The Relationship between Theology and Philosophy

Yes, I got him mixed up with someone else.
After he converted to "Christianity" he became a Presbyterian, and then ended his life as a curate in the Church of England. Not much details are given on his actual conversion though.

 

It is you that interpret "go astray" to the absurd and rediculous extreme of going through nurseries and breaking teeth out or some other weird definition of "go astray.'

Yes, babies manifest the sinful nature in its primal state. They are total selfish from the start and learn to lie almost immediately, and manipulate. I have had five children and I have not yet had to teach any of them to sin as it comes natural and instinctive. However, teaching them to do right is a real job as it is contrary to the very nature of survival.

Are you serious that there are TWO KINDS of babies that David is talking about coming into this world? Think about that HP - that is about as bizzare as it comes - do you really believe that? If so, then according to you bizzare analogy and definition of "going astray" there are infants that really do that, huh?

 

Like all terms they must be intepreted in the context they are found. I gave you two uses of the term "unclean" by Job and he does apply it to that born of women in Job 15:14.

The ceremonial laws of the unclean are types of sin. Infants had to be ceremonially cleansed signifying they were born with a sinful nature and were unclean in God's sight and must be ceremonially cleansed.

 

HP, you have a problem here. You always have. The context doesn't bail you out. As I pointed out: it is a prayer. David does not set out to teach doctrine. It is the Holy Spirit that teaches the doctrine of the depravity of man in Psalm 58:3 whether you like it or not. It just can't be so easily dismissed or rationalized away. It is there. Accept it.

 

How would the lack of Jewish theology teaching on a doctrine add to your conclusions?

Does Jewish theology teach the Christ will suffer and sacrifice His life for the sins of man?

I believe the Jews were scolded in many ways for not understanding God's Word. Nicodemus did not understand the new birth to come and most of the Pharisees of the time scolded Jesus for teaching them contrary to what they taught.

So the "Jewish theology never taught it" does not add anything favorable to your position. In fact, in one way it hurts your position since they have so many biblical truths wrong.

 

I don't know the context of these comments but it seems you are elevating philosophy and theology to some form of true spiritual knowledge. If that is the case, how do you reconcile that with the fact that certain forms of philosophy not only deny the existence of God, but deny the existence of metaphysical reality itself? Re: Empiricism, Hume, others...

 

>HP: Sorry JD, but you must have me confused with those following the heathen philosophies of Augustine in his support of original sin.

Wasn't/isn't most protestant theology based on Socratic/Augustinian philosophy?

Whose philosophy is Baptist philosophy based upon? "We only believe the Bible?" You gots to be kidding!

 

St. Augustine taught that since Adam sinned, resulting in the "total depravitiy of man:"

http://www.answers.com/topic/total-depravity-2

 

No he wasn't confused. You allow your philosophy to dictate your theology. You even say so. In fact you go one step further. You demand that we all do the same thing, which in fact is false. We (or most of us) allow the Bible to interpret itself, comparing Scripture with Scripture and using sound Biblical hermeneutics to allow the Holy Spirit to guide us as we exegete the passage in question. That way there is no question as to what the passage is saying.

Almost all of us agree on the meaning of Psalm 58:3 for example. You allow a philosophy formulated by men like Finney to influence your interpretation of that verse instead of looking at it from a Scriptural point of view. We have pointed out this to you in such a way that you cannot refute it. But you won't change because your theology is based on your philosophy. You have your mind made up, and it can't change because your philosophy won't change no matter how much evidence is provided that your interpretation is wrong.

 

Exactly.

2 Pt 2 has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt by context that the spoken of are not once saved individuals who have returned to lostness, but are of those who are pretenders and liars having never known regeneration by the Holy Ghost.

But have you seen HP humble himself and agree?? No, he cannot because he has given human reasoning equal authority as the scriptures. In the future a OSAS debate will arise and just as sure as the earth revolves around the sun HP will post once again 2 Pt 2 as a person who has been saved getting lost again.

 

HP what you are trying to do is use human philosophy to establish a theological premise that human responsibility requires ability to freely choose good as well as evil without any INWARD or OUTWARD compulsion to choose either. Thus in one swoop deny the doctrine of total depravity before even approaching the Biblical revelation of the nature and extent of the fall of man.

Sorry, but that is building a doctrine on human rationale that is directly contrary to the revelation of Scripture and is not necessarily logical in the first place.

The Bible does teach that man is not OUTWARDLY compelled by God and demons to choose between right and wrong. However, the Bible also teaches that man is INWARDLY compelled to resist, reject, hate, and refuse to obey God's Word while loving sin. This is precisely why the Bible says that man must be born again as he does not free from INWARD compulsion to love, choose and do evil.

God has provided both EXTERNAL and INTERNAL revelation of what is right and fully understand right from wrong but is inwardly compelled by their own DESIRES and LUSTS to always choose wrong. God is perfectly just to condemn them for their own free choice as nothing OUTWARDLY compelled them to choose anything. Their choices are entirely determined by their own SELF-INTERESTS, desires and motives which the Bible clearly and repeatedly teaches LOVES darkness.