Do cals Read JUST cals Authors/Non cals Just Non Cals?

[glfredrick]

Your telling me Dr Allison isnt Reformed?!? Then I guess I cant read "Historic Theology" .....thanks! LOL:thumbs:

Allison is Reformed in the Baptist tradition, not in the oft-cited Presbyterian tradition.

I HIGHLY recommend reading his book, Historical Theology. Great corrective for some of the horrid theology I see posted about here and ther.

 

[glfredrick]

I think most "real theologians" say little more than what is expressed here BB land. However, they often do say it with a much more eloquent language couched in terms only the most theological studious might be accustomed to.

Actually, you would be quite incorrect. Most "real theologians" have quite a lot more to say than gets said around here. We banter about with catch-phrase common-man theology instead of dealing with the sound andc solid arguments and propositions of true theology.

Oh, and those technical terms of theology are not just there to make theologians seem eloquent or educated. They are the way that difficult nuances and concepts of theology are brought into propositional form. The terms used are necessary to the discipline and a lack of understanding as to their usage leads to all sort of misunderstanding and theological error. I see it often, especially here on this board.

For instance, using the term "saved" to discuss soteriology is an error all by itself, but one we practice here on a daily basis. Which part of "saved" are we talking about? Justification, faith/repentance, effectual call, election, sanctification, perseverance, or glorification?"

I also realized that I never answered the OP question. Yes, I read everyone. So do most true theologians. How can one respond ACCURATELY to the propositions made by any given theologian if one fails to read them? How can one formulate a good theological response if one is not disciplined well in his or her own chosen propositional statement? Answering what has not been carefully read or understood is akin to presenting strawman arguments -- something we see often around here.

 

[quantumfaith]

Actually, you would be quite incorrect. Most "real theologians" have quite a lot more to say than gets said around here. We banter about with catch-phrase common-man theology instead of dealing with the sound andc solid arguments and propositions of true theology.

Oh, and those technical terms of theology are not just there to make theologians seem eloquent or educated. They are the way that difficult nuances and concepts of theology are brought into propositional form. The terms used are necessary to the discipline and a lack of understanding as to their usage leads to all sort of misunderstanding and theological error. I see it often, especially here on this board.

For instance, using the term "saved" to discuss soteriology is an error all by itself, but one we practice here on a daily basis. Which part of "saved" are we talking about? Justification, faith/repentance, effectual call, election, sanctification, perseverance, or glorification?"

I also realized that I never answered the OP question. Yes, I read everyone. So do most true theologians. How can one respond ACCURATELY to the propositions made by any given theologian if one fails to read them? How can one formulate a good theological response if one is not disciplined well in his or her own chosen propositional statement? Answering what has not been carefully read or understood is akin to presenting strawman arguments -- something we see often around here.

The point I was trying to get across is that what we "banter" about here in BB land more often than not comes from those that we read and find ourselves in agreement with..

 

[Amy.G]

What would happen if we all laid down our theological books and studied only the bible? Do you think we would agree more or less?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What would happen if we all laid down our theological books and studied only the bible? Do you think we would agree more or less?

I personally never understood God until I picked one up. I viewed God as capricious before I started reading Orthodox theology. IE, without it I double I would have ever seriously turned to Him.

 

[Ruiz]

What would happen if we all laid down our theological books and studied only the bible? Do you think we would agree more or less?

Amy,

Some use this same idea to discount the importance of the Bible. I do think we can gain wisdom and insight from Godly people and preaching shows that we need to hear from wise and Godly men on theological issues.

 

[JesusFan]

Brotherly love isn't about sickening sweetness. There is no noncalvinists who calls himself a Christian that I would begrudge acts of charity in his time of need (requests via the internet excepted). In the arena of competing gospels, however, there is no virtue in civility.

just stating that we always need to remind ourselves that we all have a common enemy, and its NOT another brother/sister in Christ!

 

[JesusFan]

Actually, you would be quite incorrect. Most "real theologians" have quite a lot more to say than gets said around here. We banter about with catch-phrase common-man theology instead of dealing with the sound andc solid arguments and propositions of true theology.

Oh, and those technical terms of theology are not just there to make theologians seem eloquent or educated. They are the way that difficult nuances and concepts of theology are brought into propositional form. The terms used are necessary to the discipline and a lack of understanding as to their usage leads to all sort of misunderstanding and theological error. I see it often, especially here on this board.

Think that many of us here on the BB assume that we are discussing the same biblcal concepts/doctrines, but the truth is that we are using same verbage/but different understanding!

example would be when we say spiritually dead in sins...

Some have us still able to exercise inherit faith and believe on Christ, others here see us so dead in sin that ONLY Grace/act of God fiorst done towardsus prepares us to believe unto Christ![quote/]

For instance, using the term "saved" to discuss soteriology is an error all by itself, but one we practice here on a daily basis. Which part of "saved" are we talking about? Justification, faith/repentance, effectual call, election, sanctification, perseverance, or glorification?"

Think that IF one have a misunderstanding in this area, from the biblical prespective, then all other items start to fall apart!
[quote/]
I also realized that I never answered the OP question. Yes, I read everyone. So do most true theologians. How can one respond ACCURATELY to the propositions made by any given theologian if one fails to read them? How can one formulate a good theological response if one is not disciplined well in his or her own chosen propositional statement? Answering what has not been carefully read or understood is akin to presenting strawman arguments -- something we see often around here.

seems that many of us here posting ont he BB appear to not fully realise what our theology teaches, or are ignorant of just how that is in realtionship to the bible and towards other held theological stances here![quote/]