Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > The Church Started with Paul?

Forum Quick Jump

155 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Modes of Thought
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817

Posted 11/6/2001 5:41 PM (GMT -6)

You don't have to work even that hard! The good news was proclaimed to all the nations through Abram from Gen. 12:1-3. If Israel had been obedient, they would have been more effective in being a "blessing" to "ALL the nations of the earth."

"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted 11/7/2001 8:18 AM (GMT -6)

don -

quote:
Help my ignorance, what is a zero point Calvinist? What makes them different from other Calvinists?

I am not a Calvinist. It is in reference to the 5 points of Calvinism, also known by the Acronym TULIP. Some Calvinists are 3 or 4 pointers, because they don't affirm or they even oppose some of those points. I don't just deny one or several of the points of TULIP, I deny all the points of uniquely Calvinistic theology which is represented in TULIP. It is a more familiar way to call attention to my faith, which has a more fundamental disagreement with Calvinism. And that is with the foundational principle that TULIP rests upon and Calvinism is fully strung together by this precept. Without this precept, all of uniquely Calvinistic theology is unsupported and untenable.

That precept is that God is immutable. Immutable means no change, hence God is absolutely and perfectly unchanging. That belief is what spawned several key associated theological thoughts, like that God exists outside of time, because everything within time is manifestly subject to change. Also much interpretation of God's foreknowledge of the future (and all of time) is that God knows it all perfectly and exhaustively, without error or change. Also, this is used to support that people going to heaven and hell is a foregone conclusion before you ever existed, and that salvation has nothing what so ever to do with your response to God. And all of this teaching that presents the future as a forgone conclusion is accurately spoken of in direct analogy to Greek mythology and philosophy terms of "fate" and "destiny", only these terms are associated to biblical expressions and with God in sovereign control and so on.

I believe that any simple or earnest review of the scriptures shows God as a God that changes sometimes in the most significant ways. He is true and loving and trustworthy and holy and wise and so on and so forth. The part about God that I believe can not change is His nature and character, in brief, He is eternal and He is Godly. God reserves the right to "repent" (not do what He said He would do) of national blessings or destruction based upon the contingency of man's response to Him (Jer 18 1-10, esp 7-10 Potter and the clay). God is a God of future contingencies (uncertainties), the entire future is not pre-known, only the parts that God is certain about is absolutely certain. Also, at one point, God truly "became" flesh and dwelt among us (prior to that change, God had not "become" flesh), to deny that change in God is to deny the plain teaching of the incarnation and to strip Jesus of the truth of His godliness and humanity.

I hope that helps.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

Bob Hill
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 98

Posted 11/7/2001 5:00 PM (GMT -6)

Dear Kyle,

This is the first time I've visited this site for a while, since I have been under the weather.

I was amazed and saddened at the discourse on the baptism thread.

I really don't know how to proceed. I'm a full time pastor, and I have my own web-site to keep up with as well as answering email questions.

I've decided I will post my book on this thread, chapter by chapter. If anyone objects, I will delete it/them.

Per MOT's request to delete it, I delete ch 1. I will be posting my book on biblicalanswers.com

In Christ,
Bob Hill

Edited by - Bob Hill on 11/08/2001 8:00:15 PM

Kyle Essary
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 113

Posted 11/7/2001 6:48 PM (GMT -6)

I'm sorry to hear that you have not been feeling well. Thank you so much for doing this. I am sure it is a very time consuming endeavor, but for myself as well as others, I am sure it will be a wonderful read. Thank you Bob, from what I can tell you are a very kind guy.

Kyle Essary

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted 11/7/2001 9:49 PM (GMT -6)

Administrators - or anyone in the know.

Bob brings up posting Greek text in their original typesetting/font. (Hebrew also applies) It seems to me that I have seen this before on a website forum, but I have never been able to post Greek letters properly. Does anyone know if it can be done? And if so how. Same for Hebrew also. Perhaps I need to go back and read the introductory faq, as I vaguely recall something about fonts there. Thanks for whatever help you may have to offer.

Is there anyone else moderating this forum besides Mr Boyd? I'm just curious to know the probability of getting a response from an administrator.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted 11/7/2001 10:45 PM (GMT -6)

Bob, perhaps you view how I handle objections to so much abuse and falsification that has been almost constantly slung at me, as part of the problem. I can't help but to find your lack of expressed support as unspoken judgment against me to some extent. But I have grace and some understanding for our differences, as I assume you do to. Personal judgment and moral offenses (however slight) happen with or without expression, the same idea corresponds to sins of omission vrs sins of commission. I view my opposition to how I have been treated as "part" of the solution. Regardless of our differences, I think we both agree that at some point, futility happens, and that when it does, we should move on to more productive encounters.

I don't like it that folks here hardly give me the time of day except to speak disparagingly or prejudiced against me. For example

, the second I suggested that there was more than one gospel I was branded a heretic and treated rudely, and was demanded to stop speaking that way. Another time I simply mentioned dispensational thought, I didn't even try to defend "dispensationalism" per say, and the responses have been from ridicule to violent and perverted as well. Most people here think it was funny and commendable to create a dispensational scheme based upon various and sometimes unscrupulous sexual conduct, it was MoT (page 4 baptism salvation thread) who created a dispensation scheme of sexual ethics, and it was fully repeated again on page 11 by "faithfullservent" asking how that could be offensive, and thought it was "beautiful". In fact, just about everyone here has given it the highest praises. I assume you know about it, it has been validated at this site as humorous and clever. Unfortunately, even Mr. Boyd said the following on page 8.

quote:
I thought Mode's sex-dispensation satire was clever, hilarious and insightful. But I can also see how Bob Hill and others who share their view could be offended by it and decide it's time to check out. The point could have been made without the sarcasm.

Apparently he would not have objected to such a perverted disgraceful idea, if they kept such things to themselves to enjoy and mock.

I mistakenly placed too much favorable expectations of profitable Christian discussions from Mr. Boyd. I assumed he had intended open discussion and sharing. I was mistaken. Corrective addition: He apparently changed his mind about sharing, or only wanted to stimulate further discussion, by asking questions without expecting to respond, I guess. Instead it appears that appropriate objective and honest discussions can last as long as a single introductory remark/presentation from each side with no counter responses happening at all. I suggested that his lack of response especially in light of his previous invitation to share risked displaying duplicity as well as not caring about us wayward dispensationalists. I'm sure that you have seen this sort of rejection reactions before, perhaps thousands of times or more.(?) So I will observe your ways and minimize myself even more than I already have.

I will be posting my comments for critical review on your site over Matt 22:41-46, Jesus speaking about the Christ as the son of David, and also as Lord to David. I posted that question to Mr. Boyd also in the Baptism thread page 11.

It's good to see you back again. Sorry to hear you have been under the weather lately, hope you are doing better. Blessings.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

Edited by - 1way on 11/08/2001 10:07:53 PM

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Yesterday 1:11 AM (GMT -6)

Welcome, Bob!

This thread is especially for you.

Thanks, too, Kyle.

PotOnWheel

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Yesterday 1:54 AM (GMT -6)

Bob, please pardon the presence of this post here. Kyle had suggested that Abbie and I could exchange on this thread, which we've done once. It remained on my "to-do" list to remark on an earlier post of hers. I will not argue; but rather just remark, as I did about the verses she asked me about. some things that seem problematical to her raise no problem for me. I believe that this post will be worth while.

quote:
POW, I did post something for you over on "The Church Started with Paul?" thread. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Abbie

TO THAT END...I'll put a copy of her post here for me to find and remark on latter.

quote:
Abbie Posted - 11/04/2001 : 2:04:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(omitting the 1st paragraph)
(omitting a portion of the 2nd paragraph). . . My guess is that if you make up dispensations for specific things, you will find that the changes in what God said about those things will correspond with the general changes He made. You will find changes when God instituted the Law, when Christ came to earth, and when God set aside the nation of Israel.

Salvation has always been by faith (Heb 11:6), but it has not always been by faith in Christ. Peter says that the prophets did not understand what they were saying when they prophesied about Christ's death and the glory coming after it (I Pet 1:10-12). Not even the twelve disciples understood that Christ would die (Lk 18:31-34). It wasn't until after Christ's resurrection that they finally did understand (Lk 24:44-46). Before Christ's death, men believed whatever message God gave them to believe. Noah believed that God would send a flood (Heb 11:7). Abraham believed that God would give him a land and descendents (Acts 7:3; Heb 11:8; Gen 15:4-6, 18). Works come into play when the message men were to believe required works. Noah could not have believed that God would send a flood without building the ark. Even though salvation has always been by faith, there were times when faith could not have existed without works (James 2:20-24). Now that God has told us that salvation is by faith alone and not by works, working for one's salvation is a sign of unbelief (Rom 4:5; Eph 2:8-9).

The words "testament" and "covenant" are used to translate the same Greek word, and the word "testament" is used to speak of what the OT calls the covenant (Ex 24:8; Heb 9:19-20). In Jer 31:31-34, God tells Israel that someday He will make a new covenant with her that is not like the covenant that He made on Mount Sinai. Christ called His blood the blood of the new testament (Matt 26:28). If the covenants/testments were the same, God would not have made a distinction between them.

If God had never made any changes, wouldn't we still have to worry about doing no work on the Sabbath (Ex 16:29; 20:9-10)? God commanded that a man be stoned when he was found simply picking up sticks on the Sabbath (Num 15:32-36).

In my Father's love, Abbie

See ya later!

PotOnWheel

(ISA 64:8 "Yet, O Lord, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.")

Abbie
Registered Member

Date Joined Nov 2001
Total Posts : 7

Posted Yesterday 3:15 AM (GMT -6)

POW,

Thank you for your post. I really enjoyed reading it. I can see the artistic influence in your writing. It's neat. I would really like to respond to the things you've written, but I am struggling so much with the things that are going on on other threads that I am having a hard time coming back to this site. I go away feeling filthy rather than feeling cleansed as we should after interacting with God's Word. For that reason, I am going to have to pull out. I do not hold anything against anyone personally. This is a decision based on a conviction about the things I should be filling my mind with. Thank you for your graciousness toward me in this thread. I do appreciate it.

In His love,
Abbie

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Philippians 4:8

Edited by - Abbie on 11/08/2001 08:16:14 AM

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Yesterday 9:31 AM (GMT -6)

Abbie - I empathize with you, God's word and Christian teachings should strengthen and cause comfort and edification to our soul, even in circles of differing beliefs that we will always find in individuals. But in the realm of helping Christians who are strongly contradictory, if God's love and truth is ever to work it's way and blessing into such division, man must undertake a certain amount of unpleasant and sometimes upsetting realities and relationships. But not all people are as well suited to that particular arena. Still we should allow for such impositions exactly because of our love and caring for others.

Additionally, forgetting the difficulty of contrary Christian relations, sometimes, after hearing God's word, we individually should feel disturbed and uncomfortable about ourselves, it is good to be pushed beyond our comfort zone into the sometimes harsh light of His revealing truth, that is the best way for anyone to learn and grow in Christ.

You have been a great source of admirable stability and biblical reflection. I really appreciate you for what you have done. I am assuming you are speaking about what was happening in the baptism salvation thread.(?) I am sorry to see you are led to leave because of the problems presented, and I affirm the reason for your decision is based upon much truth. I only ask you to consider, as time passes on, that at least you will allow a focus on other's well being, and how your input counts towards eternal effect and abundant rewards. Because of your apparent maturity and bible knowledge, I sense that I have probably expressed little that you did not already know. So, it is my single hope to encourage you, over the work you have already done, and to consider that hope remains. I hope for change, the future is full of potential, and the Lord has not returned yet!

Blessings reside in the truth that sets us free. It has been an honor.

Your peace is with you, and welcomed as well.

Blessings,
1Way

Ro 12:10 [Be] kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another;
Ga 6:10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith.

Edited by - 1way on 11/08/2001 10:12:10 PM

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Yesterday 11:35 AM (GMT -6)

Blessings on BOTH of you.

To honor Abbie I'll not post those inner-dialog thoughts. In honor of my sife--the English teacher, I will write them....privatley. She (my wife) talks about "making meaning" while "journaling." (an 80's educational paradigm) I will need to look at the thoughts I have , and think about them. But I may only share them with one or two other folks, privatley. And not to aid divisions.

Again, blessings on you both (Abbie and 1way.)

PotOnWheel

(ISA 64:8 "Yet, O Lord, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.")

Bob Hill
Registered Member

Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 98

Posted Yesterday 2:47 PM (GMT -6)

Seeing no objections, here is chapter 2.

Respecting MOT's request, I delete ch 2.

Edited by - Bob Hill on 11/08/2001 7:56:08 PM

Modes of Thought
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 817

Posted Yesterday 2:50 PM (GMT -6)

quote:

I was amazed and saddened at the discourse on the baptism thread.

I really don't know how to proceed. I'm a full time pastor, and I have my own web-site to keep up with as well as answering email questions.

I've decided I will post my book on this thread, chapter by chapter. If anyone objects, I will delete it/them.

Dear Bob Hill,

I am here to object to your posting your book here which further serves to promote your perspective. I would not object if you had shown any interest in defending the methodology you use, but you and the others who agree with you have completely failed to do so. I have no authority here, but since you offered to retract if someone objected, I will take you at your word and request that you do retract your book. I would prefer that you honor the requests regarding method, but that seems unlikely given the history of dispensationalists input on this board. I respect you as an elder brother in the Lord, but I think that your teachings are so dangerous as to be threatening to the one true gospel itself. If you should choose to take up the challenge, perhaps consider picking up where Abbie left off on the thread entitled "Dear Abbie". There is one simple question needing to be responded to. Granted, it is not my only question, but it is a good place to start. Otherwise, please do remove your book as you have offered. It was indeed gracious of you to offer such a retraction.

"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK

adiaphora
Registered Member

Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 123

Posted Yesterday 3:01 PM (GMT -6)

quote:
Administrators - or anyone in the know.

Bob brings up posting Greek text in their original typesetting/font. (Hebrew also applies) It seems to me that I have seen this before on a website forum, but I have never been able to post Greek letters properly. Does anyone know if it can be done? And if so how. Same for Hebrew also. Perhaps I need to go back and read the introductory faq, as I vaguely recall something about fonts there. Thanks for whatever help you may have to offer.

Is there anyone else moderating this forum besides Mr Boyd? I'm just curious to know the probability of getting a response from an administrator.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

Hi 1way. I am a moderator on this site. Sorry, there is no way to post Greek and Hebrew characters on this discussion board. The only fonts that work are the ones in the scroll down menu at the top of post entry window. ~ a d i a p h o r a

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Yesterday 5:57 PM (GMT -6)

POW - Thanks. Reflection can be a powerful aid. And so is the will for blessings for others. Respectfully, to you the same, except even more so.

adiaphora - Thanks, perhaps I was thinking about webpage not forum writing or something. This site is very thoroughly nicely done. FYI, I also made a comment to the administrators in the baptism salvation thread, somewhere around page 11 about page 10, because of a link that was offered that forces the browser to go way wider than the width of the screen, a very reader inhibiting unfortunate issue. Isn't there a way to either force browser width letter wrapping, or to downsize the font to make the link smaller, or to make the link language shorter in the first place, or to suppress the use of links until this issue can be resolved or something. ;) Thanks again for your assistance.

Edited by - 1way on 11/08/2001 11:13:27 PM

Kyle Essary
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 113

Posted Yesterday 6:04 PM (GMT -6)

Bob, I believe that 1way, POW and myself would all love to read chapter 2. Modes, I know that you object because he has not answered your questions of methodology, but possibly his book has answers to his methodology, otherwise it will have no real merit. I am sorry to do this, but could you repost it or perhaps start a new thread for it? Or even put it on your site somewhere (that would probably stop the number of people who order the hardback version though). I enjoyed the first part especially since I am a first-year Greek student. The dialogue on the genitive case was very nice, and went along with what I had been learning about it! I would love to understand your side of this issue (that is why I put this thread here, hehe), and until I understand where you are coming from myself (nor anyone else) can stand with or against your teachings. By the way, I said this on another thread but in case you didn't read it, you have a wonderful website.

Kyle Essary

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Yesterday 6:41 PM (GMT -6)

Kyle - Thanks and I agree, and am encouraged by your allowance to hear a persons views in an objective and respectful fashion. I think some of what Bob and I have posted has been neglected to a high degree esp. by some. But to speak just for myself, I have presented the groundwork foundational precepts for how it is that I approach the Bible. Mind you, I am not trained after the likes of scholars and all that. I use the terms that I am familiar with and my methodology, and yet so far, I believe that my remarks have been rather neglected. I will post them again (in another thread), in hopes that it would be accepted as a friendly offering in answer to the question, what is my biblical methodology. It does not really attempt to teach dispensationalism, because that is not at the heart of my methodology of approaching scripture, it seems to be the best overall is system of thought that I feel is consistent to my more fundamental methodology. And to be honest, I have no idea what Bob Hill or others associated in my loose association here think of my points of method, and my association of them to dispensational thought. My position is somewhat formative, and yet also backed by reasonable conviction and understanding. Judge for youself.

I wish I knew Bob's intentions better, I desire that he responds to you for himself, but due to the obvious public nature of the information involved, I feel obliged to offer to you that Bob has just place his book online at his website for all to freely read. In fact, he has set up an entire forum especially made for critical review of it! He has even done a neat thing where you can option to view the forum stuff right beside a little sidebar with his book in the sidebar for immediate references.

I am confused. As to your reference

quote:
Or even put it on your site somewhere (that would probably stop the number of people who order the hardback version though). I enjoyed the first part especially since I am a first-year Greek student. The dialogue on the genitive case was very nice, and went along with what I had been learning about it! I would love to understand your side of this issue (that is why I put this thread here, hehe),

I just searched the first two entire chapters and found no remarks about that. Was that part of Bob's book that he posted here? Perhaps Bob was posting another book here? The one he is posting on his site is called "Calvinism Unmasked". For some reason, I thought they were the same. ?

Thanks for taking what Bob has said seriously and with the amount of objectivity you have already kindly afforded.

Edited by - 1way on 11/09/2001 12:15:48 AM

Kyle Essary
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 113

Posted Yesterday 7:28 PM (GMT -6)

Bob was posting from his book called "The Big Difference between the two gospels"

It talked about the use of the greek genitive case.

Kyle Essary

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Yesterday 9:56 PM (GMT -6)

Kyle - Oh, wow, I see. Thanks, I wish I had seen that, I'm sorry I missed it, I gather it's sort of his best book, I think it's the only one in hardback if I'm not mistaken. I realized that you were speaking about the genitive case, and had assumed it was concerning the Greek, instead of that, I was asking about how it was that Bob spoke about it, because I mistakenly thought the book was the same book he had just put on his website, but, you said it was not. Well, here's to hoping that Bob and or Mode will reconsider our requests.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Yesterday 10:02 PM (GMT -6)

Kyle - Hey, here is some good news. This was from the post where Bob printed chapter one, and then erased it.

quote:
Per MOT's request to delete it, I delete ch 1. I will be posting my book on biblicalanswers.com

Apparently (?) he will post that book there as well.

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Today 2:24 AM (GMT -6)

Thanks for the sentiment (and thought with the feeling) 1way.

quote:
POW - Thanks. Reflection can be a powerful aid. And so is the will for blessings for others. Respectfully, to you the same, except even more so.

Now, just so you don't think you won

I have to leave another remark.

It is not so important to me that I still think that the method and some of the teachings of dispensationalists aren't in really good shape. For me the part that tugs at my heart is the thought--with feeling--that there are lots of wonderful bible passages that I have to suspect get glossed over or run right past because they are in the "gospel of circumcision", etc. Of second order but as much feeling then is the pain of heart that we might not be able to share discussing some of those gems.

Here's hoping!

PotOnWheel

(ISA 64:8 "Yet, O Lord, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.")

Edited by - PotOnWheel on 11/09/2001 07:26:20 AM

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Today 2:35 AM (GMT -6)

HERE IS MY RECENT POST OVER ON THE BAPTISM/FOUNT THREAD:

quote:
When I was in the seventh grade I had no idea that where the Holy Spirit was there was the Church, the Kingdom of God presently acting in history. (I don't think that I stretched that too far--my memory is not great.) I just knew that I would rather be outside playing ball than listening to my dad tell me about the necessity of being Baptized. To my "that age" psyche it was yet another requirement. Our discussion was not deep. I surely was not deep. Sacramental understanding in my Baptist church was not deep. But my dad's words, which I trusted, that Jesus wanted me to do this thing (following a pastor's class that would begin the next week) and that it was a necessary part of being in Jesus Church. (The institutional aspect of just about anything, for me at that age, extended just about to the horizon of when I would be called in for dinner.) It was not a hard decision to be baptized.

What is harder to understand now is all the times I had responded to altar calls in my 4-6 grades years. I had been a cognizant Christian back to well before age 4. Being around lots of people now who speak of Covenant Theology, it is not hard because I know that there is not a time when I know that I wasn't taking God's hand and He mine. I could be perturbed that those adults made me miss being a participant in Jesus supper all those years. The emphasis on "decisions" did that. I suspect. Getting them, causing them, harvesting them. Making them too. but mine--if there was one--was made in that Sunday school class of four year olds (if only because this is as far back as I can remember) where my mom's cousin asked about us asking Jesus into our heart. My sister did that with me too later that year. (It was fresh each time.) So for me it is the on-going that is more a part of my experience. But back to baptism.

Baptism is not an ongoing... It is a gonna--doing--done thing. It was very special. The classes (before which my dad had done the right thing by discussing with me himself first), well, they were fine; they did the job. Being baptized was super. Being welcomed into the church in a line of handshakes was real.

(Family is waking up now; so I'll have to wrap this up.) The ONGOING part of baptism is, in the Eastern tradition's words at lest, the {i]2nd-baptism of Confession. Confessing sins is a washing in that baptismal grave where we were buried with Christ and risen with him, entering the Church. That is what happens when we follow: "If we confess our sins, He is faith full and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

SPLASH!

PotOnWheel

(ISA 64:8 "Yet, O Lord, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.")

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Today 8:04 AM (GMT -6)

POW - But which is our greater fundamental concern?

To learn and grow and be subject to our Creator.

Or to say of the Creator, why did you create and change things the way you did?

The fact is that God created dispensational thought. The system of theology most people ascribe to dispensationalism is full of errant ideas and is not the sense that I am thinking of. Consider: We live in the dispensation of Grace, it is temporal in nature, it has it's roots (origin) clearly in the NT, and it clearly has it's ending with at least one other dispensation after this one not to mention the final state in the new heaven and the new earth. So even if you only affirm one dispensation, that one dispensation teaches at least two others, and very like several more, i.e. before the fall and before the flood and before God gave the law, etc, all these are extremely distinct and unique in the way God related to man. God made all those changes, (pure) or faithful dispensational thought is simply that which is simply subject and respectful of these changes. But again, don't forget, my understanding of dispensational thought is not that dispensationalism is the most fundamental precept for approaching the bible, I feel that dispensatioalism is little more than being cognizant of the changes that God created, and because of this system of thought is so wide in it's contextual base, and because my foundational precepts take a strong bent towards honoring the overall contextual truth, dispensationalism happens to be near the foundation of my theology, but is none the less resultant and subsequent to other considerations, as mentioned in my other thread about just these very things.

The evident ambiguity of dispensational thought presented in the Bible doesn't mean that dispensational thought doesn't exist, quite the contrary. And specifically back to your point, if, and I say again, if we are right, that the NT teachings of distinction (they are many) between the circumcision and the uncircumcision also imply differences of gospel requirements for salvation, then the correct response to such information would not be to be upset about them, and how you currently feel this would make people gloss over or run right passed certain passages. Quite the contrary is true, if, and again I say, if we are correct, having a more clear understanding of the gospel truth, is much like what happened when you first got saved and how it was that the Holy Word of God suddenly opened up to you and you felt extreme joy and abundant reward whenever you took in this heavenly nourishment.

It is a pure joy to read with ever more clarity the circumcision parts of the Bible, no repulsion to be found. No matter what the imaginative objections, it is always better to loose whatever false teachings that man has placed upon himself in exchange for the truth from God that sets us free.

Back to your mention of feelings, I need to make a very different point and affirmation. Saved people are led by God into an uncomfortable distress which is a sort of warning system that is very useful in keeping us away from false doctrine and all that is destructive. And I fully grant that you and others here feel fully justified in acting out your fears because of what you perceive from us as being just such problems. To that end, I have no problem with you folks getting upset and grieved even, as it is grieving when believers are in such turmoil and disunity. But a few words to the wise should help guide us through such a difficult situation.

As fellow Christians, we are encouraged to not be quarrelsome, to live at peace amongst ourselves as much as it is in our power to do so. Correction of fellow brethren takes several key points to keep in mind:

We should proceed with respectful fear and humility, but we should proceed,

We should rest our convictions on God's word, all sides included,

We should have Grace and love to cover much human frailties that we are to normally offer all who individually do not agree with every aspect of faith,

We should try to differentiate between acting out of fleshly fear and Godly respect, because the spirit of God does not lead us in fear, but in power and sound mind.

As far as I'm concerned, we can take whatever topic or detail or general precept folks are more able to deal with without being drug into so much violent un-productivity. But as for the harsh judgments of prejudiced bitterness, there is no biblical support for judging things prior to giving them a fair hearing. And a primary initial submission I offered to you folks as welcomed judges, is that my theology is not according to what most people commonly associate, the most common understanding about dispensationalism for example was to mixed up and had it's faults and I disassociate accordingly.

Your thoughts and feelings are thus respectfully considered. Keep up the "hope", ,,, in the Lord, abundance and joy is returned.

Hey, where'd you get the clown face? Neat. I didn't know there was such a face. (smile)

Edited by - 1way on 11/22/2001 01:42:44 AM

1way
Registered Member

Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 299

Posted Today 8:19 AM (GMT -6)

POW -

quote:
well, they were fine; they did the job. Being baptized was super. Being welcomed into the church in a line of handshakes was real.

I did the same, only my classes were unenergizingly wimpy and boring, and those students with me were frankly appathetic. It was great expressing my faith before my church and to experience their warm reception, handshakes and hugs. I gave an approximate 15 minute or so proclamation of faith, I was nervous, audibly so especially at the beginning. My main passages of personal appreciation was 1Cor 13, and Rom 14, and I also mentioned, the ones about the spirit of God is not one of fear and timidity, but of power,,, as well as Jesus' yoke is easy and His burden is light, and Rev 22:20, as a welcoming vote of Christ's second coming. I've since changed church several times.

I've got to go too. Take care.

"If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

PotOnWheel
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890

Posted Today 1:50 PM (GMT -6)

Take care to you too, 1way.

I'll let you have that last word!

PoW waves like a native Minnesotian (that he is) at the back fence. The sun sets on another day.

Edited by - PotOnWheel on 11/09/2001 6:55:55 PM

155 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:52 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual