|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: R.C.Sprouls Teaching On Reformed Theology | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Scripture is the message. It tells you what to do. It tells you that if you don't produce the fruit, you don't have faith. You need to have faith in the message.
Tradition asserts that the grounds are Scripture alone and Faith alone.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Ever hear somebody say that such-and-such-an-actor is a really nice guy in person? Is he really a nice guy or is he just a good actor?
I am saying that they are more honest.(and humble)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phil Johnson writes:
Sounds like creationism. But the Internet makes it easy for like-minded but ignorant people to clump together and endlessly reinforce one another’s ignorance. An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. They correct me when I'm close-but-not-quite.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Would you rather have a God who carelessly fires a shotgun out the window or a God who targets you specifically?
...but it may well point out the differences between a God of order and a God of random chaos.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
They're both negative analogies - deliberately, because there doesn't seem to be a positive side to Sproul's theology.
the shotgun is a negative analogy. Phat writes:
What you would rather have is not pertinent either to Sproul or to reality.
I would rather have a God who favors me rather than a random God who simply wound us all up and then left us to do as we wilted...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
Huh? How could your preference have any relation to Sproul's preference or my preference? How could your preference of ice cream be related to the topic? ringo writes:
Not sure I agree. What you would rather have is not pertinent either to Sproul or to reality. I myself would "rather have" a God who comes when I call and otherwise leaves me alone - but if I don't get what I prefer, why should you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
The Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar are being persecuted by the Buddhist majority. So Islam is real and Buddhism is not?
Some of us myself included have argued previously that persecution within Christianity was evidence that the cause was real. Phat writes:
Why do you always go to "con artists"? Can't people just be wrong?
I mean, how many people would risk the loss of life, limb and property were they simply con artists?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
If they were honest, they would at the very least have to acknowledge that they were embellishing. Otherwise, how do you account for the discrepancies?
And if we were to honestly confront the storytellers of each era (through our magic time machine) and ask them to honestly admit that they were creating God, they would likely deny such an assertion...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
How do you account for the discrepancies?
I would argue that they would say they were elaborating...and were sticking to the truth as they understood it. Perhaps exaggeration would be inevitable, but they would likely defend their integrity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
So, in other words, there's no reason to think they knew what they were talking about, even if they BELIEVED they were telling The Truth™.
Human nature. Incorrect information. Perhaps even cultural bias.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
What about when the evidence goes against the belief?
It starts with belief. Not with evidence. Thats why you never became a believer. You started with evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
The "traditional message" was as much about politics as it was about religion. The Church had a vested interest in a stable society, so "the responsibility of being a good and honest person and doing your best " was a message that made sense for them. It also gave the civil authorities an incentive to support the Church. ... the traditional message regarding Christ. The Church told people they'd go to Hell if they weren't good citizens. Today we can see that being good citizens can have a good effect here on earth. The outcome is the same. We're just being good for our own sake instead of for the Church's sake and the government's sake.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
I can give you an example: There's a global consensus that killing people is a bad thing. Remember that consensus doesn't require unanimity; there may be dissenters. But what is the definition of a global consensus? But who said anything about a global consensus?An honest discussion is more of a peer review than a pep rally. My toughest critics here are the people who agree with me. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
In the story, some men would have said that Jesus was a preacher. Some men might have said that Jesus was the Messiah - and they would have been disappointed when He died without accomplishing anything that the Messiah was supposed to accomplish. Maybe a few men would have said that Jesus was the Son of God; no doubt many of them would have been disappointed too when He died. So ringo, who was Jesus? Is he more than another in a long line of teachers? Why or why not? Is there any reason to think He was was something other than another preacher? Is there any reason to think He existed at all?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
That's a handy copout. When something isn't fulfilled you claim that the scriptures mean something completely different from what they say. "Ask and ye shall receive" might as well mean that you'll receive spiritual benefis after you die of starvation. It wasn't until the Holy Spirit came upon them at Pentecost that they understood that it had nothing to do with earthly liberation, but liberation from sin, a spiritual kingdom that is "not of this world."And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024