Spiritual hearing...or the lack thereof

[Iconoclast]

This thread requires some work on your part.The work is listening to this introduction to a 62 part series dealing with Sacred Space......

Before responding....listen to the complete sermon....do not just skim it.....it is worth the time.....

when you offer a response.....if possible....give the time of the part of the message you agree with...or disagree with...ie, at the 7 minute mark...he said ......

Here is the sermon:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/playpopup.asp?SID=11407161733

It starts off slow...but it is necessary...all the pieces fit together...especially when he opens up Acts 17.......enjoy:wavey:

I have listened several times...and it still triggers new thoughts and verses.....

 

[freeatlast]

I cannot even begin to comprehend a church where that kind of message could be given and the mass of those attending wrap their hearts and minds around it. Perhaps a group of graduating seminarians, but the church?
That being said the organized church today does need to come to know the "Unknown God" of the bible verse the one that it is claiming to worship. I am afraid we have turned to idols of our own making.

 

[Iconoclast]

I cannot even begin tlo comprehend a church where that kind of message could be given and the mass of those attending wrap their hearts and minds around it. Perhaps a gk roup of graduating seminarians, but the church?
That being said the organized church today does need to come to know the "Unknown God" of the bible verse the one that it is claiming to worship. I am afraid we have turned to idols of our own making.

fal he shows how spiritual death and inability is internal and relational...like man being put put pf the garden...were alienated from the life of a saint.this series goes through the bible and demon.strates whymen miss a saving faith.....until they are born from aBove

 

[webdog]

So before we can discuss this we have to listen to an hour and ten minute sermon?!?

 

[freeatlast]

fal he shows how spiritual death and inability is internal and relational...like man being put put pf the garden...were alienated from the life of a saint.this series goes through the bible and demon.strates whymen miss a saving faith.....until they are born from aBove

I am not suggesting he is wrong in his effort, just was wondering how many really catch his intent as there was very little milk there is any.

 

[Winman]

Well, I listened to all one hour, nine minutes, and fifty-five seconds, but I did not get much out of it. He made a few good points, especially about symbols in the scriptures such as the streets made of gold, crystal, jewels, etc...

At times he seemed to get rather mystical, reminded me much of Hinduism.

A definition of Hinduism, given by the first Vice President of India, who was also a prominent theologian, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, states that Hinduism is not "just a faith", but in itself is related to the union of reason and intuition. Radhakrishnan explicitly states that Hinduism cannot be defined, but is only to be experienced.[62]

This pastor used similar language, he frequently spoke of "experience".He said that true knowledge is more than information, similar to the statement above.

I noted a lack of scripture in this sermon, but much speculation.

I would not listen to this sermon again, and I certainly would not listen to 60 more sermons like this. It was far too wordy for me, I like someone who gets right to the point. But that is me.

 

[Iconoclast]

So before we can discuss this we have to listen to an hour and ten minute sermon?!?

At two places in this sermon...he addresses Acts 17......you use Acts 17 more than anyone here on Bb.....I thought you might provide some good feedback...
i know you are busy with the growing family and all....but I think you will like some of what he is setting out.
if need be.....download it.....and work through it slowly....i have listened to it several times....and have to pause to make sure i am getting most of what is being offered....as well as question some of what he says....
I do think it is worth the effort....it helps me get a better handle on cults, new age religions ,and all works based faiths.


Winman......this is an introduction and over-view.....that is why only a few verses are offered......but what is being set up ...allows a person to look into the history of redemption....and see for themselves the truth of this teaching.

Along the line of 2 kings 6 that he speaks about.....but he goes through the main portions of scripture in the series...

 

[Alive in Christ]

So before we can discuss this we have to listen to an hour and ten minute sermon?!?

Aint gonna happen with me, since I am about 99% sure its advocating the errors of calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

Aint gonna happen with me, since I am about 99% sure its advocating the errors of calvinism.

Thats ok AIC.....doubt you would offer any imput anyhow...you say or claim you are "all about scripture"....but that comes as a surprise to us who have seen your posts:wavey: You must be saving it for another occasion????

AIC.....try this instead...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDIYmwa6vnQ&feature=related

 

[Alive in Christ]

Greetings brother Iconoclast :wavey:

You posted...

Thats ok AIC.....doubt you would offer any imput anyhow...you say or claim you are "all about scripture"....

Yes, thats exactly correct, I am a "scripture" guy.

Thank you for noticing.

....but that comes as a surprise to us who have seen your posts:wavey:

I am certain that it does.

You must be saving it for another occasion????

No, I have been a "scripture guy" since March of 1982 when I was born of the Spirit.

It was the scriptures, and only the scriptures, that lead me out of the convoluted mess known as calvinsm

Thank you for your input and concern.

 

[Iconoclast]

I cannot even begin to comprehend a church where that kind of message could be given and the mass of those attending wrap their hearts and minds around it. Perhaps a group of graduating seminarians, but the church?
That being said the organized church today does need to come to know the "Unknown God" of the bible verse the one that it is claiming to worship. I am afraid we have turned to idols of our own making.

In a bible believing church these themes can be explored to great profit. It will lead to a more biblically educated evangelism,and discipleship.
What is sad is when you see people who have been in church 30 yrs....and they are still not past the abc's of the word.They have nothing to offer new converts, because they have not made progress themselves:thumbs:

 

[freeatlast]

In a bible believing church these themes can be explored to great profit. It will lead to a more biblically educated evangelism,and discipleship.
What is sad is when you see people who have been in church 30 yrs....and they are still not past the abc's of the word.They have nothing to offer new converts, because they have not made progress themselves:thumbs:

Yes I agree.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well, I listened to all one hour, nine minutes, and fifty-five seconds, but I did not get much out of it. He made a few good points, especially about symbols in the scriptures such as the streets made of gold, crystal, jewels, etc...

At times he seemed to get rather mystical, reminded me much of Hinduism.



This pastor used similar language, he frequently spoke of "experience".He said that true knowledge is more than information, similar to the statement above.

I noted a lack of scripture in this sermon, but much speculation.

I would not listen to this sermon again, and I certainly would not listen to 60 more sermons like this. It was far too wordy for me, I like someone who gets right to the point. But that is me.

Winman.....what did you think of his understanding of Acts 17...dealing with the idolatry of the pagans?

What did you think of the example from 2 kings 6.....Elisha's prayer
2 Kings 6:17
And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

This sermon is based upon these Scriptures apparently:

2 Opinions 3: 16-22 It is based almost wholly upon:
mins. 12-19 His personal philosophy of epistemology and ontology

He briefly mentions Elisha's servant and conveys something about man's natural state of Spiritual blindness....Yes....Its called the Noetic effects of sin, no Orthodox Theological System would dispute his points about Spiritual blindness. an OT realizes this as well as this preacher does. Who doesn't? They are obvious to any sincere student of the Scriptures and not unique to the Calvinist tradition.

He makes two very true, indisputable and somewhat Elementary points here:

min. 25 his points:
1.)Man has an innate understanding of Spiritual reality
2.) Man has an innate sense of estrangement
(my paraphrase)

min. 29 Just as a side note: Athens was not the "Capitol" of anything until 1834

min. 30 He finally cracks open a Bible:

He utilizes Acts ch. 17 and faithfully exegetes and illustrates his two aforementioned points he made in min. 25. He states nothing debatable or unique to Calvinism, Arminianism or anything else: It is 2 perfectly simple and indisputable points he has made. So far so good.

min. 44 simple epistemological philosophizing...."all true knowledge is experiential" derived from his philosophizing in mins. 12-19. Many philosophers agree, many disagree...but this is merely his philosophy, not a Biblically based Theological truth. This entire sermon is based largely on the 7 mins. of his philosophical conjecture contained in mins 12-19

min. 53:52 He has spent several minutes stating that all physical descriptions of heaven are mere imagery...and then suggests that at min 53...heaven is not a real "place" I believe he is mistaken....and yes, the streets are made of gold, and each of the twelve gates are made of a single pearl. He utilizes an extremely stupid statement by cosmonauts about how they could not see God in present age "space-time" to re-inforce his ideas.....What the cosmonauts do not realize is that present manifestation of "space-time" may or may not be the only existing reality of space there is....Isaac Newton posed a separate and very real space and time wherein God dwells and is absolute in order to explain the "relative" space-time we now inhabit...He may or may not be mistaken as no one has (as of yet) disproved Newton's contentions. A decent philosopher....such as WLC might be able to shed some light on your neo-phyte philosopher's incomplete understanding of ontological reality.

1hr. 4mins: He states: "It [Heaven] is not a place per se" His general thrust of heaven's manifest truth may be accurate; but he denies the actual spacial reality of an actual "place" a "city" because he believes philosophically this is impossible; but it is not necessary to do so: Heaven can indeed by a very real "place" and at the same time satisfy the conditions that he sets for it: They are not mutually exclusive: His philosophy has encouraged him to believe that Heaven is in no sense spatial....even if he is correct, he has heretofore shown us no Scriptures to back up his claim that Heaven is not physical as well...this appears to merely be his philosophy denying John's statements that the Holy City has streets of Gold. The Apostle gave us many specifics about This city...details which serve no purpose in the sense of being mere imagery. This guy is super-imposing his philosophy of space-time reality upon the Scriptures. His mention of the Scriptures about heaven has thus far been to deny that John did indeed see what John claimed in the actual Bible that he did see.

1 hr. 4 mins: My mind is not yet reeling as he (rather pompously) suggests: And in answer to his question about how much time we have spent contemplating these things: A lot of time.....He might benefit from the work of some decent Philosophers and Theologians who have spent their lifetimes studying these topics: even specializing in them: "God, Time and Eternity" by WLC might be helpful to him. It may at least help him abandon the notion that Heaven cannot reasonably be thought of as an actual place. Which is what he seems to think.

On the whole: He did not "Preach the Word" He introduced us to his philosophical understandings and cracked open the Bible in order to demonstrate what he thought: He did not derive his ideas from Scripture as much as He gave us His personal point of view and put the Scriptures into it. He faithfully exegeted the Scriptures when he used them...but he did not derive his points from them. Generally, I tend to prefer a more Biblical sermon, rather than fallen man's understanding.

 

[webdog]

Thank you for that summary...you saved me an hour of my time :thumbs:

anyone that denies heaven is a real place is someone I will avoid like the plague.

Also...IC, I thought you were against philosophy?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Thank you for that summary...you saved me an hour of my time :thumbs:

anyone that denies heaven is a real place is someone I will avoid like the plague.

Also...IC, I thought you were against philosophy?

You are welcome: I took one for the team, and I was bored anyway:thumbs:

It was worth the time spent: As long as you are looking for an interesting conjecture....about philosophy and Theology from a largely non-Biblical perspective. He is a smart guy with interesting insights, but if you are looking for a Biblical sermon from a man of God to the people of God...You are wasting your time as this was not based upon Scripture. And yes, he is basically a heretic on the reality of heaven.

 

[Iconoclast]

This sermon is based upon these Scriptures apparently:

2 Opinions 3: 16-22 It is based almost wholly upon:
mins. 12-19 His personal philosophy of epistemology and ontology

He briefly mentions Elisha's servant and conveys something about man's natural state of Spiritual blindness....Yes....Its called the Noetic effects of sin, no Orthodox Theological System would dispute his points about Spiritual blindness. an OT realizes this as well as this preacher does. Who doesn't? They are obvious to any sincere student of the Scriptures and not unique to the Calvinist tradition.

He makes two very true, indisputable and somewhat Elementary points here:

min. 25 his points:
1.)Man has an innate understanding of Spiritual reality
2.) Man has an innate sense of estrangement
(my paraphrase)



min. 30 He finally cracks open a Bible:

He utilizes Acts ch. 17 and faithfully exegetes and illustrates his two aforementioned points he made in min. 25. He states nothing debatable or unique to Calvinism, Arminianism or anything else: It is 2 perfectly simple and indisputable points he has made. So far so good.

min. 44 simple epistemological philosophizing...."all true knowledge is experiential" derived from his philosophizing in mins. 12-19. Many philosophers agree, many disagree...but this is merely his philosophy, not a Biblically based Theological truth. This entire sermon is based largely on the 7 mins. of his philosophical conjecture contained in mins 12-19

min. 53:52 He has spent several minutes stating that all physical descriptions of heaven are mere imagery...and then suggests that at min 53...heaven is not a real "place" I believe he is mistaken....and yes, the streets are made of gold, and each of the twelve gates are made of a single pearl. He utilizes an extremely stupid statement by cosmonauts about how they could not see God in present age "space-time" to re-inforce his ideas.....What the cosmonauts do not realize is that present manifestation of "space-time" may or may not be the only existing reality of space there is....Isaac Newton posed a separate and very real space and time wherein God dwells and is absolute in order to explain the "relative" space-time we now inhabit...He may or may not be mistaken as no one has (as of yet) disproved Newton's contentions. A decent philosopher....such as WLC might be able to shed some light on your neo-phyte philosopher's incomplete understanding of ontological reality.

1hr. 4mins: He states: "It [Heaven] is not a place per se" His general thrust of heaven's manifest truth may be accurate; but he denies the actual spacial reality of an actual "place" a "city" because he believes philosophically this is impossible; but it is not necessary to do so: Heaven can indeed by a very real "place" and at the same time satisfy the conditions that he sets for it: They are not mutually exclusive: His philosophy has encouraged him to believe that Heaven is in no sense spatial....even if he is correct, he has heretofore shown us no Scriptures to back up his claim that Heaven is not physical as well...this appears to merely be his philosophy denying John's statements that the Holy City has streets of Gold. The Apostle gave us many specifics about This city...details which serve no purpose in the sense of being mere imagery. This guy is super-imposing his philosophy of space-time reality upon the Scriptures. His mention of the Scriptures about heaven has thus far been to deny that John did indeed see what John claimed in the actual Bible that he did see.

1 hr. 4 mins: My mind is not yet reeling as he (rather pompously) suggests: And in answer to his question about how much time we have spent contemplating these things: A lot of time.....He might benefit from the work of some decent Philosophers and Theologians who have spent their lifetimes studying these topics: even specializing in them: "God, Time and Eternity" by WLC might be helpful to him. It may at least help him abandon the notion that Heaven cannot reasonably be thought of as an actual place. Which is what he seems to think.

On the whole: He did not "Preach the Word" He introduced us to his philosophical understandings and cracked open the Bible in order to demonstrate what he thought: He did not derive his ideas from Scripture as much as He gave us His personal point of view and put the Scriptures into it. He faithfully exegeted the Scriptures when he used them...but he did not derive his points from them. Generally, I tend to prefer a more Biblical sermon, rather than fallen man's understanding.

Hos,
I give you credit for listening:thumbs:

I did not like his description of heaven ....although he does believe in heaven.
He just believes it is much more than we picture....he said it is beyond what we picture...it is a different realm beyond what we perceive is what he said.

This as an introduction to a series was not meant to be a verse by verse description.

I believe his teaching on why since the fall men cannot perceive God is on the money.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Hos,
I give you credit for listening:thumbs:

I did not like his description of heaven ....although he does believe in heaven.
He just believes it is much more than we picture....he said it is beyond what we picture...it is a different realm beyond what we perceive is what he said.

And I am with you!! HE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!! In the sense that he understands that Heaven is decidedly much more than what we picture as merely a "physical" place, with our mansions and gold and what-not....He GETS!! and rightly so, that Heaven is infinitely more and greater than that. But to feel the need to DENY those things, and to deny the reality of those things is rather sad: Alternatively, I think he "strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel" If this is your Pastor, I would encourage you to mention this to him, because I sincerely like the fact that he has a deeper and indeed more Scriptural understanding of the (signifigance I will call it) of what Heaven is.....but he denied its physical reality to get there...He is VERY smart, surely, you can challenge him to rethink this? In that he is decidedly outside of Orthodoxy on this point. To many, this is a "fellowship-ending" type of error.

This as an introduction to a series was not meant to be a verse by verse description.

Yes, and I know I was very harsh about his use of Scripture, and I do understand the necessity of some preliminary basic premesis to "set the stage" as it were for his topic....but I am (personally) married in a way to a Homiletical idea I once heard from a Theologian from N.O. Baptist Seminary (Gary Shadix) who: (IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS) impressed upon us that: Preachers should NEVER have a point, and then subsequently use Scripture to prove our point, but rather, we must first pose a Scripture, and THEN base our point upon it.....He co-authored a very powerful book entitled "Power in the Pulpit" He may have been the most engaging teacher of Homiletics there is!!:thumbs: His teaching was so powerful, and engaging, that we refused to allow him to take his lunch breaks, (and incidentally ours) and forced him to continue teaching us way past the alloted time of the class! This was at a S.B.C. Ridgecrest conference...Since then, I am radically changed in my view of proper preaching...and, yes, somewhat critical of those who do not meet the Standard he set for us...

I believe his teaching on why since the fall men cannot perceive God is on the money.

I agree. He is informative and very engaging on this...the way he utilized Acts 17 in his sermon is very good...I look at Acts 17 in a deeper way now...

The beauty of Scripture is that we could read or even learn or preach the same passages over and over and over, and yet, faithfully used, the treasure of Scripture is limitless, and the same passage can (rightfully) and without misuse, teach us more and more...I very much like his exegesis of Acts 17 here.

 

[Iconoclast]

Hos,
I give you credit for listening:thumbs:



And I am with you!! HE IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!! In the sense that he understands that Heaven is decidedly much more than what we picture as merely a "physical" place, with our mansions and gold and what-not....He GETS!! and rightly so, that Heaven is infinitely more and greater than that. But to feel the need to DENY those things, and to deny the reality of those things is rather sad: Alternatively, I think he "strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel" If this is your Pastor, I would encourage you to mention this to him, because I sincerely like the fact that he has a deeper and indeed more Scriptural understanding of the (signifigance I will call it) of what Heaven is.....but he denied its physical reality to get there...He is VERY smart, surely, you can challenge him to rethink this? In that he is decidedly outside of Orthodoxy on this point. To many, this is a "fellowship-ending" type of error.



Yes, and I know I was very harsh about his use of Scripture, and I do understand the necessity of some preliminary basic premesis to "set the stage" as it were for his topic....but I am (personally) married in a way to a Homiletical idea I once heard from a Theologian from N.O. Baptist Seminary (Gary Shadix) who: (IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS) impressed upon us that: Preachers should NEVER have a point, and then subsequently use Scripture to prove our point, but rather, we must first pose a Scripture, and THEN base our point upon it.....He co-authored a very powerful book entitled "Power in the Pulpit" He may have been the most engaging teacher of Homiletics there is!!:thumbs: His teaching was so powerful, and engaging, that we refused to allow him to take his lunch breaks, (and incidentally ours) and forced him to continue teaching us way past the alloted time of the class! This was at a S.B.C. Ridgecrest conference...Since then, I am radically changed in my view of proper preaching...and, yes, somewhat critical of those who do not meet the Standard he set for us...



I agree. He is informative and very engaging on this...the way he utilized Acts 17 in his sermon is very good...I look at Acts 17 in a deeper way now...

The beauty of Scripture is that we could read or even learn or preach the same passages over and over and over, and yet, faithfully used, the treasure of Scripture is limitless, and the same passage can (rightfully) and without misuse, teach us more and more...I very much like his exegesis of Acts 17 here.

Hos,
This is not my Pastor...I heard him in God's providence on sermonaudio....I personally like expositional preaching..

Pastor Culver is gifted ...so it seems.....but I am leary as I said of where he drifts off to. So..when he goes somewhere I do not necessarily follow.

It was work to listen to this type of teaching...sd I supply my own verses when he suggests the ideas....philosophically....for example...I think he was thinking of psalm 115 during the middle portions....Thats what the Spirit brought to my mind..our God is in heaven...He has done what he pleased.

Let me phone him again,and see if he picks up.....no..answering machine again...lol...he is going to think I am a stalker:laugh:


Hos...he can defend himself...I am just looking for any pastor or teacher to "expand my understanding of Jesus person and work. Some of his "thoughts" were solid...some are going to be left behind.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I am just looking for any pastor or teacher to "expand my understanding of Jesus person and work. Some of his "thoughts" were solid...some are going to be left behind.

In reference to the discussion in the other thread....what enables you to do this with a Calvinist but not a non-Cal? Why the freedom to err on something so Orthodox as the heaven issue....but not this? Some might consider that a more blatant error. So you can "eat the meat and spit out the bones" with this guy merely because he is a determinist??