The Great IMBALANCE on this board

[evangelist6589]

This great imbalance is that MOST lack GRACE. I am including myself as I also lack grace at times. Its very sad that so many these days are so obsessed with Truth they lack any Grace. Jesus was a very graceful person, but also one that stood for Truth. Calvinism I believe to be the most Biblical, however sadly many that subscribe to it lack grace but are too much into truth. Have people not read Ephesians 2:8-10? Is it not Grace that saves us? Perhaps Lordship Salvation and yes The Way of the Master focuses too much on our performance and not enough on God's Grace so that it misses the entire picture. Jerry Bridges and his books were heavily emphasized when I was at Bob Jones University, and I do not believe him to be a friend of Lordship Salvation. God should by logic allow every single poster on this board to be struck dead and to burn in hell. But He has not because he is very very graceful and has called forth his elect to salvation which may be MOST on this board.

So as God has shown you Mercy and Grace, show it to others.

 

[plain_n_simple]

Awesome truth this young man spoke. Love is the greatest command. Love cannot be learned or given from a strict adherence to a tweaked doctrine. Love never thinks evil, so let's not say this one or that one is a heretic bound for hell. Love always thinks the best, so when we disagree and neither gives way, give way.

 

[evangelist6589]

1 Cor 13 is a great passage on love. Know when it comes to fighting for the essentials of the faith we need to be militant. But secondary issues are just not worth it. I disagree and think Arminian are wrong, but many of them have showed me more love than truth militant Calvinist so there needs balance...

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Awesome truth this young man spoke. Love is the greatest command. Love cannot be learned or given from a strict adherence to a tweaked doctrine. Love never thinks evil, so let's not say this one or that one is a heretic bound for hell. Love always thinks the best, so when we disagree and neither gives way, give way.

What do you mean by "Give Way?" ..... do you mean give way in our beliefs? Would you expect me to give way to a Pelegian, to a Catholic, to a Jehovah Witless, to a Mormon? Then absolutely not.

 

[plain_n_simple]

When the debate goes back and forth with neither side convincing the other it gets nasty. Give way to your opponent and agree the debate will not be resolved. Walk away as gentlemen.

 

[evangelist6589]

When the debate goes back and forth with neither side convincing the other it gets nasty. Give way to your opponent and agree the debate will not be resolved. Walk away as gentlemen.

There are some debates where I have done this. On another board I walked away from a debate on dispensationalism. On FB I walked away from a debate on women street preachers (not pastors) as the bible is clear on that issue. And on this board it's perhaps wise to walk away from debates with WinMan, Quantum Faith, and Mitchell.

Andy Stanley is bad news but as I believe is a believer. WinMan has much bad theology but as I recall holds to the essentials.

If Rev Brother Paul Washer was all my influence I would be militant with these posters, but is not all my influence.

 

[OnlyaSinner]

What do you mean by "Give Way?" ..... do you mean give way in our beliefs? Would you expect me to give way to a Pelegian, to a Catholic, to a Jehovah Witless, to a Mormon? Then absolutely not.

Not sure who this quote is attributed to (Augustine?) and I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think it a useful thought (and I believe it uses "charity" in the I Cor. 13 sense):

In the essentials, purity.
In the non-essentials, liberty.
In all things, charity.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Not sure who this quote is attributed to (Augustine?) ...

Nope. It is Rupertus Meldenius, an unknown among churchmen but the author of a powerful tract (yes, they had them back then) written in 1627. He was, according to researchers at Georgetown University, " ... an orthodox Lutheran, who was far from the idea of ecclesiastical union, but anxious for the peace of the church and zealous for practical scriptural piety in place of the dry and barren scholasticism of his time."

... and I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think it a useful thought ... "

The actual phrasing, according to Georgetown, in transliterated Latin, is "In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis (or, dubiis) libertas, in utrisque (or, omnibus) caritas."/I]. I believe you are right, in stating that caritas is used in the KJV practice of rendering the word "charity" in place of the actual word, which is "love."

 

[DHK]

Not sure who this quote is attributed to (Augustine?) and I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think it a useful thought (and I believe it uses "charity" in the I Cor. 13 sense):

In the essentials, purity.
In the non-essentials, liberty.
In all things, charity.

The key is attitude, and as some have pointed out, "love."
All too often in a simple disagreement such as dispensationalism vs. covenant, dispensationalism was recently called heresy. Darby was labeled a heretic. So was Scofield. Is this accurate? Is it loving? Is it right to consider those who believe in dispensationalism, as believing in false and unbiblical doctrine? These are wrong attitudes. They are unloving.

How would you approach someone who posts and believes this:

On some occasions we also point out many of the wrong teachings of the churches, both Protestant and Catholic. These wrong teachings include immortal souls, heaven or hell at death, the Trinity and wrong views on the atonement, for example substitution. All of these are contrasted with the true Bible teaching man is mortal, he returns to the dust at death and then awaits the resurrection at Christ’s return, One God the Father and Jesus is the Son of God, and a representative view of the Atonement.

Shoot him down as a heretic immediately!? Castigate him? Call him names?

The Bible says:
2 Timothy 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

Gentleness, patience, meekness, are not the qualities that are displayed here very often. And if they are not shown to this individual he will never give up his false doctrine.

 

[plain_n_simple]

lol, I'll start with apologizing to DHK for calling him a snake a few months ago.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Not sure who this quote is attributed to (Augustine?) and I probably don't have it exactly right, but I think it a useful thought (and I believe it uses "charity" in the I Cor. 13 sense):

In the essentials, purity.
In the non-essentials, liberty.
In all things, charity.

Oh seriously...then what are you going to debate?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

lol, I'll start with apologizing to DHK for calling him a snake a few months ago.

He probably thought you were complimenting him:tonofbricks:

 

[DHK]

Oh seriously...then what are you going to debate?

Debate doesn't have to be nasty. It can be instructional instead.
Can you "teach" your opinion instead of YELLING it forth with all nastiness and name-calling included?

 

[DHK]

He probably thought you were complimenting him:tonofbricks:

Maybe. "Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves."

 

[preachinjesus]

Well, looking at my calendar, I guess it is time to get the semi-annual "we need to be nicer to others" post.

Folks, it's a debate forum. In big capital letters it says DEBATE.

That means we will have different views. It means we will disagree. Some people will not have their points of view validated. Others will get their feelings hurt.

That's what happens in healthy debate.

Now, we don't need to be yelling at each other, name calling, and using ad hominems. But if you can't handle having ignorance called on the carpet, or having your point of view confronted, don't post here. Maybe you'd be better suited going and posting here.

We can remain civil and honorable, but I know I'm not tolerating fools or error laden posts. Besides, this is an online forum...it doesn't matter. It's all electrons that get aligned and spell out words. That somebody will delete from an old server in 20 years. It's just an online forum. It's not real life.

Get into a church, get busy, serve others, enjoy God's blessings, and speak His Gospel...that is the point of it all.

 

[DHK]

Well, looking at my calendar, I guess it is time to get the semi-annual "we need to be nicer to others" post.

Folks, it's a debate forum. In big capital letters it says DEBATE.

That is true enough. And sometimes they get emotional--too emotional.
As I posted earlier. This is an actual post, and it is recent:

On some occasions we also point out many of the wrong teachings of the churches, both Protestant and Catholic. These wrong teachings include immortal souls, heaven or hell at death, the Trinity and wrong views on the atonement, for example substitution. All of these are contrasted with the true Bible teaching man is mortal, he returns to the dust at death and then awaits the resurrection at Christ’s return, One God the Father and Jesus is the Son of God, and a representative view of the Atonement.

How would you respond to it?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Maybe. "Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves."

Snakes eat rats...and rats carry diseases. Thus, snakes are good.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[OnlyaSinner]

Nope. It is Rupertus Meldenius, an unknown among churchmen but the author of a powerful tract (yes, they had them back then) written in 1627. He was, according to researchers at Georgetown University, " ... an orthodox Lutheran, who was far from the idea of ecclesiastical union, but anxious for the peace of the church and zealous for practical scriptural piety in place of the dry and barren scholasticism of his time."The actual phrasing, according to Georgetown, in transliterated Latin, is "In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis (or, dubiis) libertas, in utrisque (or, omnibus) caritas."/I]. I believe you are right, in stating that caritas is used in the KJV practice of rendering the word "charity" in place of the actual word, which is "love."

Many thanks. I much prefer being able to correctly attribute any quotation I use.

The word "love" or "charity" in I Cor 13 is agape, "selfless love" (or "Christlike love"), but I'm confident you already know that.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Well, looking at my calendar, I guess it is time to get the semi-annual "we need to be nicer to others" post.

Folks, it's a debate forum. In big capital letters it says DEBATE.

PiJ, do you understand what a "debate" is? Not a knock-down, drag-out free-for-all, by any means. It isn't even a discussion of viewpoints that is necessarily aimed at changing anyone's mind. It is reasoned, civil discussion of an issue highlighted by the presentation of valid, supportable arguments for and against a particular issue.

That means we will have different views. It means we will disagree. Some people will not have their points of view validated. Others will get their feelings hurt.

No one will get their feelings hurt if no one attempts to hurt others' feelings, or, if they approach the debate as an intellectual discussion with no personal axes to grind.

That's what happens in healthy debate.

No, what happens in a healthy debate is rational, courteous, respectful, informative discussion in which both parties come away better informed and more prepared to take action when the need arises.

What that means, essentially, is that there has never, ever been a "debate" on this or any other Internet forum. :laugh:

 

[preachinjesus]

PiJ, do you understand what a "debate" is?

Pretty sure I've got my arms around that one. Thanks for checking.

Not a knock-down, drag-out free-for-all, by any means. It isn't even a discussion of viewpoints that is necessarily aimed at changing anyone's mind. It is reasoned, civil discussion of an issue highlighted by the presentation of valid, supportable arguments for and against a particular issue.No one will get their feelings hurt if no one attempts to hurt others' feelings, or, if they approach the debate as an intellectual discussion with no personal axes to grind.No, what happens in a healthy debate is rational, courteous, respectful, informative discussion in which both parties come away better informed and more prepared to take action when the need arises.

Well part of the peculiarity of debates in an online forum is that they are moved along in light of our anonymity from each other. That means some people can be less loving on purpose.

I addressed the rest of your posts in my above post.

Rigorous conversations often can enflame passions. That's good. We need to keep our respect for each up front. I've been harassed, mocked, labeled, and libeled plenty around here. Doesn't bother me, because this stuff doesn't matter. It's a fun way to interact, blow off steam, and strengthen my resolve and arguments.

That said, I have little tolerance for fools and foolish thinking. I'll be plenty upfront about all of that too. We're adults, we can act like it.

Do be sure to read the rest of my above post.