• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Scholars vs. Laity part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Amy.G

New Member
Let's pick up from here.

Posted by Havensdad

Tell me, if a bunch of doctors, who had gone to medical school, gave you a diet plan for losing weight and getting in shape, and your uncle Bob, who read Men's Health said they were wrong, who would you tend to believe?

When it comes to teachers, I'll take the guy who makes the study of God's Word a priority, over the guy who'd rather just "get by" every time. Where a person's money is, is where there heart lies. And a person who is willing to work his tail off, and shell out large sums of money, because he believes that God's Word is THAT important, trumps the guy who says "I can get by without all that" and goes out and spends his money on cars, T.V.'s, and fishing boats.
Click to expand...
 
webdog

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Oops...I started another thread already with the emphasis on money, because this really needed to be dealt with. :)

I would hate for a lurker to come to the BB who is in bankruptcy or foreclosure and think "oh well, I guess I'll never know correct doctrine...so why bother"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Amy.G

New Member
webdog said:
Oops...I started another thread already with the emphasis on money, because this rally needed to be dealt with. :)

I would hate for a lurker to come to the BB who is in bankruptcy or foreclosure and think "oh well, I guess I'll never know correct doctrine...so why bother"
Click to expand...

That's a good thread you started and you make a very good argument. :thumbs:
 
H

Havensdad

New Member
Sorry. I, personally, am not going to engage. The moderators locked the thread for a reason, and it seems kind of a bypass of their administrative duties to simply start another thread.
 
L

Luke2427

Active Member
Amy.G said:
Let's pick up from here.
Click to expand...

Yea, I think Haven has a good point.

No one is saying that a layman can't get all he needs from his personal study of the Scriptures.

He can understand a great deal.

But there is a ton more that he cannot understand without training.

I think that is plain on this very board.

Webdog said the other day that Jonathan Edwards was not orthodox.

I don't know of an educated person, even Arminian, who would agree with that.

But these are things you come to understand as you are trained in seminary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

BobinKy

New Member
Luke2427 said:
Yea, I think Haven has a good point.

No one is saying that a layman can't get all he needs from his personal study of the Scriptures.

He can understand a great deal.

But there is a ton more that he cannot understand without training.
Click to expand...

True, but training does not have to come through an institution--unless the aim is to restrict such training to a specific doctrinal perspective adopted by the funders of the institution.

Training can be self-directed in most professions, except those requiring some sort of apprenticeship.

Training is different from learning. Training, to me, speaks more of acquiring a specific set of objectives required by some group or organization. Learning, on the other hand, is broader and extends beyond boundaries (leaping over the electric fences).

Now, I think if a person wants to pursue a church-related career in a specific denomination or tradition, then the person should attend that denomination's approved list of institutions in order to receive the prescribed training for leadership within that denomination.

However, if a person wants to learn without boundaries, without electric fences, then the path of individual scholar pursuing a self-directed course of study over their whole life may produce a more satisfactory learning experience.

I also think the Holy Spirit works in both training and learning situations.

...Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

preacher4truth

Active Member
Since when did Almighty God have to start using scholars (ahem) to confound the "wise"? I always thought that He used those that were...well, let me let Him say it:

For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. 1 Corinthians 1:26-29. -KJV

All this glorying, in his presence is shameful.

Unless the ABSV has a better translation than this, I'm sticking to this text!

I'd quote the ABSV, but I can't find it right now! :smilewinkgrin:
 
L

Luke2427

Active Member
webdog said:
Actually, I said he was a hyper calvinist. Reading comprehension.
Click to expand...

Post 34 and 42 of the "Why is Evil in the World" thread.

Here is post 42. It has preachinjesus' response to the post where you indicated that Jonathan Edwards was not orthodox. And then you respond-


Quote:
Originally Posted by preachinjesus
This doesn't have anything to do with the OP and I'd be happy to take it elsewhere but webdog, dude, Edwards is a thoroughly orthodox theologian. His theological positions are well within the bounds of orthodoxy and, honestly, his work on the economic and immanent Trinity defined the theological categories themselves.

I'd hesitate to say he's "hyper-Calvinist" because a) I haven't read that aspect of his work that well and b) we need to carefully define the hyper part of that.

Anyhoo, just saying...oh and if you want a citation about him being the most brilliant American theologian Gonzalez Christian History or History of Christian Thought would probably suffice. There are lots of others, but Gonzalez is a recognized authority.
Click to expand...


webdog
Not as orthodox as you might think http://www.americanpresbyterianchurc...w_divinity.htm
Click to expand...
 
webdog

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Luke2427 said:
Post 34 and 42 of the "Why is Evil in the World" thread.

Here is post 42. It has preachinjesus' response to the post where you indicated that Jonathan Edwards was not orthodox. And then you respond-
Click to expand...
Like I said, your reading comprehension is quite lacking. "Not as orthodox as you might think" is NOT the same as "Jonathan Edwards is not orthodox".

Please do better following along.

Do you believe the governmental theory of the atonement is orthodox?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
N

nodak

Active Member
Site Supporter
Aw now, preacherfortruth done gone and got God's idea of our high falutin' degrees.

Killjoy :)
 
L

Luke2427

Active Member
webdog said:
Like I said, your reading comprehension is quite lacking. "Not as orthodox as you might think" is NOT the same as "Jonathan Edwards is not orthodox".

Please do better following along.

Do you believe the governmental theory of the atonement is orthodox?
Click to expand...

This is from post 37 of that same thread


Quote:luke2427
Good heavens man! This is the position of those whose names practically DEFINE orthodoxy. Have you ever heard of a little fellow named Jonathan Edwards? was he not orthodox???
Click to expand...

webdog
Like you, I don't consider Jonathan Edwards orthodox. He's hyper.
Click to expand...

Now I anxiously await the spin doctor to see how he will spin this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
webdog

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
You are correct, I should have qualified my statement. In regards to the atonement, I do not believe him to be orthodox. He's clearly hyper.

Now, do you believe in Governmental Atonement?
 
webdog

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Luke2427 said:
Excellent. Now you should follow up that statement with an apology for your smart alek remark about reading comprehension.
Click to expand...
In regards to that particular phrase on this particular thread, I jumped the gun and I should not have said that and I apologize.

Now do you care to answer the question?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top