Hmmmm wheres the POLL gone?

Thomas, no matter what I say you'll rip it apart. I call you the Cryptogram man around my house. (And NO, I don't mean the second 'occult' definition.) You have your own secret language that only you can decipher according to your needs.

The definition I gave for tabula rasa came right from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2004, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Guess that didn't satisfy you, Thomas.

No where does Stefan leave an opening for the Holy Spirit in his remark. Notice, also, that I used the ? at the end of my remark.

If I cared what you thought, I'd show you where you and your Calvinistic co-horts have been using that same ? as proof of innocence and guilt concerning questions and remarks in the last 2 days. But then I don't care what you think. You are NOT in any sense MY spiritual leader!

 

Then you won't pitch a fit when it is done to you, now will you?

 

But you do have a secret language, one that is so far removed from persons not paid to practice religion, that you make no sense to them. Most of us call that snobbery!

 

I've found Thomas's words quite comprehensible and your answers to his questions evasive Diane. This isn't a personal attack. Why aren't you answering his question? You made an accusation and now you can't back it up. How does that make you feel?

 

This thread is about as bad as the thread it is about. I think Diane was well within her rights to pull the thread, as the person of a thread can asked for it to be closed for whatever reason they want. Can't people show a little more compassion and humility when discussing this issue?!? It seems like everyone is trying so hard to pick apart and find the aboslute worst possible in everyone else's posts. These sorts of discussions is exactly why I severly limit my participation in the entire Calvinism forum - few are able to discuss it kindly and patiently.

 

There is much room in my statement for the Holy Spirit. God uses our experience to illuminate our understandings of Scripture. Even if God overrode our previous knowledge, we still would not have a "blank slate"--God would have radically overridden all previous knowledge and experience--you would interpret in spite of your experience. Nevertheless, the experiences still remain.

I would venture to say that it is not normative (though still possible) for God to engage in such a radical altering of one's theological paradigm, for doing so would be comparable to having a French-speaking Catholic turn into a Spanish-speaking Baptist by the direct act of the Holy Spirit--possible, though not likely.

Another compounding issue:
If the Holy Spirit can be presumed always to override one's life experience in every theological discussion, then since God cannot lie, every Spirit-led study would result in flawless, inerrant, infallible theology. Therefore, we can assume that only one position of theology could be correct, for those in any form of error could not be led by the Spirit.
I am not willing to accept these implications, nor do I think the vast majority of the people on this board are.

My point was simply this: God has apparently not chosen to delineate perfectly every minute point of theology that we might ponder, so as we interpret Scripture, though there is an element of guidance from the Holy Spirit--we must always remember that our own experience is simulaneously shaping our understanding.

I make this point from a heart for unity in the faith--we are all human, so all of our theology relies in some part on "human thought." Calvinist, Arminian, or somewhere in-between (as I am), I believe that most of us can agree that there is "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" that we all try to serve as best we know how.
Peace be with you all.

 

StefanM,
Having been in discussions about One Lord, One faith, and one Baptism, I can assure you there is not a whole lot of agreement there either!

There are wide variances in the meaning of those terms among the believers.

 

Well, I didn't imply any specific meaning. Perhaps (with my tongue way back in my cheek), we can accept this without knowing exactly what they mean

 

Diane says:
Before Baptist Board, I'd only heard C/A mentioned one Wednesday night by a preacher who began swaying toward Calvinism and quickly lost his church. He's now working in a bullet factory.
************************************************

HN replies:

Galatians 4:29
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
***************

Look at what happened to Jesus when He went about telling of His Father.
***************
Often it is the ones that we should listen to that gets nailed to the Cross, or tossed out of the church, etc......

 

Feeling Persecuted here now? Trying with some subtlety persuade other's that Diane is the devil?

Give us a break herenow, we ain't buyin' your Calvinist riggamarole.

 

I doubt seriously that Diane will think that I am in any way accusing her of being the Devil.

ONLY you Wes would read that into my post. Which clearly explains why it is impossible to have a serious debate with you.

 

Topic closed for lack of relevancy to the theological topic of this forum ... and for the personal sniping.

Let's keep it decent, fit for decent conversation.