Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
95 online now:
AZPaul3, dwise1, nwr (3 members, 92 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 893,958 Year: 5,070/6,534 Month: 490/794 Week: 116/89 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   R.C.Sprouls Teaching On Reformed Theology
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 70 of 175 (825055)
12-06-2017 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by jar
12-06-2017 3:42 PM


Re: origins
jar writes:

What Calvinists market is that God favors them only and specifically, that Jesus death as atonement is not for everyone but Calvinists only, that God chose Calvinist only.

Remember the L in TULIP; Limited Atonement. It is perhaps the most vile form of Christianity I can imagine and goes directly against what the Bible claims Jesus taught.

RC Sproul, Essential Truths Of The Christian Faith writes:


1. Definite atonement replaces the term limited atonement in the acrostic
TULIP.
2. Definite atonement refers to the scope of God’s design for redemption
and the intent of the Cross.
3. All who are not universalists agree that Christ’s atonement is sufficient
for all, but effective only for those who believe.
4. Christ’s atonement was an actual propitiation for sin, not a potential or
conditional propitiation.
5. The Atonement in a broad sense is offered to all; in a narrow sense, it
is only offered to the elect.
6. John’s teaching that Christ died for the sins of the whole world means
that the elect are not limited to Israel but are found throughout the
world

I was surprised to see Sproul defending Calvinism so strictly. Your argument actually has merit, and yet I can also see when Sproul argues that if chance even exists, God is finished. He likely would argue that chance only applies to predetermined possibilities but that ascribing any power to chance to determine anything, it is effectively robbing his God of the power of absolute determinism.

Essentially, his argument is that chance is nothing and yet people use it to describe the origin of virtually everything. I suppose he would argue that God belongs in that spot.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by jar, posted 12-06-2017 3:42 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 6:53 AM Phat has replied
 Message 72 by NoNukes, posted 12-07-2017 7:07 AM Phat has seen this message

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 73 of 175 (825066)
12-07-2017 7:14 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by jar
12-07-2017 6:53 AM


Re: origins
I agree and yet in a way, I mourn the death of God as I understood God to be. Mind you I never ascribed to the God of TULIP knowing the evil and illogic that has been exposed, but I always have seen God as interactive and personal rather than distant, majestic, and necessarily aloof due to the chasm that separates my ant from His omnipresence.

Of course, I still am left with Jesus, and I still believe that Jesus is a living intercessor.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 6:53 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 7:26 AM Phat has seen this message

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 77 of 175 (825074)
12-07-2017 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by jar
12-07-2017 10:32 AM


The School Of Hard Knox
I read a good article about John Knox (1514-1572), Presbyterian with a sword~

It mentioned the power of religion in those days...the Roman Catholic Church in particular.

quote:
Many were angry with the Catholic church, which owned more than half the real estate and gathered an annual income of nearly 18 times that of the crown. Bishops and priests were often mere political appointments, and many never hid their immoral lives: the archbishop of St. Andrews, Cardinal Beaton, openly consorted with concubines and sired 10 children.

Of course, immorality has always been represented in religious men as much as it has in politics and any other profession. Knox was a fiery orator and reformer, and his life likely was forged by the struggle of his day. The struggle at that time was literally a matter of life or death.

quote:
In the early 1540s, Knox came under the influence of converted reformers, and under the preaching of Thomas Guilliame, he joined them. Knox then became a bodyguard for the fiery Protestant preacher George Wishart, who was speaking throughout Scotland.
In 1546, however, Beaton had Wishart arrested, tried, strangled, and burned. In response, a party of 16 Protestant nobles stormed the castle, assassinated Beaton, and mutilated his body. The castle was immediately put to siege by a fleet of French ships (Catholic France was an ally to Scotland)

And so on and so forth...It seems to me that the American Protestants of Calvinist persuasion have been seduced by money moreso than threatened with any loss of life. RC Sproul and others often host talks together to reaffirm unity and agree upon doctrine. The earlier reformers had a passion and zeal no doubt forged by the persecution which they suffered.

Some of us myself included have argued previously that persecution within Christianity was evidence that the cause was real. I mean, how many people would risk the loss of life, limb and property were they simply con artists?
Comments?


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 10:32 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by PaulK, posted 12-07-2017 11:48 AM Phat has seen this message
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 12-07-2017 11:58 AM Phat has seen this message
 Message 80 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 1:15 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 81 of 175 (825090)
12-07-2017 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by jar
12-07-2017 1:15 PM


Institutes Of The Christian Religion
John Calvin wrote a book similar to Sprouls and of course he did it first. It likely is what Sproul based his book on:Institutes Of The Christian Religion

RC Sproul: Essential Truths Of The Christian Faith

As I compare and contrast both books side by side, I am struck with many similarities of belief.

First of all, Calvins arrogance was greater than Sprouls. To wit:

Institutes writes:

prefixed to the second edition, published at strasburg in 1539.
In the First Edition of this work, having no expectation of the success which God has, in his goodness, been pleased to give it, I had, for the greater part, performed my office perfunctorily, as is usual in trivial undertakings. But when I perceived that almost all the godly had received it with a favour which I had never dared to wish, far less to hope for, being sincerely conscious that I had received much more than I deserved, I thought I should be very ungrateful if I did not endeavour, at least according to my humble ability, to respond to the great kindness which had been expressed towards me, and which spontaneously urged me to diligence. I therefore ask no other favour from the studious for my new work than that which they have already bestowed upon me beyond my merits.
I feel so much obliged, that I shall be satisfied if I am thought not to have made a bad return for the gratitude I owe. This return I would have made much earlier, had not the Lord, for almost two whole years, exercised me in an extraordinary manner. But it is soon enough if well enough. I shall think it has appeared in good season when I perceive that it produces some fruit to the Church of God. I may add, that my object in this work was to prepare and train students of theology for the study of the Sacred Volume, so that they might both have an easy introduction to it, and be able to proceed in it, with unfaltering step, seeing I have endeavoured to give such a summary of religion in all its parts, and have digested it into such an order as may make it not difficult for any one, who is rightly acquainted with it, to ascertain both what he ought principally to look for in Scripture, and also to what head he ought to refer whatever is contained in it.
Having thus, as it were, paved the way, I shall not feel it necessary, in any Commentaries on Scripture which I may afterwards publish, to enter into long discussions of doctrines or dilate on common places, and will, therefore, always compress them. In this way the pious reader will be saved much trouble and weariness, provided he comes furnished with a knowledge of the present work as an essential prerequisite.

Basically, the whole doctrine of what we now call Calvinism was laid out in this book. Original Sin is there, Gods Sovereignty, all of the issues which we disagree with amongst each other at EvC in our religious debates...
One example here.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 1:15 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by jar, posted 12-07-2017 8:34 PM Phat has seen this message
 Message 83 by Faith, posted 12-09-2017 3:21 PM Phat has seen this message

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 84 of 175 (825240)
12-10-2017 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by jar
11-29-2017 10:53 AM


Is TULIP Biblical?
Faith writes:

But the doctrine of Election is in the Bible and all of them recognized that, the doctrine of Predestination, all of it.

Faith brings up a point. (Of course, you will say that people can and do use the Bible to support whatever philosophy, belief, or doctrine that they want.) But lets examine the scriptures of TULIP.

Sproul has his views on it, and much of what he says unabahedly backs it up as the preferred Theology within his club. TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction

Now let me find the scriptures that they use to support the idea:

Total Depravity (Original Sin) Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 1:18–25; 3:9–23; 7:18; 1 John 1:8–10

Unconditional Election: Romans 8:28–39; Ephesians 1:3–14; 2:8; 2 Timothy 1:9, 10

Limited Atonement: John 6:37–39; 17:6–12; Romans 5:8–10; 1 John 4:9, 10; Revelation 5:9, 10

Irresistable Grace: John 10:3, 4; 11:38–46; Galatians 1:15; Revelation 22:17

All that the Theologians seemed they were trying to do was to attempt to understand and define God in light of scripture.

You cant honestly expect Theologians to critically examine the Bible and speak of a "god character" and base their doctrine on the idea that humans wrote, edited, and redacted the bible. It leaves them with no working definition for the God they believe exists.

Granted TULIP speaks of a God that I would prefer not to believe in...but after all, I need to have a frame of reference to conceptualize the God whom I believe actually is. And i dont really like the universalist idea of a God compiled from many varying belief systems either.

I trust that God Himself will ultimately guide me into understanding Him better...eventually.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 11-29-2017 10:53 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by jar, posted 12-10-2017 12:27 PM Phat has replied
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 12-10-2017 12:42 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 86 of 175 (825242)
12-10-2017 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by jar
12-10-2017 12:27 PM


Re: Is TULIP Biblical?
I agree that honesty is important. There needs to be a consensus on what God we are worshiping and which God we choose to market.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by jar, posted 12-10-2017 12:27 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 12-10-2017 3:23 PM Phat has seen this message

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 88 of 175 (825245)
12-10-2017 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by PaulK
12-10-2017 12:42 PM


Re: Is TULIP Biblical?
Good argument we have developing here!

jar writes:

Should we expect those who are marketing the product to be honest about what is says?
When it comes to religion should we settle for them selling the sizzle instead of the steak?

TULIP hardly seems like sizzle to me. If anything, it describes a God who is uncaring. So what if He has the power to do whatever He deems right? My point is that if we are to describe GOD at all, we should at least come to a consensus regarding the GOD who is rather than simply pointing out the characters of God created by earlier humans.

As believers, cant we at least start with the belief that GOD is? (apart from any human attempts at characterization?)

Next, are we in any sort of agreement that of the many characters of God described in the Bible, there is one who seems more likely?

PaulK writes:

They should certainly care about the differing depictions of God in the Bible and recognize that in some cases God appears as a character in a story. And they should certainly care about the process by which the Bible came to us. That is how they should work out their ideas of God - that is their job as theologians..

So we can agree that we are working out our ideas of a God we can agree on? Or are we gonna remain uncommitted and philosophical?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 12-10-2017 12:42 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by PaulK, posted 12-10-2017 1:03 PM Phat has seen this message
 Message 91 by jar, posted 12-11-2017 7:26 PM Phat has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 94 of 175 (825306)
12-12-2017 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by PaulK
12-12-2017 3:33 AM


John MacArthur on Election
Another well known Bible teacher is John MacArthur. This is what he says regarding this issue of election:
quote:
Among the most hotly contested and persistent debates in the history of the confessing church, the doctrine of election is perhaps the greatest of all. The question goes like this: Does God choose sinners to be saved and then provide for their salvation? Or, Does God provide the way of salvation that sinners must choose for themselves?

Where's the evidence?

This question of choice is called "election" because of the Greek word for those who are chosen—the Bible calls them eklektos. There are many such uses in the Bible (cf. Colossians 3:12; 1 Timothy 5:21; Titus 1:1; 2 John 1), but one of my favorites is in Romans 8:33: "Who will bring a charge against God's elect?" The answer is, "no one," but why? Is it because I chose God, or is it because God chose me?

One passage that is critical to the discussion is in the opening chapter of Paul's letter to the Ephesians. Immediately after his customary greeting, Paul launches in Ephesians 1:3-14 with a great song of praise. It's only one sentence—but, with 200 words in the Greek, it may be the longest single sentence in religious literature.

Paul touches on all the great biblical themes in that hyper-complex sentence—sanctification, adoption, redemption, and glorification—and all of them rest on one foundational doctrine, the doctrine of election. The most superlative spiritual blessings stand on Ephesians 1:4—"He chose us [elected us] in Him before the foundation of the world."

So the doctrine of election is biblical, but what does that passage really teach? I want to help you get a better grasp of that by pointing out what Paul teaches about election. If you are a believer, you can equip yourself for your next conversation on this topic. But more important, as one of His elect you can rejoice in the astonishing kindness God showed you before the world began.

What does it mean?

Paul's song is essentially his reflection on the amazing truth that God "blessed us with every spiritual blessing . . . in Christ" (Ephesians 1:3). And how did He bless us? "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world" (Ephesians 1:4).

God didn't draw straws; He didn't look down the corridor of time to see who would choose Him before He decided. Rather, by His sovereign will He chose who would be in the Body of Christ. The construction of the Greek verb for "chose" indicates God chose us for Himself. That means God acted totally independent of any outside influence. He made His choice totally apart from human will and purely on the basis of His sovereignty.

Jesus said to His disciples, "You did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16). And in the same Gospel, John wrote, "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12-13, italics mine). And Paul said, "But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth" (2 Thessalonians 2:13).

Those statements defining God's sovereign choice of believers are not in the Bible to cause controversy as if God's election means sinners don't make decisions. Election does not exclude human responsibility or the necessity of each person to respond to the gospel by faith. Jesus said, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out" (John 6:37).

Admittedly the two concepts don't seem to go together. However, both are true separately, and we must accept them both by faith. You may not understand it, but rest assured—it's fully reconciled in the mind of God.

You must understand that your faith and salvation rest entirely on God's election (cf. Acts 13:48). And yet the day you came to Jesus Christ, you did so because of an internal desire—you did nothing against your will. But even that desire is God-given—He supplies the necessary faith so we can believe (Eph. 2:8).

Think about it—if your salvation depends on you, then praise to God is ridiculous. But, in truth, your praise to God is completely appropriate, because in forming the Body before the world began, He chose you by His sovereign decree apart from any of your works.


Just as with RC Sproul, John MacArthur is the heart and soul of Biblical Christianity. His integrity has so far remained unscathed....but the question again is this: In jars words, are these men taking pieces parts out of context? What mistake did Calvin...and much later RC Sproul and John MacArthur...make regarding the use of scripture to defend their beliefs?

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by PaulK, posted 12-12-2017 3:33 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by PaulK, posted 12-12-2017 12:08 PM Phat has seen this message

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 15992
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003


Message 95 of 175 (825307)
12-12-2017 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by jar
12-11-2017 7:26 PM


Re: Is TULIP Biblical?
jar writes:

Why not let each person imagine and worship the God they create?

Does this include you?

Not that I know the inner workings of your mind and soul, but in my mind, the God you have created is beyond your capacity to fully understand.

  • He is almost certainly unlike anything any humans have defined so far.
  • He does not favor any one group of people.
  • He can be described as a She or an It because He is not simply anthropomorphically human...thus beyond gender.
  • In addition, your position on Jesus is still unclear. While Jesus is not God (The Father) is He a human like all of us that was resurrected by GOD? If so,
    did Jesus exist pre-incarnation or was he just like the rest of us humans?

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 91 by jar, posted 12-11-2017 7:26 PM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 96 by jar, posted 12-12-2017 9:37 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 97 of 175 (825310)
    12-12-2017 11:22 AM
    Reply to: Message 96 by jar
    12-12-2017 9:37 AM


    Re: personal journey
    jar writes:

    Even within Christianity there is not unanimous acceptance of even something a basic to the faith as the Nicene Creed; differences that have not been resolved in over 1600 years.

    Based on the available evidence the idea of coming up with some consensus God seems futile.

    But what we can do is examine the God different peoples market.

    So again I ask: Just as with RC Sproul, John MacArthur is the heart and soul of Biblical Christianity. His integrity has so far remained unscathed....but the question again is this: In jars words, are these men taking pieces parts out of context? What mistake did Calvin...and much later RC Sproul and John MacArthur...make regarding the use of scripture to defend their beliefs? Also...concerning the "God" of Calvinism...

    jar writes:

    I can look at the God Calvinists market and say "If that is God then I reject all that God stands for".

    Whereas I can accept some of what they teach and/or market while rejecting other points or beliefs. In my mind, the Calvinists have used scripture extensively to support their idea. To reject the God wholesale means basically having to imagine a totally different God than what scripture talks about.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 96 by jar, posted 12-12-2017 9:37 AM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 99 by jar, posted 12-12-2017 12:24 PM Phat has seen this message

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 105 of 175 (825682)
    12-17-2017 10:01 AM
    Reply to: Message 101 by jar
    12-16-2017 1:30 PM


    Is God Always Created By Humans? Implications....
    jar writes:

    The God character in the Bible is yet another example of contradictions and evolution found throughout the Bible.

    The newer God found in Genesis 1 is characterized entirely differently than the much older God found in Genesis 2&3.

    In the older stories the Hebrew God is but one of many Gods and in fact tied to a particular piece of real estate. That is why Namaan asked for two donkey loads of dirt from Israel.

    In the New Testament God becomes an off stage voice, a classic Greek Chorus or Mira.

    Each Bible story writer created the God that was appropriate to the story being told and the era and milieu they lived within.

    So are you basically saying that in all instances, humans created God? I simply cant accept this. 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...much as Faith denies that she does it. I can admit that humans likely make god out to be what they want Him to be and see Him as....but what bothers me about what you say is the total lack of belief that God actually exists and interacts with us. You may claim...honestly...that you have no idea...but to project this belief onto the rest of us is a bit of a stretch.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 101 by jar, posted 12-16-2017 1:30 PM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 106 by jar, posted 12-17-2017 10:33 AM Phat has seen this message
     Message 107 by ringo, posted 12-17-2017 2:01 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 108 of 175 (825741)
    12-17-2017 2:29 PM
    Reply to: Message 107 by ringo
    12-17-2017 2:01 PM


    Re: Is God Always Created By Humans? Implications....
    ringo writes:

    If they were honest, they would at the very least have to acknowledge that they were embellishing.

    Hmmm.
    Embellish
    make (a statement or story) more interesting or entertaining by adding extra details, especially ones that are not true.
    "she had real difficulty telling the truth because she liked to embellish things"
    synonyms: elaborate, embroider, expand on, exaggerate
    "the legend was embellished in later retellings"

    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. For examle, jar and I disagree on the character of GOD. jar says GOD is complete. I say GOD is good. GODmay well have created the possibility of evil, but this fact alone does not make GOD evil.

    Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 107 by ringo, posted 12-17-2017 2:01 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 109 by ringo, posted 12-17-2017 2:39 PM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 110 of 175 (825833)
    12-18-2017 10:52 AM
    Reply to: Message 109 by ringo
    12-17-2017 2:39 PM


    Re: Is God Always Created By Humans? Implications....
    How do you account for the discrepancies?
    Human nature. Incorrect information. Perhaps even cultural bias.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 109 by ringo, posted 12-17-2017 2:39 PM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 111 by ringo, posted 12-18-2017 10:58 AM Phat has replied

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 112 of 175 (825846)
    12-18-2017 11:39 AM
    Reply to: Message 111 by ringo
    12-18-2017 10:58 AM


    Re: Is God Always Created By Humans? Implications....
    It starts with belief. Not with evidence. Thats why you never became a believer. You started with evidence.

    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 111 by ringo, posted 12-18-2017 10:58 AM ringo has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 113 by ringo, posted 12-18-2017 11:46 AM Phat has seen this message

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 15992
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003


    Message 114 of 175 (828054)
    02-08-2018 4:17 PM


    The Calvinists vs Joel Osteen
    It seems that Joel Osteen and his popular brand of positive affirmations goes directly against the traditional beliefs of the late Dr.Sproul and his contemporaries. One of the speakers whom I have respected is Ravi Zacharias. Here he eloquently points out the deficiencies in Osteen's message:

    A generation of people who deny Jesus Christ as the only way to God....sounds a bit like our do your best arguments here at EvC where we place the responsibility of being a good and honest person and doing your best above the traditional message regarding Christ.

    Edited by Phat, : spelling


    Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
    ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
    Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

    Replies to this message:
     Message 115 by jar, posted 02-08-2018 4:36 PM Phat has seen this message
     Message 116 by ringo, posted 02-09-2018 11:39 AM Phat has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.1
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022