The post is #7.
You and Austin denounced Paul's words as theologically flawed and false.
I never expounded on the passage.
I never gave you my interpretation.
I gave the passage. NOTHING MORE.
-
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!
Faulty theology pt 2
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
You and Austin denounced Paul's words as theologically flawed and false.
I never expounded on the passage.
I never gave you my interpretation.
I gave the passage. NOTHING MORE.
Wrong.
Reformed and Baptists have never declared that viewing Adam as being created natural (human body, human soul) of the earth and not spiritual (of heaven) heresy.
Many Baptists have affirmed my view. Done Reformed have. It is an old debate.
What is heresy, however, is calling Scripture theologically flawed and false.
You keep saying that Austin and I have done that, but its you who refuse to accept Adam had spiritual life, refuse to accept that he spiritual died, and you see Jesus being born in same human nature that we all have!
That's really funny I'm a Baptist and I disagree. Calvinist and there doctrine Has tried to tell me what and how to believe ever since I came here. Yet I have not given in to the nonsense of man's thinking. Calvinism is Catholic heresy.
MB
Different topic, different thread.
In Post#7 Austin directly rejected Paul's words as flawed theology and false. You cannot get around that fact. And then you agreed with him. You cannot get astound that fact either.
For the record, Austin did not realize I was quoting Scripture because I did not provide the reference. He thought I was expressing my view. But that does not change the fact that the two of you are at dds with Paul (post 7).
Last edited:
You said
So I gave you these verses:
Then you quoted my post:
and you said:
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
And what's the deal with everyone getting all heresy calling happy?
It is one thing to view something as a heresy based on one's own personal beliefs or small group, but as I noted on another forum this is a Christian board (not a Calvinist board, not a non-Calvinist board).
A "heresy" here is at least an unorthodox Christian view.
In the context of orthodox Christianity Calvinism is not heresy. Arminianianism is not heresy. Penal Substitution Theory is not heresy. Christus Victor is not heresy. Genesis 2:17 referring to spiritual death is not heresy. Genesis 2:17 referring to physical death is not heresy.
In other words, on the Baptist section of this forum if you start to claim someone a heretic you are probably wrong. You may not like or agree with their view but even the most horrendous error made here (like questioning Braves winning the 2020 World Series) is probably within orthodox Christianity.
"Heresy" does not mean erroneous or false. It also does not mean "opposed to my view".
I am getting tired of seeing it used as a type of insult.
It is one thing to view something as a heresy based on one's own personal beliefs or small group, but as I noted on another forum this is a Christian board (not a Calvinist board, not a non-Calvinist board).
A "heresy" here is at least an unorthodox Christian view.
In the context of orthodox Christianity Calvinism is not heresy. Arminianianism is not heresy. Penal Substitution Theory is not heresy. Christus Victor is not heresy. Genesis 2:17 referring to spiritual death is not heresy. Genesis 2:17 referring to physical death is not heresy.
In other words, on the Baptist section of this forum if you start to claim someone a heretic you are probably wrong. You may not like or agree with their view but even the most horrendous error made here (like questioning Braves winning the 2020 World Series) is probably within orthodox Christianity.
"Heresy" does not mean erroneous or false. It also does not mean "opposed to my view".
I am getting tired of seeing it used as a type of insult.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
I do not agree with @JonC on MANY things. But I honestly think you and @Yeshua1 are overplaying your hand here. He literally posted a verse, granted without reference, and did not offer exposition on that verse. So you can't really say his theology on that post is flawed. His theology on the topic in general? I agree it is flawed, but not on that post. Give it a rest.
You are wrong. My position, regardless of whether right or wrong, is Baptist (but not Reformed Theology). This has been a debated topic for a very long time (which is why it is addressed in Baptist theologies on both sides of the debate).
You are wrong to exclude views you do not hold as heresy and not existing in Baptist or Christian theology.
It is fair to say my position is rejected by many Baptists (as is yours) and contrary to Reformed Baptist theology.
It is a false accusation to call my position "heresy", "not Baptist", or "unorthodox". Ultimately that demonstrates an ignorance on your part (believing your views representative of Christianity and Baptist theology as a whole).
But I am neither Reformed nor Reformed Baptist.
You, and @AustinC, need to be careful about holding yourselves as the standard of orthodoxy. My view may be an error, but it is within Christian and Baptist theology as evidenced by its existence as a debate within those two categories.
Wait!...... What? When did this happen?
JonC earlier stated that his view was akin to a Roman Catholic view. I have never read any Baptist having his position in Adam not having a spirit, but only being flesh. In truth, I haven't even heard a Roman Catholic make such a claim.
Perhaps the debate is held in an ivory tower far away from mainstream Christianity and JonC just wants to let us into his world.
Speaking only for myself, I have no compulsion to enter an ivory tower.
Perhaps the debate is held in an ivory tower far away from mainstream Christianity and JonC just wants to let us into his world.
Speaking only for myself, I have no compulsion to enter an ivory tower.
Austin,
Just because we are not familiar with a view does not mean it does not exist within Baptist Theology.
I was not familiar with some doctrines within Primitive Baptist theology. I was not aware dome Baptists hold to God as actually separating from Christ on the Cross. I was not familiar with Baptist Bride theology.
But all of that was ignorance on my part. I would be very foolish to have said all of the doctrines I have not encountered were heresy or a departure from Baptist Theology.
The fact is my view is orthodox to Christian and Baptist Faith. You were wrong to claim otherwise.
You can argue that my theology is wrong. I can argue yours us wrong. But it is a false statement for either of us to argue the other holds a Christian heresy or view that is not Baptist on this topic because that is simply untrue.
What you should do is argue your position without assuming yours is the standered to which others should bow.
I just caught this.
This is actually a very false statement.
I never said my view was akin to a RCC view.
I also never said Adam did not have a spirit. In fact I said Adam had a human body and a human soul and a human spirit.
So what you have done is outright made a false claim (you "bore false witness" ). If intentional you lied. If ignorantly you are merely untrustworthy.
It does bring up a good point, however.
What some do (here @AustinC, but he is not alone) is make outright false and outlandish claims against Christians who disagree with them.
It was very dishonest for @AustinC to say that I earlier stated that my view was akin to a Roman Catholic view.
I think he (and those who do this) believe the idea that if you lie about someone enough others will start to believe the lies true.
Members need to stop being dishonest about people who disagree with them. They need to stop lying about people and trying to slander them (on all sides of these debates).
All @AustinC and @Yeshua1 had done, ultimately, is called their character into question. Online forums are not worth it (it is better to loose or withdraw from an argument than forfeit your character).
People WILL disagree here. Let that disagreement be an honest disagreement. The false clams, name calling, falsely rendering to doctrine as heresy, unorthodox, un-baptist.....this dishonesty needs to stop.
37818
Well-Known Member
Faulty theology is when truth regarding God is refused to be heard.
The Word in John 1:1-2 stated to be two different "natures" if I can apply the term here. Twice said to be facing God, "with God," indicating the Word to be someone besides God, and identified as God too, being "was God." It sounds to be the Word was both not God and God at the same time. Being someone other than God, "with God." God does not change. Yet the Word changed to become flesh, a man. What changed? Not that the Word "was God," that did not change. But how the Word was "with God" did in fact change. Hear what John 1:1-2 says.
The Word in John 1:1-2 stated to be two different "natures" if I can apply the term here. Twice said to be facing God, "with God," indicating the Word to be someone besides God, and identified as God too, being "was God." It sounds to be the Word was both not God and God at the same time. Being someone other than God, "with God." God does not change. Yet the Word changed to become flesh, a man. What changed? Not that the Word "was God," that did not change. But how the Word was "with God" did in fact change. Hear what John 1:1-2 says.
Yes it is. Calvinism came from the Catholics. Augustine wrote the doctrine for the Catholic church and when the reformation happened the protestants took it with them. Warmed over Catholicism is what many call it. Of course the Catholics change there doctrine every single time a new Pope comes in. Calvinist still study the catechisms. Even John Calvin called it the one true Church. He also placed his own daughter in a convent because he didn't want to take care of her.
MB
I have to say. I have read all of your posts. I have read them multiple times. Like this one here They are very difficult to understand. Either they are not as clear as you think they are or you are being intentionally ambiguous.
What in the world does that even mean " and not spiritual"?
As long as you insist on calling me something I'm not I'll do the same for you. You are a full Pharisee. You act like you know it all when in reality you would not know a Pelagain if one jumped up and bit you. I do believe in the trinity and I don't believe man can save himself, as do Pelagains. Yet you do fit the Pharisee's.Criteria. You judge people just like they do which makes you hypocritical just like them.
MB
- Status