click here to tweet this post
click here to share with your friends
subscribe to this feed
Leaving (Christ)ianity
by C Michael PattonFebruary 21st, 2013
430 Comments
I sat down with a young lady not too long ago and had a conversation. This was a conversation about faith—her faith. Better put, this was a conversation about a faith that once was and is no more. She was a very interesting and bright lady—inquisitive, well-read, and very suspicious. She began by telling me that she had been a Christian, but had since left the faith. Christ was once a part of her confession. However, after a long voyage of not finding sufficient answers for her doubts, she came to the conclusion that she believes she has had no choice but to follow her own integrity and renounce Christ all together. That said, when I asked her to share with me what her particular problems were, she became very emotional. It was just as if I represented Christianity, and she was ready to take all of it out on me.
Ignorance. Pity. Shame. These are all word descriptions she associated with Christianity. However, through these superficial word descriptions, it was evident that the best root word to describe her feelings was “betrayal”. She had been betrayed by the Church, because they duped her into a belief not unlike that of the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. When she discovered this “betrayal,” no one could provide a valid answer or excuse. So she left. She is now an unbeliever—a soon-to-be evangelistic unbeliever no doubt. I discussed the issue with her for quite a while. However, she seemed to have come to the point in this process that she was no longer open to counsel, no matter what I said.
As many of you know, a part of my ministry is dealing with people who doubt their faith just like this young lady. I possess well over a dozen books containing a plethora of autobiographical sketches of people who once proclaimed to be Christians. Yet, these same individuals are now professing evangelistic atheism, agnosticism, or skepticism. They are “evangelistic” in that their avowed goal is to convert, or rather “unconvert”, others to their world view system of unbelief. I have received e-mails, phone calls, and personal visits from numerous people who have either already, or are on the verge of leaving the Christian faith. On a positive note, may I say that many of those individuals have been restored to a faith in Christ.
Leaving Christianity is one of the most serious issues facing the Church today. Right under our noses, an epidemic is confronting Christianity— the “disease” of unbelief spreading among our very own. The ironic fact is that there is a great assembly of people in our churches who are somewhere in the process of leaving. No, I am not talking about them leaving one denomination, only to join another Christian group. I am not talking about abandoning some institutionalized notion of Christianity. I am not even talking about the explicit renunciation of their expressed beliefs. I am talking about those who are leaving Christ. (And this is coming from a Calvinist who does not believe that those who are truly elect will ever leave).
Over 31 million Americans are saying “check please” to the church, and are off to find answers elsewhere. Jeff Schadt, coordinator of Youth Transition Network, says thousands of youth fall away from the church when transitioning from high school to college. He and other youth leaders estimate that 65 to 94 percent of high school students stop attending church after graduating. From my studies and experience I find that leaving the church is, on many occasions, the first visible step in one’s pilgrimage away from Christ.
There are so many complicated reasons why people “leave Christ” and I don’t propose to do justice to them here. However, I do want to discuss the observations I have made of the steps that people take in leaving Christianity.
Step One: Doubt
This is the case when a person begins to examine his or her faith more critically by asking questions, expressing concerns, and becoming transparent with their doubt. One normally finds this step coming from teenagers, or those in the process of transitioning from adolescence to their teen years. However, this step frequently applies to individuals included in demographics that reach much farther out than the teen years. This step of doubt is not wholesale, but expresses an inner longing to have questions answered and the intellect satisfied, at least to some degree. Normally, a person experiencing this step will seek out mentors in the faith, someone he respects who will listen to his “doubt.”
While there are several diverse reasons that are responsible for the initiation of this doubt, three primary causes stand out:
Maturation: Much of the time, the cause is purely reflective of one’s age progression, a phase in life we like to call “simple maturation.” As people grow older, they begin to ask more serious questions about their beliefs (and their parents’ beliefs as well). During this stage of life, intellectual maturation, or at least what we perceive to be such, becomes a stronger motivator in our life. We begin to grow in our critical thinking, and discernment skills grow stronger.
Intellectual challenges: Often, the doubt comes from intellectual challenges in the form of questions. “Is the Bible truly reliable?” “Does science demonstrate that there is no proof of God?” “Why do I even need to believe in God?”
Experiential challenges: These types of challenges come from God’s actions (or lack thereof) in our lives. This is exemplified through prayers that don’t get answered, the apparent silence of God in a person’s experience, or a tragedy from which the doubter or someone else was not rescued. These experiential challenges can be catalysts which ignite intellectual challenges.
Any one of these (or all three together) can fire the starting gun on the voyage away from Christianity.
Step Two: Discouragement
This follows doubt, as a person becomes frustrated because he is not finding the answers to his questions. The answers (or lack thereof) cause his discouragement. He becomes further discouraged because he has little or no hope that acceptable answers to his questions will ever be found. His church tells him that merely raising said questions is “unchristian.” A Sunday school teacher may offer an ambivalent response such as, “I don’t know. You just have to believe.” Another might simply say, “That’s a good question, I have never thought of that before. . .” and then proceed on their own way, their own leap-of-faith journey, totally oblivious, just as if the question had never been asked.
These experiences cause obvious and great discouragement in the life of the beginning doubter, who sees his questions and concerns as legitimate, and they deserve to be answered. “Are others scared of these questions? If so, why?” are the doubter’s thoughts.
Step Three: Disillusionment
It is at this step that disillusionment sets in the mind of the doubter. He becomes disillusioned with Christianity in general and proceeds to engage in more serious doubt. He feels genuinely betrayed by those he had trusted most when he first believed. He becomes skeptical not only of what is, in his mind, an unwarranted story about Christ and the Bible, but also of the very people who encouraged and influenced him to believe such an untrustworthy myth. He is further disillusioned that the faith which he had been persuaded to believe was so saturated with naivete that not even his most trusted mentors could (or would) answer basic, elementary questions about the Bible, history, or faith. In his thinking, a person’s “legitimate” intellect was discarded out of hand, supplanted by the church becoming an “illegitimate” contender for the minds of gullible believers. Once the mind of the “Disillusioned Doubter” has been lost, the turn has been made. He may still be emotionally rooting for his former faith, but this will soon pass as his “intellect” talks him out of his emotional conviction. What a very sad place this is for the doubting “leaver,” as he realizes for the first time that he is truly leaving Christ. It is at this point that he will likely go through an indefinite period of depression, despondency, and indecisiveness.
Step Four: Apathy
At this stage in his journey away from the Christian faith, the disillusioned “former Christian” becomes apathetic to finding answers, as he is convinced that the answers don’t exist. He is treading headlong down the path of skepticism, agnosticism, or all-out atheism, but he doesn’t have the courage to admit it to himself or others. An individual in this stage frequently lives as a “closet unbeliever.” He is convinced that it is not worth the risk to come clean about his departure from the faith. He desires an uneventful and peaceful existence in his state of unbelief, without creating any controversy. This may help him to cope with the depression that his loss of faith has brought about. If he isn’t honest with himself or others about it, he won’t have to deal with it. Surely, he may continue to hand out bulletins at church, sing in the choir, show up to socials, take a mission trip here and there, and even teach a Sunday School class, but he no longer believes. He is content, for now, to stay in the closet.
However, not everyone stays in the apathy stage.
Step Five: Departure
(This is where I met the young lady I introduced to you at the beginning of this post. In actuality, she was somewhere in between apathy and departure.) At this stage in the process, the fact that one has left the faith has become real to him, and he is ready and willing to announce the fact to the world. Because of his sense of betrayal, he feels as if it is his duty to become an “evangelist of unbelief.” His goal and mission now becomes to “unconvert” the converted.
This is the stage where many former Christians, such as Bart Erhman, reside. In my opinion, Dr. Erhman is full of zeal due to his sense of betrayal. Either he feels that he has to legitimize his departure by taking with him as many as he can, or he is truly attempting to help people quit living a lie out of true concern. Either way, his emotional commitment to Christianity is gone and reversed. He is now an evangelist of unbelief.
“I don’t really even care what you have to say to me,” she told me that day. “I just don’t believe anymore and there is nothing anyone can do about it.” As I thought about this young lady, one thing kept coming to mind: How was she a part of the church for so long without the church ever engaging her on these issues? You see, the issues she confronted were numerous, but foundational. She doubted the resurrection of Christ; the inspiration, inerrancy, canon of Scripture; and the historicity of the Christian faith in general. If the church had legitimized her questions during the doubting phase and truly engaged her on an intellectual front, I can’t help but think things might have been different. But once one reaches the apathy stage, that seems to be that point of no return.
Folks, we have a lot in our job description. But rooting people theologically by presenting the intellectual viability of the Evangelical faith must be at the top of the priority list and it must come early. While I understand this is not all there is to the Christian faith, it is an absolutely vital part of discipleship and foundational to everything else.
Everyone will go through the doubt phase. Everyone should ask questions about their faith. If you have not asked the “How do you know?” questions about the message of the Gospel, this is not “a good thing.” We should be challenged to think through these questions early in our faith walk. (Taking my own advice, I am reading this to my 14-year-old daughter right now. Why? She needs to hear it.) The Church needs to rethink its educational programs. Expositional preaching, while very important, is not enough. Did you hear me? Expositional preaching is not enough. It is not the correct venue for the discipleship that is vital for us to prevent and overcome this epidemic. We should not fool ourselves into thinking that it does.
The church has been on an intellectual diet for the last century and we are suffering from theological atrophy. What else do you expect when we have replaced theological discipleship, instead prioritizing entertainment, numbers, and fast-food Christianity that can produce nothing more than a veneer of faith seasoned for departure?
The solution: We must reform our educational programs in the church. We must lay theological foundations through critical thinking. We must understand that the “Great Commission” is to make disciples, not simply converts. And most importantly, we must pray that God will grant a revival of the mind and the spirit, knowing that without the power of the Holy Spirit, no amount of intellectual persuasion can change an antagonistic heart.
Absent these solutions, the epidemic of leaving Christ will only worsen. We will (if we don’t already) have more evangelists of unbelief than we do the Gospel.
Similar Posts:
- Dealing with Doubt: Coming Next Tuesday Evening
- Dealing with Doubt: Part 4 – Intellectual Doubt
- “Memorize these Two Verses and Call Me in the Morning” or Dealing with Doubt – Part 2
- Why Some People Believe and Others Don’t
- How to Know if you’re Elect (Sam Storms)
430 Comments
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7
I have gone through times of great pain and doubt. There was a time where I was screaming out to God if I had lost my salvation.
However.. when I was converted, I was soundly converted , not only in my mind, but deeply in my inner being, where there I encountered God- and I knew at that time I was forgiven and saved.
While I have suffered pain and doubt of my salvation in the past – (The story of which some will know here ) I never doubted the existence of God or Christ, nor the Holy Spirit.
I was recently reading Tozer who said something I think speaks into this area of concern. He said our minds are carnal and dead in sin – but it is our inner man who is made alive in Christ – through experiencing God’s love within. You cannot reason anyone into faith, for then their faith will be only an intellectual exercise and not one of deep inner conversion.
Therefore we need today the experience of the Holy Spirit and the foundation of the word to cement our faith together. Is it any wonder that we find Paul praying for the Ephesians.. I pray that you will know the Love of God within your inner being…
Like or Dislike:
0
What was the essence and basis for her sense of betrayal?
Like or Dislike:
1
Craig @1, well said (always like Tozer).
I was raised going to Sunday School and church, VBS and Christian camp but when I got into my teens I went the way of the world, the flesh and the devil. I came to the point described in the post where I just didn’t believe anymore. I see now I looked at God like Luther did – as a strict Judge – and I didn’t like Him very much.
When I did come back to the Lord I expected Him to pound me up but instead He saved me. I believe I went from being spiritually dead to being spiritually alive. It was not an intellectual transformation per se but one in the deepest part of my being. The intellect followed but the primary change was to my dead and darkened heart.
I believe the intellect needs to be addressed, not only because there are answers, but at least to take that weapon away from the enemy. Paul said our fight was spiritual, not physical, and that we are to take every thought captive to obedience of Christ. We are to study and to accurately handle the word of truth. Like Paul said, we are to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.
As I re-evaluate my own life I can’t help but wonder where personal discipleship and pursuit of Christ is in the life described. Paul and the writer to Hebrews both mention people who are called saints but also “carnal” and immature. Paul reminds Timothy that those opposing him are snared by the enemy “held captive to do his will.” The good news is that repentance will lead them to the knowledge of the truth and they will come to their senses. If that does not happen, won’t the final chapter sound a lot like what we have described above? Isn’t this what apostasy looks like?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6
Starting out as an agnostic and coming to follow Christ in later life, I am convinced that we need to deal with the issue of a viable intellectual basis for Christianity. But I think part of the problem is there are those who grew up in the church who are afraid to deal with the issues or help others deal with the issues for fear of finding out Christianity does not stack up intellectually so they tell people don’t question just believe. And the irony of this is there is a solid basis for belief, if we look for the answers. But by refusing to examine the issues for themselves these people convince others there are no answers.
Like or Dislike:
1
My dad was the Sunday school teacher for the young adult class at my childhood church. He was solid in his faith. From that class one student became a Mormon, another bought in to the philosophy of the Masons, another became a left wing anti war believer. All of my 4 siblings are solid believers as I am. I don’t understand why this is but it must have something to do with election!
Like or Dislike:
0
The great Parable of the Sower, Matt. 13: 18, Mk. 4:3, Lk. 8:5 comes to mind! But only one soil was “good soil”, and bore “fruit, thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold.”
“And If any man has ears to hear, let him hear. And take heed what you hear; the measure you give will be the measure you get, and still more will be given you. For to him who has will more be given; and from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” (Mk. 23-25)
Grace is always only God’s to give, but indeed how and in what way do we receive it? There is great mystery here!
Like or Dislike:
0
Surely the doctrine of God’s grace and perseverance comes right to the fore here!
Like or Dislike:
1
And, sadly the problem and loss here is with this person and woman herself, not God..his Word or His servants! Apostasy is very real! (1 John 2: 19) Not “regenerate” and thus elect believers, but those who will apostatize! Note in 2 Peter 1: 10, WE…”Wherefore rather BROTHERS (Brethren), be you diligent to make and confirm your calling and choice firm, for these things DOING.. by no means you will fail, ever!” (literal translation)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7
Robert.. that is a terrible thing you just said.. making it the womans fault. I tried to click dislike on your post, but instead it made it a like..
It seems that Michael clearly said she was wounded and hurting. I once ministered to a dear soul whose son died through suicide. The pastor of the church she and family attended stood up that Sunday and preached on why those who suicide go to hell. – Her husband took her and daughter by the hand and led them out of the church service.. and they were blackbanned from the church as being back slidden.
12 years later I held a memorial service for those bereaved by suicide, and spoke to her over a cup of tea. She said, Craig, you have given me the faith and hope to once again get involved in a church again. I have never lost belief in God / Jesus – but the church -deeply it has hurt us.
There are times when the body of Christ has to do some serious navel gazing on how its shoots, kicks, stabs and spits on its wounded. – Shame on you Robert! Shame!
Like or Dislike:
0
I’ve been interested in this topic myself, having left Christianity and the church for a few years after going away to college.
The one thing I would really point out to such a person is how they take Christianity for granted as far as their value system, ethics etc. (Such people often believe in things like “The Golden Rule”, that a person should be a Good Samaritan. We should help the helpless, help the handicapped etc. Such things really don’t fit well if you believe in Atheism, Evolution, and the survival of the fittest. Some people like Dawkins have tried to explain them with the cooperative behavior of animals but in the end it is only stretching because animals altruistic behavior tends to be limited to those that are in their social group and not towards those who are outside it. It’s really the unique contribution of the Judea-Chrisitan heritage why society at large wants to help the handicapped, the developmentally disabled, the poor etc. Because in previous pagan cultures such people were left die as infants. And of course there is social Darwinism. Many atheists want to help the poor, but if you do such a thing how can you have any “evolutionary progress” if the unfit are allowed to survive, breed, and prosper?
Like or Dislike:
1
Michael,
Is there some reason you won’t answer the question that I asked yesterday? “What was the essence and basis for her sense of betrayal?” I would like to know more about the thought processes and experiences of one who has come to such a position in life. Did she feel betrayed by her pastor, personal friends, church teachings, her understanding of scripture, God….what?
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t know the answer to that. Sorry.
Like or Dislike:
1
Good article. I agree whole heartily in this plan of approach when it comes to doubt and questions. However with that said one componant that the writer has left out is the possibility that the doubt and questions can often times be brought on by insesent sin in the persons life. When you are repeating sinful patterns it can often force us to alter our own theological presuppositions. Think of how prevelent it is for young Christians to be engaged in pre-marital sexual activity or an ongoing pornography addiction. Can’t activities that we have become so enslave us that we begin to doubt the sexual morals that we assumed before. Especially when everyone else around us are engaged in the same behavior. It is this kind of thing that can help to make doubts more convenient for our lives. Now I am not saying that this is always the case but I think that it is a possibility that we must always consider when interacting with a person’s doubts.
Like or Dislike:
0
I love this prescriptive scripture summation for ourselves and on others behalf: build up faith; keep on; pray; wait; have mercy; have fear; snatch others out; rest assured; worship and glory God!
“beloved, building ourselves up on our most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep ourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life. And have mercy on some, who are doubting; save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh. Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.” Jude 1:20-25
Like or Dislike:
1
Michael, this an excellent article that needs broad dissemination. I’ll do my little part on Facebook in a minute. I would encourage you to unpack another reason for disillusionment to which you gave brief reference…the church makes many pronouncements about “relationship with God,” and our “worship” at times seems composed of nothing else. But in our heart of hearts, there are those (I am one) who cannot honestly characterize our experience as ever having “met” or engaged in any two-way interchange with God. It’s easy to wonder whether we’ve been sold a bill of goods, or whether everyone around us is under a mass delusion.
Put another way, it’s not only intellect, but also intellectually-honest examination of emotions and experience, that can lead one to question the validity of the whole show.
Like or Dislike:
0
Thanks, Michael! I am a big believer in teaching apologetics to anyone who will listen, churched and unchurched alike. I struggle with the tension between good old preaching of the Word and addressing the intellectual barriers to faith. In our post modern world, I believe both are necessary. I would love to see more pastors incorporate apologetics into the teaching and preaching of the Church.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael in the OP: {{In their thinking the intellect has become legitimized and the church is therefore an illegitimate contender for their mind.}}
I’ll suppose based on the rest of your article that what you meant was that, in their thinking, since the church has (to them, however this came about) never legitimized the intellect, and since now they realize the intellect is legitimate, therefore the church is an illegitimate contender for their mind. If the church had taught them that the intellect is legitimate, the church could have been a legitimate contender.
So for example,
Michael in the OP: {{As I thought about this young lady, only one thing keeps coming to mind: how was she a part of the church for so long without the church ever engaging her on these issues. [...] If the church had legitimized her questions during the doubting phase and truly engaged her from an intellectual front I can’t help but think, from a human point of view, things might have been different. [...] [R]outing people theologically by presenting the intellectual viability of the Evangelical faith must be top on the priority list… The solution: to reform our educational program in the church. To lay theological foundations through critical thinking. [...] Without these, the epidemic of leaving Christ will only worsen.}}
But as you note in the article, some people in the church would say instead that the intellect is not sufficiently legitimate to seriously question church teaching and reach answers pro or con; thus contributing to the problem this young lady and others have experienced.
Michael in the comments to another post on accepting Calvinist soteriology even though Michael himself doesn’t see how it logically adds up: {{Again, think Trinity and you will see what I mean. Can you rationally understand the Trinity? If you can, you have just entered heresy. [...]We will redefine neither divine election nor human freedom to make them fit a more rational or logical system.}}
For example.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5
If you yourself teach people to disregard commonly legitimate signs that a mistake is being made somewhere, then who exactly is contributing to the problem that people in the church are being taught to disregard intellectual challenges, leaving them vulnerable to frustration because they are not finding the answers?
In one post you tell people in regard to Calvinistic salvation doctrines, “I don’t know. You just have to believe.” And then when people answer saying, wait a minute, why do we have to accept it’s true despite apparent logical problems, why can’t we go with something that doesn’t seem to have logical problems, your answer is that such questions are in effect unchristian: it’s heresy (you think and teach) to rationally understand the Trinity, so readers should by that example see what you mean about doubting Calv salvation logic.
This causes great discouragement in the life of the person as they begin to see that their questions and concerns are either illegitimate or are legitimate enough not to have an answer among those who should. Now the person begins to become disillusioned with Christianity in general and proceeds to doubt much more deeply. They feel betrayed by those who made them believe the now (technically) unwarranted story about trinitarian theology and salvation (technically unwarranted because teachers deny warrant by not providing it and shutting down inquiry into providing coherent warrant). In their thinking the intellect has become legitimized — which you seem to agree is actually proper — but intellectual challenge is denied legitimacy (as you yourself do on some important doctrinal topics), therefore the church is an illegitimate contender for their mind.
Such people will either look for answers elsewhere (perhaps finding different answers along the way that what they’ve been taught they should and must accept), or become apathetic to finding the answers, believing the answers don’t exist.
Like or Dislike:
2
A very important article, I’m glad you wrote.
It is implied that no conversation had occurred between the woman and her fellow church-goers. Maybe she directly stated that in your conversation, maybe just implied it. It would have been a shame if she kept her concerns to herself and not reached out for answers that may have been addressed at an early stage and possibly nipped them in the bud. But a greater shame if, having been confronted with questions, the church couldn’t have found one wise soul to listen with patience to the concerns and responded without judgement but with gentle guidance as Jesus would have done, realizing that it would not be up to him to bring her full fellowship with Christ but the power of the Spirit that is capable through him. I’ve seen too many ham handed approaches by “pastors” that have the opposite intended effect. If Shepherds just let God work through them as they would want Him to instead of their own pride they might find themselves more effective, and perhaps more of these “leavers” would stay.
Lastly, it seems in the many churches of my experience there was less time for for God talk as there was for people talk. So it isn’t too surprising she got too the point of departure.
Like or Dislike:
3
To clarify I’m very much a gung-ho hyper-orthodox trinitarian Christian apologist. But if I don’t recognize the principle right of other people to reject what I’m teaching if they think I’m making a mistake in my data and/or logic somewhere, then my apologetics are not a legitimate contender for their mind, because I would not be allowing a fundamental respect for truth over ideology. People must be free to respect the truth more than to respect my ideology, and so to reject me where they think they see me in error, even if they happen to be the ones who are wrong. (And after all, I might really be making the mistake, which they’re rightly perceiving!)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
4
Going back to that prior post as the example again:
You (Michael) were at the point where you agreed that the Bible clearly teaches:
1.) God has the capability of successfully saving whomever He intends to save from sin;
and
2.) God has the intention (as a factor of His love for all persons for example) to save all sinners from sin;
It should have been time then to:
a.) re-examine just how clearly the Bible teaches that some sinners will never be saved by God from their sins;
b.) re-examine just how clearly the Bible teaches one of the other two positions;
c.) re-examine if the Bible is falsely muddled when it comes to soteriology.
Sceptics go with (c) (or become sceptics thereby, about soteriology at least).
Christian universalists (like myself) find (a) faulty on closer examination, and even find the opposite testified: God successfully saves all sinners eventually from sin. (Not necessarily from punishment first, but from sin.)
Arminians find (b) faulty and reject (1) (by denying God’s competency) or (2) (by denying God persists in this intention, choosing to drop His intention to save sinners after some point even though He could in principle continue to success. Or perhaps He stops trying for everyone after a point, leaving success or failure entirely up to His servants and/or natural coincidence).
Calvinists also find (b) faulty and reject (2), although in a different way than (2)-rejecting Arminians do. Calvs may (or may not) affirm that God still somehow loves those whom He chooses not to even try to save from sin, but He didn’t love them THAT much and in any case never even intended to try.
“Punting to mystery”, as you called your deferment in the other thread, in a fashion that shut down any further inquiry to resolving the problem later (it can’t be rationally resolved and it’s heretical to even try), is exactly the kind of discouraging behavior you’re criticizing for leading people like your young woman out of the church.
Like or Dislike:
3
C Michael Patton says: “The church has been on an intellectual diet for the last century and we are suffering from theological atrophy. What else do you expect when we have replaced theological discipleship with a gluttonous promotion of entertainment, numbers, and fast-food Christianity that can produce nothing more than a veneer of faith seasoned for departure?”
I would agree wholeheartedly with this for some. For others I would add that it has been a gluttonous feast upon poisonous theological apostasy that can only produce the sickly spirituality of a faith in falsehood promoted by those who will regrettably NEVER depart.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
7
The issue is that many in church leadership are hypocrites. Moreover, the most recent reformed movement has produced a set of church leaders who abuse their “power” and lord over people by writing them off as non-believers or not educated enough in doctrine if people have questions or don’t agree with what they say. I was gearing up with others to go plant a church and leave my position as a biochemist here at the university when I had a few logistical questions and the pastor and elder overseeing it all went off. Now months removed and upon logical review of the situation I realize that what we are dealing with is people who claim to be educated or “called” to church leadership who are just power hungry and in it to find a pathetic way to raise money through “support” raising. You see the issue is there isnt a litmus test for the church leaders, there is no way to accurately judge who should and shouldn’t be. If there was someone please explain then how the current state of the church is so decrepit? The church likes to put itself in a special category that isnt compared to other businesses or organizations. i.e. In any business if the failure rate or return on investment was as low as it is in the church people would be fired. Instead what we see in the church are tyrant pastors and elders who are prideful looking to settle scores and push agendas that have no logical lineage of thought. Thus, the majority of young people are leaving the church because leaders are not held accountable and cannot be questioned. The only argument, even the one made in this article, is that if you leave depression and indecisiveness follows. As if that threat is enough to keep people around. Sad, very sad and pitiful counterargument. People who question will never be accepted into the church because its leaders are not capable enough to handle the questions. As a result of the next 20 to 10 years the church as you know it will cease to exist.
Like or Dislike:
1
I think this is key. I can understand their doubts and disillusionment with Christianity but too often I don’t think they have considered the alternatives to Christianity. They will either find they end up out of the frying pan into the fire or bury their heads in the sand and not think about what they actually believe. In my opinion there are no rational alternatives to Christianity. When I teach Sunday schools to kids and adult but especially the kids, I train them to ask questions and even questions they are afraid to ask because they think it might be inappropriate. You are right, part of the problem with so many leaving the faith is because no one has confronted them and help them think through these hard questions.
Like or Dislike:
1
(1) How much of this young woman’s rejection a head thing, and how much of it is a heart thing? Frequently, what people say is a matter of a lack of Christian intellect is oftentimes a mask for a hardened heart.
(2) When I was examining the foundations and underpinnings of the Christian faith (which was before the age of the internet) there was a wealth of resources (apologetics and theological) available for me. I had a brain and I could read.
I didn’t restrict myself to talking to Christians who didn’t know very much, nor did I make sweeping statements about “the Church.”
Thanks CMP for talking with this woman, and praying for her or with her.
Like or Dislike:
0
Truth Unites… and Divides has a good post: Especially this: Thanks CMP for talking with this woman, and praying for her or with her.
If her disposition is as it appears from this piece I don’t think I would even tell her I was praying for her as she would probably take it as condescending. She may think: “yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. The doubting rebellious apostate needs prayer. Thanks, but no thanks”
I have never once overtly denied the Gospel since I was saved in 1984, but man did I go through a long time where I sure may as well have. I doubted everything at times, but I never came to the place where this women is. I was probably far worse though in the terrible witness I was. People like her are rarely recovered. Hebrews 6 comes to mind though I don’t know her and am not pronouncing this necessarily upon her. It does make me sad for her though. She’s in a desolate lonely place.
Like or Dislike:
3
“But the primary description that I felt coming from here was “betrayal.” She had been betrayed by the Church because they duped her into a belief not unlike that of the tooth fairy and Santa Claus. ”
This is exactly what happened to a friend of mine. I think he first started moving away from the faith because of shame and embarrassment he felt among his non-believing friends. He would frequently complain about how other Christians acted that insulted or embarrassed him. I lost touch with him shortly after this for several years, so I’m unclear exactly how he lost his faith, but I know he began reading a lot of material that was skeptical of the Christian faith.
When we finally reconnected many years later, he was very bitter… and that seemed to be his primary complaint — that he was duped. That the church brainwashed him into believing a fairy tale. And he would frequently post anti-religious stuff on Facebook… not just “liking” articles, etc. . . but very antagonistic status updates. He eventually stopped. . . partially because I think he realized that many of us old Christian friends who reconnected with him, weren’t befriending him simply to try to re-convert him.
Like or Dislike:
1
Thank you for great article. This re-affirmed what I already agreed to this statement:
“We do not exclude anyone because of any matter of honest theological disagreement among members of the Church. Our church body is not connected because we all have same theological views. We align ourselves with a common vision and mission to expand the Kingdom of God.”
Unfortunately, the leadership of that church has twisted that statement from “Honest theological disagreement among members” to “honest theological disagreement in areas of important or peripheral beliefs.” That means I would be forced to agree to their core beliefs of that church.
That means the church would not allow me to express differing thoughts and I am being honest, that made me want to leave that church.
Again, thank you for the post!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6
Maybe she has doubts because she examined Christianity and found it wanting. Many Christians actually believe that all the animials we have on earth now came from thos that were on an Ark. Many don’t believe in a form of evolution and are still quoting very poor theories to dispute evolution. Many Christians still think that the Bible is without error. Maybe this young lady decided to read a little and think on her own. I am a Christian but the things many Christians teach are just antiquated. And then there is the whole how are you saved thing. Are you saved by God for some unkown reason or is it by faith? The whole system we call Christianity needs an overhaul. It is not truth that is changing just the way we interpret the truth. An outrageous claim? Read the history of Bible interpretation.
Like or Dislike:
3
I find the reference to heretical thought quite illuminating in an above comment. When honest intellectual questioning is shut down under the umbrella of “heresy,” then avenues to truth are cut off, and the social fear of excommunication and shunning kicks in. If all avenues were left open, the emotional, social aspects would not figure so prominently. However, I think that strict intellectual inquiry along scientific lines must inevitably lead to disbelief in the material reality of Deity, since such a concept can’t be proven materially under strict scientific preconditions.
In my view, the Church errs in trying to compete in the scientific and material realms, as its entire basis is nonmaterial and based in spiritual and ethical concerns. One branch of apologetics that particularly irritates me is presuppositionalism, which inserts the necessity for God as a precondition for rational thought. There is no legitimate reason to do this beyond a need to create legitimacy from whole cloth for nonmaterial deity in the material realm.
Like or Dislike:
1
Intense! I heard of Christ in the 80′s. One thing I found hard to take was the dishonesty of many christians. Why is it hard to take? Because if we are really serious about Christ, we will be people of inward truth, which means of ALL people, we should be willing and able to dig deeper without fear. But often we don’t. We talk Spirit but walk flesh. Which brings me to a seriously important divide. Michael, you talked of her issues being FOUNDATIONAL. Right on. The ” i see that hand, your’re saved if you followed me in the sinner’s prayer” kind of evangelism is a departure from the biblical doctrine of the need for Spirit generated conviction of sin and repentance. You can now get saved without either in most evangelical churches. Tozer called it Christless crossless christianity and spoke of how men may now exercise faith without a jar to their rmoral life. I attended a large pentecostal church . We once had a speaker who told somewhat proudly of how he led a football jock to the Lord by telling him that God wanted to quarterback his life! How insulting to the King of Kings! One of my more recent pastors would preach stuff about how God puts dreams in our hearts and wants to make our dreams come true, bless us, give us the desires of our hearts, etc. He fell into serious sin, no doubt related to his man centeredness There is a difference between the kind of dream that originates from a heart attuned to self and one attunded to the heart of God. I get her , I think. She was right in that she was saying that what she was seeing didn’t line up with what she was taught. Sadly she didn’t realize that she was reacting correctly to a counterfeit gospel; mind set on flesh produces death. modern christianity bears little resemblance to classic biblical christianity because it has embraced the world and its man made teachings and left Christ and His word.
Like or Dislike:
0
It would be interesting to track these that “walk away” from Christ and see what happens to them.
I’m of the opinion that most of them get significantly disappointed with God not doing something for them or protecting them from something bad that happened to them. That disappointment turns to anger and leads to bitterness cutting them off from the operation of grace in their lives (Heb 12). While we should be sympathetic with their pain and emotional stress, they like all of us, must decide to humble themselves in spite of their pain. I think that is where God leads all of us eventually. He has no such plan for those that are not His.
I agree that we need to teach young people more foundational truth and show them early on how to practice it in real life situations. But I also know we should not give into their sinful demandingness because God didn’t come through for them on their terms.
Like or Dislike:
1
AS so much of “Christianity” is based on what ‘we do’ or what ‘we ought not be doing’…you’ll end up with basically two kinds of Christians…the prideful…or the despairing.
The despairing are very likely to dump the whole project overboard. Or they will become phonies and tough it out.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
6
Hi Michael,
I find it a bit strange that amongst all the reasons you outline you don’t mention the character of God as one of the possible reasons. Why is that? I don’t have your level of contact with lots of people but whenever I’ve spoken with people about God/Jesus I try to ask the question “explain to me about the kind of God you don’t believe in?”. Many times it’s the god of Calvin, or aspects thereof, that comes forth and one can only say “well, I wouldn’t believe in that kind of god either!” So, I mention that for full disclosure.
I am not really trying to “bash” your beliefs or start one of the usual arguments. However, I think my point is that Calvinism does have some challenges to overcome in this area. It’s pretty much “all or nothing” when it comes to Calvinism and it’s rather a complex system to understand. Calvinism is a bit like coffee, it’s an acquired taste and it it seems one has to either grow up within a community that believes it or to spend quite a bit of time learning about it.
You also say that one of the answers is to “to lay theological foundations through critical thinking”. As someone that has engaged with Calvinists in a couple of average evangelical churches I don’t really see much openness to critical thinking. There’s very little honest engagement with those of different views other than arguments.
There’s not much of “yes, we’re all on a journey and here’s where I am at, and I respect where you are at, let’s serve Jesus and our fellow man together and be friends while we have a conversation about these things…”. The level of hostility within the Calvinist community against those that disagree with them is astounding. Of course, this is only my experience but it’s usually more or less “if you’re not for us, you’re against us” and one is viewed with suspicion. I am speaking as one that hold to Armenian/Open Theism views. “Critical thinking” and “Calvinists” seems very contradictory.
Like or Dislike:
0
Sadie Heilemann: “One branch of apologetics that particularly irritates me is presuppositionalism, which inserts the necessity for God as a precondition for rational thought.”
That’s too funny. I like the various branches of apologetics, including and particularly presuppositionalism.
Oh well.
Like or Dislike:
0
One question your post never addresses…
How does one who has the one true God as Lord of his/her reasoning manage to reason his/her way OUT of that position?
- SD
Like or Dislike:
3
I am sickened by the commenters here who so clearly put their cherished doctrinal treasures ahead of compassion and merciful consideration for the person’s soul. Your arrogance and myopic hearesy is clear to all but you. There are often serious doubts that need to be dealt with. And there is a way to be true to Truth in love; full of grace and truth. You should look for that or resolve to keep your comments to yourself. That’s exactly what’s driving so many away. (And I do recognize and regret the irony of this post)
Like or Dislike:
0
“That’s too funny. I like the various branches of apologetics, including and particularly presuppositionalism.”
Maybe my limited exposure to it has been a major source of irritation? In the back-and-forths I’ve listened to and read, it inevitably leads to a circular argument that resolves nothing and wastes time, leading only to the idea that we can’t really know anything for sure, unless God is inserted and understood to be the rock beyond perceptual relativism. But one could use an actual rock, I suppose.
Like or Dislike:
0
Although you gave a passing salute to Calvinism you say these people leave Christ. I would prefer to say they have fallen away from the faith and they may have a myriad of excuses for doing so. It sounds that many fall away from faith over some problem with a person or people who are “Christians”. (1 Tim 4:1-2) They may fall away but do they leave Christ? Is Christ the issue? If he is, it would seem they are much like those in John 6:66-69. They may not be believers at all, never were. Who among the true brethren leaves Christ. None!
Like or Dislike:
0
As a pastor, with a teenaged son graduating this year, and wrestling with these same issues, all I can say is, thanks so much for your message.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael, I really like this analysis and could see using it sometime. Just two suggested refinements as you develop these thoughts in the future:
Do you think that maybe Stage 5 could better be divided in two? (or stage 4 and 5 divided into 3.) I think many reach “Departure” who don’t later go on to be “evangelistic” nonbelievers. Rather, they stay in “apathy,” exept an apathy outside the church and faith rather than inside. So maybe those stages could be clarified.
Another area which could be clarified is the intellect vs. emotion axis. I agree with your conclusion about the battle for the intellect and how the church has largely abrogated our duty there. It runs against the grain of the age we live in, where intellect is downplayed and story and emotion are lifted up. I think very few church leaders would agree with you, at least not in *practice,* that “presenting the intellectual viability of the [evangelical Christian] faith… is foundational to everything else.” I *almost* agree, but I see it more as twin foundations: head and heart go hand in hand. When someone truly meets Jesus, when they are soundly converted, as one commenter described, they may or may not be asking the intellectual questions at that time. I guess that’s why it’s tempting to neglect them. But the foundation of intellectual understanding needs to be laid along with the foundation of heart experience.
Something in your story about the young woman struck me: she belt *betrayed* – which is a deep-cutting emotion – because had been (she thought) *duped* – which is an intellectual idea. I think it’s the interplay of heart and head there which is so powerful. So keep exploring that. Thank you for discussing this issue with those who follow your work!
Like or Dislike:
0
I have several problems with this article. However, there is one issue I would like to raise . A relationship with Christ is based on faith. Ultimately it is faith that is the foundation for our relationship with God and faith that maintains that foundation.
The Christian is a “believer”. He/she knows (if they know anything about faith at all) that none of us have all the answers, but that trust in God assures us that the answers are there, that there is “evidence of things not seen”.
Of course, we try to give doubters the best biblical, theological, philosophical and even scientific answers we can, but finding a true “resting place” still depends on faith.
This article, to me, seems to give the impression that “staying with Christ” rests on always having acceptable and accessible answers, and that persons are somehow justified in “leaving Christ” when answers are not readily available, when the fact of the matter is that if we had, our could have all the answers there would be no need for “faith”.
Doubt, in my view, is inextricably bound up with believing. And doubt is not a bad thing at all. Genuinely converted persons often harbor serious doubts, but are buoyed by the truth that God is “bigger than our doubts”.
I am not saying that we should not give doubters at the departure gate with ticket in hand reasons not to “leave Christ”; but among our answers should be the biblical encouragement that “the just shall live by faith.”
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: Often theology really does matter, especially biblical theology. Simply, I am a Calvinist, and you are an Arminian, and salvation is always really God’s! And real saving grace is efficacious and effectual, and again perseverance is the gift of God’s Perseverance.. of God with the Redeemed!
I noted no one said a word about the Parable of the Sower! Pretty plain, but full of GOD’s “mystery”!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Steve Skeete,
Personally, I find these sort of comments very unhelpful. You’re right that ultimately, we have to make a “leap of faith” — in the sense that we cannot know with absolute certainty that what we believe (or hope to believe) is true… and at some point we have to just hope and trust that its true.
But, I can tell you that if my own faith was not built on at least some amount of sound reason and/or historic witness, I doubt very much I could (or really should) maintain that faith. It would seem foolish. If we weren’t speaking of Christ and the Christian faith, I assume you would feel the same way if someone told you that they worshiped the flying spaghetti monster because “they just had faith” that he was real and worthy of worship.
And if someone stopped believing in the spaghetti monster because they felt there was reasonable reason to believe in him, I doubt you would “have a problem” with it.
As someone who wants certitude in all things, it took my a long time to finally be ok with resting in my faith and hope that Christ is my Lord. But I can tell you that if at any time that belief became intellectually impossible, I have no doubt that my faith and hope would die with my intellectual reasoning.
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says:… salvation is always really God’s! And real saving grace is efficacious and effectual, and again perseverance is the gift of God’s Perseverance.. of God with the Redeemed!
Of course I couldn’t agree more.
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says:… I noted no one said a word about the Parable of the Sower! Pretty plain, but full of GOD’s “mystery”!
I saw and of course sin IS the ultimate culprit. When she stands before the judge of all the earth “the church lemme down” ain’t cuttin it. That of course should come up in wisdom, along with the declaration that sinful men do not legitimately indict the Lord of glory in whose name they many times falsely live and speak. But it still should also be done with a genuine burden and a heart in which it is plain to the doubter that they are loved and that the door and the arms will always be open as I’m sure you’d agree. As has been alluded to by somebody else as well, she could just plain be a reprobate. A vessel of wrath prepared for destruction. I don’t know and neither does anybody else which is why she, like anyone in that position should be dealt with mercifully.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Phil Long: I guess this is shot my way? But again, we simply must be biblical and theological! I am not an “Ivory Tower” priest/presbyter, I work mostly now (semi-retired) as a hospital chaplain.. (but I am an old “theolog” too). But sadly many of this new generation are simply not challenged by the Gospel “Kerygma” (message) itself! Again the Parable of the Sower!
Btw, it is hard to bring the Gospel to a generation of the biblically llliterate!
Like or Dislike:
1
Glad to see someone with the same burden I’ve had for over 30 yrs.
I advise beginning with heuristic arguments, and sound bottom-up thinking. We have loads of top-down thinking from those anti- people, but real science is founded on bottom-up thought. Phenomenon first, then theory!
Like or Dislike:
0
Is this my daughter?
Like or Dislike:
0
Judeo-Christianity has always been 0ntological, i.e. the metaphysics of the doctrine of being and man’s ultimate substance, which is at the essence of what St. Paul says is “spirit and soul and body” (1 Thess. 5: 23)…spirit-soul, “bipartite”. The doctrine or teaching of phenomenology, i.e. phenomena without any attempt at metaphysical explanation has only a secondary place for the Christian life. The former, is also part of the Jewish Hellenism, and the Greco-Roman of the Apostles Doctrine, Acts 2: 42, etc.
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t think I’m following your point Fr. Robert.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: The Judeo-Christianity IS “top-down first.. “spirit and truth”!
Like or Dislike:
0
I have not read all the responses so I do not know if I am covering ground already covered by others.
It seems that while the argument that the church has not done its job in responding to this or that question, there are other variables a foot. (take for example a man like Frank Schaeffer (son of apologist Francis Schaeffer) – Frank clearly grew up in a home with a robust theology, and a dad who would by nature, seek to address questions. But Frank has shed his faith, at least in terms I can understand.
Other options:
Parental Sin (or Community sin) which pollutes or distorts the gospel message.
The lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, the pride of life…in which a persons own sin hardens him against the witness of the Spirit.
or finally
The questions that the doubting person is asking are credible, and the answers he or she might be given ARE and always will be inadequate.
–
You will know, this article hits a nerve. This is my house, my daughter.
We are aware of the many ways we have not represented Christ well before our children. We also see devilry underfoot. And then there are some questions that my daughter asks, that I am not satisfied with the answers (or non-answers being given). By me, or anyone else.
Like or Dislike:
2
Kirk,
So why not share “The questions that the doubting person is asking “; that your daughter, and others have? There have been a lot of people commenting here. Perhaps some may have insight into some of the questions and be able to help you with the answers. It has bothered me from the start that no one seems to know the basis of the young lady’s feelings of betrayal; and yet there is a great debate about people leaving the church. Let’s forget the theories and postulates and maybe and deal with some concrete issues. What are the problems that people are having? (in their own words.)
A lot of this reminded me of research discussions with a professors discussing the what ifs and theories, and no one actually going in the lab and doing the experiment. What are the issues people bring up and how have they been so hurt by them that they want to turn their backs on God? Surely, that is the issue. That is the data we need, not discussions about whether they were really saved or not. Why are they hurting?
Like or Dislike:
1
I Pet 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts:and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
This sums it up. We should be filled with the Spirit of God and His word so we can give a reason of the hope within us. I will be praying for this young lady and others you encounter. We have Christ and He is our wisdom in time of need. I pray He reveals Himself to them and they will call on His sweet name.
Like or Dislike:
0
Right on, David
Like or Dislike:
0
Funny, I have had some psychology, even sexual and otherwise, as my training for the priesthood (way back when now). And even some Jungian studies, the collective unconscious, etc. But in reality neither Jung nor Freud, were systematic philosopical thinkers. Note btw that Jung’s work really centred upon the process of ‘individuation’ whereby a person undergoes a developmental journey, with myth, archetypes, and symbols.. towards the final destiny. And now we also know that Freud actually invented many of the scenes his patients were supposed to have had from memory. And psychoanalysis to say the least has been controversial!
Myself, as a Anglican priest/presbyter, I have found the biblical-theological & pastoral to be much more real and lasting! Btw, note Calvin was much more of the pastor-teacher-theolog, also. We should also see the value and worth of Calvin’s Genevan Theological Academy, with men like Theodore Beza, and then later, Francis Terretin. In fact Terretin’s “Elenctic” Theology was surely a thing of beauty! See available today from P&R I might add!
Like or Dislike:
0
I have no objection to scholarly, sound apologetic instruction. However, I have a couple of questions about the progression you described, based on my own experience.
(1) Doesn’t this believer have any personal, basic experience of God Himself? Since my commitment to God rests on the conviction arising from learning through experience that He is there, I’ve never been able intellectually to solve any problem by declaring “God is not there.” He is. It’s part of my experience, an ontological fact.
(2) Doesn’t the believer ever ask any of the questions of God? There may not be answers in his or her immediate circle — not everybody knows a good apologist — but God knows the answers, and He is more than willing to get them across to anybody who asks and is listening for an answer.
I never completely understand any believer who does not have the real God in their experience; I don’t think I could persevere as a Christian without that genuine connection. And I do not understand at all somebody claiming to be searching for answers, but not asking God. Almost certainly, such a person has an ulterior motive for walking away from the faith, and actually does not want to find good answers.
Like or Dislike:
1
@philwynk: Great points mate!
Btw, if this Phil Long, is the “theolog”, Philip J. Long? YOU missed it theologically and biblically, and you should have known better! Christianity can really only be expressed by dogmatic theology! Even our Orthodox (EO) friends know this. And if not Philip J.? Then please forgive me! But may the truth, both in “spirit and truth” reign! And may we pastor-teachers, seek to guide the flock of Christ, “speaking the truth in love”!
Like or Dislike:
1
As one of those “be leavers” I relate to this girl’s pain and feeling of betrayal. The question that made me give up on my faith was the genocide in the Old Testament. The death of David’s baby, the fact that the bible does not ever say slavery is not acceptable. The treatment of women in the bible as men’s property. Yes I have read Paul Copan’s book “Is God a moral monster” I have read William Craig’s response to the genocide verses, I have read Matt Flannigan’s comments and do not feel they give good answers to these questions. I have read Hank Hannegraph’s books and still feel that these apologists are jumping through hoops to explain a book that was written by many different men.
Like or Dislike:
1
Cerbaz…what do you do with the issue of Christ. It seems to me that it is Christ who reconciled all to God, no matter ones race, gender, age or social status.
Like or Dislike:
0
If the bible is not a good book violence, slavery, women’s rights, and jesus is god and was with god how does that make it acceptable. I believed for 40 years what I was taught. It was when our church challenged us to read through the whole bible that I started to ask questions and went looking for the answers from apologists that I respected. I have read “The Case For Christ” by Lee Strobel and I found that he accepted the answers too easily without asking the hard questions.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz.
We need to read the Bible within the genre that its meant and within the sociological cultural lenses of the day, and not as a novel. It contains governmental law, poetry, prophecy, history, song, lamenting and parables.
As for womens rights, the books of law, actually contain some really good advances for women rights within the framework of the culture of the day. Such as a slave women had the right to divorce her husband if he didn’t provide intimacy, shelter, clothing and provision. It also protected her from sexual advances during her time of bleeding and after giving birth.
These few things alone were remarkable within the culture of the day and so we do see the advancement of womens rights within the Bible.
Like or Dislike:
0
40 years? and you had not read the Bible thru at least once? There again is another problem for this “be leaver”! I wonder sometimes how many who sit in the church and name Christ, have ever wore-out a Bible by reading it? I can remember well wearing out Bibles by reading them along the way… Thanks be to God! Note again my point about biblical illiteracy today! But indeed “Jesus Christ” is the Bibles Centre!
Like or Dislike:
0
If a man seduces a vergin who is not engaged he has to pay a dowry to the father for her to be his wife, but the father has the option to refuse to give his daughter to the seducer. In that case, the man pays anyway, for spoiling the virgin. Exodus 22:16-17 If a man finds (overtakes) an engaged girl in the city and lies with her, and they are caught in the act, then both the man and the girl are to be stoned to death. The girl is to be punished because she didn’t screm (in the city, her screams could be heard). Deut 22: 23-24 If a man finds an engaged girl in the field, and forces her to have sex with him, then only the man is to be stoned to death, but the girl is not to be punished, because out in the field her screams could not have been heard. Deut 22:25-27
If a man finds a virgin girl who is not engaged, and seizes her and lies with her and they are discovered, then the man is to pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver, marry her, and never divorce her Deut 22:25-27. This is acceptable to you. Apparently it was inconceivably that a rapist could cover the girl’s mouth or threaten to kill her immediately if she creamed, or something like that.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz… are you reading this as literally meaning that command comes from the word of God…or are you reading it as governmental policy for the people of the day.
It would be crazy for anyone to read any governmental policy as being the word of God…
Like or Dislike:
1
Yes I had read the bible from cover to cover before but not with asking questions. At the time this challenge was given I had a niece that was facing heart surgery at 3 months old and we were all praying. She successfully made it through surgery and is doing well as a two year old. When I came to reading about David’s baby being killed because of his sins I started to question. I went back and started reading again and many things started to seem unacceptable to me. Not sure what you mean Craig is the bible god’s word or is it not?
Like or Dislike:
2
Cerbaz..it depends on what you mean by “God’s Word!”
If you mean that every word in the Bible was dictated by God…then I strenuously disagree with that view of the Bible.
If however you understand the bible to be written by humans, which tells the story of humanity and their experience with God and with each other.. then yes I totally agree with that viewpoint.
From there we have to work out what is the genre of the books we read. Is it history. Is it poetry. Is it prophecy. Is it governmental policy. We need to take note of who is saying what. And from there draw out what it means for us today.
Like or Dislike:
0
Totally acceptable to me Craig. However, not acceptable to the majority of people on this site. Glad you are able to see the bible for what it really is written my men and not inspired by god.
Like or Dislike:
0
■It’s true that the Bible never explicitly condemns slavery.
■However, in a fallen world, God can only fight so many evils at a time. Slavery was not high on his list in the days of the Old Testament. In New Testament times, God may have kept silent about the issue so as not to provoke the Romans to persecute Christians.
■God chose to combat slavery by growing mankind’s moral maturity over time. A change from within is the best and deepest way to produce changed behavior toward others. This is why many Christians were at the forefront of the abolitionist movement.
■Slavery in the Old Testament was not what we might think. It was not racial or imperialistic. Sometimes, it was more like indentured servitude. Other slaves were prisoners of war. [Some apologists justify the latter as God's judgment on wicked, pagan nations.]
■In addition, the Old Testament regulated the treatment of slaves, proscribing excess cruelty.
■The Bible may not speak directly against slavery, but neither does it condone the practice. In fact, it gives even the slave a reason for dignity and hope.
Sounds reasonable, right?
Like or Dislike:
0
slavery in Bible times significantly differed from slavery in modern times. It was not based on race. It was often less imperialistic. Some believe that in many cases it was actually more of an indentured servant type arrangement.”
That is true to an extent. Exodus 21:2-6 describes an arrangement by which a Hebrew could sell himself to one of his countrymen for six years, after which time he was to be set free.
However, this is not the form of slavery to which skeptics object. There are other forms of slavery in the Bible.
Infamously, the next four verses permit a man to sell his daughter as a “servant.” Let us pretend that wording about “pleasing her master” who has “selected her for himself” does not carry any overtones of sexual slavery and move on. What else is there?
Leviticus 25:44-46 states that the Israelites may buy foreign slaves. Unlike Hebrew slaves, foreign slaves were in bondage for life. Do you think it is moral to buy someone and all his descendants and treat them as property? That’s exactly what God gave his people permission to do.
Aside from the fact that these slaves had the Sabbath off and their masters were only allowed to beat and whip them severely, but not kill them, this is very close to the type of slavery we practiced in the American South. No wonder Southern slave-holders used the Bible to justify the practice! Already, we can see that it’s dishonest to claim that slavery in the Bible “significantly differed from slavery in modern times.”
But it gets worse.
Like or Dislike:
0
10 When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives, 11 if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails 13 and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. 14 If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw, let me recommend the ESV Study Bible (Crossway). Check out the History of Salvation Summary, for each Books of the Bible. And the Literary Features, in the Introduction.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz.. your right that I don’ t think the Bible is dictated by God and is written by men.
However, that does not mean I do not think the Scriptures are inspired by God. The inspiration of God is that the Scriptures point to Christ. And Christ points back to God.
Now, while you might have problems with some of the OT records, and for that matter, so do I – those records are not central nor are they important to my faith, as my faith is soundly based on Christ.
Now.. what are we to do with him?
Like or Dislike:
0
According to Deut 20 and 21 Israel was allowed to take women and children captive as booty from wars, so long as the women and children lived outside of the borders of the Promised land, (women and children inside those border were to be killed). Deut 21 stipulates how Isralite males are to treat any women taken captive from wars against Israel’s enemies. When you go out to war against your enemies and Yahweh you God hands them over to you and you take them captive, suppose you see among the capitives a beautiful women who you desire and want to marry, and so you bring her home to your house: she shall shaved her head, pare her nails, discard her captive’s garb, and shall remain i your house for a full month, mourning for her father and mother; after that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you are not satisfied with her, you shall let her go free and not sell her for money. You must not treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her Deut. 21:10-14. So if an Israleite soldier killed a woman’s husband and found her attractive he was allowed to capture her, give her one month to mourn, and then force her to marry him. Sounds like human trafficking.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz.. it does. Now here is the point to make.. is this governmental policy, or is God saying this.. there is a huge difference.
Like or Dislike:
1
Craig majority of evangelical christians believe in the inerancy of the whole bible. Can’t just cherry pick the verses that you agree with.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz.. again it depends on what you understand that means. Gordon Fee has written a great little book called “How to understand the Bible for all its worth.”
In it he explains the difference Genres of the Bible. How we are to understand the different genres. Then we have to work out who is saying what. To whom are they saying it. Why are they saying it.
Within the framework of Exodus / Deut etc.. we are talking about a large number of people who suddenly don’t have a governmental body over them. 200 years before they were ruled by Egypt they were but a small group of people who were self governing.
Now America states “In God We Trust!” But are all their policies godly policies. Should we dismiss God because a nation has ungodly policy?
But again I ask you,.. what do you make of Christ?
Like or Dislike:
0
I have always believed in the inerancy of the scriptures. God breathed each word inspired so for me god and christ are one and the same. John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him: and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. In Him was life: and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness: and the darkness did not comprehend it. Use to believe this was the christ with god from the beginning. So if christ was with god and the bible says the word is god breathed than what?
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael have you read this one to your daughter? If two men, a man and his countryman, are stuggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and put out her and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall show no pity. Deut 25:11-12. Yeah read Copan’s argument that she will have her groin shaved. Really that is acceptable to you?
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz.. now we are getting to the crux of God’s word and what is the meaning of God breathed. Within the framework of this, Paul is actually talking about the OT being God breathed. But, there is a point to what he is saying.. his point is that the the OT Scriptures point to Christ.
Christ is the fulfilment of God’s word. The word of God speaks of Christ, because Christ is the Word. So.. when we come to the OT which of them point to Christ?
Like or Dislike:
0
My understanding was the sacrifice of the animals was the foreshadowing of the sacrifice of Christ. If he was in the beginning then he was a part of the ot. Can’t separate the two of them in my understanding
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz..
Now we are getting to the point of the difference between the Priestly function of Israel and the Government function of Israel.
Like or Dislike:
0
The Bible is a progressive revelation, the OT to the New, “line upon line”, etc. (Isa. 28: 10). The Salvation History of God, (Gen. 3: 15), Covenant/covenants. And then of course the promised Incarnation, (Rom. 9: 4-5 ; 15: 8, etc.) Indeed Christ is both the Rhema and the Logos!
But, indeed the question: “But who do you (personally) say that I am? Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ (Messiah), the Son of the living God.” (Matt. 16: 16-17)
Like or Dislike:
0
Robert, it would be really good to see you engage with what is being said.. instead of just pontificating
Like or Dislike:
1
Neither of you two are dealing with the issues in the ot. That is the problem for me. I never doubted that christ was the saviour. The doubts all came from the ot and I can not accept what the ot says therefore christ being part of that is no longer acceptable. I am not discussing the new testament I am saying look at the ot and do you find this acceptable? Fine if you do however, many be leavers do not reconcile the old testament with the new. Read the blogs of those who have left christianity after many years of belief because like this girl Michael talked about can not accept the arguments from apologists that jump through hoops and say things that are not good arguments. From my understanding this was the reason for the post. WHY ARE CHRISTIANS DOUBTING AND LEAVING THE FAITH. The ot is one of the main reasons.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: Your funny mate, how is seeking to quote Holy Scripture, with a bit of historical logic, “pontificating”? I call it the truth of God’s Word! Rather simple really!
Like or Dislike:
0
Note, as I said the ESV Study Bible! And check out a bit of both Calvin and Luther on the OT! Especially Calvin!
Like or Dislike:
0
And btw, real Christians simply don’t leave the OT, but believe it! For it is the tutor and formation of Christ, Gal. 4: 1-7, as we see of the law in Hebrews. You might want to read the whole of Galatians too!
Like or Dislike:
0
So Robert once save always saved. Yeah for all us unbeleavers!
Like or Dislike:
2
George Jenkins… You asked me the kinds of questions that my daughter (who was a very vibrant Christian for many years) has asked and for which I have inadequate answers.
(I know some of you will assume that one is either always a Christian, or that one masquerades as such… i can only affirm that my daughter was for many years the most precious, most pure, most devoted student of Christ and has now fully abandoned that confession.
Some of the discussion above is just the terrain we have waded through in our house, namely the portrait of God presented in the Levitical Law. For example, This example from Leviticus 22
13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” 15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. 16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels[b] of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, 21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.
–
My daughter reads this and says it sounds like the Taliban.
Like or Dislike:
0
I have read the new testament. Again what do you have to say about the ot.
Like or Dislike:
0
No, I am a Calvinist, the true believer perseveres by grace unto the end! And it does appear you ain’t one!
Like or Dislike:
0
No longer will allow me to make comments.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Kirk: We at this point, can it appears only pray for your daughter! The Lord is the Savior and the Redeemer! But surely apostasy is also very real!
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says:@Greg: The Judeo-Christianity IS “top-down first.. “spirit and truth”!
Ok, but it seems you have your hands full with doubting Cerbaz here. Not to appear unkind, but nobody leaves the faith at all to say nothing of doing so “because” of the OT. There is PLENTY in the old testament (and new actually if properly understood) that will send self exalting autonomous man running… fast. Nuthin new. Cerbaz my friend, you won’t wanna hear this and I intend no insult to you personally but He’s God n you ain’t. In Jeremiah 19 He told Israel that he would cause them to eat their own children and they did. You understand neither His holiness nor your sin and are therefore laboring under the delusion you are yourself the standard by which God, if in your mind there is one, is to be judged. Repent. Forsake this idolatrous self exaltation, surrender to this God who is God alone and watch Him give you peace in the knowledge that you no longer have to advise Him on His shoddy running of the universe. I’m not being funny or sarcastic. I will not be one of these squeaky beanheads who tries to help God out by explaining away what He has clearly declared (not that anybody here is doing that right now) .
BTW, I agree with Fr. Robert. The Crossway ESV study bible is a fine piece of work (for the most part) with not only a massive collection of commentary notes among zillions of other features, but some solid (conservative) basic theological essays in the back as well. You can get a hardcover one for like 40 bucks. Well worth it.
Like or Dislike:
1
Thank you Kirk for your comment and I am sorry this has happened in your family. I have a son who is a strong believer and teaches in a christian school and I have a son who has questioned the bible. I struggled with him and came out on the same side as him. Robert I accepted Jesus Christ as my lord and saviour I prayed the sinners prayer and I led young people to the lord do not say I was never a christian. Just because I began to question my beliefs does not mean I did not believe at the time I made a conversion. You are despictable to even suggest or question what I once believed.
Like or Dislike:
1
Ugh, it is kind of hard to have a back and forth when multiple conversations are going on all at once:)
My daughter is also concerned by those texts that mention, condemn, and dictate death for homosexuals. This is not abstract in our house. Such penalties realized today would mean the death of several people very close to us.
I have answered that the penalties for homosexuality belonged to another era, and were part of the law for National Israel and do not apply today. But my daughter then replies.. that is all well and good, but if we had lived then, would have been God’s will that we pick up stones and kill my aunt, my sister, my friend…etc. I cannot love such a God.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Cerbaz: Again simply read in the Gospels the Parable of the Sower! It appears you fall in there somewhere? (Mk. 4: 3-25)
Like or Dislike:
1
Kirk Jordan says:. But my daughter … cannot love such a God.
She’s right She can’t. Nobody can unless first raised from death in self willed sin to life in the risen Christ. I do not say things like this as a detached and heartless dispenser of cold theology. I understand completely what I am saying and the emotional toll it takes on those who are touched by these realities. Truly I do, but I dare not presume to improve upon what my creator has decreed. We don’t get to tell God how it’s done. He alone commands universes to exist from nothing and all things exist to serve Him alone. Rather than lament the manner in which the law exposes sin, I rejoice in the fact of my having been saved from both though they are certainly not the same thing.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz,
Half the Bible is rated R. But since my daughter is 14, I have no problem reading this to her. Lots of interesting stuff in the Law. Good thing our faith is not grounded in the “how we would like things to be” or “what we find palatable” or we may not find much warrant for belief in Christianity. It is grounded in the resurrection. If that happened, these smaller issues lose their bearings.
But this post has nothing to do with that. Lets keep it on track please.
Like or Dislike:
0
Folks, looks like things have gone off track. Lets get it back on. All others will be deleted.
Like or Dislike:
0
Jason, I am not sure what scar this post has caused you to pull off, but your examination of my thoughts was agglomerated irresponsibly if your goal was to understand and accurately represent me. Lots of accusations. It is probably best if you ask questions first. And, considering you nub seems to really be with Calvinism, this is not the post to bring that back up.
But please know that I am a cataphatic theologian until I find it necessary to punt to apaphatic theology (and this is not often… There are only five major issue that this applies in my theology. But, if you have ever been in my theology program you would see that I argue for Arminianism (and even pelagianism) with great force in order to disarm, instigate l, and educate my students. I may not follow the advice of this blog perfectly, but my practice here does meet my ideals more often than not.
Like or Dislike:
0
Sometimes I feel like strict adherence to the Bible (or at least to how we interpret the Bible, because we ALWAYS interpret the Bible) is like Congress creating mandatory penalties for crime: it assumes all accused are evil, has no knowledge of the individual case, and leaves the Judge (of All) completely out of the running.
1. Condemning the original young woman, or the cherished daughter spoken of, with whatever uncharitable names or ‘theological’ judgments is highly un-Christian. Hardening of heart is condemned in both O.T. and N.T., and Jesus’ most universal message was one of God’s love for us and readiness to forgive. Forgiveness is what allows the sinner to stop self-defensively persisting in sin and despair; forgiveness cleanses us of our guilty selfcondemnation or feelings we can’t be made whole, which allows us to find true Joy in Jesus’ message and Christ’s redemption. God is a God of unlimited chances, if we only repent. People who feel they are one of the ‘elect’ can easily fall into pride and feeling superior, which has led to the bad feelings by people who knowingly have sinned which pushes them out the door, or the feelings that the self-proud ‘elect’ are a bunch of hypocrites, so the church must be as false and heartless as they are. “Christians” who withhold forgiveness (even in advance of being asked), especially when they supposedly represent God’s point of view are responsible for great evil, and lost souls.
2. All young people, especially today, have doubts as they mature; they have been given a theology for children and must be given a theology for adults, as Michael says. They still may stop going to church for a while, but that does not mean they won’t be back. (And if they find a different pastor, or denomination, they feel more at home with, Praise the Lord!) Youth is a time for testing; if their formation of character was strong, they will be moral whether or not they go to church. Sorry to go on so long, but I…
Like or Dislike:
0
I can’t keep up with deleting all these comments guys!
I am responding to Caleb’s doubts through private email. Again, the millions of issue that we need to discuss with Christians cannot be sufficiently covered in this post. I have written about most of these so stick around on this blog and you will be doing much to fulfilling the admonishment of this post.
Kirk, I would love to talk to you about your daughter. I will email you.
For all: no more or I will use the underused blacklist thingy ma jig on this blog.
Like or Dislike:
0
… read ALL the posts, some of which broke my heart.
If we look at others with God’s magnanimous view (like you would look on your two-year-old’s mistakes), we might start getting the picture of God’s forgiveness.
Like or Dislike:
0
I agree leaving Christianity is one of the hardest things I have every done. I cried when I first read this post about this girl because I know the pain and heart break she has gone through. Despite that my questions and doubts have not been answered.
Like or Dislike:
0
I have begged God to help me in my doubts and again tonight I pray God help me in my unbelief and bring me back. This is not easy for people who doubt and it often causes families to break up and take sides.Christians need to help those who are doubting and not condem. Would love good answers to my doubts.
Like or Dislike:
0
Would like answers thank you Michael for your response. Waiting now to hear from you.
Like or Dislike:
0
I have emailed you twice with the answers and invite for discussion. Did you get the emails? Again, off topic for here, but I would love to exchange with you through email. If you did not get them, email me and I will send again (michaelp at credohouse dot org).
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
5
It seems to me that the people who leave because they don’t like some facet of the Old Testament or other are, in effect, choosing the Evangelical Bible Culture over God Himself.
The problems are not problems if one does something with the Old Testament other than treat it as half-educated Evangelicals treat it. At the margin, the offended Christian could say “Well, then, I just don’t like the Old Testament,” and direct his or her study to the New. What percentage of the Church proper is Evangelical? 10%? 5%? It would be easy to continue as, say, an Episcopalian, or a mainstream Methodist, or even a Catholic, rather than abandon God.
But rather than jettison Evangelical doctrines like inerrancy, these folks feel better leaving the Church than simply changing denominations. It’s as though they think, “If the Evangelical view of Christ is wrong, no view can be right.”
I conclude that Evangelicals are taught that their version of hermeneutics is actually more important than Christ. And that, friends, is idolatry.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz says:<<< I have begged God to help me in my doubts and again tonight I pray God help me in my unbelief and bring me back. This is not easy for people who doubt and it often causes families to break up and take sides. Christians need to help those who are doubting and not condemn. Would love good answers to my doubts.
Intonation and facial expressions obviously don’t carry over the internet which in this case makes me hesitant to say anything to you for fear that anything I say will be taken wrong. I wish I knew you in real life. There IS resolution and peace for every fear and doubt in the blood and resurrection life of Jesus, but God must be approached through a posture of surrender my friend. He will not change who and what He is or what He has said or done for anybody. I am no prophet, but I sense that He will bring you through this and you will be stronger for His having done so. That will be my prayer. I hope you email Micheal if you haven’t already
Micheal, of course if this is violating your order, do delete it, I don’t mean to. I think this man may be sincere though and this last plea touched my heart.
Like or Dislike:
2
Regarding what I consider to be “the half-educated Evangelical view of the OT”:
God could not simply command Bronze Age man to become 21st century man, could He?
There are two problems with that. First, the differences in mindset are so dramatic that they simply would not have been able to do it. We tell our Bronze Age leader, “You should not enslave people.” He replies, “Well, what should I do with the people I conquer, then? Eat them?” You say, “Uh… well, you could try not conquering them…” And he replies, “So I should let him conquer me instead?” “How about conquering him and then letting him go?” “He’ll just attack me tomorrow. You’re arguing for perpetual war! And what did I conquer him for in the first place?” See the problem?
And the second problem is, the 21st century, with its millions of abortions and hundreds of millions of government-sponsored murders, is not all that much better.
God’s way is better: He approaches each culture where it is, and gives them a version of their own laws that bends them in the direction of His ideal, a few steps at a time. The result over time is permanent change.
How do you think slavery came to be regarded as wrong? God instituted the Jubilee to show how He felt about slavery in the first place; and over time men came to apply the lessons to all their practices. God DID abolish slavery. It took Him about 3000 years — but no other approach ever even began the project.
Like or Dislike:
0
I appreciate too the comments emphasizing how important prayer is. For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, 2 Cor 10:3-5
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m a bit leery to chime in– 109 posts before this one. But I’ve been thinking pretty hard about this issue for a while now. Rather than present conclusions, I’ll submit the results (so far) in the form of questions.
In my view these are behind much of what’s been discussed. And I agree that it’s critical, particularly for those in leadership, to deal with them. So here goes: in order for a person to sustain their faith, it must pass three tests.
Is it rational? Is Christian theism rationally coherent?
Is it relevant? Does Christianity address the fundamental questions of our existence: purpose, meaning, ethics? I’ll omit the afterlife because for many young people this is an abstraction. They haven’t yet taken seriously their own mortality.
And finally, is it real? Can the Christian life actually be lived? If so, where are the examples? Christianity makes more than merely theological claims. It also claims that those who embrace it will be transformed into the likeness of Jesus. Does that really happen consistently?
To me this last is the acid test. If the Church fails here, the first two alone cannot sustain belief. At least not for a young person confronted dozens of times a day with messages and images intended to subvert their faith.
’nuff said
Like or Dislike:
0
Paul was an intellectual and said he let go of all of his intellect (ie beliefs, opinions, etc). You see how he, the intellectual, was not persuaded by apologetics, but by Jesus. Paul says in his epistles that arguments do nothing (especially those concerning genealogies, opinions, etc)and it’s all about faith. In fact everyone including Jesus said it’s all about faith and obedience. The only people who think intellect plays a part are Americans, Europeans, etc, of modern times. They allow humanism and doubt to guide them. Therefore, this is an issue of lack of faith. Only God can change minds and hearts. And he can change anyone. No amount of intellectual arguing will change minds or hearts. Plus, anyone who is Christian because of intellectual reasons is most likely holding fake belief. There’s a reason Jesus said to have faith like a child. Children, normally speaking, believe with no question. We need to believe God, not humans, without question.
Like or Dislike:
0
The problems are arrogance, doubt, and rebellion. Many people just do not want to acknowledge the fact that humans are powerless, are inherently evil, and were made to serve God. The hurt excuse is exactly that, an excuse. I have been hurt by many racist “Christians”, segregated or even ignored. I always blamed them for their evil, not God. If you have been hurt, go to God. Where do people come in? Some people just do not want the truth. In a prior post, someone mentioned that when a woman’s family member committed suicide, the pastor spoke of suicidal people going to hell (which is in the bible), and she walked out. Just accept the truth for what it is!
Instead of wasting time doubting, have faith in God and only go to him for wisdom, understanding, and guidance. When churches realize that this is the correct route, then they will do what’s right and simply preach, teach and live the gospel. Realize that most of the world will never accept Jesus. Acknowledge Romans 1, ie that humans know about God but choose to reject him.
Like or Dislike:
0
Have sent e-mail to the address and tried to respond to the first and only one and I am unable to because their is no such address.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: The limits of an open blog are too obvious, but if you note, I do quote and always refer to Holy Scripture! And as I have said many times on the blogs, I believe in the “presupposition” and complete authority of Holy Scripture, and what the Reformers called the “sola Scripturia” in the debate with late medieval theology. So the Holy and Sacred Scipture is always my foremost “ethos”.
Btw, your OT “suppositions” are looking poorly here! You too need a good Study Bible it appears, I know one… The ESV Study Bible!
I also like: The Reformation Study Bible, ESV also…R.C. Sproul, General Editor, but note Keith Mathison is the Associate Editor. Indeed Judeo-Christian tools are very important. And also, Mathison’s book, ‘The Shape of Sola Scripturia’ is a nice read! And note again Craig, I was at one time a NT Lecturer, so yeah I read and love books! And always want to share what I see as the “cream” of GOD’s given men and ministry over the centuries. So keep reading mate! 
Like or Dislike:
0
@Cerbaz: We cannot do your biblical homework for you! But you too keep reading, maybe you will find the assurance and power of God’s Holy and “breathed-out” Scripture!? Again I say Christ is both the “Rhema” and the “Logos”!
Like or Dislike:
0
This is from the ESV how do you interpret this
The Defeat of King Sihon
26 “So I sent messengers from the wilderness of Kedemoth to Sihon the king of Heshbon, with words of peace, saying, 27 ‘Let me pass through your land. I will go only by the road; I will turn aside neither to the right nor to the left. 28 You shall sell me food for money, that I may eat, and give me water for money, that I may drink. Only let me pass through on foot, 29 as the sons of Esau who live in Seir and the Moabites who live in Ar did for me, until I go over the Jordan into the land that the Lord our God is giving to us.’ 30 But Sihon the king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him, for the Lord your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might give him into your hand, as he is this day. 31 And the Lord said to me, ‘Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land over to you. Begin to take possession, that you may occupy his land.’ 32 Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Jahaz. 33 And the Lord our God gave him over to us, and we defeated him and his sons and all his people. 34 And we captured all his cities at that time and devoted to destruction[b] every city, men, women, and children. We left no survivors. 35 Only the livestock we took as spoil for ourselves, with the plunder of the cities that we captured. 36 From Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and from the city that is in the valley, as far as Gilead, there was not a city too high for us. The Lord our God gave all into our hands. 37 Only to the land of the sons of Ammon you did not draw near, that is, to all the banks of the river Jabbok and the cities of the hill country, whatever the Lord our God had forbidden us.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz,
It seems to be rather straight forward. Where is your interpretation problem?
Like or Dislike:
1
“The necessity for God as a precondition for rational thought” is not, in my opinion, a trick to make belief in God legitimate, but the only sensible attempt to explain logically how there can be rational thought in the first place, once we accept the existence of rational thought as a given.
Yolanda mentions preaching the Word and apologetics as both needed in the post-modern world, yet post-moderns tend to connect through neither of these primarily, rather through relationships and experiences, “what works” for each individual. I haven’t given up on the Word or apologetics, but I think the missing piece is the life and love of God being lived out through the Church, not so much our words. “Not caring what you know until I know you care” is key.
“Apostasy” on biblegateway.com is of some interest. Matt. 24:10 “Many will turn from the faith” and 24:12 “the love of most will grow cold”. But in I Timothy 4:1 “in later times some will abandon the faith” (to follow demon words). Wondering if it will be some or many/most, or if most will turn but only some of those will be demon-led in the process while others are led by other factors.
I’m a big fan of Clark Pinnock’s book “Reason Enough” which argues for the faith from five different dimensions. No one thing is “absolute proof”, nor are all five together “absolute proof”, but all five together make it very reasonable to have faith, so that faith is not blind. It’s not that there is no evidence outside of faith; it is that some will find the evidence convincing while others will not, more like a court case than a scientific conclusion.
Like or Dislike:
0
@philwynk: WE are on the same page mate! I am always a classic Anglican, and I hope both “catholic” and “reformed”, sadly fewer and fewer today understand what “Evangelical” Theology really is! Note, I even read Barth, but not much “Barthianism”. And oh sadly too the great Luther is read rarely these days! As Walther von Loewenich said in his Luther bio: “He related Holy Scripture to personal existence. This is the essence of his hermeneutic, his teaching concerning the interpretation of Scripture… we may note that he borrowed the Christological meaning from Augustine.” (page 94) Oh that the Evangelical Churches knew Luther’s doctrine of the Cross once again (“theologia crucis”).
AS a wee “churchman” I believe in the pastoral ministry, as the spiritual and prophetic instrument of God, in the great “Kerygma” of Christ!
Like or Dislike:
1
Christian Smith has a book out called Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism is not a True Evangelical Reading of Scripture. Another good one is Scot McKnight’s Blue Parakeet. Third, let me mention Clark Pinnock and Barry Cullen’s The Scripture Principle, and finally Bob Finley’s Reformation in Foreign Missions (the chapters on how the Gospel is spreading in Asia, Africa, and Latin America).
It could be that the betrayal or duping is a legitimate accusation against a certain religious and cultural tradition regarding how we live, interpret and present Scripture, and not really a charge that the Bible is untrue or that Christianity is wrong.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Glenn Shrom: Amen to the last paragraph! This was “philwynk’s” point also! The Great Mystical Body and Economy of God In Christ… “because through HIM we both (Jew & Gentile) have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” (Eph. 2: 18)
Like or Dislike:
1
Great post. I am a former evangelical myself. I am now firmly entrenched between atheism and Christian agnositicsm. I’m 42 and finally came to terms with my unbelief about a year ago. I was the model Christian child, youth and adult. I attended the same Baptist church for over 35 years, was saved at six, baptised at ten, was a Royal Ambassador, a leader in my youth group, a Sunday school teacher for about 15 of those, a deacon (chairman twice) and the head of a pastor search team for my church. I battled doubt for most of my life because the Bible contradicted reason in my opinon. Things that were clearly untrue were put for as correct (young earth; denial of evolution; literal belief of Adam and Eve, Noah, Jonah, etc.) . I squelched all of this for years because I did not want to create conflict among family and friends. I was miserable.
Due to events at my church that forced us to leave within the past year, I was finally able to jettison my belief in the Christian God. He is an illogical and inconsistent figure in the Bible and the orthodox views of creation, fall, salvation and restoration are nonsensical, IMO. The problem in my case was not a lack of discipleship; it was that Christianity doesn’t have any good answers to the questions of existence and suffering. Certain questions are always out of bounds with accusations of heresy always lurking in the background. Everything that can’t be answered is left to the realm of mystery – the ultimate cop-out.
I’ve never been happier than I am now as an ex-Christian. I no longer feel the weight of cognitive dissonance about holding two beliefs that contradict each other. I’m not an evangelist, but I am ready and willing to state why I don’t believe. Although I understand why many people need religion and I do not begrudge them for it, I faind that Christians are mostly Christians because they have been raised that way and are afraid of uncertainty.
Like or Dislike:
0
I would add that when someone does “leave the faith”, this is not the same as saying that the person was saved and has now lost their salvation, since it could be a dead faith to begin with, such as what James talks about.
In this case, it is quite possible that leaving the dead faith is a step on the way towards living faith – not a net loss for the person, but a net gain all around as the person begins to walk with more integrity and maturity, and masks are taken off which did nobody any good.
Some may do best with the mask off and among believers who can influence and pray for them, others may do best out on their own finding out the truth the hard way. Some do best away from those who are pseudo-believers to begin with. For some, whether they stay or go is no worse, since they are destined to perdition either way.
While we should do all we can to influence people to trust Christ, speaking the truth in love, we must remember that Christ gave perfect testimony of Himself and of the Father, yet was still rejected by many, so someone else’s departure from the faith does not equate to our failure in God’s eyes.
The important thing is that if someone stumbles, they should be offended at the Gospel, and not because of our fleshly offenses.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz says:<<< Have sent e-mail to the address and tried to respond to the first and only one and I am unable to because their is no such address.
I know for a fact that this address: michaelp@reclaimingthemind.org works
Continuing to post questions in this thread is not the way to go man. This is not my place and I really don’t want to get in the middle here, but I also don’t want to see you left to yourself if for some reason you actually cannot reach Micheal. If worse comes to absolutely worse mail me at tiribulus@gmail.com A utility account and I’ll give you my real address. Micheal if you don’t like this, I totally understand. (I don’t think I would) I know you have immense offline responsibilities at the moment though and this guy is breaking my heart. Maybe I’m a sucker, but I can live with that.
Like or Dislike:
1
I’d say that Robert’s posts provide an excellent example of the Gordian Knot of Calvinism. Robert’s questioning the faith and convictions of former believers are the antithesis of Christian love. Robert assumes that everyone who has left the faith was not really saved. Yet if Protestantism, and Calvinism in particular, stand for anything, it is assurance in one’s salvation by grace through faith in Christ. Former Christians like Cerbaz and myself were as fervent in our faith and assured of our salvation in Christ at one point as Robert is presently of his own. There is no guarantee that Robert will not one day reject Christianity himself. Certainly, he doubts this will ever happen, but so did every fervent believer who eventually left the faith.
This is the lie of Protestantism: that one can be assured of one’s own salvation. First, it is impossible to quantify faith. Every Christian has some amount of doubt about his own faith even if he squelches and denies it. Second, one cannot project one’s current faith condition into the future. There is only the present and the believer’s current faith condition. Anything else is speculation.
Dostoevsky was right. God placed an impossible burden upon man by requiring faith as the conduit for salvation. The only logical alternatives are that Christianity is false or that Universalism is true. In either case, Christianity does not offer anything different or better than any other creed that champions the Golden Rule.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: If it is on your heart (Cerbaz), then go with it, personally! But note too again Glenn Shron’s # 23, a very good word! I fear “Cerbaz” has been among some very poor, if not bad “evangelical” (so-called) teaching, and it appears for a very long time, very sad! Note Glenn’s statement “pseudo-believers”! I know this is a hard statement, but truth in reality oftens hits hard, especially when people start rejecting God’s Word, and then expect the church to say nothing, or speak smoothly. But again, prayer is often best at times like this, especially for our one brothers daughter. Note, I have a beautiful Lesbian niece (my younger brothers oldest daughter, 24), who lives with her lover, and used to claim Christ. Now she just lives “in the world”. Saved? Not according to the Scripture! Aye, I have been up this road! I must leave her to God!
Like or Dislike:
0
AJG wrote:
This, and not “mystery,” is the ultimate cop-out. You Bulverize all Christians as simply fearful. This may match your experience, but it certainly does not match mine.
In truth, while there are lots of denominations where people are afraid of heresy accusations and personal reactions as you describe, I’ve spent the majority of my Christian experience (almost 40 years now) among people that are not afraid at all. You should have switched denominations if you didn’t like the one where you were.
For the record, I was raised Jewish and agnostic, and became Christian at the age of 18; and I’ve overcome long since whatever fears I’ve had of uncomfortable answers. I currently attend a Vineyard church.
But God is real; He operates in real time, so while I’m not a good Evangelical anymore, I still worship the God of Israel with my whole being.
AJG wrote:
Mystery is inevitable. Man is encountering the real God who created the 3-dimensional universe, so He must exist outside of it. He will necessarily have characteristics that make no sense within 3 dimensions; so the existence of mysteries like the Trinity or like Christ being man and God simultaneously are precisely the sort of thing we should expect.
What would be a real mystery, in my humble opinion, is if our universe could be explained by human intellect in its own terms. Think it through; on atheism, there is no particular reason why we should expect the ability to explain anything, let alone everything. Nor is there any reasonable explanation for curiosity, for the expectation of meaning, for genuine love, for the concept of justice, and so forth.
Like or Dislike:
0
AJG wrote:
None of those beliefs are necessary for salvation, nor are any of them required for Christian obedience. As I said in an earlier comment, you solved a local, denominational problem by making an enormous, life-altering change. You could just as easily have left the Baptist church and become a Catholic, where nobody would condemn you for rejecting those positions.
I do sympathize with your misery, more than you know; but I think that leaving Christ to solve it is like cutting off your legs because your toenails were poking holes in your socks.
AJG also wrote:
I beg to differ; Christianity explains it perfectly. Maybe your local version of it does not, but there are plenty of places you can look where those things are explained expertly.
But my question to you is, what else does? Yeah, I agree, what you’ll get in the average Baptist church is thin gruel, but what you get from the atheists on these questions is irrational to the point of ridicule.
If there were no light, we would have no eyes, and we would have no concept of darkness. By exactly the same reasoning, if there were no meaning, we would have no concept of meaning, nor would we have any desire to know what our universe means.
Like or Dislike:
0
W Craig states “If we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t know the policy on this sort of thing here, but I wrote a book explaining exactly the sorts of things we’re talking about here, and if I do say so myself, it’s pretty good. So for AJG, Cerbaz, and anyone else who’s wrestling with ideas and thinks his church does not encourage such wrestling, allow me to recommend:
“He’s Greater Than You Know: Essays for a Doubting Christian,” by Phil Weingart. I don’t think they allow links here, so you’ll have to scan Amazon for it, but it’s there. Enjoy.
PS: I do know the policy against self-promotion; but I genuinely do want to help, so I’m hoping that the need in the current conversation excuses what would otherwise be a netiquette violation. If not, please forgive me, O Moderatus.
Like or Dislike:
0
@AJG: Assurance of Salvation is a “gift” of God, even John & Charles Wesley taught it! But the perseverance of the Saints, i.e. the Perseverance of God with the Redeemed, is again GOD’s lifetime work.. Jude 1:1 ; 24-25. All of this is “to the only God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord.. etc.” (verse 25)
Again, not a word from these “apparent” undone/ruined-once believers, as to the Parable of the Sower! (See Mk. 4: 16-19, etc.)
Like or Dislike:
0
Note too, I am an old combat vet (retired from the RMC – Royal Marine Commando’s – Reserves), an old mustang…the Vet’s will know what that means. My last combat service was Gulf War 1 in my early 40′s. My first was as attached to the American Marine 3rd Force Recon, out of Pu Bai, in the Nam (1968). The point is, in my life.. I have had some bad days in combat, lost some real close friends, but really never doubted the will or presence of God In Christ, never! Oh yes, I have had my share of PTSD, but by God’s grace, only lightly so. So yes, GOD In Christ has kept me, and gracious so! In many ways, I walk very lightly, at least for myself and I take nothing for granted! I am very blessed and very thankful for God’s great providence! soli Deo gloria!
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: @Greg: If it is on your heart (Cerbaz), then go with it, personally! But note too again Glenn Shron’s # 23, a very good word! The last part anyway. The charge of “biblicism” is all too often hurled at anybody more traditional or conservative than the one pitching the charge.
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: I fear “Cerbaz” has been among some very poor, if not bad “evangelical” (so-called) teaching, and it appears for a very long time,
Let’s don’t be silly. I don’t suspect this at all. I am quite CERTAIN that it is the case that our friend has been subjected to a very weak theology proper to say the very least. I just don’t sense that he’s playing games. I think he really WANTS to love the true and living God. I’m willing to risk being chumped off to find out. Its’ a small price.
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: “pseudo-believers”! I know this is a hard statement, but truth in reality often hits hard, I’m with ya. As I said, “my church lied” ain’t cuttin it at the judgement. He is being offered help and he almost certainly needs to find a stronger communion to worship among. 1 John 2:19 is loomin large here though.
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: especially when people start rejecting God’s Word, and then expect the church to say nothing, or speak smoothly.
Quite so, rebellion should never be coddled, but at the same time, godly wisdom and a willingness to strive with someone through a wilderness season in their life is as necessary as any other part of ministry. You know that. God put saints in my life who were there for me. I have them now.
Yes, if we could have some Samuels today who will say “speak Lord, for your servant is listening” the false perception of unanswered prayer would fall to the ground.
Like or Dislike:
3
I’m amazed and saddened that @Fr. Robert and @Greg (Tiribulus) seem in most of their comments to be demonstrating exactly the sort of attitude that Michael called out in his original post. Michael stated “If the church had legitimized her questions during the doubting phase and truly engaged her on an intellectual front, I can’t help but think things might have been different.” Far from legitimizing questions, what I’m hearing from both of them is that Michael’s friend, and @Cerbaz, and @AJG are demonstrating their probable reprobateness (?) or arrogance against God, for asking the questions they ask. Though their words make at least a halfhearted show of concern, the message that comes through is basically “who are you to question God? Deal with it or burn.” That attitude, I believe, is one of the most powerful God-repellants on the planet (and since I’m Arminian, I believe that those who provide such repellant should be careful lest they be fit for a millstone).
@Cerbaz, you have failed to engage @Craig Benno’s excellent question “but what about Jesus?” Your objections are primarily drawn from Leviticus and Samuel. Don’t forget that the Pharisees & lawyers of Jesus’ day had Leviticus & Samuel, were as sure as Robert and Greg that these were the word of God, and completely missed Jesus too…you know, the guy who said “you have heard it was said…but I say?”
I would encourage you to take a look at Jesus without the fundamentalist and Calvinist baggage he’s too often been laden with. You just might find him validating a whole lot of your objections. And if you’d like dialog with someone who’ll be a lot more sympathetic than some of the folks you’ve encountered here … a doubter who’s still attracted to Jesus … connect with me over at nailtothedoor dot com (see posts on “evangelism”) and let’s talk.
Like or Dislike:
1
Michael,
Your previous answers to challenges to your soteriology were a relevant example, insofar as you criticize church leaders for practices you yourself demonstrably engage in for defending your own beliefs. When they do it, you correctly perceive it leads to a loss of faith in church leadership (and thence in God, to the degree that faith in God is nurtured by church leadership); and you describe that progression in various ways. When you do it, though, it’s apparently okay, even though it results in the same progression (with descriptions I then quoted from your original article for parallel illustration purposes. Those aren’t my scabs, those are the scabs you yourself reported.)
Out of the five major issues you are apophatic on, at least two are very centrally important topics for the shape of Christian theology (trinitarian theism and soteriology). If your young woman has logical difficulties with them, and you tell her to disregard commonly legitimate signs that a mistake is being made somewhere, because these crucially important and prevalent issues cannot be understood rationally and even to try is heretical, then what is she going to do?
More to the point, why criticize other teachers and church leaders when they do the same thing, resulting in the same discouragement and disillusionment? Shouldn’t you be defending them for doing the same thing you do, on those hugely important topics, even though it leads to discouragement, disillusionment, apathy, etc.?
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael: “If the church had legitimized her questions during the doubting phase and truly engaged her on an intellectual front, I can’t help but think things might have been different.”
Okay, how does telling her, during her doubting phase, that issues shaping 80% or more of Christian belief cannot be legitimately judged by the criteria for indicating a mistake is being made, and even to try to coherently understand them is heretical–how does that truly engage her on an intellectual front?
(With some other commenters, I’m also puzzled how you could spend hours talking with her and come away with no idea what her problems were. If you had said that was pastoral confidentiality, I’d've understood, but it doesn’t usually take me more than a few minutes to hear things like “The OT (and/or NT) seems too brutal for other things I’m being taught,” or “The Trinity doesn’t seem to make sense” or “I don’t even know why we’re supposed to believe the Trinity is true in the first place, the few scriptures people tell me about don’t seem to add up to all that” or “I’ve been taught such and such about salvation or condemnation is true, but that contradicts other things I’m taught over here or what I read in the scriptures over there” or so on.)
Like or Dislike:
0
(Note: not actually trying to post more than one comment; I thought the second one might be more practical. Please delete this one and whichever of the other two you prefer.)
Like or Dislike:
1
This, and not “mystery,” is the ultimate cop-out. You Bulverize all Christians as simply fearful. This may match your experience, but it certainly does not match mine.
I said mostly. Mostly != All. You’re misrepresenting me.
The number one predictor of a person’s religious affiliation is the religious affiliation of their parents. This is true of ALL religions, including Christianity. So I stand by my assertion that the reason most people become Christians is because their parents were.
For the record, I was raised Jewish and agnostic, and became Christian at the age of 18
Good for you, but you need to recognize that you are an outlier, not the norm.
Like or Dislike:
0
AJG wrote:
You’re the one who said it as though it was relevant to the discussion, so backing down now over the difference between “most” and “all” is puzzling. But it’s ok, we don’t need to be adversaries.
The relevance of my own situation is that the outlier demonstrates that Bulverism is Bulverism, and an error no matter how many people you think it affects. If those who are not born Christian can believe Christianity after significant investigation, then “most people are born into it” may demonstrate an interesting anthropological fact, but cannot be a sound explanation for why people believe what you think is unbelievable.
Besides, most of the Christians I know personally are more inquisitive than most atheists think they are. It’s part of the “I left” profile — the leaving Christian imagines him- or herself to be more inquisitive, intelligent, and well-informed than those he or she left behind. I don’t offer this as my own, counter-Bulverism (!) but simply point out that there are relevant personality quirks in all sorts of places, on all sides of the issue. So let’s not get lost in them, k?
BTW, in case you’re not familiar with the term, “Bulverism” is a name invented by CS Lewis to describe a particular form of ad hominem fallacy, the ad hominem circumstancial.
I’m really interested in what you think does provide a sound explanation for existence and suffering, and why you don’t accept the good explanation offered by the character of the Christian God.
Like or Dislike:
0
Indeed things can get messy on the theological blogs, if one might look carefully, I myself spoke first and foremost “theologically” about this issue, rather than ad hoc or towards this brothers daughter. I also find it interesting that some like our friend here, an Arminian takes a theological shot himself! Indeed our personal theology is always going to shape our attitudes, and especially us Calvinists, who believe that God is always sovereign & providential! So no apologies from me! This actually only again convinces me how important and even critical our approach to the doctrine of God must be! For the presupposition of God’s Word and its authority is always a foremost issue in proper theological and doctrinal understanding!
So again, may the “games” (battle) begin! And make no mistake, the Battle is always in and over the Word of God!
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert, I was really disgusted with your initial posts, which showed little to no pastoral wisdom. Tell me, as a hospital chaplain, would you say those same things to a patient in hospital who was expressing their doubts and fears to you.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: I can see that you are actually new to “doing” theology! One must “think”, and try not to get your emotions strictly involved!
You have no clue to how I handle my pastoral ministry, save to say that GOD is sovereign & providential! But of course pastoral and hospital chaplain work are not done on the blogs, thankfully!
The one on one is always the real place of pastoral work, of course outside the place of Word & Sacrament, i.e. “preaching”.
Like or Dislike:
1
Dan Martin says: You just might find him validating a whole lot of your objections.
If he finds that he will have found another Jesus indeed. One created in his own image (and yours) and unable to save.
Dan Martin says: And if you’d like dialog with someone who’ll be a lot more sympathetic than some of the folks you’ve encountered here … a doubter who’s still attracted to Jesus … connect with me over at nailtothedoor dot com (see posts on “evangelism”) and let’s talk.
Please do Cerbaz. If you buy that post modern liberal deception he’s selling over there you will have saved a couple of us some time. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know Dan. It’s just this attitude that’s the problem right?. Au contraire. It is you and other angels of light like you with your blasphemous perversion of the Son of the most high God who have buried the true gospel under a heap of carnality and unbelief. No sir. I do not think I am endangering Cerbaz one bit. That’s your pathetic humanistic theology. Man the devil doesn’t miss a beat these days. The enemy may be afraid of you Cerbaz. Maybe that’s why he’s sending one his messengers after you when you reach out and some brothers try to help. i disagree with Micheal on a whole lot, but I really do hope you have gotten a hold of him.
The bottom line is people who let the world redefine the word in order to make it believable to those for whom it is SUPPOSED to be foolishness are the worst enemies of all. These people this article is about do not need a diluted recasting of our God and His Christ. They need a resurrecting encounter with both through the power of the Holy Spirit which come only through the pure word. BTW. I know Arminians (one in particular) who I would not hesitate to send Cerbaz to before you go off on that kick.
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw Craig, I am a real “conservative” Brit., both bilbical-theologically and politically! This also causes sparks with liberals! And btw, I consider your theological approach rather sloppy and liberal! How’s that mate! Clear? I hope so!
I mean we must draw our lines!
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert. I am labled by many things, by many people. None of them worry me. Blogging is more than a place for theological debate…we don’t know if the person Michael as written about reads his blog or not. I certainly know that if I was that person, and read what you did, I would not have been ministered to and encouraged within a pastoral framework.
Like or Dislike:
0
Craig Benno says: I would not have been ministered to and encouraged within a pastoral framework.
Shouldn’t THE question be whether what is being said is faithful to God and His word regardless of how anybody responds to it? My goal is always to be in His presence, in submission to His word, remembering the unthinkable mercy He has shown to me and delivering that word in love AND purity while leaving the results to Him. This practice of pragmatic revision in order to elicit the result that we desire is an unmitigated disaster. There is NOTHING more loving than truth no matter how much it hurts. In fact it is many times that very pain that is used to accomplish His purpose. OR… hang on, I know folks don’t like this anymore. OR, to chase some of the goats from the fold. AHHHHHHH!!! Now he’s done it!!! There he goes acting like God is not weeping and bending over backwards in white lipped desperation trying to get people to believe Him.
Like or Dislike:
1
Where is love one another?
Like or Dislike:
2
Greg.
As Christians we have a pastoral duty in caring for our wounded. Yes we need to speak the truth, but we need to speak it in love.
The post of Roberts that I was referring to was the one that said perhaps she is not one of the elect. I truly do not believe that that is any business of anyone but God’s. The Scriptures show us that there are 5 tenses of Salvation.
1) We were saved.
2) We were being saved.
3) We are saved.
4) We are being saved.
5) We will be saved.
Within God’s economy, if that women in question is one who will be saved, then that means at this point in time, she is also one who was saved and is saved.
I can really imagine from Roberts post that as a hospital chaplain he would just dismiss this woman as being not part of the elect.
Robert.. I would love to read you actually engage with just how you would engage personally with a real live person, who was expressing their doubts and fears to you.. because so far, you have failed to do so.
Like or Dislike:
0
Indeed our brother Greg makes the only point of true pastoral theology, i.e. “Truth”! And surely the pastoral and the theological are wedded together! This is the great beauty of John Calvin’s theology, he was the consummate pastor-teacher! And after over 500 years he is still being read, and affecting the Church “catholic” & “reformed”!
Amen Greg!
Like or Dislike:
1
Where is the love for those who doubt?
Like or Dislike:
1
Cerbaz says: Where is love one another?
You have my word before my God that you are in my prayers and that even though I don’t know you, you are on my heart and I WANT you as my brother. I gave you my email address, but I would prefer you exhaust your efforts contacting Micheal first though I will of course answer in any case. This is his house. I don’t know why his mail wouldn’t work for you.
I gotta tell ya though. “Love”, is NOT what the modern world (and church) has perverted it to be. The God who did indeed do and say those things (some ARE misinterpreted) in the old testament IS love. Yes He is. He loved me when I should have been struck dead where I sat for the life I was living AFTER I knew Him and knew His word better than most people. My hand will always be out and my heart always open to people like you, but I will joyfully submit to being slowly boiled in oil before compromising His truth to make you feel better.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: YOU just don’t get it do you? This is a theological blog, a place to think aloud, and my point about the “female” or woman, was yes the great doctrine of God, that we see in the Parable of the Sower! And indeed btw this Parable hammers Arminianism theologically! I am not saying that one cannot be a Christian and be Arminian, but doctrinally and theologically, and most especially its doctrine of God is most flawed!
Like or Dislike:
0
I am in contact with Michael and he has responded with great help and by the way I am a women Craig.
Like or Dislike:
0
I agree with Dad, ok Father =] (I’m jist kiddin)
I wouldn’t tell the person themselves that they may not be elect because as been said, that’s nunna my business. Mentioning the possibility here though is simply a matter of course because it IS a possibility. The only person’s election I can be certain about on this entire earth is my own.
Also, the parable of the sower WAS spoken by God in the flesh for a reason and this IS a big part of it. Additionally, it is EXACTLY in times like these when the Arminian god is indeed shown to have no clothes. To say nothing of these post modern hippie gods. PLLLLEEEEZE won’t you believe!!! I promise I’ll send my prophet Barney the purple dinosaur to sing to you so you’ll forget all about my truth, holiness and law.
Like or Dislike:
0
@cerbaz: A Woman? Well that changes, nothing! But, it does account for the subjective, somewhat. ‘Women are from Venus and men are from Mars’!
Like or Dislike:
0
cerbaz says: I am in contact with Michael and he has responded with great help and by the way I am a women Craig.
EXCELLENT!!!! Haha, ya know I wondered if you were one of them there girl type peoples. You are in our prayers over here. We have a team of intercessors led by a woman named Debra (yes that’s right a woman) who will be getting your screen name in the morning. I would follow this lady into spiritual battle (have) any day of the week and she has a strong team with her. They are seasoned warriors. and have a few “charismatic” stories for the cessationists around here. (sorry, couldn’t help myself. lol)
Like or Dislike:
2
Never ceases to amuse me how certain types of Christians can go on about God’s love and mercy while demonstrating a spirit completely devoid of love or mercy. No, I’m not suggesting it’s loving to twist the truth. I *am* suggesting that the Christ who would not quench the smoldering wick or bend the bruised reed, looks nothing like the people who are so sure of their own doctrine they will trample roughshod over one who is struggling to reconcile their faith with their experience. Must be nice to have all the answers, eh? Too bad they’re not to the questions real, hurting people are asking.
@Cerbaz, I’m sorry you have to go through this. I’m glad you’re connecting with Michael though. He actually seems to give a rip. I only pray you consider whether you’ve left the fold because of Jesus or because of those who wear his name on their sleeve.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Dan: So now YOU can judge between love and mercy? Funny, very funny! And you have not walked in my shoes that’s a certain mate! I bet I got 20 years on you or more!
Like or Dislike:
2
I believe my words were “demonstrating a spirit completely devoid of love or mercy,” Robert. I can’t judge your heart, I can only see your words. And your words ain’t merciful, dude!
Like or Dislike:
1
Thank you Craig for your Christian love and for reaching out to a doubter. God will bless you and thank you for your prayers.
Like or Dislike:
0
Well “dude”, your words ain’t so sweet either, but even worse, they are theologically lacking! And again “dude” I got years on you! And, we must seek to speak the “truth” in love! And real love speaks “truthfully”, ‘In Christ’! But what does ‘In Christ’ mean? So tell us, biblically & theologically!
Like or Dislike:
2
Hi Cerbaz.
I don’t fear doubt and fear. I have been there myself. Michael is a good guy, and I think you are in safe hands with him.
Btw, is Cerbaz a Spanish name, what does it mean?
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] Read More [...]
Like or Dislike:
1
Dan Martin says: a spirit completely devoid of love or mercy.
Look Pal. Love and mercy have biblical definitions set forth by a God proclaimed therein with a certain being and character that are impossible to miss by those who let the bible read THEM as much as they read IT. We are not at liberty to pick and choose and redefine as we see fit based on what makes us feel good. I spent five minutes on your pagan blog and knew EXACTLY where I was.
Here’s a clue. Real hurting people are not the purpose of creation. The glory of almighty God and the kingdom of His son Jesus Christ, from whom, by whom, for whom, to whom and through whom are ALL things is the purpose of creation.
The white horse rider who is called Faithful and True, and who in righteousness judges and wages war. Whose eyes are a flame of fire, and on whose head are many diadems, clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and whose name is called The Word of God. Followed by the armies which are in heaven, He from whose mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and who treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on whose robe and on whose thigh He has a name written, “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Real hurting people really do matter, but the Word of God did not become flesh, bleed, die and rise again to make mankind happy. He did it to save His people from their sins and all you bible butchering libertines are in for the most heartbreakingly rude awakening there will ever be when you find out how entirely unimpressed the rider of the white horse was with all the help you thought you were giving him by mangling His word in the name of real hurting people who were anything but helped by your perversions.
Like or Dislike:
2
Greg, inherent in the Gospel is a deep sense of social justice. I was only reading in Zechariah today in regards to fasting that God was saying… stop your traditions, and get your heart right. Start caring for each other. Look after the poor, the widow, the orphan the refugee. Stop your hardness of heart and thinking evil of each other.
This theme runs all the way through the minor prophets and Israel’s lack of social justice within their community was the reason for their exile. Caring for the hurting within our community and extended community is part of the whole repentance package.
Like or Dislike:
0
Wrong topic, wrong thread Craig, but my jaw hangs in astonishment at what you just said. Go to my Facebook page or somewhere if you want to talk about that. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002020333790 I already owe Micheal an apology for this thread, but I couldn’t help myself. I need to start one of these blogs and stop invading other people’s so much.
Like or Dislike:
2
Greg, explain why that is jaw dropping?
Inherent in Jesus ministry was the whole reconciling all to the father. Inherent in that is the whole concept of true community. The community cannot call its self righteous in Christ, if it doesn’t care for those whom Jesus cares for.
The pharisees majored on sin, but Jesus majored on forgiveness of sin and what that looked like.
Like or Dislike:
0
The man asked us to get back on topic 2 days ago and despite my best intentions I didn’t manage to do it either, but this isn’t even close. Your perspective is faulty in my view, not that there isn’t the fleecing of the poor and unjust scales denounced by God (and Jesus), but this is not the place to take that up.
Like or Dislike:
2
Greg, its completely on topic. We are talking about pastoral care for the hurting.
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert, I’m not entirely sure what the fact you’re probably 10-20 years older than me has to do with the price of tea in China, but I acknowledge you are. Beside the point, which is this:
Michael started a discussion about the way we let doubters slip away from the church, and the even though he’s Calvinist in his soteriology, this causes him (legitimate, merciful) pastoral concern. You and your buddy Greg respond with the semi-theological equivalent of “So? Some people are destined for destruction. Sucks to be them!” I can think of no less-pastoral response if I try.
And to what end? If, as I believe (and you clearly do not), we actually bear responsibility for those souls we drive away from Jesus (cf. Matt. 18:6-7 & synoptic parallels), then such callous disregard for a seeking person’s questions could have eternal consequences for them *and us*. If on the other hand, it’s all down to election and no human has any influence in the matter, then all you’re doing is rubbing salt in the wounds.
This is one of the paradoxes displayed by many–though not all–Calvinists I have known. They seem to be deeply dedicated to the proposition that those destined for God’s wrath in the next life, must not fail to feel the full extent of their own wrath in this one. I’ve never figured out whether this is schadenfreude or just plain meanness, but it sure seems common. Mercy, it’s not.
Like or Dislike:
1
And Robert, you asked me to respond with “Truth” biblically and theologically. I won’t play the book-chase with you on theology because I don’t think it’s constructive or relevant. But Truth, biblically, is ultimately and finally Jesus himself, the Way, Truth, and Life (John 14:6). And Jesus, the Truth Himself, said:
“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden , and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matt. 11:28-30).
Talk to me about truth when you start looking and sounding like the Truth.
Like or Dislike:
2
I am saving this whole thread as a testimony to Calvinism and Calvinists. It really IS as bad as it
Is made out to be and this thread is the proof.
Like or Dislike:
0
Dan Martin says:Greg respond[s] with the semi-theological equivalent of “So?
Here’s a tip. Never mangle and misrepresent someone on an internet forum that displays what your target’s actual words were right in the same thread as your libelous misrepresentations. Some less charitable than I may accuse you of being of an intellectually deficient hooked on phonics dropout. I will however forgo such infantile slander and simply attribute it to a mind poisoned by humanistic heresy.
Leo and Craig. I have absolutely no time at the moment again. Probably not for several hours at least. I may be able to help you Leo. I sure will try.
Like or Dislike:
2
@Greg – Never mind me. I think anyone reading this thread can make up their own mind. Enough have been said, don’t you think?
Like or Dislike:
0
@Dan: My point about the age difference was because this 20/30 generation today is so narcisistic to my mind, and sadly even the “emergent” Christianity… Brian McLaren, and company, Bell etc. Indeed the Wesley brothers, especially John had more in common with both Calvin and Luther, especially on Justification by Faith. See btw John’s most in-depth essay on the doctrine of Sin, reading it you simply don’t get the sense of today’s Arminianism! And certainly old-school Wesleyanism held to the doctrine of sin to degree.
But again here, I have somewhat pressed the Doctrine of the Parable of the Sower, and not a word “theologically” from you Arminians! Indeed the Parable is a hard statement for Armnian doctrine! This is really the issue theologically. And before we can get to any social doctrine and idea, we simply must deal with the basic idea of the doctrine of God, and again this is most certainly blurred in so-called evangelical theology today, as noted with the emergents.
So, are YOU an emergent? Sadly an important question today in our time of postmodernity!
So you can cry foul all you want, but this is really a smokescreen to the issue of the great doctrine of God! And Divine Election will always be central here.
Like or Dislike:
1
Hey, Fr. Robert? I don’t consider myself either Calvinist or Arminian — I think both positions are true at the same time — but I’m very familiar with the parable of the sower, and I do not see how it would be difficult for an Arminian to interpret. When I preach from that passage (I’ve done it twice in the last year,) I talk about how God works the soil to prepare it to receive the word of God. Each person is responsible for hearing the word and letting it grow up in them, but if you ask God, and sometimes even if you don’t, God will plow and harrow the ground of your life in such a way that the seed will grow up and bear fruit. You just have to be willing to let Him, and not harden under the plow.
How does that upset Arminian theology? Just curious.
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert I will match your bet on the parable of the sower and up the ante to the story Jesus told about the unfruitful tree which the master wanted to cut down and burn…
But the faithful servant said no! Let me tend to it. Dig around its roots. Fertilize it. Let me take care for it.
Jesus commended this servants faith and his pastoral care..
Now, I’m going to not only up the ante.. but go all in. Luke goes on to tell the story of lost sheep, the lost coin, the prodigal son where the father goes out into the driveway and continually looks out for his son and embraces him when he comes back.
But wait, he doesn’t stop there.. he hits those hard hearted religious leaders right into the solar plexus. Tells them about the religious leaders who are beating his servants through the parable of the shrewd manager..
Finally he tells the religious leaders off that they have divorced themselves from God. And highlights that point by talking about the leper in heaven and the rich man in hell.. btw that rich man was representative of those hard hearted religious leaders who thought they were right with God!
I take great heart that Michael Patton is like the father looking out for his son. He is like the servant who says no, I’m going to dig around the roots and fertilize, water and take care of this tree. In my book, Michaels example and those like him – are the only reason why I don’t outright reject calvinists entirely…because I sure have run into some mean bastards in my time.
Like or Dislike:
2
It seems we will never know the source of the young lady’s disillusionment and sense of betrayal in her experience with the church that led in part to her “loss of faith” in Christianity and ultimately Christ.
I can offer from personal experience another potential factor along the steps Micheal outlined although not specifically identified.
In my spiritual journey I went from a very traditional denomination up through high school to became involved a church that was “mildly” charismatic in worship the summer before college. I experienced deep heartfelt worship that I had never experienced before, made many deep long lasting friendships with solid Christians, served in youth and college and career ministry and grew deeply in my faith and love of Christ.
There were some on staff and in teaching positions who began to teach a form of “name it and claim it” faith although not by name and that while the Bible did not ensure you a life free from trouble that victory over any problem or health issues was obtainable with enough faith.
Long story short I went through a series of multiple health, relationship and financial setbacks to which I applied a desperate “Lord if you don’t come through I am in deep doo doo” kind of “faith.” As you might expect God did not come through in the way I believed He promised to on many levels.
My intellect and struggling faith had to conclude that God had not broken any promises however my relationship experience suffered every bit as if God had walked away from me in a time of my greatest need and repeatedly.
Still I knew there was no other person in which to find salvation and words of life. Needless to say wrong theology can do significant harm when it was equated with God’s word yet found to be false.
I am still in recovery on experiencing the more intimate relationship I once had but my earlier experiential faith and intellectual faith never let me walk away by His grace. Still I can understand…
Like or Dislike:
0
Perseverance of the Saints:
You cannot lose your salvation. Because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure. They are eternally secure in Christ. Some of the verses for this position are John 10:27-28 where Jesus said His sheep will never perish; John 6:47 where salvation is described as everlasting life; Romans 8:1 where it is said we have passed out of judgment; 1 Corinthians 10:13 where God promises to never let us be tempted beyond what we can handle; and Phil. 1:6 where God is the one being faithful to perfect us until the day of Jesus’ return.
——————————————————————————–
Like or Dislike:
2
Hi Scott. Well said.
I think there is a problem when we make any theology out of balance. While I believe that theology is extremely important – I believe we need to learn how to treat people well within the bounds of our theology when it appears to fail us.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Phil: Thanks to respond here on the Parable of the Sower. First, we can get lost in the “details” of this Parable, we can see that in the notes of the likes of the Dake’s Bible, etc. But, when we get to the “thematic” centre, it is simply the ‘Doctrine of God’, and His Word! For it is finally only the true “Word” of God itself that creates both the “good soil” and the “fruit” that endures! Just to quckly quote the Reformation Study Bible note here: “The coming of the kingdom is not equally visible to everyone, although it is a kingdom of power. Those on the outside have unreceptive hearts. For those with ears to hear, the parable unveils the “mystery” of redemption, hidden in the person and work of Christ Himself.” Of course only GOD In Christ, can “regenerate” the heart & mind, with the Gospel and Good News of Christ, this “kerygma” (message) of Christ! And this is not ethical instruction, which can only come after the regeneration and kerygma.
Sorry to speak quickly here, we could speak more fully, but this is the essence I believe.
Like or Dislike:
1
It sounds like the young lady had the realisation that beliefs are not facts. She wanted to make sure what she believed to be true, was actually true.
But when she came to investigate this by asking questions and doing research, the results of her investigation clearly established that her beliefs were not true. She would have been foolhardy indeed to continue to dedicate her life to something which she had established to be untrue.
The bible says prayers will be answered (“ask and it shall be given unto you”), and yet all prayers are not answered.
The bible claims to be the perfect word of god and yet contains hundreds of contradictions.
There is no physical evidence of a man called Jesus,and no contemporary record of the existence of such a man.
God is invisible, inaudible, we can’t touch, smell or taste him, or indeed detect him in any way.
Everything is just as though there isn’t and never was such a thing as a god. Just as though the word ‘god’ and the entity it describes were both a concept constructed by man..
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: Btw love the texts from Rev. 19: 11-16!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: The real “mean bastards” are Satan and his demons! (Eph. 6: 12)
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert wrote:
Fr. Robert, I realize that you were being brief and may have left out a lot of explanation, but I think you’re missing the point. The same Word landed on four differently-prepared soils. It only bore fruit in one of them. Clearly it was not the Word that prepared the soil; the soil itself had to be prepared properly for the Word. For this reason, Jesus warns his listeners after explaining the parable, “Be careful how you listen.” (Luke 8:18)
Sounds more Arminian than Calvinist to me, actually. Although, let me remind you, I’m not strictly Arminian, I actually think both sides make true claims.
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw Phil: I am no “Calminian”! Note too Augustine here, and his debate with Pelagius. If you have access, see his (Augustine’s) piece on “Causa Gratiae”.
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert. I think at times the devil and his henchmen are clapping their hands together and just watching… take fred phelps and his crew who truly show calvinsim to be the devils work.
Like or Dislike:
0
Note, this is a Parable.. and the issue is not four other soils, but what soil does God’s Word use to produce saving faith and fruit! But indeed, for “us” how we listen is part of God’s work in and to us!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Craig: Oh please, stop with the poor ad hoc, and get to the Biblical Text!
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw Phil note Mk. 4: 15…”The sower sows the Word.”
*Yes, I am rather busy with e-mails and other blog answers!
Like or Dislike:
0
Leo says: @Greg – Never mind me. I think anyone reading this thread can make up their own mind. Enough have been said, don’t you think?
Oh no sir. You misunderstand entirely, which is fine because I didn’t have time to provide much clarification before. I am offering to henceforth be your personal living object lesson. Anytime you are in need of the cold dead insane historical “Calvinistic” view on something, you now have no need to speculate or rely on second hand accounts. I will gladly come wherever you ask and answer absolutely any question anybody may ever have. I pretend to represent no one on this site except myself, but I WILL give you what was once the boringly common yawn inducing mainstream reformed view that only appears extreme by today’s westernized feel goodism. Don’t be shy now. It would be both my honor and my pleasure. Make no mistake either. I fully expect to be scorned and dismissed by pretty much everybody you would ever introduce me to. I can take it in Jesus name. Ya know what kills me about guys like you? You’ll probably never do it. You’ll just go on talking about people like me, but never allowing one to speak for themselves.
Craig Benno says: I believe we need to learn how to treat people well within the bounds of our theology when it appears to fail us.
True theology never fails us. WE may fail IT, but truth is true yesterday today and forever. When faithfully proclaimed and practiced it accomplishes all that the Lord intends. Our trouble nowadays is our insistence in chasing results rather than obedience. Where God is allowed to be God, we are free to sleep well knowing that we’ve pleased Him today and knowing that while we plant and water, it is Him who gives the increase. The proper and honorable treatment of others, including the poor, is a means by which Christ and Him crucified is preached. Not an end in itself. ANY slackening of His holiness in the pursuit of any other end than His glory is idolatry.
Like or Dislike:
2
Robert, very briefly:
1) I’m 50, not 20 or 30.
2) I’m not emergent; way not-hip for that in fact. I’m an Anabaptist by heritage and philosophy/theology; one who for many years thought I had issues with God and faith that didn’t seem quite right, then discovered to my shock that when I actually looked again at the Bible, it didn’t say half the crap that people claim it says…and did say a rather different set of things. Hence I came to the conclusion that it wasn’t God, but rather people who rather badly misrepresent God, that was the source of my frustration and disillusion.
3) I don’t see Calvinist election in the Parable of the Sower at all. I see all people being offered the Word by God, and only some *choosing* to hear and respond to it.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Dan: Well, my Irish little brother is 50, and he is now an American citizen, and one time American Marine (1980′s). I am 63, 64 this late Oct. I think we chatted on your blog one time? I remember your avid Anabaptist positions!
Well “we” are not gonna agree much here, since I am also a “churchman” and somewhat Creedal, i.e. Nicene to Chalcedon at least. Menno Simons btw held to a Valentinian position on the so-called “flesh” of Christ, just a point.
And of course we will not agree about the nature of the Parable of the Sower, for only the “regenerate” man/person will choose Christ unto the ability to produce lasting “fruit” from “good ground”! (Mk. 4: 8 ; 20)
Btw, how does one receive “ears to hear” the word of God? But save by faith, which comes with/by regeneration and the gift of God! “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:6) And as verse 8: “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (See also John 1: 13)
Like or Dislike:
0
Thanks Craig,
A class I took on How to Interpret the Bible that Micheal Patton taught helped me immensely in identifying particular errors within the false theology I had been taught. This was not a “name what you want and claim it” type of thinking but rather one that believed all promises mentioned in the Bible to all believers (new and old Testaments) were our right to claim in and by faith.
There were also two significant episodes even after recognizing the former teachings as false experientially where I fully believed I had heard God’s direction and promise of deliverance within current circumstances. In both cases there were parallel stories in the Old Testament that seemed to support what I believed I had heard as being consistent with God’s ways.
I imagine recognizing where true faith crosses the line into presumption and discerning the prompting of the Holy Spirit from the promptings of what we desire will not soon become easy. I hope I have learned to recognize the danger of believing that my perception and/or interpretation of what I believe is God’s voice is as rock solid as my belief in Him, His character and His provision of salvation to me through Jesus Christ.
Like or Dislike:
2
You know reading many of the recent comments on this thread leave me wondering why anyone who doubts would want to stay in Christianity. It seems some here worship theology rather than Christ, and I say that because I do believe in good theology. However when it becomes down to ad hominem stuff and personal opinion like it has in this thread, i can readily how it would turn a doubting Christian off. It sure does me.
We need to be more careful, IMO, how we come across, and that means not so much about being right as beingboth right and compassionate.
Like or Dislike:
0
mbaker says: that means not so much about being right as being both right and compassionate.
This is not a bad sentiment. Sincerely. 2 things though. 1, compassion built on bad theology is humanistic psychobabble, which leads me to 2. This is exactly the wrong place for a doubting Christian to go for answers. Also, if you knew me for 2 minutes in real life you would know that you had run into someone for whom theology is NOT for it’s own sake. The people in my church would laugh you out the door i that accusation is pointed at me. Though I agree with you a hundred percent. The worship of theology IS one of the most deceptive and insidious forms of idolatry ever and it IS everywhere today. Neo-orthodox (Barth) and new perspective crap seem to draw huge numbers in this direction.
Like or Dislike:
0
Kirk,
You sent me an email. I responded but it rejects your email every time. I don’t know why. Are we Facebook friends?
Please send me an email with your phone #. I know (think) I can still receive your emails.
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] in LEAVING (CHRIST)IANITY, Michael Patton takes us through the stages that many people go through on their way to apostasy, [...]
Like or Dislike:
0
[...] Leaving (Christ)ianity [...]
Like or Dislike:
1
You’re quite right, Robert, that we’ve chatted before, though I don’t recall that it was on my blog (I can’t search comments by contributor); it may have been another thread here on Michael’s. It’s also pretty obvious that we won’t be resolving the election/free will issue, upon which better minds than ours have butted heads for centuries.
Although I don’t think people usually frame it this way, I think the question of the *necessity* of free will comes down in large measure to a different question, which is why our *human* sense of justice (the one that says one can only be culpable if capable of choice) comes from human rebelliousness (the Calvinist would say so) or from God Himself (which is the more Arminian approach). And in all honesty I don’t know that we have a Biblical answer that is unequivocal in either direction.
BTW in the realm of Anabaptism, I do not mean to suggest I consider all of Menno’s doctrines unassailable. Nor, for that matter, is he the only Anabaptist thinker of note from the beginnings. But when I refer to myself as an Anabaptist, the major points I would adopt from that stream of thinking are a sola scriptura foundation for doctrine; the individual responsibility (and culpability) of each individual for his/her own choices, including of salvation, religious affiliation, and ongoing actions (and God’s having truly assigned capability along with responsibility in this regard); the absolute separation of earthly authorities from any standing in religious matters; the priesthood of all believers and the concomitant unacceptability of *authoritarian* church leadership structures/offices; and the way of nonviolent peacemaking. That’s probably an oversimplification but it’s certainly a decent summary.
But yes, I agree that we won’t see much doctrinal common ground no matter how we hash it out … too dissimilar foundations. Pax!
Like or Dislike:
0
Craig Benno says: Robert. I think at times the devil and his henchmen are clapping their hands together and just watching… take fred phelps and his crew who truly show calvinsim to be the devils work.
Did you really just say this?
Like or Dislike:
0
@Dan: Indeed when we get past the blog aspect of human posture, i.e. debate and differences, we are are both confronted with not so much “free” will (as all men and humanity are sinners), but what I would call theologically as “responsible” will before God, indeed we can see this is St. Paul’s Letter of Romans chapters 1 & 2, etc. And here we are also confronted with biblical epistemology! Indeed how we think and reason, and our methods in the Word of God. The Radical Reformation itself certainly had and has its own sort of method and limits of knowing and understanding God. Though I would say it is surely truncated! Perhaps the biggest area of loss and cutting itself short is in history, i.e. the Jewish Hellenism and the Greco-Roman. St. Paul is always a Jew and something of the fulness of the Pharisee! (Acts 22: 3 thru chapters 26, see 26: 2-8, etc.)
Indeed so-called “theology”.. the study and doctrine of God, must be done in faith, hope and love, and pastorally… as we can see and hear in St. Paul: “Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” (2 Tim. 2: 10) But also pressing on to verse 15, “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” We should also note verses 16 thru 19. And especially Paul’s metaphor of the “great house”.. 2 Tim. 2: 20-21! Surely, this has become “Christendom”, in the last 2000 years or so! Btw, I myself see “God’s firm foundation” as the best of the visible church (1 Tim. 3: 15), as the place of God’s “elect” (in this life)!
Like or Dislike:
1
Good article. I am and have continued struggling. Ten years ago I was exposed to the Calvinist doctrine. I grew up in an Arminian church although it wasn’t identified as such and didn’t discuss the two doctrines at all.
I see now that Calvinism has many valid pts for its support and I have started leaning to accept the doctrine to the pt that I have been thinking that I am a ship intended for destruction and that has been my chosen course from the beginning of time. It has been difficult. I don’t doubt the existence of God, the devil doesn’t even doubt that. My doubt (or losing of faith) is that in my sin I feel that this is my elected path towards destruction.
Those stages are scary and apathy is on the door step for me where I simply give up and no longer care.
Thanks again for the article.
Like or Dislike:
0
Indeed it is rather funny, but sad really that our “brother” Craig has called “Calvinists” and “Calvinism” “henchmen” with the devil! Humm.. not so loving or kind here either! I know that though I don’t believe “Arminianism” to be biblical, I would not call them all “henchmen”, who believe in some aspects of it! Note, I in fact like much of the Wesley brothers…they are or were Evangelical Anglicans! And note, please I am an Anglican “evangelical” myself!
Like or Dislike:
1
Part of the problem is that the popular culture is so aggressively anti-Christian these days, and young people are nothing if not adept readers of the zeitgeist. But it does not only affect them. Many church members, knowingly or unknowingly, are largely formed in their beliefs by people with un-Christian or anti-Christian agendas. When young people question such people, they may have no adequate response in part because they do not actually even believe the Christian position in the first place, or at least have significant doubts about it.
There may have been a time when a lackluster intellectual formation was acceptable for Christians, because the more-or-less default position for a person was to be part of a church. The times, they have a-changed. Now we may assume that most people will either not be born into any church context, or else that they will probably leave at some point in the path to full adulthood. It really is too counter-cultural for a majority of people. Those who stay will have to have strong foundations, both spiritual and intellectual, to persevere in these times. It is tempting to see in our own times the great falling away described in Revelations, but there has been no shortage of people in all periods of Christian history who have fallen into that temptation. We do not know the hour. But we do know that without aggressive work, our churches will continue shrinking and dying. The work you are doing is important. Thank you.
Like or Dislike:
1
You know what gets me is almost every time we talk about immorality and critics of Christianity, all the hypocrites like Martin and Benno would crawl out of the woodwork with bellicose criticism of those who dare to point out the sins of those who live contrary to the Bible. They claim that it is uncharitable to criticize the sinners while at the same time being uncharitable in criticizing the criticizers.
I fully agree with Fr R’s application of the parable. But let’s not forget what we are really talking about here. We are not talking about people who have legitimate doubts and sincerely searching for the truth as brothers and sisters in the faith. We are talking about people who have left who are on their way to becoming ardent critics of our faith like evangelistic atheists. People who IMO unjustly label us as irrational, deniers of reality and most importantly attack the integrity of God. And the worst we say to them is that we doubt that they were ever truly saved and this is suppose to be unloving? Are you kidding me? What harm can it be to tell them that they have never truly believed in the mythical God they now deny or the mythical hell that they are going to that they also don’t believe in? Let’s face it too often the motive for someone to claim they were once a Christian and now they reject it, this past affiliation is suppose to give them more credibility in their attack of Christianity. If they are offended by the accusation that they were never true Christians in the first place, it is because it removes their gravitas to promote their new found faith in atheism.
Like or Dislike:
0
I would too like to say that, I appreciate our brother Michael’s blog, we are both Calvinists, and though however we don’t always agree, I think we are always on the same page! I am always rather sad, and surely really dislike people who are pastor-teachers (and here this includes theolog’s, who sit in their Irovy Towers, and cash their check’s..teaching).. but who hardly engage pastorally! Or when they do, speak simply or simplisticly and without getting their hands dirty! Indeed here is a great shame, itself!
Like or Dislike:
1
Do you even realize how contradictory that sounds. Everyone has a theology. You wanting to be right is a theology. It may not be a Biblically sound theology but being the son of fallen Adam you’ve created your own theology. You just want to dispense your view of right and your view of compassion. Compassion in the absence of truth is insanity.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Tel: Hey mate, I have missed your voice!
Like or Dislike:
0
Thanks Bro, I am very busy lately, too many balls in the air, check in when I can. This is definitely my favorite blog. Thanks Michael.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Jacob F. : Hey mate, check out the life of the great evangelical poet, Wlilliam Cowper (pronouced “Cooper” btw), he had a great struggle with the doctrine of election & reprobation. See his hymns: “God moves in a mysterious way”, and “There is a fountain filled with blood”. And even his hymn: “Castaway”. He was a man who had many deep struggles! But no doubt he was man with some aspects of mental health issues, perhaps brought on by a physical problem or problems? Since he was a man of the 17th/18th century, we will really never know, but it does appear that his illness was cyclical and perhaps clinical, but surely the trials were almost entirely interior. And yet, I almost surely believe I/we will see him in heaven!
Btw, check out the Olney Hymns (1779) he did with the great John Newton!
Like or Dislike:
1
Teleologist,
I think perhaps you might have misunderstood me. I wholeheartedly agree that compassion in the absence of truth is insanity. I believe Christ preached and practiced both, and certainly those are not only Christ’s words but Michael Patton’s (see blog rules) as well, that we are to be irenic in our dealings with others on this blog. as we express opinion.
Granted, it can get out of hand sometimes, because no one ever agrees 100% of the time, but we all need to be careful that we don’t get so one sided that we stop listening, and worse, have folks stop wanting to listen to us when we do have valid points to add the discussion.
You are right that everyone has some form of theology. That’s why when I speak of being right, it isn’t being right in my own eyes, but agreeing on essential biblical truths. I believe we can have truth along with compassion. It’s a hard balance to achieve sometimes, admittedly, but it seems to me the focus of this blog, at least as I understand it in the written rules CMP has laid out for all of us, is one of both Spirit and truth.
Like or Dislike:
0
@m/baker: I admit I am a somewhat older crusty “presbyter” (note my life experience included the military & combat…always central in my life, even as I age), and I am always a “theolog” type, and surely both Reformational and Reformed, i.e. a Calvinist, but I think I am somewhat of a neo-Calvinist, and I hope I am after the “Biblical Text”, but always seeking “faith, hope and love”, in the face of God In Christ!
*And btw, ‘Women really are from Venus, and men from Maris’!
… I remember that American Christian book, (back in the 90′s?)
Like or Dislike:
0
@mbaker, I am sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying. I have to admit that you did throw me off when you said
I don’t think any of us who are dogmatic about our theology worship it but we believe that God has revealed Himself in history and written words so that by the help of the Holy Spirit we would know how to worship Him. So if I am dogmatic it is because I want to worship Him in truth/theology. As a result there are times when we need to call a spade a spade, not for the sake of creating antagonism but speaking the truth sometimes will cause offense. None of us like to be told that what we do is unacceptable/sin. I know Calvinism/Arminianism is a long standing debate but to tell others (not you necessarily) that they shouldn’t approach those who left the faith from a Calvinist perspective because it is unloving is hypocritical.
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw “Teleologist’s” remark on page 5 #7 is right on the mark, and not just because he agrees with me, but because of his spiritual & rational clarity!
Rock on Tel!
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: Ivory Towers, … but who hardly engage pastorally! Or when they do, speak simply or simplistically and without getting their hands dirty! Indeed here is a great shame, itself!
I know you were not pointing this at me at all, but I feel that I should point out that I DO deal with real, hurting struggling people ALL the time though I am not even a pastor. Anybody here thinking that this is all just a quest to be the most invincible theologian has missed my points entirely. There is no such as thing as GODLY, love, compassion or practice on any level or in any area for that matter, that does not sprout from a seedbed of essentially sound theology. Period. EHV-REE-BUDDY”S practice IS simply their beliefs in action. I say again, the church’s job is NOT to get results. That’s a modern Americanism. The church’s job in ministry and evangelism is to OBEY her master and bridegroom, in both attitude and action, and leave the results to Him. Those attitudes and actions are to come from a sound exegetical treatment of scripture. Not from what we find to be “effective” or agreeable to our finite, corrupt and unholy sensibilities.
On another note, this teleologist guy and I just may get along.
Like or Dislike:
1
Teleologist
Hopefully we understand each other now. I am neither Calvinist or Arminian, and I do believe that good theology, both intellectually speaking and in practice, is crucial to the spiritual health of all Christians. I believe where we fail overall nowadays as a modern church is that we often take sides on so many non-essential issues that we lose our focus on the gospel itself, which does emphasis both Spirit and truth. Thus we lose people like this young lady, that we are supposed to be, according to scripture, snatching out of the fire.
I take that very seriously, because I have sure been there and done that, specifically when I came out of the hyper-charismatic church years and years ago, and literally had been so taught much that was false that I had to relearn the Bible all over again, and seek out a church where I could do that under someone who followed it with integrity.
My friends who believed in both Spirit and truth were very patient with me as I struggled to understand what is right in the eyes of the Lord. I can never thank them enough, for sticking with me, otherwise I would have lost my faith entirely.
So I truly can sympathize with this young lady in Michael’s post being disillusioned by the kind of church that make pie in the sky kind of promises, and will not answer questions truthfully.
Like or Dislike:
0
@mbaker, Thank you, I agree with you and I share a similar background. I’ve also had my salvation questioned because of my view on Genesis (OEC). So I disagree slightly with you on debating the non-essentials, because they are still terribly important but you are right, sometimes (not this time) we lose sight of the gospel/essentials. As in the case of Christians who are in similar situations like this lady before she left the faith, more debate and addressing of their questions might help.
Like or Dislike:
0
teleologist says: @mbaker, I’ve also had my salvation questioned because of my view on Genesis (OEC).
While I disagree I can hold my nose and live with somebody’s belief in an old earth IF they are actually biblical creationists on the rest which is getting rarer and rarer.
teleologist says: As in the case of Christians who are in similar situations like this lady before she left the faith, more debate and addressing of their questions might help.
Of course the church should provide answers when the pew dwellers have questions. The world will be mooooore than happy to step in if not. Those answers must be unflinching though on one hand and not contrived where impossible on the other. Yes, God did command the extermination of whole nations of men, woman, children and animals. To say otherwise is to lie. He does not need our whimpering defense in the form of explaining away His truth. Things like this SHOULD though absolutely be explained in light of the overarching narrative of holiness, sin and redemption. A reformed framework in which God’s sovereign pursuit of His own glory is paramount usually IS the explanation.
Some questions don’t have answers and likely never will. Micheal’s recent article on Satan is a good example. He says over and over that he doesn’t know because we aren’t told. That’s the right answer. We DON”T know. I give that answer to screaming arminians all the time. “WHAAAAT!!! How in the world can God sovereignly choose individuals before creation to save and damn and man still be meaningfully free and justly accountable!!!!!”
The answer is… I don’t know. The day I show up here saying that I DO know? You have my permission to shoot me. He’s God n I’m not see? I sleep like a baby in this most comforting of truths. My prayer and goal is to patiently love others to that place. I have older mature men of God in my life who are patiently loving me to their place. That’s how the body works.
Like or Dislike:
0
Thank you @Greg I feel the same about my YEC siblings.
Like or Dislike:
0
Guys,
Michael’s theological word of the day is dualism.
“Early philosophical system which sees the universe in terms of two antithetical forces which are continually at odds. These two forces are responsible for the origin of the world. Often the dualist worldview produced a metaphysical separation between the spiritual and physical, with the spiritual being good and physical being evil. Christianity has rejected all forms of a dualism yet its assumptions often find their way into the church.”
I think that may seem true to some folks who are genuinely confused when they do hear the very passionate arguments on both sides of things like YEC/OEC, Calvinism/Armianism, and perhaps they wonder if we’re being double minded. I don’t know, I have always wondered about that myself. So I think that perhaps we need to be better grounded in all our churches in promoting the essentials, along with better Bible training and personal discipleship before we expose them to other things.
Having someone accept Christ after an altar call and then leaving them up to their own devices has always seemed to me like winning tickets to the Super Bowl and then being left in the parking lot.
Just my 2 1/2 cents.
Like or Dislike:
0
All this group is going to tell you is that she wasn’t a christian in the first place and now all she wants to do is convince christians that they shouldn’t believe in the christian god. The people who respond on this blog have their theology all ready decided and are not willing to every enter into someone elses doubts.Author: Olive
Comment:
It sounds like the young lady had the realisation that beliefs are not facts. She wanted to make sure what she believed to be true, was actually true.
But when she came to investigate this by asking questions and doing research, the results of her investigation clearly established that her beliefs were not true. She would have been foolhardy indeed to continue to dedicate her life to something which she had established to be untrue.
The bible says prayers will be answered (“ask and it shall be given unto you”), and yet all prayers are not answered.
The bible claims to be the perfect word of god and yet contains hundreds of contradictions.
There is no physical evidence of a man called Jesus,and no contemporary record of the existence of such a man.
God is invisible, inaudible, we can’t touch, smell or taste him, or indeed detect him in any way.
Everything is just as though there isn’t and never was such a thing as a god. Just as though the word ‘god’ and the entity it describes were both a concept constructed by man..
Like or Dislike:
0
We just post comments from Robert continually but not others?
Author: Olive
Comment:
It sounds like the young lady had the realisation that beliefs are not facts. She wanted to make sure what she believed to be true, was actually true.
But when she came to investigate this by asking questions and doing research, the results of her investigation clearly established that her beliefs were not true. She would have been foolhardy indeed to continue to dedicate her life to something which she had established to be untrue.
The bible says prayers will be answered (“ask and it shall be given unto you”), and yet all prayers are not answered.
The bible claims to be the perfect word of god and yet contains hundreds of contradictions.
There is no physical evidence of a man called Jesus,and no contemporary record of the existence of such a man.
God is invisible, inaudible, we can’t touch, smell or taste him, or indeed detect him in any way.
Everything is just as though there isn’t and never was such a thing as a god. Just as though the word ‘god’ and the entity it describes were both a concept constructed by man..
Like or Dislike:
0
mbaker you seem like a decent man with a sincere heart and genuine desire to see people come to and stay with Christ. You are however grossly misunderstanding “dualism”, but that’s ok for now.
We have altar calls at our church. People come. Sometimes a lot of people. We are in the ghetto of Detroit where there is an abundance of desperate need. We have a team that takes serious professed new converts into our basement where they are individually prayed with and their information is gotten with arrangements to bring therm back if necessary.
We have a 3 “semester” program called “FTP”. Foundational Training Program, 101, 201 and 301.
101 is basic Christian doctrine. Scripture, God (trinity), Christ, Salvation, atonement, last things etc. 10 weeks. 201 is how to live the Christian life. Prayer, basic principles of bible study, seeking transformation (sanctification), fasting, fellowship, attendance to corporate worship (going to church), giving etc. 10 weeks. 301 is discovering your giftings. Basic testing ,written and conversational, along with individual time with a mature mentor/s of your same gender to help you learn in what areas God has equipped you to serve Him by serving His bride the church. We will give you a job, however menial to start out, to get you on your way to a well rounded healthy life of Christian service in and by His grace. 10 weeks.
All free of charge and we will give you a fancy shmancy diploma and a graduation service complete with food and professional pictures. There is nothing like having a grown man bawl on your shoulder thanking and praising Jesus at receiving his diploma because he has never achieved or graduated from anything in his life. (I love ya Jeff) We are at war boys n girls. This article and discussion is a perfect illustration. We need warriors. Covered in the full armor of God and trained up for battle. Pathetic, powerless, “progressive” false unity is the devils way of neutralizing the church. It’s working.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: Btw, “mbaker” is a dear female and woman of God! One of the reasons for my quote about women are from Venus and men from Mars! A friendly quote I might add!
Like or Dislike:
1
And of course Robert, its full of great theology hey!
Like or Dislike:
0
I like the title, but I did not read the book!
Like or Dislike:
0
Goodbye to all of this
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: @Greg: Btw, “mbaker” is a dear female and woman of God! One of the reasons for my quote about women are from Venus and men from Mars! A friendly quote I might add!
Had no idea lol. Thank you sir. That explains a lot. (jist kiddin mbaker)
Like or Dislike:
0
Greg,
Interesting you should mention Detroit . I lived there in 1966, at 134 W. Columbia Ave, in one of the little brownstones right outside of downtown Detroit, and worked in the David Stott building., and then at J. L. Hudson’s department store. Are they still there? Some of my folks at that time lived at Five Mile Road. I loved the polish sausages and perogies in Hamtramack. Still drool for them. My biggest memory of Detroit was the bums that I would have to step over that were laying against the building in the morning. And of course the better ones were of Bell isle and the Motown sound, and the Supremes that we used to go out there to see on weekends. Although many of my memories of living in Detroit are happy ones, despite its bad publicity. I have no memory of any good churches like what you are talking about.
However, i am glad your church has such a comprehensive program now. That is good.
However, most churches i know of both where you are and where I am now do not have anything like that. I think that is why a lot of people who are asked to accept Christ, and do then are left without any kind of proper counseling except for a sermon on Sunday, and I do think that is a great lack, and perhaps a big reason why many are leaving the faith because they don’t have a proper anchor to begin with, so they never progress or even fully understand what Christianity in the fullness of Christ is really all about because they are not educated about it.
@Fr. Robert,
I know we don’t always agree but thanks so much for your kind words.
Like or Dislike:
0
Hudson’s on Woodward was demolished October 24, 1998. Historic building. I felt bad seeing her go.
Our church is committed to building disciples wherever a willing heart is put in our midst. We are at Grand River and Schoolcraft
We have about 1500 members with several hundred very reliable very serious ones. It is about 95% black though I was born blond n blue and white as the wind driven snow. We are all brethren in both Adams. We also have that intercession team I was talking about who now has Cerbaz and the man’s daughter to be “bathed in prayer”. Minister Debra’s words when I gave her the names. She’s the leader and can singlehandedly pray all the hordes of hell back into the pit. She could teach most men about full armored warfare.
I only give some details in order to disabuse some of the possible notion that I am a religious theoretician who belches cold confessional orthodoxy at struggling brethren. Not so. As I say though I will not however take the edge from God’s truth in order to coerce a result that the Holy Spirit would not otherwise give.
Like or Dislike:
0
Love how the people on this blog have empathy for doubters. Did any of you read Michaels blog on doubt and showing empathy for the doubter or all you worry about is whether or not your a Calvinist ar an armanistbreally that is all the gos,pel means to you.
Like or Dislike:
1
Cerbaz,
Please don’t give up on Christianity because of us, and just because we are such poor representatives of it.
Don’t mind us, if we have turned you off, but please just think of your own eternal security. I am praying for you, and am hoping you know that, flawed though I am too.
God bless you.
Like or Dislike:
1
Olive, #186: “There is no physical evidence of a man called Jesus,and no contemporary record of the existence of such a man.”
CMP, Fr. Robert, Greg (Tiribulus), et al, how would you folks respond to this statement? I seriously would like to know.
Thanks.
I wonder how the Apostles, Luther, Calvin, Rick Warren, Daniel Wallace, Mohler, the Pope, John Piper, Charles Spurgeon, Van Til, William Lane Craig, Paul Copan, Chuck Swindoll, John MacArthur, Billy Graham, et al, would respond to that question, along with a response to their answer by “Olive.”
I have seen, at times, winsome and truthful answers trampled and dismissed rather rudely by folks made in the image of God.
Like or Dislike:
0
For me, the topic of the canon became the fulcrum point that felled my faith. Any study of the pre-Nicene church is going to leave the common student with little to do but fall back on tradition or reject the whole thing as make believe.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz says: Goodbye to all of this
I just this minute saw this. I can’t help how you will receive this, but do know that there will be people of God loving and praying for you as you have said that you had done yourself. I will tell you this. If you are His. He WILL bring you home and you WILL come. And you will do it willingly, gratefully, joyously and probably tearfully. I will continue to hope that I can have you as my sister. Please read this with a tinge of heavy hearted sorrow. That’s how it is being sent. Not with scowling, snooty, arm folded condescension. Not at all.
Like or Dislike:
0
#38, I will let our blog-host take this one, since I am a “Presuppositional” guy, and believe the historical evidence, of both Text & history itself! (Note the Apostolic Community, Peter, James & John, and later Saul/Paul). And say just this, but we have more historical evidence for Jesus the Nazarene, than Plato. I think there are only one to three full manuscripts for Plato from himself? I wonder how many “mythicists” deny Plato’s existence?
Unbelief is a hard taskmaster!
Like or Dislike:
0
@jesse: If you really care? there is a new book on the Canon, called: Canon Revisited, Establishing The Origins And Authority of the New Testament Books, by Michael Kruger (2012, Crossway). Yes, I have it and have read it! Both John Frame and Mike Horton have written in support of this fine book!
Like or Dislike:
0
PS..Also jesse, for a very good book, really a classic that includes the church before Nicaea, see J.N.D. Kelly’s: Early Christian Doctrines, (1958 first edition, but it has been revised also). One of a kind, by a historical scholar, and a conservative Anglican theolog, died in the late 70′s.
Like or Dislike:
0
*Another good book to read is Eusebius’s: The History of the Church – The History Of the Church From Christ To Constantine. Eusebius (AD c. 260-339) was a Greek Christian writer, often called the ‘Father of Ecclesiastical History’. See the Penhguin Classics edition, introduction to the Revised Edition, by Andrew Louth!
Like or Dislike:
0
@ Fr. Robert, of course I am interested in the topic of Apostolic history; and, have read the Ecc. Histories. Still, the earliest attestation to the canon as a list of books [Muratorian Fragment, c. 200AD] convinced me that the canon as we know it has deep problems. I would have liked it had the five volumes of Papias been preserved, but history is indifferernt to my needs or biases.
By the way, I attended an Anglican college in the OAC. Are you the Rector of a parish? What communion?
Like or Dislike:
0
@jessie: Of course the Muratorian Canon, the oldest extant list of the NT books, compiled in Latin before 200 in Rome, discovered by Ludovico Muratori, an Italian scholar (1672-1750), must be seen in the sense of “apostolic men” and church at the time. Again too, we can note later the work of NT Scripture quotation and compellation in Eusebius History of the Church. Again see Kruger’s book, which has several references to the Muratorian fragment/Canon in his work.
I am btw an Irish Brit (born and raised in Dublin), I was a cradle but practicing Roman Catholic until my mid to late 20′s. My first degree was even from a Catholic College in philosophy (BA). I hold now the D. Phil., and Th.D., I lived and taught in Israel in the late 90′s. And that was a real providence! I am now (since about 93-4), a “Biblical” Zionist, and I am Historic Pre-Mill. Yes, I am somewhat an eclectic Reformed guy.
At present I am living in the US with my wife, who has some health issues, one of the reasons we are here. I am semi-retired, and now do some hospital chaplain work. I am a non-stipendiary priest, for several years now. I am a conservative both theologically and politically, and yes a Evangelical and Reformed. (I have been an Anglo-Catholic in my long past, and even still somewhat friendly with the general history of the EO). See my wee blog. 
Like or Dislike:
1
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: #38, I will let our blog-host take this one, since I am a “Presuppositional” guy, and believe the historical evidence, of both Text & history itself!
My thoughts exactly. Or some somebody else.
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: And say just this, but we have more historical evidence for Jesus the Nazarene, than Plato. I think there are only one to three full manuscripts for Plato from himself? I wonder how many “mythicists” deny Plato’s existence?
DOH! Then ya jist couldn’t help yerself could ya ;]
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says: Unbelief is a hard taskmaster!
Indeed. It is itself the intellectual bondage of sin. Bottom line in the end is, “If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.”
That it is NOT cold and uncaring. It is heartbreaking and biblical. I know how tough it is for modern westerners to swallow, but those two can be the same thing.
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes, Amen @Greg! The Holy Scripture will always be God’s word and will, even if we cannot figure it all out! (Lk. 16: 31)…But thank God for His Irresistible, Effectual Grace in His chosen/elect people, not “our” work but His, but we are submissive therein.
Like or Dislike:
0
Loss of faith in what? I think that’s the crux of the issue – and the disillusionment stage (as outlined in the article) is where it becomes obvious that one’s faith was not truly placed in Christ. Superficially, there may be all sorts of reasons – mostly excuses – for why one disavows Christianity, but in the end it can’t but be that one’s faith is not truly in the Master. The Blessedness of the Unoffended is a message this generation needs to hear. Offenses must come. For those who really trust in Christ, the inevitable response to tragedy, trial and tribulation will be “To whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.”. But to those who are unable (or unwilling?) to renounce faith in anything but Christ, a root of bitterness can easily spring up and defile not only them, but those around them.
The bottom line – if they leave, they were not truly (or fully) Christ’s to begin with.
By way of (a poor) analogy, if you are told that you must stand on a table to ensure that you will survive the rising waters that are flooding the house you are in and you, at the same time, are holding on to a firmly bolted metal rail on the wall to help balance yourself, at some point you are going to have to let go of the rail or find yourself wet (and possibly eventually drowning). Meanwhile, the table is rising with the waters to the roof (where, supposedly, you can be pulled to safety – but the analogy is already breaking down). The point is, faith in Christ is all or nothing AND if it is masked (at all) by (any) faith in anything else, the crisis (and it is often internal and unseen) will force the individual to choose where their faith lies (I use “choose” in the loosest sense as I don’t see it as a choice in the sense it is often portrayed).
Like or Dislike:
0
I have to admit I question the sincerity of those who doubt the evidences for the divine origin of the Bible. There are a plethora of evidence to support the divine origin of the Bible if one cares to look. As a presuppositional-evidentialist I straddle both camps. There are plenty of well known figures from past to current that supports the evidential views because they started out trying to disprove the Bible, Simon Greenleaf, CS Lewis, Lee Stroebel. And it isn’t for lack of scholarship if one cares to look, Dan Wallace, Darrell Bock, Craig Evans, Michael Licona, Michael Kruger, there is even a conference coming up Skeptics and the Savior
There is a lot of truth in what James Spiegel said in the title of his book The Making of an Atheist: How Immorality Leads to Unbelief. The truth is that it’s not that there isn’t evidence for God but sinners who don’t want to live accountable to God. We hear a lot of ranting about Christianity, but do they apply the same critical eye to the alternatives? What is the alternative to God?
In an atheistic framework there is no difference in the death of a human being from a monkey, snake, catfish or a virus. We are nothing more than a subgroup of catarrhines made of nothing more than the meaningless collection of star dust.
Absent of a transcendent personal God, any talk about suffering and evil is just nonsense. A staunch atheist like Jean Paul Sartre is right to consider moral rules as slavery to a bad construct. In the last sentence of his book Being and Nothingness, Sartre writes “all human activities are equivalent”, and “it amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations.”
cont…
Like or Dislike:
0
cont. from #49
And the famed Bertrand Russell who is greater than most atheists “man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labors of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of man’s achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins – all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand.”
If you think that is rational and want to put your faith in a life without the God of the Bible then good luck to you.
Like or Dislike:
0
Oh the dark limbo of obscure psychical subjectivism. It often leads to profound lust, and outright idolatry! Simply without God we are lost, to ourselves and real being-ontology!
Like or Dislike:
0
Exactly. And let’s not forget it is atheistic reductionism that tells us that there is no soul no mind, we are nothing more than a blob of protoplasm encased in an exoskeleton. Our actions are nothing more than the result of some interactions between some biochemical reactions which we cannot control and fatalistic. You can’t blame a primate for going on a killing spree because of a donut he ate that morning which triggered a biochemical chain reaction that caused him/her to kill. I didn’t just made up these ideas this is the kind of reductionism that is espoused by atheists like Richard Dawkins and BF Skinner.
Like or Dislike:
0
Ugh, on B.F. Skinner! I have to read him a bit in my college days, aye he made it across the pond!
“When Milton’s Satan falls from heaven, he ends in hell. And what does he say to reassure himself? ‘Here, at least, we shall be free.’ And that, I think, is the fate of the old-fashioned liberal. He’s going to be free, but he’s going to find himself in hell.”
—B. F. Skinner, from William F. Buckley Jr, On the Firing Line, p. 87.
Like or Dislike:
0
That was one of Van Til’s clearest calls. It’s not there’s a lack of evidence for the Christian God. There is nothing BUT evidence for Him. The problem is man’s self willed blindness in sin. Not a paucity of evidence. If however such notions turn one into a stark worshiper of a mechanical theology whose soul does not weep for it’s fellows yet lost, then I MUST wonder where is the heart that has been the recipient of and grasped it’s own forgiveness?
The knowledge of my own sin and my surety of my own eternal election makes me YEARN to see others have what I have. When I hear stories like the ones reported in this thread, I wanna get on an airplane, fly to where they are and hug them and shake them at the same time. Pastor Chris tells us all the time. Emotions make wonderful servants, but dangerous masters. I refuse to let them coerce me into compromise for the sake of feeling better.
Like or Dislike:
0
Michael,
Thanks for sharing this. Much needed and appreciated.
Back in the mid 70s I too began questioning the claims of the Christian faith. I had been schooled by ultra-fundamentalist and later began being taught by agnostic professors. I went to many of my pastor friends whom I considered more knowledgeable than myself for answers to questions raised by some of my unbelieving professors. I was surprised that they were not equipped to deal with the questions that troubled me. Unfortunately too many pastors are no more prepared to answer a skeptic than the average layman.
I departed from radical fundamentalism to agnostic liberalism for almost 4 years. It was a horrible experience, for it was a constant battle between my heart and mind. Only by the grace of God did I eventually see the truth. I learned a lot through that experience. I may not be able to help every skeptic that comes my way, but I never want them to have the same experience with me like I had with the few pastor friends I had back then.
Like or Dislike:
0
Danny Crowder says: the truth.
Which is?
Like or Dislike:
0
Danny Crowder says: the truth.
Greg (Tiribulus) says Which is?
answer: Jesus
Like or Dislike:
0
George Jenkins says: Danny Crowder says: the truth.
Greg (Tiribulus) says: Which is?
George Jenkins answers: Jesus
Greg (Tiribulus) then asks: Which one?
Like or Dislike:
0
Start with John 1
Like or Dislike:
0
George Jenkins says: Start with John 1
Actually, I’ll start with Genesis 1, but thank you very much. It wasn’t that big a deal, but I was thinkin maybe he’d answer for himself.
Like or Dislike:
1
Bear baiting is rarely helpful.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: Amen indeed 2 Cor. 11: 4!!! This section of Pauline revelation is very clear, the enemy is spirit and spiritual (“receive another spirit”), and simply seeks to undermine “the simplicity that is Christ”!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Fr. Robert (Anglican): That is precisely where I was goin. I’m not accusing this Jenkins guy of anything necessarily because I don’t know him. However, he’s talking like one of these, “no doctrine, just Jayzus” types. As if there could possibly be such a thing. Well, there can, it just won’t be the Jesus of scripture. The one that John is actually talking about. Every flaming hell bound heretic in history claims some “Jesus”.
That’s Paul’s repeated point. The Richard Dawkins of the world are easy to spot. It’s the guys with a soft fatherly smile, a 10 pound bible and an outstretched hand talkin about “Jesus” that are doin the serpent’s best work.
Like or Dislike:
0
Robert,
If you took the time to look at the context of my comments instead of speculating about what I may, or may not, have had in mind, and what my background might be you might be able to contribute something helpful. Your speculative comment has nothing to do with the topic, but is typical of academics. Looks like one of your hot buttons got tweaked. If you want a doctrine without Jesus, it won’t be Biblical.
Greg asked which truth. I said Jesus. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth and the life……..” Check it out; He really did say that. If you want to fantasize about some other Jesus that is your prerogative. However; ultimately, all truth, physical and spiritual, is bound up in Jesus. Not only did He create all things; but He holds all things together. The spiritual laws are part of His truth; the physical laws, whether they pertain to things we can see or things we cannot see, are also part of His truth. Why is this so? Simply because it pleased the Father to make it so. Perhaps you have some other truth.
Greg is right about starting in Genesis 1 to get the most comprehensive picture of Jesus, but then you have also got to throw in Romans 1 to get the mandate for studying the visible universe to learn more about the invisible things of God, such as how the duality principle of light adds perspective on the nature of the Trinity and the significance of light being the first entity specifically mentioned as created on Day 1. However, for a concise description of Jesus’ nature and person in the Godhead, I still think John 1 is a reasonable place for someone to start who wants to know about Jesus.
Like or Dislike:
0
I didn’t disagree with anything you said in this last post George. I asked which truth of Mr. Crowder because within Christendom “truth” can mean almost anything anymore. Then when you give the one word response, “Jesus”, I am instantly reminded that now we most definitely must settle which of those we’re talking about as well because even 2000 years ago there were already other Jesus, other gospel’s and all manner of reprehensible heresy advancing itself as the truth Paul was proclaiming. It’s one million times worse today.
I don’t know how many of these blogs I’ve been to where somebody lists all the generally sound doctrine they used to believe and now they’re a hot pink liberal heretic who rejoices in their utter backsliding as if it were progress.
So, when somebody like this Crowder fella tells the story he did and then makes the in itself meaningless assertion that “Only by the grace of God did I eventually see the truth”, I am simply curious. Does he by “truth” mean what rank apostates like Rachael Held Evans means by that? Or has he actually been lifted by the Spirit of God into a solid place of biblical truth?
It was a sincere question.
Like or Dislike:
0
@George: It seems one of your “buttons” really got tweaked! I was responding from the Text itself in 2 Cor. 11: 4, I mean there’s an exegesis here, and only then an application. The Text really speaks for itself! As Greg has said! The “other Jesus” has “another spirit”, and this is measured by the doctrine of Christ Himself, which is always “sincere” and has pure “devotion” to Christ by faith, but also Christ’s “incarnation” is always central. As we see in 1 John 4: 1-3. Today’s age of so-called “tolerance”, often does not like much judgment and spiritual discernment!
Like or Dislike:
2
Good grief! It seems to me after following this thread it has gotten into a big theological debate, instead of really addressing the issue instead of the real heart of the OP. I feel sorry for Cerbaz, and I can truly say I empathize with her, because after reading these comments they make me feel I was like I was a bad person instead, and didn’t deserve salvation in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
2
Thanks Danny,
I have heard from someone that this has gotten back off track and is becoming rather discouraging for people to read. Granted it is only one person who said it and they have a personality for such observations, but if this is true, please keep things civil. While there are very few who read comments and only a select handful who read them this far, that handful is often those who are in need of the most help.
If there are any who are attempting to solve this issue by saying these people were never saved to begin with, this theological conclusion needs to be rethought from a pastoral perspective. It is kinda like saying “we will all be sanctified in the end, so who care about what we do to get there.” While its true we will all eventually be sanctified, out work here in that process matter and somehow contributes to such. And while it may be true that some of these people were never saved to begin with, 1) we don’t know if any individual fits this category and 2) this does not change our responsibility to care deeply for them and to do all we can to strengthen their faith.
Like or Dislike:
2
Thank you, Michael. i just pray that this person who contacted and influenced you be blessed. And Cerbaz and any other doubters as well. The last thing we need to be doing is turning folks off to Christianity.
Like or Dislike:
2
Michael… You little ripper mate. That comment you made was fair dinkum and one of the best I read here yet.
Like or Dislike:
0
C Michael Patton says: 1) we don’t know if any individual fits this category and 2) this does not change our responsibility to care deeply for them and to do all we can to strengthen their faith.
My posts, which are all still here, have uniformly affirmed both of these statements. I have never once declared an individual reprobate, ever. Here or anywhere else. My own prodigal life is a permanent cure for any such insolent presumption. I would only very civilly add that the fact of someone’s being turned off to Christianity is not ipso facto evidence that ungodly behavior has occurred. Scripturally speaking, every single child of Adam yet in their sins is by definition very thoroughly turned off by the notion of forsaking sin they don’t believe they have and surrendering to a master they don’t believe exists. To the extent I otherwise violated your wishes for this thread, I do apologize.
Like or Dislike:
2
Greg,
You have so been one of the folks that have so turned me off, (and I am a strong Christian), despite your saying in an earlier comment that no one in your church would believe that of you. Perhaps they don’t see the side of you that has been displayed on this blog, and this isn’t the only thread I have seen this on. As a died in the wool Calvinist, which you have porported to be, where is YOUR irresistable grace? Can’t say I’ve seen it so far. Lots of good theology from you, but the real grace, of the Lord, no. Think again how you are coming across to doubters.
Like or Dislike:
1
Jumping in once more to thank mbaker. We all need a conscience to wake us up now and then –me included.
Just one thing more: though it was a while back, the facile dismissal of a suicide as unquestionably hell-bound hurts many of us who have known these poor souls. A minister whom I’ve found way more Christlike in attitude than many opened my eyes to the plight of the suicide: people only kill themselves when death is preferable to their pain and despair. Suicide is wrong, of course; but most suicides are mentally distraught, and not nearly as responsible or self-controlled as we imagine them to be. God knows their hearts; we don’t. Dismissing them to hell only hurts their already wounded loved ones, who never can be completely comforted. Again, responding to an early post in this thread, but it’s all part of not looking at each other with God’s eyes, but our own proud judgmental ones.
Like or Dislike:
0
Mbaker, we have some misunderstandings which I would be willing to discuss with you further if you like. When I say “discuss”, that means I WILL listen as well as speak. This however is not the place. Feel free to email me tiribulus@gmail.com or on my Facebook page. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002020333790 I don’t bite and I’m actually a rather nice guy as you will find out if you take me up on this offer.
I simply MUST address here what you say in number 18 above though:“these comments…make me feel…like I was a bad person instead, and didn’t deserve salvation in the first place”. You ARE a bad person who didn’t deserve salvation in the first place. So am I. I really REALLY hope you don’t believe you did. Micheal’s gonna back me up on this one even he doesn’t publicly state it. Read the 3rd chapter of Romans, verses 9-18. YES Ma’am. This has EVERYTHING to do with the topic of this thread and it will (or should) govern how we approach doubters. And everyone else for that matter.
Like or Dislike:
1
Frist, I have always thought of this blog as mainly, a quote
“Theological” one, but of course biblical theology must always be done in a pastoral manner. I don’t see anything I have said here as non-pastoral, though as I have noted I have some rough edges as an old conservative Irish Brit., etc. But in fact I have always taken 1 Tim. 4:6-16 pretty literal and to heart! No doubt as one over 60 (64 this year), I come from a different generation as a so-called baby-boomer. But, I will never apologize for the Word of God! My point about the Parable of the Sower, has only been lightly touched, and by a few, and I did not take the time and room to try to give any outright exegesis. But this is really a main issue about people who confess Christ, then for whatever reason turn away. We must always let the tensions and Word of God speak for itself! Truth is always GOD’s, and to my mind has a presuppositional reality. Surely any evidential reality follows from out of this authority itself. But as I said also, Theology, i.e. the study of the doctrine of God, can be a messy affair oftentimes, especially in this fallen world, of which we ourselves are still even as Christians part of. One must have tough skin to be a faithful pastor and teacher in this age of postmodernity! And the historical Church has simply never been as in the trenches as it is now! Just one look at the Roman Catholic communion itself these days, will quite reveal this reality! Not to mention the “emergent” mess in the so-called evangelical churches. And in this, the Church itself is always really visible and invisible! The ‘Wheat & Tares’, etc. “The Lord [alone] knows those who are His”. (2 Tim. 2:19)
Like or Dislike:
1
And btw, I will surely stand with our brother “Greg” here for the most part. He too might have some rough-edges, be he seems to have a good handle on the Reformed or Calvinist Gospel! Indeed the real Good News of Christ is always “Sovereignly” God’s to speak and express to His own creation and “kosmos” – the world as created, ordered, and arranged! (John 3: 16) Note this is quite the opposite of what man has called “chaos”, which God never created!
Like or Dislike:
0
Amen #26 & Amen $27
Rock On for the Lord!
Like or Dislike:
1
Hi Greg,
Been out of touch for a while getting the cattle ready for a big storm that is supposed to hit tonight. I get where you were coming from in your comments about Jesus. I guess that I don’t consider anyone Jesus, but the One who created the universe. I ran into a lot of academics who liked nothing better than to go off into debates about topics with really no other purpose than to get a reaction out of someone. I’m glad that is not what you were about.
Something about the tone of this whole series has bothered me from the start and just reminded me of university debates that seemed to be an end in themselves. Consider that this all started with a story about a lady who felt betrayed. I have not felt much love thoughout for the lady or those like her who are surely hurting or they would not react so emotionally.
One of my favourite verses is Matthew 9:13, “But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” The NASB translates mercy as compassion. I have not sensed much compassion for those who are lost. Even when they are antagonistic, we have a duty to love them. The has been a lot of passion about the fine points of Calvinism and Arminianism . My bottom line on that is, “Big Deal”. The lost person does not care about the fine points of the debate about whether they were really saved to begin with. They do care whether or not someone really loves them.
Hope you see where I am coming from.
George
Like or Dislike:
0
I hesitate to comment further on this thread because it seems to have descended to attack on personalities rather than substance. But I just have to clear up a few points. First I assume you meant “I have felt much love…” and not “I have not felt much love…”. Second, since the Calvinists have been bashed as unloving and uncompassionate for those who left the faith. I just want to set the record straight that it wasn’t the Calvinists who brought the issue up but Jason in #17 p.1 who first brought it up. You asked a question about betrayal and a couple of other people made some comments and then Fr R gave his Scriptural understanding of where the leavers essential state came from while expressing sadness for the loss. No one expressed any malice or insensitivity toward those who have left. But here is where I have issue with those who are criticizing other Christians about their behavior and I will only speak for myself and not anyone else. It seems that as a Calvinist or even as a Christian in general if I don’t trip over and over compensate to these people who have left the faith and acquiesce that they are fully justified for leaving and God/Christianity is at fault. I get the impression that while they are hurling vain accusation of immorality at God, I am suppose to just say I understand, I love you. It is because of this kind of ignorance they left. If this kind of coddling is effective, Doug Wilson would have won over Christopher Hitchens from their tour together. There is a wide range of positions between coddling them like some here have done and figuratively hitting them over their head. Be caring, sympathetic, compassionate and above all truthful. to be cont…
Like or Dislike:
0
cont. from #30
As a matter of fact the only reason why a Christian would even engage with an atheist or those who left Christianity is because they care about that person’s eternal soul. Third you pointed out Mt 9.13, without getting into your exegesis of that verse let me offer Mt 7.6 (Matthew 7:6) “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.” Let’s face it if we don’t refute the errors of their darkened mind we are doing them and God a disservice. And by all means do it with gentleness and respect. Finally, you asked the basis of her betrayal. Did you get the answer? I don’t think so. Just because someone thinks they’ve been betrayed doesn’t mean they actually have been betrayed. The whole notion of being duped is illogical. Just analyzing it from a logical point of view without assuming whose worldview is true, it is possible that by leaving Christianity she is actually being duped into atheism. Logically speaking there does not need to have deception involved but rather two groups of people concluding to an opposing worldview. Just because an atheist accuse me of duplicity it doesn’t mean that it is true. Learn from Hitchens, he is the master of antagonism and guilt tripping.
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m am this minute on my way out the door guys.
1. Thanks to Father Robert and Teleologist. And back at ya.
2. I don’t wanna sound the wrong way, but I also don’t want mbaker to feel like she’s being ganged up on. Mbaker I hope you actually do email me. We may even get along better than you think.
3. George, that’s’ fair enough and this is a pretty solid post again overall, with one possible weak spot that I simply cannot address now. Feel free to email as well if you want to.
Aw man I just saw Teleologist ‘s post. I can’t do it now. Matt 7:6 crossed my mind, but I didn’t bring it up.
Like or Dislike:
1
At this point in time, I’m thinking of Job’s friends, and God’s response to them.
Like or Dislike:
0
Christians who see friends and family apostasize experience suffering. In some ways they might feel like their suffering is akin to Job’s.
Like or Dislike:
1
I still think the best response is speaking the truth in love, as scripture admonishes us to do. And if we can’t love them or have compassion upon them, at least we can still speak kindly. That’s just common courtesy no matter what side we are on.
Teleologist is right that the reason we engage with them is because we do care about their eternal security, and sharing the truths of the gospel, even the hard ones, in anger is not the way to do it, IMO.
@ Greg,
Thanks for your offer, but I am happily married woman and don’t believe it would be appropriate to have personal e-mail conversations with a man I don’t even know.
Like or Dislike:
0
Often “Job’s Friends” are those within in the so-called House of God. Sadly that “house” has become for too many “Ichabod”, the glory has departed!
Like or Dislike:
1
Fr. Robert,
And don’t you think that the reason for it has more to do with us, and our opinions, rather than those of God? I wonder sometimes if we just shouldn’t shut up with all our opinions and books etc; and just start preaching the straight word of God again and see what happens.
Don’t get me wrong, I agree with reading about good theology and church history, but sometimes i think we place more emphasis on that type of thing in the church nowadays than the Bible itself.
Like or Dislike:
0
mbaker says:And if we can’t love them or have compassion upon them,
but they have been shown love and compassion. I don’t understand. Where is this cold uncaring behavior to be found? There is no such thing as love without truth and truth is only acquired by careful bible study. I agree with teleologist. Of course nobody wants to see anybody lost. It’s heartbreaking, but people apostatize from even the best churches. It does not appear that Cerbaz was very well taught. One of these questions from “Olive” earlier in this thread is resolved by the profound act of reading a translation other than the KJV that handles the Greek verbs of 1st John 3 better for Pete’s sake. Even so, the rejection of Christ IS SIN mbaker and must be repented of.
I AM also believing and praying with this man for the recovery of his daughter. I treat every person I see who is still breathing as if they are one of God’s elect. I have no idea who is who and simply assume they all are. When I go out street witnessing in the city here, I don’t give half literate half dead junkies an exposition on total depravity and irresistible grace. I tell then that sin is the cause of their misery and that if they will turn from that sin and trust that Jesus has nailed it to His cross then HE HAS and they can be free.
@ Greg,
Thanks for your offer, but I am happily married woman and don’t believe it would be appropriate to have personal e-mail conversations with a man I don’t even know.
Fair enough, but I most assuredly intended nothing inappropriate and certainly your husband would be completely welcome to participate as well. I do respect your conviction and will not ask again, but the door remains open.
Like or Dislike:
0
Craig Benno says:At this point in time, I’m thinking of Job’s friends, and God’s response to them. If Job had abandoned God, his friends would have had a point.
Like or Dislike:
1
Greg,
I am not going to respond to you any more. I feel like Carrie did with you on the other thread that you think you are so right that no one has a fair chance with you, and so you don’t have an audience with me any more either. So please do me a favor and don’t address me again. Thanks and God bless.
Like or Dislike:
0
MBaker,
Your comment above to Greg (Tiribulus) is particularly ungracious and unloving.
Like or Dislike:
1
TUAD,
You might think so but just ask Carrie. Greg’s comments on another thread were so arrogant that she had to call him down too, and quit listening too. Hey, I try to be fair on both sides but he has gotten to be too much. Notice he only comes against the women here, not the guys. I notice there are very few women on this site anymore. I wonder why!
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t know where this is coming from mbaker, (I can now guess) but the charge of my singling out women is a libelous demonstrable falsehood that is plain for anybody to see. Carrie got on me for taking up with Micheal, a man, and owner of this blog. As anybody who glances at that thread will observe, SHE came after ME. She accused me of stuff I didn’t say too. I also got a very flattering compliment from Chad Douglas in that thread. It’s still there. Anybody can look. http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2013/01/a-letter-to-some-atheists/#comments You’ll see me engaging other men there too like I always do.
As you wish mbaker. I haven’t done a thing to you. I’m sorry you feel this way and I won’t bother you, but you can talk to me anytime and I would never throw this in your face if you did. There’s always Facebook too. That’s public. My wall is open. Anybody can say anything. Men OR women. Feel free. I’m thinking you already looked over there though. In fact I think I’d bet on it.
Like or Dislike:
0
Thank you M Baker for all of your comments.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz,
Thank you, my dear. I truly hope you will not hold this poor showing on this blog against us as Christians. I can only pray that you will come to know Christ is so much better than we are. I used to be where you are now, and I can’t honestly tell you what changed that. Wish i could! But whatever has on influenced you on this blog for good or for ill, just know I am only concerned with you! if you want Michael can give you my e-mail, if you want to continue our discussion., although I honestly can’t tell you I have all the right answers either. But whatever you decide I will still continue to pray for you to find them.
God bless, my dear,
Margaret
Like or Dislike:
0
My hateful comment from a few pages ago:
Cerbaz says:<<< I have begged God to help me in my doubts and again tonight I pray God help me in my unbelief and bring me back. This is not easy for people who doubt and it often causes families to break up and take sides. Christians need to help those who are doubting and not condemn. Would love good answers to my doubts.
Intonation and facial expressions obviously don’t carry over the internet which in this case makes me hesitant to say anything to you for fear that anything I say will be taken wrong. I wish I knew you in real life. There IS resolution and peace for every fear and doubt in the blood and resurrection life of Jesus, but God must be approached through a posture of surrender my friend. He will not change who and what He is or what He has said or done for anybody. I am no prophet, but I sense that He will bring you through this and you will be stronger for His having done so. That will be my prayer. I hope you email Micheal if you haven’t already.
Like or Dislike:
0
@mbaker: I think myself, as Scripture indicates that the “glory” of God has surely departed from much of the historical church of God, “Ichoabod” (1 Sam. 4:21 / 2 Tim. 2:19- into chapter 3 and 4: 1-4). As Paul wrote in his sort of last will & testament in 2 Tim. 2: 19-21, etc., “a/the Great House” [of God], has become a place of “honour” and to “dishonour”. And the faithful, who name the name of Christ, must thoroughly purge themselves from evil! Of course this is a very “spiritual” battle! But surely “Satan”, the “devil”, is in the sanctuary! (2: 26)
Like or Dislike:
0
What people want is a God created in their own image. One who contritely conforms to their fallen and creaturely notions of good, evil, right and wrong. Who have exalted themselves as de facto dictator of the universe demanding that God conduct Himself in a manner worthy of their own subjective morality. Some will have their hearts returned and say with Nebuchadnezzar:
“blessed [is] the Most High, and praised and honored [is] him who lives forever,
for his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
and his kingdom endures from generation to generation;
all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing,
and he does according to his will among the host of heaven
and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand
or say to him, “What have you done?” Daniel 4:34b-35
We don’t like that. “WHO AND WHAT DOES THIS GOD THINK HE IS!!!!!”
Nebuchadnezzar learned the hard way. God KNOWS who and what He is. He also KNOWS who and what YOU are. Your very first step is agreeing with Him on both.
Like or Dislike:
0
Amen, “preach” it Brother Greg (Tiribulus)!
I am convinced that seeking to just “reason” people into the faith, is one of our “problematic” aspects in the West. “Reason” i.e. biblical/theological truth & argument, yes, in sound thought or judgment and good sense! But inferences, proof and just mental conclusions, i.e. facts alone…just don’t make it! It simply must be the real “spirit and truth”! And again here GOD is the Sovereign & providential of His own message-Gospel (kerygma). And were not talking just “theological” ideas here, but the doctrine and revelation of God In Christ! And HE leads us btw into the doctrine/teaching and fellowship (Koinonia) of God Triune, Eph. 2: 18!
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw, myself, I think our friend “Cerbaz” has not had or seen solid Reformational and Reformed doctrine and teaching! Here are the great top-tier Reformers: Luther, Zwingli, Bullinger, Calvin, etc. Not to mention some of the fine Reformational and Reformed Creeds! I know in today’s Christian scene, these guys get read little.. or any with many Christians! And this is just very sad to say the least! So, in love, Christian love.. and the desire for “truth”, I would lay down this challenge!
And btw, there is a newer and simply grand book and bio on John Calvin out, by Bruce Gordon: ‘Calvin’ (Yale University Press, 2009 / Paperback, 2011). I have the hardback (and a few paperbacks… I give to choice students). A must read for the serious historical and theological student! (And we are always really “students” in the school of Christ!)…And let us not diminish true theological study, as some here have said; the Holy Scripture itself always challenges us to read & study, note what Paul says in 2 Tim. 4: 13, he was himself a student and reader!
Like or Dislike:
0
Father Robert, would you email me, or otherwise give me a way to contact you? I can’t find an address at your site? If you are so inclined. I wanted to chat a bit, but not in public if possible.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: I am sure Michael & his Blog has my e-mail, you can get it from him. Write me as you are lead.
Like or Dislike:
0
You are quick on the draw brother. I asked him.
Like or Dislike:
0
@ Fr. Robert (Anglican):
I will suspend judgement on what this may or may not mean, but he is not answering me. You could drop a line at my utility account which is tiribulus@gmail.com I’ll give you my main address from there. of course IF you want to.
Like or Dislike:
0
Robert is this what you believe?
Unconditional Election
God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before fore the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause God’s choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God’s choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
Like or Dislike:
0
@Margaret: Yes, I am a certain Augustinian and Calvinist (perhaps more of a neo-Calvinist), I would prefer to call Unconditional Election as God’s Divine Initiative.
Like or Dislike:
0
I will also chime in with a hearty yea and amen to this exceedingly biblical statement brought to us by our dear sister mbaker. I’m betting Micheal will pretty much agree as well though he is obviously free to disappointment me and say no.
Like or Dislike:
0
Greg, and Fr. Robert
This is a different Margaret who commented above. My name is the same but we are not the same people.
Like or Dislike:
0
Sorry Margaret Baker I hope this was not a problem. Irresistibly grace impugns the goodness of God. If God calls and draws sinners irresistibly to himself so that they escape hell simply because he overwhelms thems and regenerates them without any act of free will on their part, then a good God would do that for everyone! Only a moral monster would refuse to save persons when salvation is absolutely unconditional and solely an act of God that does not depend on free will.
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes I know who this “Margaret” is to some degree, she is a conservative Roman Catholic female and a serious Catholic-Christian woman of God! God Bless her!
Like or Dislike:
0
Oh my dear Margaret, this is NOT the doctrine of GOD’s Divine Initiative! You have misunderstood the doctrine and teaching of God here! No doubt from poor Catholic understanding, I am sorry to say!
Like or Dislike:
0
Classical Arminian theology, sus as that of John Wesley affirms the total depravity of human beings and their utter helplessness even to exercise a good will toward God apart from God’s supernatural, assisting grace. It attributes the sinner’s ability to respond to the gospel with repentance and faith to prevenient grace-the illuminating, convicting, calling, and enabling power of the Holy Spirit working on the sinner’s soul and making them free to choose saving grace or reject it. This is the drowings of God mentioned by Jesus in the gospel of John. God does not draw irresistibly but persuasively, leaving human persons able to say no.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret,
Welcome to P and P. Hearing that name today is so unusual. No problem, because I am not a Calvinist or an Arminian. I can see points on both sides.
So don’t let anyone here intimidate you into thinking you must adhere to either one in order to be biblical.
God bless.
Like or Dislike:
0
In the true Doctrines of Grace, the will of the believer-sinner is “regenerated” and somewhat “renewed”, and always in submission the Christian is somewhat able to respond in grace to obedience. But, he/she can never have free-will, as a sinner alone, but has again by God’s grace responsible will before God. Of course the Christian has a New Man or Nature in the New Birth, but even here he is always a sinner-saint (in this life).
Like or Dislike:
0
Wow lots of typos hope I do better this time. Love the judgements Robert go your best. Arminian theology does affirm divine election, but it interprets it as corporate rather than individual. Romans 9, the bedrock Scripture passage of high Calvinism is interpreted as the early church fathers did-as referring to the service of Israel and gentile believers in God’s plan, not to the eternal destinies of individuals. Armians affirm predestination, interpreting it with Romans 8 as God’s foreknowledge of faith. They reject reprobation except insofar as it is freely chosen by people who live against the will of God revealed in nature and the law written on their hearts Roman 1-2
Like or Dislike:
0
Hey Robert you need to know Margaret is Cerbaz. Arminians believe that any limitation of God’s intention for everyone’s salvation, including “limited atonement,” necessarily and inexorably impugns the character of God even where Calvinists insist otherwise. Arminians do not claim that Calvinists say God is not good or loving: they say Calvinism implies that necessarily, so that Calvinists should say it in order to be logically consistent with themselves.
Like or Dislike:
0
A. P. S. to Margaret,
Sometimes folks here can be a bit on the harsh side, and although I may disagree with Fr. Robert on some things (and that will be obvious if you read some of our previous exchanges) I know he is good Christian man, and a brother in Christ whom I respect, despite some of our disagreements on interpretation.
Like or Dislike:
0
It is interesting that the Wesley brothers both taught and believed in the “assurance of salvation” by faith, i.e. the Justification by faith, alone! And they both also believed in the New Birth! John at least was close to Calvin here, as he wrote in his Journal, (Tues. May 14, 1765). See his “Works”, X, 349. “I believe justification by faith alone, as much as I believe there is a God. I declared this in a sermon preached before the University of Oxford, eight-and twenty years ago. I declared it to all the world eighteen years ago, in a sermon written expressly on the subject. I have never varied from it, no not a hair’s breadth, from 1738 to this day.”
Note both John and Charles were Evangelical Anglicans!
Like or Dislike:
0
Calvin sums up his whole doctrine of God’s providence thus: “No wind ever arises or increases except by God’s providential governing of history cannot be expressed by means of permission’ God does not merely permit anything but ordains it and brings it about most certainly. For Calvin, this is seen most clearly in the fall of Adam, which was foreordained by God. Just in case there would be any quibbling about how strong Calvin’s doctrine of providence was, I will quote this passage from his Institutes: To sum up, since God’s will is said to be the cause of all things, I have made his providence the deteminative principle for all human plans and works, not only in order to display its force in the elect, who are ruled by the the Holy Spirit, but also to compel the reprobate to obedience.
Like or Dislike:
0
Wow, so many “Margaret’s” I did know a Margaret who was a dear Roman Catholic lady, and a true conservative believer on these here blogs, somewhere? Though come to think of it, it has been sometime back. I hope this Margaret is not “Cebaz”? Who seems to have lost her faith?
Note, I am an Anglican myself, and VERY familiar with their (the Wesley’s) writings, both! I have John’s full “Works” and “Sermons”. And several books on Charles, his Hymns, etc., and some very old bio’s too! I even wrote a published essay many years ago on Sir John!
Like or Dislike:
0
To sum up, since God’s will is said to be the cause of all things. I have made his providence the determinative principle for all human pland and works not only in order to display its force in the elect, who are ruled by the Holy Spitit, but also to compel thje reprobat to obedience. How could Calvin put it any mor blently and forefully than that? God compel the reprobate, the wicked, to obey his will. In other words, even the evil done by wicked people is foreordained and rendered certan by God. Later Calvinists such as Sproul will claim that Calvinism does not say that God coerces the wicked to do evil acts. Calvin seemed to it is so, even though he agrues God remains unstained by the evil of their deeds because his motives are goood while theirs are evil. Of course, this juist raise the question of the origin of evil motives.
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes “Margaret”, I am..as Greg, Michael, etc. “Calvinist” all the way, though I am an “Infralapsarian” myself, as are many of the Reformed Creeds, etc. So your ‘preach’in to the choir’!
Like or Dislike:
0
Yikes typint to fast.
Like or Dislike:
0
Wow, this two Margaret thing is very confusing to me also, especially as the other one, so I think I will out bow of this discussion, because it has gotten way too confusing to me and others I am sure.
To the other Margaret, if you are truly the Cerbaz we have been talking to previously, please identify yourself.
Like or Dislike:
0
There is quite nothing worse than “bastard” so-called Calvinism! But Calvin is just not modern “Calvinism” per se! Note, I am myself something of a neo-Calvinist! Do you (Cerbaz) know what is Infralapsarian? It does appear not?
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes Margaret I am cerbaz who has many doubts. Robert challenged me and I have been reading about Calvinism as I was brought up to believe once saved always saved and could not lose my salvation. Robert questioned that and I started reading to see what predestination was all about. Have my doubts gone away? Not yet still searching and again thank you for your concern for me and your prayers, I find calvinism cold hearted and their beliefs do not have the love that I think Jesus taught. Robert is stuffy and cold hearted and likes to make judgements before he knows the facts.
Like or Dislike:
0
And another P. S. to “Margaret”,
I hope you are not pranking us, because I am beginning to wonder.
I think everyone here has been most patient, but I for one am wondering why you did not identify yourself as Cerbaz and have this conversation with us in the first place. I am going to ask CMP to look into it, because quite frankly i am beginning to get very suspicious.
Like or Dislike:
0
Whew, I am with you mbaker! I will let the smoke clear!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Cerbaz: Perhaps my problem, is that I know too many “facts”!
But, the challenge is still on! But again, lets cool down, and “think” shall we? 
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes Robert I know about Infralapsarian. To be perfectly blunt and to cut right to the chase as the saying goes my problem is primarily and especially with divne determinism that leads to God’s unconditional reprobation of certain people to eternal suffering in hell for his glory. I am opposed to any idea that, as the old Calvinist saying goes, “those who find themselves suffering in hell can at least take comfort in the fact that they are there for the greater glory of God.
Like or Dislike:
0
Again M Baker I am cerbaz check with Michael same email address just been doing a lot of reading hope you are not offended.
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m jist watchin.
Like or Dislike:
0
Well this “stuffy old Irishman” needs some rest, so I will let me Calvinist brother Greg take my place.
I will be back Lord-willing later!
Like or Dislike:
0
If indeed there were a God whose true nature-whose justice or sovereignty- were reveled in the death of a child or the dereliction of a soul or a predestined hell, then it would be no great transgression to think of him as a kind of malevolent or contemptible demiurge, and to hate him and to deny him worship, and to see a better God then he.
Like or Dislike:
0
Are you suggesting Margaret that the God of Calvin cannot exist or that if He does you refuse to worship him? Honest question. You have been on my heart and my church has had you in prayer since the day I gave our intercession team your name. I’m not attacking you and I couldn’t care less about winning a debate with you.
Like or Dislike:
0
I think that there was someone in this thread that was struggling with their faith. (Sorry, I have not read anything on this thread for a hundred or so comments.) they were supposed to email me. My invite is still open: michaelp @ credohouse dot org
Like or Dislike:
0
If Cerbaz is who she says she is, and I am beginning to seriously doubt that, although some of us,including me and Michael, have even offered help privately and she has not responded then they need to prove themselves as well, as they have would have us to do. I will only go far with that victim type of thing. Then they will need to get a clue also. Two way street, IMO. Putting ourselves out as as victims of Christianity just doesn’t get it with me because it is usually our own lack of understanding that trips us up in the end.
I say that only because I have been there and done that.
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m willing to give this Margaret person claiming to be cerbaz the benefit of the doubt. Could be wrong. It is a little weird that she wouldn’t just keep calling herself “cerbaz”, but doesn’t cost nuthin. I can only imagine what her church was teaching her or what she was doing for 20 years as a Christian if this is cerbaz.
Like or Dislike:
0
M Baker again thank you for your prayers. I have issues with Calvinism and I am expressing them. This is not for you to think I am looking to say something I don’t believe or to cause you grief. Robert doubted that I was a Christian I took exception to this and started to read about Calvinism and found that it did not fit with what I believe the bible teaches. I am searching for answers and I will continue to. Sorry if this has caused you to believe I am cerbaz who was ready to say goodbye to my Christian belief that I have held for 30 years. Calvinism says and Robert says I never was a Christian. So if your daughter Michael says the sinners prayer and say Jesus is her saviour and then later has doubts are you going to say she was never a Christian. That is what Robert has said and that is what Calvinism believes.
Like or Dislike:
0
Some Calvinist defend God’s goodness based on what is called the “greate good” theodicy. All Calvinists incorporate some version of the greater good defense of God’s goodness in the face of sin and evil into their doctrines of providence. The problem is belief in the divine decision to reprobate many people to hell by sovereignly, “passing over them” when choosing some to save. In what sense can hell be said to serve a greater good? What good?
Like or Dislike:
0
Are you suggesting Margaret that the God of Calvin cannot exist or that if He does you refuse to worship him? Honest question. I’m not attacking you and I couldn’t care less about winning a debate with you. What is your bottom line here?
Like or Dislike:
0
Second Margaret, or Cerbaz, or whoever you are,
I am pained that you would even think Calvinism is so important that you would actually lose your faith over it. I feel sorry for you if that has influenced you to do so.
I don’t know what you have been taught but but both sides of this issue have their problems. So if you are basing your doubts on either side then I think you are losing sight of the real issue, which is Christ. No other belief can save you, but only the Holy Spirit can bring you back to real truth, as the Bible promises. But if you don’t believe in the Bible, I can give you no hope, because there comes a time in our lives when we have to forgo these all these arguments over whether Calvinism or Armianism are right, because these ARE defined an non-essentials. I hope you can see that and get past it, because there is nothing further I can say or do except to pray for you unless you can.
God bless.
Like or Dislike:
0
I’m beginning to wonder if this may be an anti Calvinist troll, attempting to portray Calvinism as a faith killing false gospel. Could be wrong about that too though.
Like or Dislike:
0
No Greg, i don’t think so, even though I have my own doubts as to whether we are being pranked or not. But, hey, okay if we are. We should be able to take it, because our main priority, no matter which side we fall on, should be to promote Christ first. If we can’t do that, then we deserve whatever bad reputation we get in defending the faith.
Like or Dislike:
0
Sorry you are feeling that I am not being honest in asking these questions. I am not a troo;. I am asking these questions because Robert questioned whether or not I was a christian. Like I said I was taught once saved always saved. So I looked into the calvinist view that Robert holds so highly and found things that made me say really this is what Christians believe. Not acceptable to me and again I as a Christian have doubts about what I was taught. How can born again believers filled with the holy spirit disagree on something so important as a sinners prayer that is meaningless. So M Baker yes I am questioning my faith on this. For me this important and the teaching that I have believed for 30 years. So my own children’s prayer to Jesus was not real unless they were elect ones. This is acceptable to you?
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t disagree mbaker. My point in my question is that if we’re dealing with somebody who has a preset personal criteria for what God must be like before surrender will be forthcoming then I won’t waste any more of my time. Cerbaz didn’t like some stuff in the law and the law and prophets. If this is her then we’ll wind up back there again too. This kind of doubt cannot be resolved by redefining God (not that you’re suggesting that). It can only be resolved by brokenness before His throne. He is God and we are not.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret,
Did you not even read my last post to you? I still think you are letting this Calvinist thing influence you way too much. Many here might think he was right, and who will really know until we get to heaven and ask Christ face to face to face? But who saves you in the long run, girl? Christ, or what other people think? Think about it.
Like or Dislike:
0
My last word is Calvinism teaches only the elect are chosen by God so those who pray the sinners prayer and ask Jesus to save them from their sins and then later have doubts were never the elect and really never prayed the sinners prayer or for the glory of God they are going to hell. Is this Calvinism and is this acceptable to you? The girl Michael talked to do you know if she was one of the elect or not. Was her prayer to accept Jesus as Lord and saviour not forever? I am not a troll I am a Christian searching for answers and questioning what have been taught because of what has been said here. Think what you want of me!
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret says: So my own children’s prayer to Jesus was not real unless they were elect ones. This is acceptable to you? Ok, now I’m pretty much convinced that this IS cerbaz. Cerbaz, the question is not whether it is acceptable to anybody except God. If you REALLY want to understand Calvinism, wihch you seem to be hung up on I will take all the time you need, but not here. Actually you said you were talking to Micheal in private. Ask Him about this too. I’m not trying to be presumptuous and rude on the man’s blog.
Why not look at it as “if my children are elect ones they CANNOT be lost because the eternal Father God of heaven has given them to the Son who said “all those that the Father has given me WILL come and of those I will lose none but raise them up on the last day”. John 6. To me the doctrines of grace are the most biblical, beautiful and majestic expression of Christianity there could ever be. A triumphant savior who brought me by name with Him from His tomb. A Christ who always wins and who certainly saves all that He pleases. Would you rather have your children’s salvation depend on them or upon the undefeatable will of a merciful electing God? Would you prefer the obedience they’ve shown toward you in their lives to be what commends them to God for their souls? Is that more reassuring? I know this. If my eternal destiny depends upon me then let’s eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret says: My last word is Calvinism teaches only the elect are chosen by God so those who pray the sinners prayer and ask Jesus to save them from their sins and then later have doubts were never the elect and really never prayed the sinners prayer or for the glory of God they are going to hell. Is this Calvinism and is this acceptable to you? The girl Michael talked to do you know if she was one of the elect or not. Was her prayer to accept Jesus as Lord and saviour not forever? I am not a troll I am a Christian searching for answers and questioning what have been taught because of what has been said here. Think what you want of me! Ok, that’s fair enough. To be clear, only God knows who the elect are. I dare not pronounce final judgement on anyone. What we are saying is that IF someone truly rejects Christ permanently then no they could NOT have been one of His elect because Jesus said He would lose none of them. I’m not attacking you as I’ve repeatedly said. Let me ask you this. No trick question my dear. I promise. Do you love Jesus? Sincerely. I’m just asking. Don’t think that I’m trying to wrestle with you or set you up. It’s not like that.
Like or Dislike:
0
I want to return to that love for Jesus I once had and yet I struggle with The calvinist doctrine of God’s sovereignty including evil as part of God’s plan, purpose, and determining pwer blatantly contradicts scripture passages that revel “God is Love” 1 John 4:8 takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked Ezek. 18:32 wants everyone to be saved Ezek 18:32 1 Tim 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9 and never tempts anyone James 1:13. To be sure, Calvinist have clever but unconvincing explanations of these and numerous other passages of scripture. For example John Piper argues that God has complex feelings and motives such that he genuinely regrets that sin and evil have to be part of his world, genuinely wishes that all could be save, and is grieved when those he predestined to die and even suffer in hell for eternity for his glory experience that fate. This make God doubled- mindes. Is this acceptable to you? So again I ask does God only predestine the elect and send the rest to hell for His glory?
Like or Dislike:
0
No Margaret God is not double minded. He is incomprehensible. Any God that can fit between my ears is no God at all. I cannot know the mind of the Lord as He does. I gave up trying. He brought me to sweet fellowship with Himself. I trust Him. Can you explain how God can command light and matter to exist from nothing? Yet you believe that don’t you? For instance.
Please hear me. The question is not, indeed CANNOT be “what is acceptable to you or me”. The question MUST be “who and what is God and what does He Himself say that He is like?” Wanting to love Him can be enough. God will work with that. I came to my belief in the full Godhood of God kicking and screaming. I did NOT want to believe it. Ya know what’s funny? It wasn’t even predestination that convinced me. It was Calvin’s description of sin. MY sin. I knew he was tellin me the truth. “Yes Greg, you really are that bad aren’t you?” Oh yes I was and I knew it. I would NEVER have chosen Christ on my own. Once I was persuaded of the biblical view of death in sin the rest was only a matter of course. I understood His truly amazing grace as never before. Today I raise my hands and rejoice in a God who loved me looong before I loved Him.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret,
It is not what I think of that matters eternally, nor what Calvin and his followers think, right though they think they may be, but what Christ thinks. Concentrate more on that for a change instead, and I think you will get an entirely different perspective on what Christianity really is all about.
Like or Dislike:
0
It’s 3am here folks. I need sleep. Margaret, do make sure you’re praying. Even if you don’t “feel” it. Take it from one who knows absolutely. If you are His you will NOT get away. I tried. I backslid so hard I was almost worse than before I got saved. He rescued me from a pit of drunken despair so deep I couldn’t see the top. He delivered me and made me free. I wasn’t even asking. True story. This week is 7 years that He’s kept me from alcohol. This time it’s for good. I’ll NEVER doubt Him again.
Like or Dislike:
0
M Baker scriptures from the bible are used to explain Calvinism so really what is one to believe?
Like or Dislike:
0
Do not doubt your beliefs and am glad that God has helped you Greg, however this does not help me in my quest to understand Calvinism. As I stated I started to research this because Robert doubted that I had ever been a Christian.
Like or Dislike:
0
Try thist: http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2012/12/the-irrationality-of-calvinism/
You will be in my prayers. I MUST get some sleep. He is merciful and tender Margaret. He is. He will not turn you away if you seek Him with a humble heart.
Good night for now. To mbaker as well.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret.
Again I say that Calvinism is not the last word in Christianity, but you seem intent on believing the former., and may I say somehow blaming Calvinism, although i have certainly empathized with you, doing that is a cop out. I am not a Calvinist myself, but i think you are blaming others for your own lack of belief.
So please concentrate in Christ first, who does provide salvation and answers.. Not that I am not in sympathy to your cause., because I am, because of wrong teaching that made me disbelieve, but for different reasons. However, you have been given every chance here both publically and privately and have still insisting on blaming something else, or someone else, for your own lack of unbelief.
You need to look within now.
Like or Dislike:
0
Mbaker, as the Lord lives I am not trying to pick a fight or exercise some sort of male dominance with you. Never was. If the God of Augustine, Calvin, Luther, the true Church of England (Anglican) and The Mayflower pilgrims is God indeed He just may be taking our friend here through this wilderness journey for the very purpose of showing her that. What if He is? I pray she keep doing exactly as she is. He will break her heart and show Himself merciful and mighty on her behalf with the end being her peaceful rest in the strong arms of a God who CANNOT be defeated by His own sinful creation. Despite your hostility toward me (I’m pretty sure I know why that is), I have a growing soft fondness for you. I urge you, respectfully and charitably, not to yourself miss His voice in this manifestly providential conversation going on here. Not a sparrow falls to the ground without our Father. He knows what He’s doin. Heaven and earth will pass away, but His Word lasts forever.
Like or Dislike:
0
Going all the way back to #4 and “Mike Erich The Mad Theologian”, my point here (as his), since this is a “theological” blog, is “a viable intellectual basis of Christianity.” So the challenge is also here for “Cerbaz”/Margaret! And SHE was the one who came out quite against God’s Word in the beginning! Again, note I quoted the Parable of the Sower, and not so much Calvin! Though of course Calvin and generally proper “Calvinism” take this Parable most central in the Gospel and the Word of God! But as mbaker, “Christ Jesus” is always the centre of the Gospel and the Word of God! Who is Himself, both the “Logos” and the “Rhema” of God! Yes, again this is also a “theological” place and study, and here biblically has been my challenge with Calvin and I hope the best of “Calvinism”. So again, let the “Truth” begin and reign!
Btw, again, note I recommended Bruce Gordon’s grand bio: ‘Calvin’, (Yale University Press, 2009). Even The Methodist Recorder wrote: ‘An illuminating and engaging life of Calvin. . . A complex and persuasive picture of Calvin emerges in the pages . . . of this excellent biography, beautifully produced.’
Like or Dislike:
0
Greg,
I hold absolutely no hostility toward you. I believe this conversation just gets unneccesarily heated sometimes and wanders off the subject of this thread, which is about why folks leave Christianity.
I believe i’ve expressed to Cerbaz/Margaret several times my desire for her to be able to come to a deep and rewarding relationship with Christ, where she will feel loved and protected by Him. I can only speak from my own heart some of the things that were spoken to me when I was so discouraged, and about to give up.
Like or Dislike:
0
Robert a quote from Calvin fromhis Institutes
To sum up, since God’s will is said to be the cause of all things, I have made his providence the determinative principle for all human plans and works, not only in order to display its force in the elect, who are ruled by the Holy Spirit, but also to compel the reprobate to obedience.
So according to this God ordained those who would be the elct and those who wouldn’t. Not sure how the parable fits into this And he said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? The sower sows the word. And these are the ones along the path, where the word is sown: when they hear, Satan immediately comes and takes away the word that is sown in them. And these are the ones sown on rocky ground: the ones who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy. And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away. And others are the ones sown among thorns. They are those who hear the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. But those that were sown on the good soil are the ones who hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold.”
(Mark 4:13-20 ESV)
Like or Dislike:
0
@Margaret: I hope that you just keep reading and studying John Calvin, indeed no easy ride for sure. But without doubt one of the foremost theolog’s the church has seen! And I hope you might check out that Gordon bio of Calvin? YOU have entered the big leagues theologically when you read and take on Calvin! I have been reading Calvin myself for close to 40 years!
Like or Dislike:
0
Could you answer my question about the parable?
Like or Dislike:
0
I am not sure really what your question actually is? But in the end the Parable teaches that only those that receive the Word on “good soil” (regenerate & renewed) hearts, “are the ones who hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, etc.” (Mk. 4: 20) Note NONE of the other “soils” (hearts) are really saved and bear fruit! This is really the essence of the Parable, and we must not get lost in the details of the other soils that don’t bear fruit, simply.
Like or Dislike:
0
See too the Text of Mark 4: 10-12, with 4: 25! Note again, “for those outside” (verse 11), who will simply never see or perceive, indeed here are the non-elect! To those who will never come to Christ, and those who only deceive themselves, thinking they have, but never really have.. (Matt. 7: 21-23…”I never knew you, depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.”) Looking back also on Matt. 7: 13-14, with verses 15-20.
Like or Dislike:
0
And btw, the Infralapsarian position (which I hold myself), is the theological position that God’s decree to save “follows” logically (not temporarily) the decision to create and permit the fall. Of course Infralapsarian is God’s plan of salvation for “some” people followed and was a consequence of the fall of man from grace.
Like or Dislike:
0
And most surely the true “Elect” of God are most certainly not all so-called Calvinists! I know many Roman Catholics that I feel are truly regenerate and know and love God In Christ! As too those of other historical places in the so-called Body of Christ. The true Christian is simply elect ‘In Christ’…and, “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I have become a man (an adult), I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood. So faith, hope, love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor. 13: 11-13)
Like or Dislike:
0
Concerning the theology of John Calvin, Calvin considers that the Old Testament and the New Testament form in the strictest sense one single testimony to Christ. All the truths which Calvin expounds in his theology have thus but one end – to make intelligible to us the revelation of God In Jesus Christ! But one thing is also certain God In Christ, always says “Yes” to the sinner! And for Calvin this is seen always in the One Who is always God and Man, or as the ancient church: Jesus Christ is “true God and true man”. Here is The Mediator!
“To be sure, all would have been hopelessly lost if the divine Majesty had not condescended to come down to us, seeing that we are not in a position to reach upwards to it.” (Inst. II, 12, 1)
Like or Dislike:
0
Can I ask you a question Margaret v 2.0 =] (a little joke. I’m a computer guy) WHAT IF you become convinced, as I and Father Robert and Micheal and millions of others have, that what the great confession of 1646 ( http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/westminster_conf_of_faith.html ) says is biblical? (largely but imperfectly) Like this: V. Those of mankind that are predestined unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace. and this: VII. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. For example.
Forgetting even about Calvin for a minute, over a hundred godly men spent 4 years dissecting scripture from Genesis to Revelation and wrangling out how to properly express the doctrine they found there. This was the result. I would urge you to read the page I linked to above. WHAT IF they were right? WHAT IF that is in fact what the bible teaches? Will you bow to your God or do you consider yourself to be the final judge of what God can and cannot do and be? He has you investigating Calvinism for a reason. You are not gong to be dissuaded from doing so AND you are not immediately writing it off. Oh yes Maam. He is working in you. Just watch. There is your peace and His glory down this road. I just have to believe that.
Like or Dislike:
0
I don’t mean to minimize the influence or stature of John Calvin btw. And if you would, please pray for David and our congregation. My point is, he certainly wasn’t the only proponent of our theology and not even the first actually.
Like or Dislike:
0
Nice, the Westminster Confession, here is the last few..Of the State of Man After Death, and the Last Judgment….
Of the State of Man After Death,
and of the Resurrection of the Dead.
I. The bodies of men, after death, return to dust, and see corruption; but their souls (which neither die nor sleep), having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them. The souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into the highest heavens, where they behold the face of God in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain in torments and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day. Besides these two places for souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.
II. At the last day, such as are found alive shall not die, but be changed: and all the dead shall be raised up with the self-same bodies, and none other, although with different qualities, which shall be united again to their souls forever.
III. The bodies of the unjust shall, by the power of Christ, be raised to dishonor; the bodies of the just, by his Spirit, unto honor, and be made conformable to his own glorious body.
CHAPTER XXXIII.
Of the Last Judgment.
I. God hath appointed a day, wherein he will judge the world in righteousness by Jesus Christ, to whom all power and judgment is given of the Father. In which day, not only the apostate angels shall be judged; but likewise all persons, that have lived upon earth, shall appear before the tribunal of Christ, to give an account of their thoughts, words, and deeds; and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil.
II. The end of God’s appointing this day, is for the manifestation of the glory of his mercy in the eternal salvation of the elect; and of his justice in the damnation of the reprobate, who are wicked and disobedient. For then…
Like or Dislike:
1
http://tomorrowsreflection.com/god-possible/
There are indeed different views on the sovereignty of God within Christianity. This is another.
Like or Dislike:
0
Indeed Open Theism “itself”, is a rather new human libertarian position, see also Molinism (the Roman Catholic, Luis de Molina). See John Frame’s book: No Other God, A Response To Open Theism. Roger Nicole (RIP) could write of Frame’s book: ‘A devastating critique of the concept of human freedom as articulated in the ‘open theistic’ view’.
Like or Dislike:
1
Father,
I expected nothing less in way of response from you. However, there might be others with an open mind reading a blog with the name “Reclaiming The Mind” that might find a different view interesting and worth looking into.
- Leo
Like or Dislike:
0
@Leo: I have not always been a “Reformed” Anglican in my theological life and mind, but yes I am a convinced Reformed Anglican surely now (say over 20 years, perhaps 25?). Note I have been a Christian over 40 years, not counting my being raised Irish Roman Catholic. And I could perhaps teach the basics of Open Theism myself, at least in a classroom like setting.. having read much of Clark Pinnock over the years. So I always have an “active” theological mind! And as I have said here too, I have been around the EO theologically for many years too. But again, yes surely I am more like our brother Greg, and Michael, a very “certain” Calvinist!
Like or Dislike:
0
I prayed standing up, I prayed kneeling, I prayed pacing, I prayed doing sit-ups. I prayed every way I knew, with every word I knew. I prayed for words to explain what I was praying for. Eventually I would sleep for a few hours. The next day I would capture a few moments of reading at work, read at night, lie down exhausted, and at 2 a.m. my eyes would open. For a few nights, I tossed and turned to go back to sleep, but soon gave that up. Once 2 a.m. rolled around, I might as well get up.
I literally reached a point where I said I did not know what else to say. I just sat there. Not thinking. Not forming prayers. Wondering what was to become of me. God had his timing. God knew what I needed. I did not want to rush him.
I thought of quitting the research entirely. I would assume the claim of being a “theist” and dare not think any further. I would be afraid to move forward. Afraid to move back. Live in a perpetual half-belief of “God” and nothing more. But that gave legitimacy to the questions. That would mean I was afraid of looking for what was true. Even if no one else knew, I would know—by being afraid to ask myself the question, I was conceding I was terrified of the answer.
…
I was about to become the terrible monster—a man without God. The concept of a creature that my entire youth, and much of my adult years had pounded and nailed and riveted as being hopeless, moralless, and miserable. I recognized that I had too much knowledge to hold onto God, and that I was going to become wretched.
It comes as no surprise; this threw me into despair. No one could look forward to this existence of dredging through a reality I hated. It was receiving a terrible disease, for which there is no cure, yet I would have to live out my life in pain.
One morning, I looked in the mirror and said, “O.K., I cannot live like this. I am going to say it. ‘I do not believe there is a God.’” (Yes, I half-expected a lightening bolt to come right out of the electrical…
Like or Dislike:
0
This was something that someone else wrote and this described me!
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz/Margaret
Where are you now on that?
Like or Dislike:
0
@Cerbaz/Margaret: Do you have a pastoral person and or a spiritual director in your life? It surely sounds like you need one! Of course it must be someone you know and respect to some degree. And in my opinion, the blog is not fully part of that forum. The best pastoral is always face to face, and if I can say in some way, “hands on”!…Of course I speak spiritually. (Note, Matt. 18: 19-20)
And btw, in my wee opinion, its appears (note appears) that you must find and fall in love with “Jesus the Christ” all over again!
Like or Dislike:
0
And btw, if you read Christian books, let me recommend, A.W. Tozer’s book: The Knowledge of the Holy! (Only about 120 pages, but a sweet read!)
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz/Margaret,
I had a feeling there was a lot more to this than an objection to Calvinism, so I am glad you shared this. Fr. Robert and I don’t agree on some things but we do agree that it would be helpful to seek one on one counseling from a local pastor who gets both our need to know Christ is there for us, and loves us, and can point us in the right direction as far as getting to know the truth of the Bible.
I’ll be the first one to admit I haven’t always seen the purpose of God in my life during bad times. However, don’t be discouraged, because your emotions may be telling you He doesn’t care right now. But that isn’t true. I think we all have been there, and done that at some point.
God bless, and if I can help please let me know.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret says: This was something that someone else wrote and this described me! So the story above was not about you in other words? I must ask with mbaker where YOU are if that story was not about you. Why tell it? I’m just asking. I also agree with Father Robert. Internet “relationships” are no long term substitute for time with the people of God in person. Of course nobody wants you to leave, we’re just saying that the Lord WILL send you somebody if you want Him to. Keep your eyes and your heart peeled. They may not be who you think OR want. I just cannot shake the sense that you are going to wind up stronger than ever through this.
Like or Dislike:
0
I made this comment (slightly tweaked) on Roger Olsans blog about Barth and I think its worth submitting here..
Scripture clearly saying that all humanity have sinned, therefore the wages of sin is death and therefore all are ‘elected’ to die. However, the gift of God is eternal life. And through Christ the elect, its God’s will that non will perish. For its in, through and over Christ, that God reconciles all mankind to himself.. however not all accept God’s election to life… and therefore they by default continue to be amongst those elected to die
Like or Dislike:
0
The charge and weakness against Barth’s theology will always be his Universalism!
Like or Dislike:
0
Btw, just a very sober Text, I quote: “While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which you have given Me, and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.” (John 17: 12) The Hebrew idiom here means one destined to perish. Of course this is Judas! Jesus said in Mk. 14: 21.. “It would have been good for that man if he had never been born.”
Like or Dislike:
0
There may be no more oft and gorily mangled verse of the 31,000 plus in all of scripture than 2 Peter 3:9.
I’m quite the steadfast non fan of Karl Barth for a whole list of reasons, but this is not the place.
Like or Dislike:
0
“The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with YOU,(the elect) not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3: 9)
“His promise” cannot be left undone, and “the elect” alone will not perish, but come to repentance! The theological logic is maintained in God’s promise to redeem HIS people!
Btw, Barth was brilliant, but sometimes “brilliantly” wrong!
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert (Anglican) says:Barth was brilliant, but sometimes “brilliantly” wrong!
I agree. I tell people all the time. “I don’t need you to be stupid to be wrong.” In fact, the more brilliant somebody is, the more potential they have for truly spectacular error. Nobody is wronger than a towering genius dead in sin. The faster the car the deadlier the accident.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz/Margaret,
I am concerned about you. How are you doing? Please don’t let this Calvinism/Arminian thing keep you away from knowing Christ. That would be such a shame against all christians, and we will certainly have to answer that before the Lord.
Like or Dislike:
0
If I had a dollar (used to be a nickel, inflation ya know), for every person who drilled into the word of God on a mission to disprove Calvinism and wound up on their face at His feet in sweet surrender to His full sovereign majesty I’d be able to get new tires for my car (which it really needs). She’s doin just fine Margret 1. She is daily in our prayers and and in the word probably more now than she has been in a long time. Maybe ever. Praise God.
Concern is good. You have a burden for her. I’ll tell ya this right now. If God does move in her heart to reveal His electing grace in her? She will NEVER have this problem again. Mark my words. Steadfast and faithful just as the very word itself. That’s what I wanna see see. Not some band aid job where somebody convinces her of some more falsehood she’ll find out about again later. I’ll skip the last part I was gonna write for now.
Like or Dislike:
0
Margaret Baker thank you for checking in. I followed Robert’s and your adviced and called my pastor. He said as a church we do not believe in any of the isms! calvinism or arminianisms. He asked me to share my testimony of when I had accepted Christ and asked me why did you pray this prayer? I shared with him my reasons and he asked so what did that mean to you? As we talked he asked me if I could accept the mysteries of God that can not be explained without jumping through hoops. I said I am trying and he prayed for me. I am seeing him again next week with my questions about christianity. He has asked that I come with my questions in order of most importance. He said it is okay to doubt and it does not mean I am no longer a believer. He said he would be praying that the Holy Spirit would lead him with his answers. Again thank you for your prayers, concerns, and christian love.
Like or Dislike:
0
This is a belief statement for our church.Don,t really care Robert if you agree or not or youGreg. This is for M Baker.The Lordship of Jesus Christ
We believe that Jesus Christ is Lord. Salvation consists of this fundamental and profound affirmation in heart and mouth. To believe and say that Jesus is Lord is to affirm that God in Christ took upon Himself human nature. True faith is impossible apart from the work of the Spirit of God with the Word of God. Born of a virgin, the Word became flesh. Jesus Christ taught us and worked great miracles, and then he died on the cross to atone for the sins of all humanity. He then arose from the dead on the third day, ascended to the right hand of the Father, and will one day return to judge the living and the dead. As our Lord, He saves us now through faith in Him. As our Lord, He has the right to command us and we have the responsibility to obey Him entirely and according to His order. As our Lord, He preserves us as we carry the cross He has given us through this world. As our Lord, he reigns over us even through death itself and brings us victoriously into eternal life with Him. We come to God the Father through God the Son in God the Holy Spirit. Jesus is Lord!
2. Biblical Proclamation
We believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible, including every word in the entire canon of the Old and New Testaments. As a result of divine inspiration, the Bible is the Word of God and is without error and sufficient for every aspect of the Christian life, from regeneration to proclamation. The Word of God is living and active and will accomplish that for which the Lord sent it. As a preacher proclaims the Word of God, the Spirit opens the ears of the hearer to listen and perceive the Word. The preacher of the Word has been chosen as a necessary instrument by God to proclaim His Word and that Word may not be separated from Scripture; therefore, the Christian minister’s powerful task is to proclaim the Bible in its depth and its…
Like or Dislike:
0
Is this this the church you’ve been in all these years? I’m wondering because there isn’t a thing you’ve quoted above that I would take issue with. How does this help you with your questions about the law and the prophets? See, the issue isn’t really about ______isms in case you haven’t caught it. It’s about surrender. It’s one thing to say you just don’t believe the bible teaches total depravity or sovereign election. I disagree, but fine. It’s quite another to say that if it does I won’t believe the gospel. Or somebody who knows in their heart it does but refuses to yield themself to the truth. THAT’S the issue I’m dealing with here. That’s why I asked you before, “WHAT IF the word really does teach true death in sin and God’s sovereign personal predestination?” Does that mean you’re outta here?
See, I’m not gonna tip toe around here worried you might get upset at something in the bible. You NEED to be upset by what’s in the bible for now. You NEED to look the word of God right in the face and decide what you will do. You NEED to face the fact that God sent Joshua into Canaan to kill every man, woman, child and beast. You NEED to come to terms with these upsetting facts of the law as well their function in the history of redemption. You NEED to read in Jeremiah 19 that God said that HE CAUSED a whoring backslidden Israel to eat their own Children. Yes He did. You NEED to look these kinda things straight on and decide whether He gets to be God of your life or not. This may take time and study as well as prayer. I encourage that.
Right now mbaker is wincing “OHHHH, DON’T TELL HER STUFF LIKE THIS”. No Maam. You NEED to get this settled. I WANT you as my sister in the Lord even if we never meet, but I’m not willing to whitewash His Word trying to persuade you. Anything anybody can talk you into, somebody else can talk you out of. Only God can work in you to will and to do His good pleasure. If you don’t like that that’s tough. I just…
Like or Dislike:
1
I just quoted you Philippians 2:13. Get off the throne of your life and make room for the King of creation to take His rightful place as ruler of your heart and mind. He is gracious and tender and His lovingkindness is forever, but HE IS holy first. His holiness governs His love. Not our emotions. I really believe His hand is on you. Seek Him with an open heart and He will give you peace and joy unimaginable. I KNOW what I am talkin about.
Like or Dislike:
0
Cerbaz/Margaret,
Thank you for the wonderful update. I am so glad that you are talking to your pastor. Your church sounds like it’s built on solid biblical principles. Just keep on holding on until you understand the Word became flesh. John 1:1-14 is one of my favorites passages that talks about that. It says about Christ that He was full of grace and truth. I pray he shower His grace upon you and lead you to His truth.
Please keep in touch.
Blessings to you.
Like or Dislike:
0
And an AMEN to mbaker. Well said. Ya know I really do like agreeing with people far more than I do disagreeing. You probably don’t believe that, but it’s true. It makes me feel good. I like good feelings. They’re a blessing. I just prefer them on a short biblical leash where they belong.
Like or Dislike:
0
I too am happy for Ms. Carbez/Margaret, sounds like she is applying and proving 2 Cor. 13: 5, “Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you -unless indeed you fail the test? (Are found unapproved)”… and this really is between you and the Lord!
And btw, I too have this test! And I must look to scriptures like 1 Tim. chapter 4, especially verses 11-16! (But note the whole chapter)
And btw, God would have us “His” Christians to know “the assurance of our salvation”! In repentance & faith, and Christian works, (Eph. 2:8-10). But always thankfully these are all wrought (done) in/with and by God In Christ!
Like or Dislike:
0
Even if she comes in here and tells us all to drop dead and never wants to hear about God again (not that you would do that Margret 2.0/Cerbaz), I will not cease from believing for her victory in our wondrously loving and faithful Lord Jesus.
Like or Dislike:
1
Margaret,
From my point of view the statement of faith from your church is right on. Base your belief and questions on what is presented there, after searching the scriptures to see that is so and in your own mind you agree with it.
There has been a lot of writing here about the philosophy of Calvinism and to my mind there have been attempts to add to what the scriptures say. It may give you some comfort to know that the same Calvin who promulgated this philosopy also supported the execution of Anabaptists in Lake Geneva for no other reason than that they rejected infant baptism. He also persecuted other believers. So consider the source and do not be overly concerned with Calvin or his philosopy. An elder in my church once told me that free will and predestination were two parallel lines that meet in eternity. Works for me. God will choose the best way, but in the end some will reject Him.
God loves you and working out your own salvation is the key to contentment and peace with Him. After that you can then worship Him fully and tell others what a great God you have. Work out your own salvation, then God will show you how to deal with others. It is not our duty, obligation, or purpose to wonder about who is elect. Our job is to witness to everyone. Their response to the word is their concern.
May God bless you with peace and wisdom and give you a great sense of His love.
Like or Dislike:
0
George Jenkins says: the same Calvin who promulgated this philosophy also supported the execution of Anabaptists in Lake Geneva
Yep. He sure did. Right there in Lake Geneva =] Too bad the millions and millions since, including most of protestant Europe and North America until the 20th century weren’t also guilty of the crimes committed there in Lake Geneva. Reformed theology, meaning the gospel, does not rise or fall with John Calvin. Ya’ll need to get that soon. Much higher level conversation can take place when you do. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but our dear friend Margaret 2.0 started on this whole Calvinism investigation by the providence of G…. uhhhh… I mean on her own.
George Jenkins says:It is not our duty, obligation, or purpose to wonder about who is elect. Our job is to witness to everyone. Their response to the word is their concern.
As a quick perusal of these comments will reveal that I have myself repeatedly stated. WHO the elect are barely ever even crosses my mind. It is not mine to know this side of the resurrection who are those given to the Son by the Father to be raised in His blood by the Holy Ghost. Nunna my business. Or anybody else’s except the electing sovereign God Himself. Ya know the days when anti Calvinists actually understood Calvinism appear to be behind us.
Here George. And anybody else. This will be helpful. http://gregnmary.gotdns.com/dox/The_Reformed_Doctrine_of_Predestination.pdf Actually Cerbaz, I certainly would recommend this book if you are interested in a competent biblical presentation of the true gospel as wrenched from the clutches of Rome in the reformation. The rise of Arminianism was much later and was wisely rejected at councils like the Synod of Dort. http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Dort where the five points were actually codified decades after Calvin’s death.
Like or Dislike:
0
On a side note do hear the famous words of Arminius himself on the value of the work of John Calvin in the scriptures. Its’ a shame he couldn’t have heeded them himself?
“Next to the study of the Scriptures which I earnestly inculcate, I exhort my pupils to peruse Calvin’s Commentaries, which I extol in loftier terms than Helmich himself [a Dutch divine, 1551–1608]; for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture, and that his commentaries ought to be more highly valued than all that is handed down to us by the library of the fathers; so that I acknowledge him to have possessed above most others, or rather above all other men, what may be called an eminent spirit of prophecy. His Institutes ought to be studied after the [Heidelberg] Catechism, as containing a fuller explanation, but with discrimination, like the writings of all men.”
—Jacob Arminius
Like or Dislike:
0
I am doing my hospital rounds this St. Pat’s day morning, so this will be quick, but before to touch some real history about Calvin and the Anabaptists, we must note that ‘do parallel line’s meet in infinity?’ This is a mathematical supposition, and not theology.
Now concerning Calvin and the Anabaptists, John Calvin was not involved in killing them, this is a big myth. He in fact married a former Anabaptist. But yes, he was involved in the death of the unrepentant Servetus, who was himself a Spaniard, and the Roman Catholic Church was seeking to kill him also. Calvin sought to have Servetus killed quickly, and not burnt, but the Genevan leadership would have none of it. Sadly, this was the religious nature of the 16th century generally.
In closing the difference between Anabaptists and Libertines must be noted in the study and history of Calvin. But he was always a real polemicist against both! We should note here too that Menno Simons held to a Valentinian (Gnostic) position about the flesh and humanity of Christ, thus no real proper Incarnation!
Like or Dislike:
0
Here’s a better history of Calvin at his first call to Geneva, (1536-1538)…
http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/8_ch10.htm
Like or Dislike:
1
Robert,
If you are going to critique then you really should critique what is written, not something you have constructed. I can find no where that anyone said that Calvin was “involved in killing them”. I wrote, “It may give you some comfort to know that the same Calvin who promulgated this philosopy also supported the execution of Anabaptists in Lake Geneva for no other reason than that they rejected infant baptism.” There is no doubt that Calvin supported the drowning of Anabaptists, conversely there is not even the hint that he tried to stop it. He considered Anabaptists threats to the advancement of Christianity and the maintenance of the proper social order.
Coming from two denominations that both took part in the murder of Anabaptists it should not be surprisig that you try to justify Calvin’s actions in the death of Servetus with “Calvin sought to have Servetus killed quickly, and not burnt,…”. and the observation “the Roman Catholic Church was seeking to kill him also” WOW!! Good for old John.
Like or Dislike:
0
George you’re not gonna like this, but as I say, “Reformed theology, meaning the gospel, does not rise or fall with John Calvin.” Take peek here at the The Canons of the 529 Council of Orange. http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/canons_of_orange.html (One of my favorite sites Father Robert) You’ll find tasty little tidbits such as the following: CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, “What have you that you did not receive?” (1 Cor. 4:7), and, “But by the grace of God I am what I am” (1 Cor. 15:10).. This is 529 AD. Calvin wouldn’t be snorkeling “Lake” Geneva for like a 1000 years yet.
Like or Dislike:
1
Greg,
Please get this. Your statement “George you’re not gonna like this, but as I say, “Reformed theology, meaning the gospel, does not rise or fall with John Calvin.” ” and the rest of what follows is of no concern for me whatsoever. I could not care less when the reformation started or ended. I would have stood with those who believd the “reformers” chickened out before they reached the proper end of the changes they should have instituted to bring Christianity to the place described in the Bible. My family was driven out of Wales in the early 1700′s for such beliefs.
Let’s face it. There is little difference between Anglicans and the Church of Rome. One would really not expect there to be given the origin of the former.
And old Henry, saw that both Protestants and Roman Catholics were his enemy. In one history book I read recently it described Henry as sort of an equal opportunity guy. There were three Roman Catholics and three Protestants in the same cart on their way to the gallows.
As for your designation for Robert, I prefer the admonition given in Matthew 23:9.
Like or Dislike:
0
@George: I did not try to justify Calvin at all in the killing of Servetus, it was what it was, and is, moral failure and the lack of the Christian spirit certainly. But again it was the 16th century. And you don’t have one piece of history to support the idea that Calvin wanted to drown and murder the Anabaptists! But, yes it is historically-biblically-theologically true, that Calvin believed the Anabaptists to be threats to true Christianity, especially the so-called “Libertines”. But, it is you that must quote better history! My quote on Calvin’s early history at Geneva was from the Christian theologian and historian, Philip Schaff. His historical work and merit stands on its own! I have read myself some Anabaptist and Mennonite history, and I have found it wanting historically, in some places, most especially on Calvin! One thing is certain, the theological polemics of the 16th century were harsh! But I do like the old (20th century) Mennonite scripture scholar, D. Edmond Hiebert (RIP), who was ordained with the Mennonite Brethren Church. I have several of his NT Books, printed by Moody Press.
Btw, I am an Anglican Reformed, and not a Presbyterian, but yes, I was raised Irish Roman Catholic. Sadly the shape today of many of the Amish and Anabaptist groups is all to real! Indeed proper biblical theology really does matter! But yes, we all need to walk softly here as ‘In Christ’!
Like or Dislike:
0
George I’m on the way out the door. I just have to say that men more opposed to Roman Catholicism than myself are few and far between, but the “call no man father” argument is the result of some of the most nonexistent exegetical skills imaginable. Small children at my inner city Detroit church could refute it by accident. Read the passage and see if you can tell me why?
Like or Dislike:
0
@George: Keep reading mate, I hope with a more open mind, and in the “Spirit/spirit” of Christ!
Just a note, but I am a conservative, evangelical-reformed Anglican presbyter (note the Irish Articles 1615, Archbishop James Ussher). And see 1 Cor. 4: 15, “father” is just another pastoral moniker, I can take it or leave it!
Like or Dislike:
0
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds3.iv.xiv.html
(The Irish Articles 1615)
Like or Dislike:
0
How much reformed theology have you actually read George? I’m not being sarcastic now. So many (like I did) simply dismiss it out of hand because they refuse to conceive of a God who is sovereign over the eternal destiny of His own creation. They start (like I did) with their assumption of man’s free will defined by them and THEN go to the bible with that immovable eisegetical obstacle preventing their journey through the Word at very turn. Knock it off =] Settle what GOD is like first and THEN interpret biblical man in that light and let us know what happens. In other words let God define man and not the other way around. This, from Father Robert’s page above, is where you’ll end up:
16. The godlike consideration of predestination and our election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh and their earthly members, and drawing up their minds to high and heavenly things: as well because it doth greatly confirm and establish their faith of eternal salvation, to be enjoyed through Christ, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God; and, on the contrary side, for curious and carnal persons lacking the spirit of Christ to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God’s predestination is very dangerous.
AMEN!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1
It is no coincidence that an article about “leaving Christianity” filled with Doubt, Discouragement, Disillusionment, Apathy and finally Departure is filled with discussion of Calvinism and the logical (inevitable) outcome of Reformed theology in general and 5 point Calvinism in particular.
Beyond the “Horrible Decree” (Double reprobation), Supralapsarianism (Ordaining the fall and damnation of the non-elect before he created man) and limiting Christ’s atonement to the elect (Contrary to dozens of scripture).
The sure fire way to cause the Doubt resulting in Departure is the Perseverance of the saints. (NOT PREservation as in eternal security- which is biblical).
To front load the Gospel with lordship salvation baggage such as “turn from all your sins”, “Make Christ Lord”, “Surrender your life” etc. is a sure way to make EVERY PERSON Doubt and be discouraged because no one can do those things completely and ergo, they doubt their eternal destiny.
Then after front loading the Gospel with unbiblical phrases and clichés prior to salvation, they now backload the Gospel and say “Unless you persevere in good works and avoid certain sins for a certain length of time, then you prove you are not one of God’s elect.”
Thus robbing EVERY SAINT OF GOD of assurance and hope. For NO ONE knows they will persevere in good works and avoid certain sins . (Which ones and for how long are never clearly iterated…. Usually they are listed as ones that other people are committing).
What is a sure way to cause people to leave Christ and become discouraged , doubt and depart from from the faith ? A steady diet of Reformed Theology focusing on 5-point TULIP Calvinism.
Like or Dislike:
0
Nice quote Greg! And, I agree most non-Reformed Christians are but reacting to what they really don’t know or understand, but give what has become the standard “verbiage” of the ignorant, to the great doctrine and teaching of the God’s sovereign, providential nature and character! It is indeed the great beauty of God!
Like or Dislike:
0
Jeff,
Thank you for this post. As i have stated I am not one of the either or ones, as Cerbaz/Margaret has stated, or as they call her Margaret 2.0.
A P. S My name is Margaret too in case you haven’t been keeping up with this entire rather long string of comments. Like her, I just do not understand the emphasis on Calvinism to the point that it is making folks doubt that they are saved. Like you, I believe the main emphasis should be on Christ. I haven’t seen that here, so I understand her doubts.
Like her church, mine has never even mentioned either either Calvinism or Armianism as being essential to salvation, or to the Christian life.
Unfortunately that seems to have to be what some folks on this thread are pushing, and I can see why that has turned her off. As a long time Christian it does me too.
Like or Dislike:
0
Wow, talk about “front-loading” the so-called Gospel and ignorance of “Calvinism”! Such is #13! Very sad!
I wonder if the writer knows what the “kerygma” (message) of the Gospel really is? I mean just what is the essence of the Gospel, but the Person & Work of Christ! And always here GOD is sovereign in HIS Gospel Kerygma!
2 Thess. 2: 13-14…
“But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth, to which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (NKJV)
Like or Dislike:
0
You are so right Jeff Ayers!
Like or Dislike:
0
You are so right Margaret Baker I am going to ask Michael for your email address and I will let you know how I am doing. I am unsubscrbing from this so I no longer read the comments of arrogant christians who think they have to always have the last word and correct others.
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert,
I think even the most uneducated among us get that the gospel is about God’s saving grace. Calvinism does not have a monopoly on that.
Like or Dislike:
0
@mbaker: This is about GOD’s sovereignty & grace, something that John Calvin surely grappled with, profoundly! And indeed, this is our blessing who thank God for such glory in the face of Christ! (2 Cor. 4: 6) Again, this is not really about Calvin per se, but GOD’s sovereignty ‘In Christ’!
I hope and pray that our friend Ms Margaret/Cerbaz comes to see that glory! But surely, the battle is always in the Word!
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr Robert.
You said:
“Again, this is not really about Calvin per se, but GOD’s sovereignty ‘In Christ’
Hope you mean that, because so far on this thread, at least ,as it seems to me,t hat you have come across as being a Reformed Calvinist first, is the most important. I agree with you that good theology is important, but it does not save., unless we count Christ’s theology first saying that Herwill save ALL who believe.
Like or Dislike:
0
@mbaker: I am always a/the theological student and disciple of Christ, the two are really intertwined as of God In Christ! And proper doctrine (teaching) and theology of Christ do include the Salvation History and Covenant of God, both OT to the New! And here too, we have and see our doctrine of God triune: “For through Him (Christ) we both (Jew & Gentile) have access by one Spirit to the Father.” (Eph. 2: 18) Here is our Salvation: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.” (2 Cor. 13: 14)
Like or Dislike:
0
Fr. Robert,
Then we shall all have to fervently pray for our sister Cerbaz/ Margaret that the grace of God will be with her and that He leads her to the right answers.
Like or Dislike:
0
mbaker says: Then we shall all have to fervently pray for our sister Cerbaz/ Margaret that the grace of God will be with her and that He leads her to the right answers.
That has been ongoing Margaret v 1.0 (I mean that affectionately of course in both of your cases). Here’s where we may get a real illustration of the difference between modern humanistic christiandom and the gospel. Be careful mbaker. The measure of a man or woman of God’s success is NOT Margaret 2.0′s response. It’s whether you’re delivering the word faithfully in both content and heart. Margaret 2.0′s problem is SIN. Like everybody else. She is NOT a victim. She’s goin after you because you’re coddling her. Make no mistake. Oh yeah, Jeff is clueless beyond words. Just spectacularly clueless.
Mbaker. Another honest question. Do you believe that God before the foundation of the world chose by name, face and dna those whom he would certainly save and them only? I’m just asking a non combative simple question.
Like or Dislike:
0
I have been praying for her already, that she truly see the great grace and glory of God in the face of Christ! God is the Savior. When we meet God In Christ, we are never the same! We can see this change in the life and ministry of St. Paul, (1 Tim. 1: 14-15-16).
Glory to God for His Grace!
Like or Dislike:
0
@Greg: I did want to say thanks for the reference to the Council of Orange, and the Canons thereof, (529 A.D.)However sadly, many if not most Evangelical Christians today are ignorant here, between Augustine and Pelagius, and that whole theological debate. Of which of course the Council of Orange sided with Augustine! If you can find a copy let me recommend Augustine’s work: Causa Gratiae, and too perhaps my favorite little bio on Augustine by Henry Chadwick, (RIP). I think the latter is still in print now in paperback?
And surely most of the Protestant Reformers were Augustinian’s, certainly Luther and Calvin!
Like or Dislike:
0
Greg,
You can rest assured that I am very honest in my approach to the word of God. Like many biblically sound Christians I know, I also do not believe in either Calvinism or Armianism. Both have their pros and cons. In fact I often think ad hominem arguments over them, like some of the comments on this thread, actually do more harm than good to folks who are thinking about leaving Christianity.
My focus remains on Christ and the gospel. Therefore I will not participate in any more of these type conversations, where one seems to be forced to choose between Calvinism and Armianism in order to be considered a Christian. I fear that is what happened with Cerbaz/Margaret.
Being compassionate and speaking the truth in love is not ‘coddling’ someone, but is what our Lord asks us to do when we discuss Him with others.
Like or Dislike:
0
mbaker says: Therefore I will not participate in any more of these type conversations, where one seems to be forced to choose between Calvinism and Armianism in order to be considered a Christian.
But nobody has ever said this. I have explicitly stated that Calvinism is not a prerequisite for salvation for Pete’s sake (but it sure helps =D ). The only ad hominem arguments here have been against Calvinism. Nor for it. For the record I don’t believe you’re misrepresenting me on purpose.
mbaker says: Being compassionate and speaking the truth in love is not ‘coddling’ someone, but is what our Lord asks us to do when we discuss Him with others.
Of course this is correct and please do know that I have NO doubt whatsoever that you have a genuine desire for God’s best for this woman. The point I am making is that Cerbaz got started here by refusing to submit to God’s declarations of Himself and His law because they were “unacceptable” to her. She then launched HERSELF on an investigation of Calvinism. I don’t know you that well, but other people have shown up here offering to convince her that she in effect need not really believe stuff about God that she may not like. That’s a lie. These modernist liberals will mangle and contort the word of God and thereby God Himself making their disciples twice the sons of hell that they are.
I want her to be a solid and unbending weapon in the arsenal of the Lord. That means facing the Word and deciding to surrender or not. Am I wrong? She thinks at least that you are going to tell her not to worry about that stuff which is what you ARE telling her. That is just kicking this can down the road to plague her again in the future. She needs to settle this and right now she’s reluctant which is why she’s all aggravated with Father Robert and I. We keep pushing her face into these things she’s running from. Or trying to anyway. Calvinism is just a symptomatic cover for the real issue which is surrender.
Like or Dislike:
0
Yes Father Robert, Orange is largely forgotten, but was another early key affirmation of the theology proper, hamartiology and soterilogy of the very capable and devout yet imperfect bishop of hippo. It’s too bad Aquinas couldn’t have taken Augustine in the direction that Luther and especially Calvin eventually did instead of planting his face in the butt cheeks of Aristotle. The history and theology of Rome may have been different. Probably still would have sucked though actually.
Like or Dislike:
2
Cerbaz/Margaret,
If by some chance you are still reading this despite saying you were unsubscribing due to the arrogant comments of some, I hope you still will contact me through Michael, as you asked. I have already given him my permission to give you my e-mail.
But whether you do or you don’t, I wish you all God’s blessings in finding the answers you seek.
With that, I will bow out of this conversation myself.
More Comments: