How "theological" should a sermon be?

[HankD]

Because the body of Christ is riddled with factions, some take no position on texts that divide, such as saying both views at true. Stalin did that, taking no position, therefore stealthfully rising in the ranks. Then of course he murdered about 20 million people.

We should preach the truth and where scholars disagree we should present our view, but clearly present that others hold a very different view. We worship the truth.

Not so - in this respect.. I am divided about Calvin vs Arminius and refuse to give allegiance to either.

First and foremost we are NOT to do this - I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas... etc

Secondly these ideas came centuries after Christ. True a clear definition of Trinitarian teaching took centuries to develop, however apart from Athanasius and Arius, no one says I follow "Athanasius" or "I follow Arius".

C vs A has split the church with a near mortal blow.

Thank you but I am no Stalin nor do I want to murder.

 

[Reformed]

C vs A has split the church with a near mortal blow.

Respectfully, I disagree. Yes. Calvinism vs. Arminianism has created a schism within the Church. That should be obvious to all who know anything about the debate. C&A has split some local churches. But when it comes to the big "C" church, I think the debate continues to be worthwhile. The truth should never be avoided. It deserves a forum. Now, how we debate is worth discussing. I recently reacted viscerally in another thread to an individual who created that thread for the sole purpose of furthering division. That type of debate only serves to throw red meat to one's own starving dogs. Both sides are guilty of that. But when Calvinists like James White have formal debates with Arminians such as Michael Brown, they provide a worthwhile service to the body of Christ. The theology and ideas of both positions are fleshed out, which allows observers to decide for themselves.

 

[HankD]

Respectfully, I disagree. Yes. Calvinism vs. Arminianism has created a schism within the Church. That should be obvious to all who know anything about the debate. C&A has split some local churches. But when it comes to the big "C" church, I think the debate continues to be worthwhile. The truth should never be avoided. It deserves a forum. Now, how we debate is worth discussing. I recently reacted viscerally in another thread to an individual who created that thread for the sole purpose of furthering division. That type of debate only serves to throw red meat to one's own starving dogs. Both sides are guilty of that. But when Calvinists like James White have formal debates with Arminians such as Michael Brown, they provide a worthwhile service to the body of Christ. The theology and ideas of both positions are fleshed out, which allows observers to decide for themselves.

But if both are wrong as some believe then nothing good can come of it which I believe has been proven here and in several other venues of Christian debate.

Bottom line IMO is - it is forbidden, "I am of Apollos, I of Cephas..."

 

[Reformed]

But if both are wrong as some believe then nothing good can come of it which I believe has been proven here and in several other venues of Christian debate.

Bottom line IMO is - it is forbidden, "I am of Apollos, I of Cephas..."

Then it comes down to a matter of conviction, does it not?

 

[Van]

Not so - in this respect.. I am divided about Calvin vs Arminius and refuse to give allegiance to either.
Thank you but I am no Stalin nor do I want to murder.

No one asked you to give allegiance to stuff you do not believe. The idea is to give your views as to what you believe. People who mask their beliefs to gain favor are behaving like Stalin. No one said that shoe fits you.

We should preach the truth and where scholars disagree we should present our view, but clearly present that others hold a very different view. We worship the truth.

 

[HankD]

Then it comes down to a matter of conviction, does it not?

No, don't do it.

 

[HankD]

No one asked you to give allegiance to stuff you do not believe. The idea is to give your views as to what you believe. People who mask their beliefs to gain favor are behaving like Stalin. No one said that shoe fits you.

We should preach the truth and where scholars disagree we should present our view, but clearly present that others hold a very different view. We worship the truth.

It seemed you made a blanket statement which included me - my bad if I was wrong

 

[Van]

And my bad if my blanket was too broad. :}

 

[Reformed]

No, don't do it.

Do not do what? I am convinced that the Calvinist understanding of soteriology is correct. All we can do in the pursuit of truth is to obey our conscience. You seem to be convinced that neither the Calvinist or Arminian position is correct. That is your conviction. I would attempt to persuade you to change your mind, but in the end, you must obey your conscience.

 

[HankD]

Do not do what? I am convinced that the Calvinist understanding of soteriology is correct. All we can do in the pursuit of truth is to obey our conscience. You seem to be convinced that neither the Calvinist or Arminian position is correct. That is your conviction. I would attempt to persuade you to change your mind, but in the end, you must obey your conscience.

My first objection to C which I have aired several times here is the "T" of TULIP.

Total Depravity. - We are made in the image and likeness of God - Is the image of God in us depraved?

 

[Reformed]

My first objection to C which I have aired several times here is the "T" of TULIP.

Total Depravity. - We are made in the image and likeness of God - Is the image of God in us depraved?

I believe you misunderstand what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God. We are made in God's image in that we are moral creatures. Adam was created without sin but with the ability to sin. Once Adam sinned he was placed under the curse (Genesis 3:3). While still a moral creature, Adam's morality was now flawed. Whereas it is impossible for God to sin, Adam had sinned. Adam's sinful choice impacts his posterity. Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned. How else do explain the fact that the natural man (the sinner) is incapable of understanding the things of the Spirit of God without divine intervention (1 Corinthians 2:14)?

 

[HankD]

I believe you misunderstand what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God. We are made in God's image in that we are moral creatures. Adam was created without sin but with the ability to sin. Once Adam sinned he was placed under the curse (Genesis 3:3). While still a moral creature, Adam's morality was now flawed. Whereas it is impossible for God to sin, Adam had sinned. Adam's sinful choice impacts his posterity. Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned. How else do explain the fact that the natural man (the sinner) is incapable of understanding the things of the Spirit of God without divine intervention (1 Corinthians 2:14)?

Nice apologetic brother but in my opinion it misses the mark.

We still retain His image and we should honor that in each and every man.

James 3
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

IMO to label someone in an elitist way is to brand (curse - kataraomi) them.

kataraomi - Liddell Scott - to utter an imprecation, malediction.

Yes, I am guilty, BIG TIME.

 

[Reformed]

Nice apologetic brother but in my opinion it misses the mark.

So, we disagree. That is my point about studying for yourself and being true to your conviction. It is much better than another poster who was making "slam dunk" pronouncements if anyone dared disagree with him.

 

[Van]

How else do explain the fact that the natural man (the sinner) is incapable of understanding the solid food things of the Spirit of God without divine intervention (1 Corinthians 2:14)? (1 Corinthians 3:1-3)
Notice that the men of Matthew 23:13 were in the process of entering the kingdom, demonstrating the "T" (total spiritual inability) is off the mark.

 

[Van]

The actual biblical doctrine taught in 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 is that the natural man (unregenerate person) has Limited Spiritual Ability, able to understand and respond to "milk" (the fundamentals of the gospel) but not "meat" or "solid food" the spiritual things learned only with the help of our indwelt Spirit.

 

[Yeshua1]

My first objection to C which I have aired several times here is the "T" of TULIP.

Total Depravity. - We are made in the image and likeness of God - Is the image of God in us depraved?

We are different that what Adam was before the Fall in that regards!

 

[Yeshua1]

The actual biblical doctrine taught in 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 is that the natural man (unregenerate person) has Limited Spiritual Ability, able to understand and respond to "milk" (the fundamentals of the gospel) but not "meat" or "solid food" the spiritual things learned only with the help of our indwelt Spirit.

You totally misunderstood Paul, as his point was that natural/unsaved sinners understand nothing about theological/spiritual things of God, and those who were saved are either babes in Christ on milk, or else mature on meat!

 

[HankD]

We are different that what Adam was before the Fall in that regards!

That's not an answer to my question

 

[Van]

You totally misunderstood Paul, as his point was that natural/unsaved sinners understand nothing about theological/spiritual things of God, and those who were saved are either babes in Christ on milk, or else mature on meat!

Why make bogus assertions? Why claim I misunderstood Paul? Paul spoke to them as "men of flesh" using milk. Thus natural men, unregenerate men can understand milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.
This supports the idea of preaching the gospel to the lost, rather than making a mockery of it.

The actual biblical doctrine taught in 1 Corinthians 2:14 - 3:3 is that the natural man (unregenerate person) has Limited Spiritual Ability, able to understand and respond to "milk" (the fundamentals of the gospel) but not "meat" or "solid food" the spiritual things learned only with the help of our indwelt Spirit.