:think: Cool user nickname though if he ever goes rogue...pSLAMist...:maxi:
toldailytopic: Theology. What's your favorite theological topic to discuss?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
:think: Cool user nickname though if he ever goes rogue...pSLAMist...:maxi:
The Graphite
New member
Informally educated, but a good bit more than a "hobby."Are you a formally educated ologyologianist, TG; or is it just a hobby?
oly:
The Graphite
New member
You know, you could even say that joke is timeless. :idea:
You don't? God said he predestined those that believe to Holy and without blame. And they believe. So what don't you understand?
That's a tough one. Grace and the open view are my two favorites I think.
The nature and character of God. Try this one on for size (Open Theist):
http://www.amazon.com/Nature-Character-God-W-Pratney/dp/1556610416
(the guy trying to sell it for $1000 must be crazy?! when the others are $20 +).
ebredding
New member
A hundred years ago I would have said "less than 1800 years old" and a hundred years from now "less than 2000 years old."
Hey... one out of two isn't bad? Why didn't you congratulate me for spelling it right the second time? You are such a glass is half empty kinda guy.
Just trying to play Lighthouse as accurately as possible.
In that case, you left out a few derogatory terms, idiot. That's the first rule of imitating Lighthouse, moron.
rainee
New member
I don't know who Mr Winkie P. is!
Who publishes with a first name of Winkie???
But if you absolutely had to read a book I would at least choose one that had been tested by time and a vast number of believers.
You could read Knowing God by JI Packer.
http://www.amazon.com/Knowing-God-J-I-Packer/dp/083081650X
And The Attributes Of God by Arthur W Pink.
http://www.amazon.com/Attributes-God-Arthur-W-Pink/dp/0801069890
But you know what?
I believe God wants us to know Him.
So I think reading the Bible and trying to live every day is an important way of getting to know Him.
In fact the people most blessed by those books about God??
Are the ones who did the work and study and thought to write the books, wouldn't you say?
I would never let them rip me off like that!
Let's learn Him ourselves, I say.
One verse at a time if need be.
I have the Calvinistic ones you mention. Winkie=William. Areas of strong immutability, impassibility, omniscience, etc. need to be revisited. Classical views are not always biblical ones.
Here is another classic book you would agree on (I have and value it, but again, also wrong on some points).
http://www.amazon.com/Existence-Attributes-Baker-Publishing-Group/dp/0801011124
Here is another classic book you would agree on (I have and value it, but again, also wrong on some points).
http://www.amazon.com/Existence-Attributes-Baker-Publishing-Group/dp/0801011124
Did I miss something? What am I? I have been know disappoint others before and probably still do, even Jesus at times.
I do not think it would be right to open a further discussion concerning freewill and salvation in this thread. Like I said maybe I'll start another thread about what Knight posted and thumbed up to.
I'll leave off with this . . .
And that does NOT make me Jesus only either. Though He IS . . . John 14:6.
I do not think it would be right to open a further discussion concerning freewill and salvation in this thread. Like I said maybe I'll start another thread about what Knight posted and thumbed up to.
I'll leave off with this . . .
Neither a Calvinist nor Arminianist be,
Read the red what Jesus said, and you can't wrong,
Because Jesus said "Follow Me."
Read the red what Jesus said, and you can't wrong,
Because Jesus said "Follow Me."
And that does NOT make me Jesus only either. Though He IS . . . John 14:6.
rainee
New member
Y'all, I like all sorts of theological topics, and I really enjoyed and felt stimulated (yet again!) when reading what you all think and like and enjoy.
I really liked what Stripe put as it is after my own personal heart studies in typology:
BUT, guess what?
Typology reached its heyday in the Victorian Era, and some of it was good stuff but some of it was like a chicken running around with its head cutoff (Uhm, sorry for that mental picture, Mr Chickenman, forgive me.)
So my typology today IS NOT your grandfather's Oldsmobile.
(Or some saying like that.)
I have made it new.
Which brings us to Calvinism.
Do you not love it?
Is it not your cup of tea?
Then find what is wrong with it!
If you really think principles and concepts written umpty ump years ago do not quite capture a truth as clearly and carefully as it should be captured - THEN do something new and find what is best and most accurate.
So I will give you an example of a type I am working one - or rather have worked on.
Noah.
I know - or think I know - that no one is really righteous (on this earth.)
I mean except for one - The Lord Jesus.
Yet Noah is called righteous by God.
This can mean a few different things actually, for one thing it can mean God did see Noah as uhm well er righteous.
But I think that is not what it means the most. (For several truths
can exist, right? With only ONE being the prize as The Most Important Truth, right?)
So jump down in time and find Peter.
Will Peter talk about the flood?
Yes, yes he will.
And he will not make a whole lot of sense actually when he does.
So guess what?
Make Jesus the Noah of what Peter is looking at in his time.
Now I'm Calvinist, so I'm good with thinking Noah is not really 100% righteous - I can do the depravity of man without having my head turn red or spin or whatever happens to some..
But I'm NOT a Preterist -
however, somethings ARE happening then in Peter's world, in Peter's time - or at least it will happen so close to his time he is fully aware of it because he has been told by The Lord.
Which is why Noah makes a perfect type for The Lord Jesus in Peter's life and world, imho.
IOW, Jesus represents the Righteous One who saves those with Him, while an end, a destruction of a world, is very near.
Interestingly - the water Peter refers to is not seen as bad - but good in 1 Pet 3:
1 Peter 3:18, 19
18 For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.
He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit,
19 through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison
1 Peter 3:20
20 who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.
In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water,
1 Peter 3:21
21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.
It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ...
But in 1 Peter 4:4-6, 7 once again a flood is pictured - but of bad all around- and an end to it:
4 They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you.
5 But they will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.
6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.
7 The end of all things is near.
The thing about this is if water saves us and yet destroys all others around us according to Peter - then we are what? Are we the boat, the ark? For that is how water works - it lifts boats, carries them - but no so much other things.
Anyway - maybe I shouldn't have put this here?
I'm abit slow at this thinking stuff huh?!
But there are lots of things to work on!
Like Soteriology?
What did the death of Christ accomplish?
Calvinists and others will say His death was enough to provide for all but that this sacrifice did not accomplish salvation for all.
However, I am wrestling with verses because I am not sure we have identified yet what Jesus has really accomplished.
I really liked what Stripe put as it is after my own personal heart studies in typology:
BUT, guess what?
Typology reached its heyday in the Victorian Era, and some of it was good stuff but some of it was like a chicken running around with its head cutoff (Uhm, sorry for that mental picture, Mr Chickenman, forgive me.)
So my typology today IS NOT your grandfather's Oldsmobile.
(Or some saying like that.)
I have made it new.
Which brings us to Calvinism.
Do you not love it?
Is it not your cup of tea?
Then find what is wrong with it!
If you really think principles and concepts written umpty ump years ago do not quite capture a truth as clearly and carefully as it should be captured - THEN do something new and find what is best and most accurate.
So I will give you an example of a type I am working one - or rather have worked on.
Noah.
I know - or think I know - that no one is really righteous (on this earth.)
I mean except for one - The Lord Jesus.
Yet Noah is called righteous by God.
This can mean a few different things actually, for one thing it can mean God did see Noah as uhm well er righteous.
But I think that is not what it means the most. (For several truths
can exist, right? With only ONE being the prize as The Most Important Truth, right?)
So jump down in time and find Peter.
Will Peter talk about the flood?
Yes, yes he will.
And he will not make a whole lot of sense actually when he does.
So guess what?
Make Jesus the Noah of what Peter is looking at in his time.
Now I'm Calvinist, so I'm good with thinking Noah is not really 100% righteous - I can do the depravity of man without having my head turn red or spin or whatever happens to some..
But I'm NOT a Preterist -
however, somethings ARE happening then in Peter's world, in Peter's time - or at least it will happen so close to his time he is fully aware of it because he has been told by The Lord.
Which is why Noah makes a perfect type for The Lord Jesus in Peter's life and world, imho.
IOW, Jesus represents the Righteous One who saves those with Him, while an end, a destruction of a world, is very near.
Interestingly - the water Peter refers to is not seen as bad - but good in 1 Pet 3:
1 Peter 3:18, 19
18 For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.
He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit,
19 through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison
1 Peter 3:20
20 who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.
In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water,
1 Peter 3:21
21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.
It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ...
But in 1 Peter 4:4-6, 7 once again a flood is pictured - but of bad all around- and an end to it:
4 They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you.
5 But they will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.
6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.
7 The end of all things is near.
The thing about this is if water saves us and yet destroys all others around us according to Peter - then we are what? Are we the boat, the ark? For that is how water works - it lifts boats, carries them - but no so much other things.
Anyway - maybe I shouldn't have put this here?
I'm abit slow at this thinking stuff huh?!
But there are lots of things to work on!
Like Soteriology?
What did the death of Christ accomplish?
Calvinists and others will say His death was enough to provide for all but that this sacrifice did not accomplish salvation for all.
However, I am wrestling with verses because I am not sure we have identified yet what Jesus has really accomplished.
No, chickenman knows I would never call Knight a moron.In that case, you left out a few derogatory terms, idiot. That's the first rule of imitating Lighthouse, moron.
rainee
New member
I would not talk about predestination now since really this involves only the mental capabilities of God, and how well can we understand the mental capabilities of God?
And I wouldn't ask Godrulz, or Aimiel, or anyone else I can think of the question regarding freewill I am about to ask because I wouldn't want to distress or hinder them in anyway.
But authority is different.
Especially authority that executes a catgirl smiley - even when the people vote for it!
So what is free will, may I ask?
It says in Romans 8:3
3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
And it says in Romans 8:7, 8
7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
And yet many protestant believers of today will say what?
That the flesh is weak and cannot keep the law of righteousness --
BUT it has free will? It can choose good?
It can choose God?
How does that work - exactly, sir?
And all of you?
Hmm?
With one hand you say Christ died because we couldn't make it on our own and yet with the other hand you assure yourselves and others you can at least make great and godly decisions in your flesh?
If you could do one - why not go ahead and do the other?
Or are all humans like the disciples in your minds?
Matt 26:40,41
40 Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Could you men not keep watch with me for one hour?" he asked Peter.
41"Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."
So Is This (Human) spirit "weak" to you - BUT only sometimes? Only in regards to temptations or sleep BUT not when it comes to your FREE WILL Decisions?
Aimiel
Well-known member
:dizzy:
:doh:- Status