must be unbiblical. There have been plenty of books written from your standpoint, too, remember.

    The death of the Lord Jesus Christ provides an excellent example of how something can be sin, but yet be God's will, and the fact that it is God's will takes none of the guilt away from the perpetrators. Acts 2.22-23:

    22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know––
    23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;

    God's determined purpose, man's lawless hands- the two are not mutually exclusive.

    Do you really think that people who believe as I do hold back from preaching the gospel to certain people because they might not be among the elect? That is just not so. Believers in reformed truths also seek to bring the gospel to all, because it is "through the foolishness of the message preached" that it pleases God to save those who believe. (1 Corinthians 1.21)

    I don't know much about Oedipus (a bit of a "complex" character?), but if he believed what you say, then this formerly lost one is not like him either; rather, he echoes the words of John Newton's hymn, and says:

    Amazing grace! How sweet the sound
    That saved a wretch like me.
    I once was lost, but now am found;
    Was blind, but now I see.​


    I too am sure that I need to be renewed in "knowledge and faith of Christ" as day by day I seek to serve Him, and so often fail Him.
     
  12. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, you don't agree about the knowledge and faith of Christ. Until you do, on what basis can we have unity?

    I don't have that idea. I don't know anyone who does. Do you?
     
  13. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    David --- No. You asked what I meant by "other texts." I didn't say you believed them. I merely cited a couple and said that people are drawn in.

    I agree it happens on both sides (thought I wrote it the first time but maybe not). Anyway, I was only responding to your question.

    Not sure I follow. Are you saying it was God's choice that the Jews or Romans kill Jesus rather than Him claim His kingdom at that time? Because I find Jesus saying "How many times would I have gathered you as a hen..." and the point where He said it being just one of those times. So wasn't rejection of the kingdom out of God's hands and against His will and just the first indication that God wouldn't have His will be done, at least not yet?

    I'd have to think about whether His will was according to foreknowledge or predestination. Same issue with Adam. Did God purpose for Adam to fall or not? He had to "change His mind" and curse the perfect earth He had just made for Adam. In both cases, it seems to me He foresaw something that changed His initial plan.

    I don't believe I said that. I meant that some doctrines teach that God withholds the truth from some -- the non-elect who can't "hear." And if we believe and teach those doctrines, we are preaching the word of God.

    Well, the idea with Oedipus would have been that, if he was saved, he was "saved" by "fate" -- by the decision of some god that he would be saved and not by any volition or will on his part. Is that you?

    Well, I just found that out again today on the golf course. :praying: I tell you, you can get under conviction so much that it is like your flesh refuses to do right!

    skypair
     
  14. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Like I said -- we have the "unity of the Spirit" (Eph 4:3) as a starting point. You are saved, right?

    Now let's proceed with the "one Lord" concept. Is He a Lord of fate or a Lord of free will? Which do you see happening to people both in scripture and in creation? Does God let people make choices or not?

    That seems to me to be the fate of your "non-elect." God "pre-judges" or "pre-condemns" guilt or innocence before they are even born -- "pretrial."

    Larry, I am trying to pose this in different ways because it seems so unlike God to do what Calvinists claim He does. As I told David -- I think one of the salient issues is whether we believe in a God Who controls everything and "all is fate" -- "que sera, sera" -- or whether we believe in a God in Whose image He said He made us -- with free will and sovereignty of our own.

    Let's just look at that, shall we? Is there any real purpose in us deciding and/or doing anything OR are we to just let life come crashing down around us if so be that that is our fate?


    skypair
     
    #34 skypair, May 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: May 18, 2007
  15. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes I am saved. But unity is about more than that. Unity is not just becaues we are saved. We are unified by what we believe.

    Free will. Man is free to do what he wants to do. Man, like God, is bound only by his nature.

    Free will. Man acts in accordance with his own nature.

    Yes, he let's them make choices.

    I think the issue here is that you define free will in a way that is faulty.

    They are sinful in Adam. They are not innocent. God judges them righteously.

    Might that be because your view of God is faulty?

    Here you have a false argument. A God who controls everything does not lead to fate. I think we have explained this many times.

    Yes, our purpose is to glorify God. Therefore, our decisions are to be driven by that.
     
  16. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,136
    Likes Received:
    3
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thank you, sir.
    That is a rather eloquent way of putting a stop to this thinking that man has the ability to choose good (good in accordance with how God sees that term) apart from God enabling him to do so.

    God's nature is holy. It is His nature to abhor sin, to hate it, and to love good.
    He cannot go beyond what His nature allows Him to.
    He will not go beyond what His nature allows Him to.
    Those are the parameters of His nature.

    In the same way the natural man was born at enmity with God.
    His nature is that of sin.
    Sin permeates every part of his character.
    Even when he purports to do good, there is sin lurking at the door.
    He cannot go beyond the boundaries of his nature.
    What he perceives as good is tainted by sin.
     
  17. skypair

    skypair Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Larry, you are already NOT getting what Eph 4:3 and 4:13 say. Eph 4:3 says we are already UNITED in Christ if we are saved. Eph 4:13 says we need to grow in "unity" of what our "knowledge and faith" means!

    So even God doesn't have free will? "Bound" by His nature? OK -- BIG problem! If God is "bound," then there is a higher authority than He is. If God is not "free," then neither is man, I will grant you. To what fate is God bound, BTW?

    Which "will" you now admit is neither free in God nor in man, right?

    Do you still feel this? Like I have said before, does God not sin because He can't or because He won't (WILL not)? God could sin. It is transparently obvious that Christ could have sinned but didn't. It is YOUR notion of free will that is flawed.

    And so deceased babies go to hell. Or just some of them go to hell because some are "elect" without believing. I know -- we been there before. And that makes sense to you. And most get NO chance to be saved. That's also "Greek mythology."

     
    #37 skypair, May 18, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: May 18, 2007
  18. npetreley

    npetreley New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    2
    (Sending Pastor Larry some virtual ibuprofen.) You have my admiration, support, AND sympathy.
     
  19. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    We do serve a "self-centered GOD " ! He does what He does for His own glory , not for the glory of people . His self-centeredness is completely holy and pure .
     
  20. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,602
    Likes Received:
    6
    Look at Jesus

    We need to diffently take a look at Jesus and His life, do you really see God self-centered.
     
Loading...