What view of justice is "carnal" and what is not?

it is kind of funny...if you notice the k and l are next to each other on the keyboard....looks as if i missed:laugh: JF will be proud of me:laugh:

No Benjamin...the "system comes from pastors and teachers who upon examination of the texts...put forth what the texts say....not what you in a scripturally restricted view ....would prefer them to say...perhaps because you cannot reconcile what the texts actually mean.
If you are wrong with Adam and the fall...you are going to be wrong in many other areas of theology.. That does not make you a bad person, just mistaken.
Some of your smug comments might be another story however.That is a seperate discussion however.

 

Skan,

from what i have read. this is not so...
Bondage of the will-luther
free will a slave-spurgeon
the myth of free will-chantry

http://www.the-highway.com/Myth.html

"To teach that the natural man has a free will overthrows the gospel ... it is precisely because man is in bondage that he needs Christ to set him free." (John 8:34, 36)

"Free-will or Free-grace?; The Bible says that men are born again, not of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God (John 1:13); that it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy (Rom 9;16); the work of faith is the operation of God according to the exceeding greatness of his power, who works in man both to will and to do of his own good pleasure." (Phil 2:13)

"Free will I have often heard of, but I have never seen it. I have always met with will, and plenty of it, but it has either been led captive by sin or held in the blessed bonds of grace."
- C. H. Spurgeon

"All the passages in the Holy Scriptures that mention assistance are they that do away with "free-will", and these are countless ... For grace is needed, and the help of grace is given, because "free-will" can do nothing."
- Martin Luther, Bondage of the Will, pg. 270

If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright.
- Martin Luther

"...human will does not by liberty obtain grace, but by grace obtains liberty."
- John Calvin


"We are all sinners by nature ,therefore we are held under the yoke of sin . But if the whole man is subject to the dominion of sin , surely the will , which is it's principal seat , must be bound with the closest of chains. And indeed if divine grace were preceded by any will of ours, Paul could not have said that ," it is God that worketh in us to will and to do ' (Phil. 2:13)
- John Calvin

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined.
John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

 

No less a philosophical system.

You mean comes from Calvinist pastors and teachers of Calvinist philosophical principles abiding in that system.

You mean put forth philosophies of what the text mean.

It is really difficult for me to discuss something with someone who denies or fails to recognize common sense logical truth as it stares him in the face while he keeps repeating the same things as if they have not been explained and rebutted. So I’ll pass on this one…

 

Amazing to me how some cannot see that ANY system of thought, interpretation, explanation and so on, falls into this same category as being developed by man. Amazing.

 

No QF.....it is God given...these men saw it ,and wrote about it in a way that reconciles all the scriptures together.....not just one side of the sword.....

God wants us to study and understand all the truth,or he would not have given it in 66 seperate writings.....of course men are to develop it.

All systems that have been "developed ."are not equal.

 

The only thing that will make you happy is a cage match...with you, skan, winman, van,webdog,....then we throw in Ravi Zacharias.......you can wax philosophical till the cows come home....the rest of us will just discuss scriptural teaching.

 

Then you should take caution, because it can sound very much like you (general) can come very close to elevating a system to be on par with scripture itself.

Scripture has the unique quality of (inerrancy, infallibility) not to mention the fact that it is "God Breathed", are you wishing to assign these same qualities to a systematization of scripture?

 

It also presumes will, if the one who foreknew could have made it otherwise.

As opposed to the spiritual kind.[\quote]

But mankind IS the work of His hands. Mankind IS God's property. When will you begin to see God as Creator?

The law did not impose the same penalty of eye-for-an-eye if a man smote his property, i.e. his slave. Eye-for-an-eye presumes equality, and God did not create His equals. He will not be judged by you.

The only way you can exonerate God is to bring Him down to your level, take away His omniscience, and THEN He can abide blameless in your system.

God needs no exoneration to the Calvinist.

 

So you believe in an irresistible work of the Spirit. You simply moved it from conversion to something else.

 

I have always stated that I felt and still do, EVERY person who draws breath of life has what is necessary to have a saving relationship with God. I have always felt that this ability was part of the imago dei.

 

Aaron, why is that someone who is obviously intellectually gifted and often defends their position well, such as yourself, feels the need to resort to such erroneous and blatantly misleading charges. No one here fails to see God as creator, no one here takes away the omniscience of God, no one seeks to exonerate God.

 

I'd like to see the non-cals, who are accusing our "system" of being "phikosophy" :laugh: to show us exactly what the "phikosophy" parts are in the "system."

I'll show you theirs; At any point when a passage is brought up showing that God is all knowing, they philosophize it away. It simply cannot be, it's not "logical" so in comes philosophy to diminish this truth to a acceptable and suitable level.

Another area they philosophize away is the Scriptural proof of God over all. It cannot be thus, as it is not fitting into their reason, a God so big as this, so they bring it down a few notches with philosophy and reason.

One more? They philosophize away the lost state of mankind. It just cannot be they are so bad off, apparently they must think themselves quite good fellows, so, that it doesn't fit into their reason (or better yet, they won't believe it, they've looked at themselves, how dare them to have ever been in such a state!) so they reason this away as well.

It's not hard to see why all of these things must be brought down a few levels. It's like gossip, it's done so the other fellow looks bigger. I take it John the Baptist wasn't a non-cal; "He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30 Their philosophy? Not so much.

As an apology for Cal views, we simply accept the hard portions of Scripture, and perhaps after much toil concerning these hard truths, yet, we accept the lost state of man as said, and we don't exalt man and choice to the crippling of God to do a thing until we decide, nor exalt man by any means unduly above His lost state as given to us via divine revelation. Then? We worship Sovereign God over all, and all knowing. That would describe our "philosophy."

- Peace

 

Keep beating the old horse, keep beating. You accept NO more of the scriptures than do we. You toil no more over the truths, principles and interpretation of scripture than we. We do not exalt man over God, but you keep repeating that mantra, sounds almost like the talking points of political commentators. You worship the same God and Savior as do we, your view has God no more sovereign than our view. Philosophy is the "handmaiden" of theology. Ask some of the greatest apologists, they will certainly tell you a study of philosophy is crucial

 

Exactly why I said to Icon:
"You’re sounding rather cultic to me, Pal."

And:
"You don’t seem to realize that the very system you use to interpret the scriptures within comes from reasoning through philosophical principles about what those scriptures mean. Ironic that you call other’s philosophy “worldly” while you strictly hold to a worldly philosophical system that boxes in and force fits your every interpretation. Yet, in your conceit of your system you dispute and attempt to devalue intelligent reasoning as if you are privileged to be in a state of special spiritual enlightenment regarding your systematic force fitted interpretations."

Have you ever noticed how Icon will resort to red letter writing when he runs out of recourse concerning reasoning? I've remarked to him before that it is "freakish" the way he does this. I think there is something to it. It reminds me of Pentecostals apostates who claim to have special revelations and insight when Calvinists start claiming they don’t need philosophy, that their doctrines are “Gospel”, that their doctrines “are God given and their teachers saw it” and it is very apparent that Icon will jump at every chance to announce that some may have no hope while proudly projecting his Hyper-Determinists (phikosophical) views on election. This specially privileged stuff seems especially prideful while being excessively contrary to the truth of scripture and the messages we should be giving. Yet, they refuse to acknowledge philosophical reasoning to draw out the truth in scripture. Why? I suppose it goes back to this:

 

Attention Cals...put on your secret decoder glasses to get the secret "cultic and freakish red colored " instructions...:laugh:

You can keep your philosophy,,,your ideas of what the gospel is, and your presentation.....I will keep the historic understanding of the faith once delivered to the saints ,as expressed in the historic confessions of the church.

 

QF.......these systems are scripture based to start with. They are not on par with scripture which is perfect in it's original autograph.
We are meant to welcome or receive the truth of scripture. The closer we are and the more accurate we are to it's meaning we have light and truth.

To depart from scripture...go outside of it, then come back to it and import ideas, and philosophy is to error. Joseph Smith and others come to mind.

The historic faith has been around and many of todays heresies have their root in the same old heresies with a new face on them.

No...but we need to actually HAVE scripture.....not philosophy....

yes God has said.....scripture

denial of scripture

Philosophy in place of scripture....substituted


So how does this look here on BB......

SCRIPTURE:

denial of scripture......no...he waits until we choose him then he chooses us,or another favorite......he only chooses the church corporately...but no indidvidual....

Then philosophy....... Well God has given us free-will, or it would not be fair...so it could not be as many teach that God elects, or we would be robots......God is ONLY good and if election is true that would be monstrous......I believe in election...but it must be the god limits himself because he is nice and lets us decide what we would like to choose...then he chooses us.He is a gentleman and will not force us.....he chooses us because we first loved him. or we have all we need to choose him...the fall did not kill Adam...just slowed him down a bit...Adam just needs to have a bit more info then he will use inherent faith to save himself ,with an assist from the cross work of Jesus.
:wavey::wavey:

 

Exactly, the old "corporate" nonsense. You can't separate this to not meaning individuals that make up the body.

As is needed, and one more time the "unfair" needs to be addressed. it all boils down to that premise.

Great answers Iconoclast.

- Peace