Scholars vs. Laity part 2

[Earth Wind and Fire]

He may have "knowledge" but that is where it ends with him.

He's about the most arrogant person I've never met.

The funny thing is, he thinks he doesn't have to listen to anyone. Everyone on this board can see his arrogance and many have warned him. I'd just leave him alone. This kid has got to learn to listen. He's not ready to minister.

I disagree in your interpretation of the guy. I see a very well read & disciplined individual with the will to win. I just dont understand his desire to be in the ministry. Qualities like that are tailor made for someone in business or even on Wall Street. Speaking of which, come to NYC & I will show you some folks who are truly arrogant. Oh Lord arrogant +++ and proud of it. Most are contained on Wall, Pine & Maiden Lane in the lower quadrant.

 

[Don]

Which seminary class prepared me to deal with someone hurting his wife? How about Family Ministry, Applied Biblical Counseling, Theology of Marriage and Family, and "Family Ministry Practicum" for starters. My seminary degree offered me multiple opportunities to study family ministry from a biblical (instead of psychological) perspective. Indeed, since my days in seminary, my wife and I have been instrumental in doing some very difficult family and marriage ministries, one being pre-marital counseling and another being the founders of a marriage intervention team.

Appreciate the answer. How come neither Luke nor Havensdad could give that answer?

 

[Don]

A seminary student, though, if poor enough about his studies, may end up sending a soul to hell.

This needs to be rethought and restated or not.

In the context of this thread, my intention was to convey that a poor seminary student conveys poor teaching, and thus leads souls down a wrong path. "Sends" was not a correct choice of words.

 

[glfredrick]

Appreciate the answer. How come neither Luke nor Havensdad could give that answer?

I don't know...

Perhaps it is time for a thread where we explore each other's educational credentials. But, only if we can do that in a manner where we don't cut down people. We have no right to do that, no matter the circumstances of one's educational status.

 

[webdog]

I accept your apology. And I appreciate it.

But I've got news for you.
Blah, blah, blah, blah...

It has become quite evident that you are only a cyber bully looking to cause fights. Your actions are VERY un-Christ like. You cannot even accept an apology without your finger wagging and brow bashing. The fact you qualified your statement with "but" shows you never did.

At this point, I do have serious questions about you being fit for the ministry...honestly. No amount of seminary knowledge can trump your attitude, and I pray you seriously repent.

I find it quite telling you will not tell me whether or not you agree with Edwards' view on Governmental Theory atonement. Are you afraid you might admit his view is ...*gasp*...unorthodox? You can't do that, though...you have to win at all costs, right?

I'm not concerned with what people say about me to you through PM. If highly educated people feel they need to gossip about others, they don't answer to me about that. I also find it rich that someone would say anything about my intellect when I posted something so intellectually foolish from a "doctor" done via email and PM.

In my 5 years I've only had to block one person on the BB. It is looking like this needs to be done again.

 

[quantumfaith]

I did not start this thread because I have a problem with being educated. I respect all the hard work people have done to benefit their service of the Lord. Although it should not be a matter of pride.

But all the degrees in the world do not give a person the right to claim that their doctrine is correct and others are wrong simply because they have a "degree". That was the statement that caused me to start this thread.

It was stated that the majority of Calvinists were professors and Seminary grads and that is the reason they discovered Calvinism to be the correct doctrine. Basically, the reason the rest of "us" aren't Calvinists is because we don't have the training to understand the scriptures.

Although this began as a debate about Calvinism, that is not what this thread is about.

This arrogance could also be applied to other doctrines such as Eschatology, baptism, the atonement, speaking in tongues, and on and on and on.

If a professor or other formally educated person says that his view of baptism is the correct view because he is more educated than the laity, that is arrogant and prideful.

That is the purpose of this thread. It is not to disrespect those who have studied hard to achieve a degree.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Guy, now your overqualified & nobody can afford you! LOL ...just pulling your worm....LOL

 

[glfredrick]

Guy, now your overqualified & nobody can afford you! LOL ...just pulling your worm....LOL

I am reasonably affordable. The first decent church that sends me an offer may find out just how... :thumbs:

 

[preacher4truth]

It has become quite evident that you are only a cyber bully looking to cause fights. Your actions are VERY un-Christ like. You cannot even accept an apology without your finger wagging and brow bashing.

At this point, I do have serious questions about you being fit for the ministry...honestly. No amount of seminary knowledge can trump your attitude, and I pray you seriously repent.

I find it quite telling you will not tell me whether or not you agree with Edwards' view on Governmental Theory atonement. Are you afraid you might admit his view is ...*gasp*...unorthodox? You can't do that, though...you have to win at all costs, right?

I'm not concerned with what people say about me to you through PM. If highly educated people feel they need to gossip about others, they don't answer to me about that. I also find it rich that someone would say anything about my intellect when I posted something so intellectually foolish from a "doctor" done via email and PM.

In my 5 years I've only had to block one person on the BB. It is looking like this needs to be done again.

I concur with your statement. Seriously, this is a shame, and his attitude and demeanor are not becoming to ministry, let alone to someone in laity.

That this is the attitude so prevalent in the church is heart breaking.

 

[kyredneck]

That is impossible...

We don't and can't send anyone to hell. Jesus told us how this works in John 3:16-20 or so...

I for one know it's impossible, but evidently Don doesn't.

I didn't have anything to do with my own eternal destiny, let alone anyone else's.

 

[webdog]

I for one know it's impossible, but evidently Don doesn't.

I didn't have anything to do with my own eternal destiny, let alone anyone else's.

Don already addressed what he meant a few posts up (#43). Do you disagree?

 

[Dr. Bob]

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.

Just a note - threads that pass 10pages are (or should be) immediately locked. Too long for people to read all the posts and respond intelligently.

If still have questions/comments not dealt with, go for a new thread. No issue.

Most, like this topic, are worth about 1 page. Two different views and then just those for/against waxing prolific; nothing new.

 

[kyredneck]

Don already addressed what he meant a few posts up (#43). Do you disagree?

IMO, Don neither confirmed or denied.

 

[kyredneck]

....Most, like this topic, are worth about 1 page. Two different views and then just those for/against waxing prolific; nothing new.

.....killjoy....

 

[menageriekeeper]

:
Originally Posted by menageriekeeper

Originally Posted by Don
A seminary student, though, if poor enough about his studies, may end up sending a soul to hell.

This needs to be rethought and restated or not.

In the context of this thread, my intention was to convey that a poor seminary student conveys poor teaching, and thus leads souls down a wrong path. "Sends" was not a correct choice of words.

Thank you Don. You inadvertantly hit upon one of my pet peeves.

 

[quantumfaith]

Just a note - threads that pass 10pages are (or should be) immediately locked. Too long for people to read all the posts and respond intelligently.

If still have questions/comments not dealt with, go for a new thread. No issue.

Most, like this topic, are worth about 1 page. Two different views and then just those for/against waxing prolific; nothing new.

Sort of has an "ecclesiatical" ring to it.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Sort of has an "ecclesiatical" ring to it.

You are welcome to KISS my ecclesiastical ring, if you'd like.:thumbs:

(Fewer years in purgatory . . . )

 

[Winman]

But all the degrees in the world do not give a person the right to claim that their doctrine is correct and others are wrong simply because they have a "degree". That was the statement that caused me to start this thread.

It was stated that the majority of Calvinists were professors and Seminary grads and that is the reason they discovered Calvinism to be the correct doctrine. Basically, the reason the rest of "us" aren't Calvinists is because we don't have the training to understand the scriptures.

Exactly. On another thread I posted an article from R. C. Sproul about regeneration preceding faith. R.C. Sproul was a born again Christian who had never heard this doctrine until it was introduced to him by a professor at seminary. In his own words he called it a "strange-sounding teaching", but was convinced by the professor that it was true. And why was he convinced? Primarily because he was taught many notable Christians such as Jonathan Edwards held this view, not because it was shown in scripture. Fact is, it is not shown in scripture and no layman would ever come to this belief from simply studying the scriptures.

People are impressed by "scholars". That is good when the scholar is teaching truth, it can be very harmful if the scholar is teaching falsehood.

 

[Winman]

I find it quite telling you will not tell me whether or not you agree with Edwards' view on Governmental Theory atonement. Are you afraid you might admit his view is ...*gasp*...unorthodox? You can't do that, though...you have to win at all costs, right?

Webdog, I had never heard of this theory, so I looked it up. Funny, the first thing this article said about Edwards theory is that it was clearly unorthodox.

The Edwardseans, the followers of Jonathan Edwards, who developed the New Divinity or the New England Theology were clearly unorthodox with respect to the atonement. What they held in this regard has been generally called the Governmental Theory of the Atonement. This view denied that our salvation is based on the expiatory suffering of Jesus Christ on the cross. It denied that Christ was our penal substitute and died in our place to atone for our sins and satisfy divine justice on behalf of the elect. Rather it severs the direct covenantal link between our salvation and Christ as our substitute. In its place it postulates that God arbitrarily forgives our sins without reference to the work of Christ satisfying divine justice, and that, to preserve his status as Moral Governor of the Universe he made a public demonstration of his displeasure with sin by punishing it in his own Son, Jesus Christ. Hence it is called the Governmental Theory of the Atonement as it is purports to explain the atonement as an effort to vindicate the moral government of God. How it can pretend to uphold God's moral government by having an innocent person punished without having our sins imputed to him is somewhat inexplicable.

Jonathan Edwards was a great preacher. I live less than 30 miles from his original church and have passed by it. Although he is credited with bringing many to the Lord, he also taught error. We should never allow ourselves to be overly impressed with fame or scholarship.

I used to work with a fellow back in the 80's who was Pentacostal and almost worshipped Jimmy Swaggart. He used to tell me that Baptists like myself were all a bunch of hypocrites that go out drinking Saturday night, and then show up for church on Sunday playing the saint. We used to go round and round.

Well, when Jimmy Swaggart fell into sin this fellow was absolutely devastated. He became very depressed and stayed out of work for awhile. He dropped out of his church and fell into bad ways. He had wrapped himself all up in this man. He was crushed to believe he could be misled and deceived by someone he trusted.

Scholars are men just like anyone else, they are not immune to error. We should always examine any person's doctrine or teaching in light of the scriptures. We can't always trust men, but we can always trust God's Word.

 

[Luke2427]

I did not start this thread because I have a problem with being educated. I respect all the hard work people have done to benefit their service of the Lord. Although it should not be a matter of pride.

But all the degrees in the world do not give a person the right to claim that their doctrine is correct and others are wrong simply because they have a "degree". That was the statement that caused me to start this thread.

It was stated that the majority of Calvinists were professors and Seminary grads and that is the reason they discovered Calvinism to be the correct doctrine. Basically, the reason the rest of "us" aren't Calvinists is because we don't have the training to understand the scriptures.

Although this began as a debate about Calvinism, that is not what this thread is about.

This arrogance could also be applied to other doctrines such as Eschatology, baptism, the atonement, speaking in tongues, and on and on and on.

If a professor or other formally educated person says that his view of baptism is the correct view because he is more educated than the laity, that is arrogant and prideful.

That is the purpose of this thread. It is not to disrespect those who have studied hard to achieve a degree.

This is a straw man, though Amy. Haven'sdad, nor me, nor anybody else said that just because one has a degree it makes them right and the layman with whom they are debating wrong.

We have stated this no less than a dozen times. I don't know why you keep misrepresenting what we say. Are you trying to makes villains of us here? Because if you could convince me that someone said that on here it would cause me to think less of that person. So is that what you are trying to do? Make folks think less of us?

If not, why do you keep misrepresenting us.

We have said clearly, numerous times, that a degree TENDS to give one a leg up on the average layman concerning biblical knowledge.

Havensdad never said that because a majority of seminarians are Calvinistic that that means that Calvinists are right and Arminians are wrong. He said that it is "telling".

So is blood on the hands of a person at a murder scene. It is telling evidence but it is not conclusive by itself. That is all that you can rightly deduce from Havensdad or my statements. That's it.

Please retire this straw man who said that having a degree makes one right and the one that says that NO layman can ever be as knowledgeable about the Bible as any seminarian.