|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 26, 2008 10:31:02 GMT -5
I finally uploaded my sermon on Total Depravity to YouTube yesterday. This sermon has been up on Google Video for quite some time. I knew it would get tons of views, but didn't know how quickly. A Calvinist Blog posted it and asked for prayers for this "heretic" . I'd ask you to pray for them for they are the ones who are deceived. Notice that the fourth comment on this blogpost was by "dusman." This post has some outright lies in it. Jesse Morrell has his own ministry, Open Air Outreach, and I am NOT an Open Theist. I have studied Open Theism, but can't at this point in time agree with it. I actually know this "dusman" guy. His name is Pastor Dustin Seger. He is a Pastor of a Church in Greensboro, NC. I tried to reply to his comment, in order to correct his lies, but the blog owner hasn't allowed it and I doubt that he will. Sounds like something a Calvinists would do. Pastor Dustin actually told me how great an open air preacher I am, and had John, Jesse and me over for dinner with about 20 people from his Church to greet us. He also told me how encouraging my story of stepping out in faith was to him and how I had motivated him to get out there and preach. He even said that next time I was in the Greensboro area, that we were welcome to stay with people from his Church so that we could preach at UNC-Greensboro for several days straight. He told me all of this to my face and through emails. Then WITHOUT "confronting" me or saying a word to me through email, phone or to my face, he calls me a heretic on a blog. This is typical of Calvinists. Something similar to this happened on the Two Reformed Brothers Calvinist Message Board (the old one that they had). Of course, since I am not a Calvinist, I couldn't get on there to see the accusations being made of me or respond to them. People were purportedly questioning my salvation because of my beliefs. I found about this situation through a brother in Christ, who is also a Calvinist, and was part of that message board. He wanted to email me to see what the truth was. According to my sources this discussion was allowed to continue even though I personally know the owners of the message board. Someone who used to be a really good friend (someone that I considered like a "best friend") basically separate from me over my doctrine. Towards the beginning of the Summer, I hadn't heard from him in a while and thought about calling him one night. It was on a night that I was going to preach at a concert that him and I had preached at together for the last two years. I was there with Jesse Morrell and John McGlone. Well, my "friend" arrived at the concert to preach. Jesse saw him across the street. He walked on the other side of the street without saying a word to me or even looking at me. And, yes, he couldn't have missed us since it was the same preaching spot we had always preached at for the last two years and since we had banners and sandwich boards on. When I emailed him about this, he told me that I was preaching a "works Gospel." When I explained my theology to him, he simply responded back with something like, "We have different hermeneutics, so there is no sense in even discussing it. Have a nice life." He has since seemed to try to act more friendly towards me, but with no explanation of the former. Another "friend" of mine (supposedly anyway) sent out an email towards the end of July about an upcoming evangelistic event that him, I and many others have preached at the last two years. He said that he would be attending it, but that he would have nothing to do with me and who I was with (Jesse Morrell and John McGlone). He listed a bunch of theological terms and doctrines, many of which have nothing to do with me and said that I believe them. This "friend" did not email me, call me or talk to me in person regarding any of this. Thankfully, a couple who I had evangelized with before told me about this "friend's" email and inquired about the issue (hmm...sounds Biblical doesn't it?). I spoke with them and they weren't willing to separate with me over our differences in doctrine. When I got to the event, I shook the hand of this "friend" and preached the Gospel with "my group". Still another "friend" of mine, someone I have known for even longer then the previous two, did some backstabbing as well. I helped him get a website going a while back for the local evangelism team that I was a part of. Eventually, he took over the website responsibilities because I had too much to do myself, etc. He used to have my face on one page as well as a link to several of my websites on four different pages. Well, about two months ago, I went on the website just to check it out. He had removed everything that had anything to do with me or my websites. And these websites were not "theological" in nature either. He had linked to my Gospel Tract Website and my Christian Test Website. I had thought that maybe someone else had become the webmaster or something. So, to give him the benefit of the doubt, I decided to call him to see what was up. He acted like he didn't even know what I was talking about at first. Then he kind of lied about it until he finally admitted to it. But when I asked him why, he wouldn't give me any kind of answer at all. My father-in-law who is even closer to him then I was, called him to talk to him about it. He told him that what him and others had been doing to me was wrong. Well, this "friend" used to call my father-in-law 2-3 times a week. My father-in-law hasn't heard from him since then. You know, I wouldn't have even minded him taking down the links, etc., if he would have just talked to me first to let me know! So, this is the Love of the Calvinist that I have experienced. I'm not saying that every Calvinist out there is like this by any means, but this is what I have experienced first hand from people who are supposed to be "CLOSE FRIENDS" (at least 3 of them anyway). If this is the Love of the Calvinist then God Forbid that I ever become one. If this is how "friends" treat someone, then who needs enemies? I'm just glad that we don't live in a Calvinistic Theocratic state. I might be dead by now! I'm just glad that as old "friends" separate from me, etc., that God gives me new friends. It's HARD to believe, teach and follow the truth. It would be much easier for me to be a Calvinist then be a Biblinian , but I couldn't in good conscience become a Calvinist. I just thought I would share this with those out there who may be going through some of the same situations. Be encouraged, count the cost and keep persevering in the Faith once for all delivered to the saints...
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 26, 2008 11:05:33 GMT -5
Great message on Total Depravity! Such an important issue.
I just read this morning in my Bible that God is the former of all things - Jer. 51:19. Why would God form us with a constitution or nature incapable of obedience? Or even worse, why would God form us with a nature or constitution that was sinful in and of itself? It doesn't make any sense. God formed us with a nature that is capable of obedience or disobedience, with a constitutional conscience that condemns sin.
|
|
|
Post by joemccowan on Aug 26, 2008 11:47:46 GMT -5
I feel your pain Brother, and I appreciate you sharing your story. I truly thank God for you personally!
When I first started talking about Open Theism and many people attacked me personally, here and elsewhere, you never condemned me even though you disagreed with my position. You have faithfully contended for the faith day in and day out and I am a better man for having known you.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 26, 2008 12:09:39 GMT -5
Great post brother I look forward to hearing the teaching again when I have a chance.
I have experienced the same kind of ill treatment from 'friends' of mine who are Calvinists.
I had three close friends from Hawii who have left fellowship with me over these theological issues, and many tens of acquaintances separate themselves without discussing the issues rationally or thoroughly.
The same type of thing happened when I began to share my faith verbally and most, if not all of the 'friends' I had in Christ began to ostracize me and my family for being a witness for Jesus.
Jesus' Word exposes sin and the need for repentance. I have no more time to try and convince any 'Christians' of thier disobedience to the King of kings. I just preach the gospel as purely as I can with the understanding God has given me through His Word and the Holy Ghost.
For those of you on the other side of this fence looking over. I would humbly ask, "What are the ramifications of what you are preaching, if you are wrong?"
|
|
|
Post by Jeffrey Olver on Aug 26, 2008 13:09:58 GMT -5
reminds me of Brit Williams' experience preaching on college campuses (LSU, I think?) and Christians confronting him on needing to be more loving, but when he would speak to them one-on-one, these "Champions of Love" would refuse to even shake his hand.
Many Calvinists cite "obedience" as the reason they follow various biblical mandates like evangelism, prayer, etc. But what about loving your neighbor as you love yourself? What about Jesus' parable of the good Samaratin - why, oh why, would you play the part of the scribe and pharisee if you are citing obedience to God's word?
I thank God i know some people who say they are Calvinists whom are very loving - the very same who are willing to discuss their theology and explore the implications and possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 26, 2008 18:25:46 GMT -5
"And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, there is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or fathers, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, but he shall receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children and lands with persecutions; and in the time to come eternal life." Mk 10:29-30
|
|
djpray
Junior Member
"Filipino" Preacher Man!
Posts: 86
|
Post by djpray on Aug 27, 2008 0:10:28 GMT -5
revK,
I am sorry to hear about the various things that you have experienced. Some of those people are clearly wrong in the way that they have treated you and that is not good. Yet, at the same time, I suggest that the things you have experienced have also been experienced by thousands of Christians of other backgrounds....who were persecuted for their various theological postions. For instance, you could take the statement you wrote and almost make it a "fill in the blank" statement:
If this is the Love of the Calvinist (Arminian, open theist, tongue speaker, non-tongue speaker, Charismatic, cessasationist, Baptist, sprinkler, and the list could go on and on) then God Forbid that I ever become one (_______________ fill in the blank) . If this is how "friends" treat someone, then who needs enemies? I'm just glad that we don't live in a Calvinistic (Arminian, open theist, tongue speaker, etc. etc. etc.) Theocratic state. I might be dead by now!
As you know, Christians throughout the ages have been persecuted by other Christians for holding to or not holding to certain theological positions. It shouldn't be that way, but it obviously is. Ultimately, the real problem is not "Calvinism." It is the sinful or questionable reactions of Christians in response to differing theological views....whatever those views may be whether Calvinism, Arminiaism, Open Theism or any other theological view. I would suggest that all Christians on this board - whatever theological color they may be - should be careful to respond in love and with love to those of a different "color".
Derek
|
|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Aug 27, 2008 0:11:37 GMT -5
Brother Kerrigan,
I would hope this post will not lead to a defense but to hopefully understanding my position in the matter.
It breaks my heart constantly when I think of the entire situation and the rift that has come between many of us but like I said on the phone when we had our conversation, "doctrine divides and as well it should".
I have pondered long and hard on how to approach this. I have heard all sorts of replies from - "Turn them over to Satan"" to "what's the big deal?" and I have always tried to stay above reproach and consistant with my convictions.
Like I always tell anyone... "I love you guys": You, my good friend Brother John, and Brother Jesse (though we have not had the opportunity to meet personally). Anyone who knows me will agree and attest to the fact that I am the first to say that out of any of the OA Preachers in our circles you guys hands down are the ones Paul Kaiser finds the most unity with when it comes to the preaching of the Gospel in the Open Air.
However the fact of the matter is I am afraid (as I would asume most are) that we are so doctrinally divided that there could never be any real unity or fellowship in the Gospel. I am ashamed that I often contemplate if we can call each other "brothers" - that hurts more than you may know.
It is not only Calvinists that feel this way but some dyed in the wool Arminians as well... I don't think we have to name names.
Yes, it's uncomfortable to be confronted with the conclusions many have come to. Yes, it's hard to say Kerrigan I am truly woried about where you are at.
Many may be wrong (myself included) for going about it the way we have, to that we will in no doubt have to give an account.
None the less many of us are pricked in our consciences regarding the situation and more over than being wrong on one end we have compromised many times and went against conscience for the sake of fellowship and unity on the other, to this we will also have to give an account. Bottom line is that anything not done in good conscience is sin - and the realization of that truly hurts.
To go against conscience is neither right nor sound and that is the challenge many of us face.
Like I mentioned in our conversation at one time we all had an agreed upon "cup of orthodoxy" which included both Classical Arminianism and Historical Calvinism. Today you are adding to that cup, so to speak. So for you it is an easy position but for many of us (Calvinist and Arminian alike) it is a difficult position and we seek at the best of our ability to do only what is God honoring.
It's similar to a Presburtarian saying to a Baptist... "I accept your mode of Baptism within our church why is it so difficult for you to accept mine?" They both baptize adults, however Baptist don't baptize babies. Yes, it is on a much grander scale and all analogies break down but I hope it helps illistrate the point I'm trying to make. Again I am not looking for a debate over "who defines orthodoxy?" Rather I am just sharing the other side of the fence, so to speak.
You can't fault anyone from drawing a line in the sand, now how we go about drawing that line is a different story, but as for taking a strong position on ones beliefs is something we all do.
Again, we are not the ones who changed the rules of the game... Forgive me for using such a trivial statement to make a point in such a trying situation for all of us.
You have always agreed to our position being inside the "cup of orthodoxy" - I didn't say agreed with the position, but rather held it under the umbrella of what we consider to be Biblical Christianity.
You are welcome and free to change but it is unreasonable for you to suggest that all will change and welcome as well and it is equally unreasonable that you would expect us to pick up a larger cup due to the fact that your position has changed over the years.
Finally, it breaks the hearts of many that we have come to such a grave impass in our seeking to be obediant to the cause of Christ. I make no excuse for the way things have come about but in that same vein, I do not recant any thing that has been said.
What shall we say other than "doctrine divides, and as well it should"...? Hard as that may seem that is the reality of this entire situation.
Let's face it... If we cannot share a campus together while preaching, if we cannot fellowship in the same local assembly, if we cannot agree to the same confessions.... If I could not teach your family and you could not teach mine....
We cannot have true unity lest it be false and we fool ourselves.
Brother John - You are right in saying that if we are wrong we will give an account but the sword cuts both ways.... If you are wrong you will also give an account and one thing is for sure we both cannot be right....
I can only speak for myself on these matters and I pray that if you get nothing else out of this post you will all see and know the "Love of this Calvinist..."
And to that I say....
Let God be true and every man a liar! May He lead "US" into all truth and righteousness!
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 27, 2008 5:08:32 GMT -5
Thanks for your responses djpray and Brother Paul. djpray, I understand what you are saying. The fact of the matter is that since "Protestantism's" beginning, the only "Protestant" groups that I can remember "persecuting" other "Protestant" groups were Calvinistic in doctrine. I take your point though. Brother Paul, we have discussed all of these things before. The point of my original post wasn't to disagree that doctrine doesn't or shouldn't divide. I understand that totally and agree with it. The point I was making is how my Calvinist "friends" have handled themselves. Regarding Orthodoxy, my position has changed regarding that over the last year or so. I really wouldn't consider Calvinism within "Orthodoxy" at all. As far as my position on Original Sin and Total Depravity is concerned, the sermon articulates what I have basically ALWAYS believed. I couldn't always put it in so concise words, but I have NEVER believed that someone was born a sinner, that someone had to sin or that someone was guilty for the sin of another. It is just after studying the issue a little deeper since the beginning of 2007, that I have seen how important an issue it is. Other views of mine have changed, like the atonement and from eternal security to conditional security. But those two things effect the rest like a domino effect. Anyway, the conduct of the Calvinistic "friends" that I have had in the situations described above have been inexcusable. I don't harbor any ill will or bad feelings towards them. I'm just stating the facts, because I'm SURE that there are more out there going through the same...
|
|
|
Post by William the Sinner on Aug 27, 2008 15:07:01 GMT -5
REVK,
How many parts does this Total Depravity/Inability have? I saw part 8 listed on Youtube. I wish I could spend my days watching video, but I have to work. Is there a way in which these things can be downloaded as a file so I can on my mp3 player (does videos)? Or just the Audio would be great. I have a 2 hour train ride every day. Sorry for whining, but audios + notes or outlines would me best for me. I can then reuse them to suppliment the evangelism class I teach.
Buy the way, how does one get started in open air preaching? Are permits required in some places? I'm trying to listen to sermons on line and glean lessons learned from a wealth of information scattered all over these websites. Is there any step by step guide to all this?
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 27, 2008 16:04:11 GMT -5
REVK, How many parts does this Total Depravity/Inability have? I saw part 8 listed on Youtube. I wish I could spend my days watching video, but I have to work. Is there a way in which these things can be downloaded as a file so I can on my mp3 player (does videos)? Or just the Audio would be great. I have a 2 hour train ride every day. Sorry for whining, but audios + notes or outlines would me best for me. I can then reuse them to suppliment the evangelism class I teach. Buy the way, how does one get started in open air preaching? Are permits required in some places? I'm trying to listen to sermons on line and glean lessons learned from a wealth of information scattered all over these websites. Is there any step by step guide to all this? Hello William, there are 9 parts to this particular sermon since it is around 90 min. total. You can download the audio version of many of my sermons here: pinpointevangelism.com/sermonaudio1.htmTo get to this individual sermon, simply scroll down to the T.U.L.I.P. series about midway. The sermon on Total Depravity is the first one in that series. If you scroll on down to almost the bottom of the page, I highly recommend listening to Winkie Pratney's two sermons on this issue as well. To get started open air preaching, simply go to a public place with heavy foot traffic and start preaching. Make sure that you don't block the sidewalk and make sure you know your rights. Go to www.OpenAirPreaching.com and go to the 1st Amendment Rights page on the left. Hope that helps brother. If you have any more specific questions, please feel free to ask...
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 28, 2008 15:57:54 GMT -5
Brother Paul, You are right of course with this statement that the sword cuts both ways. This is so essential to Christians that we put down our theological traditions and seek the Truth in Christ!
In twelve years as a Christian I started out as a babe and was taught unbiblical doctrines that led me astray. These doctrines of men taught me I am: a sinner not a saint, sin comes from Adam not my own rebellion aganst God's Kingship, we all sin everyday.
These issues are important because multitudes of Jesus' words command righteousness to be done in a followers life. Yet the world and the 'Christian worldlings' will make whatever excuse they can to defend sin.
I will share an experience that I had at BeleChere. We preached all day and at the end of that first day we had a small group of Christians asking us about these very issues of sin. We respond with the scriptures and they respond with emotion and a few scriptures twisted out of context. Finally, as the scene began to heat up. A 'Christian' woman runs over to a group of mockers that has been revolting against God's Word all day and says, "We are all born sinners, we can't help it right?" There was uproarious agreement amongst the heathen, her doctrine was right on in their eyes.
So I ask you brother when the world agrees with your theological doctrines do you think maybe you should examine them? The world hates the preaching we do because it exposes the sin, the righteousness of God and the Judgment to come. They hate us because we are living holy before the Lord and men. We would be hypocrites to preach otherwise. How can a sinner reprove a sinner to confess and forsake sin if the first has not done so? They will just call you a hypocrite, rightly so.
If we can't obey God's commands, why does He give them? If He made us this way, are we to blame for sin or Him? Sure Paul, I have sinned in the past, may in the present or future. But, I resist the devil and He flees from me.
|
|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Aug 28, 2008 21:57:25 GMT -5
Bro John, You should know better than to use such a faulty premise with me..... The world would likewise agree with you in that babies are born innocent without sin. Should you take your own advice? By no means am I an antinomian nor do I adhear to or preach the carnal christian heresy. So because because one "professor" who is inconsistant in her theology makes a mockery of her "gospel" it should not be counted that I should re-evaluate my position because of her lack of understanding. In Christ, Paul
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 28, 2008 23:34:46 GMT -5
Sorry brother your first statement here is just plain false. When you go out brother, ask the lost, 'Are babies born innocent or guilty?' I think if you do that for awhile you will find out that most people believe babies are innocent and yet born sinners at the same time! This false belief is based on what they have been taught by most 'churches' in America, and what they desire to try and justify thier wickedness.
I think you know my position that babies are born morally neutral. They can not do sin, because they are not morally culpable to God. I don't see babies worshipping false gods, murdering, etc. You could stretch it a bit and say see my two year old is stealing and coveting. Well, do they understand what they are doing against God? Is their conscience developed to that point? If not, are they able to obey it? If they can't respond to the commands of God to repent will He hold them accountable for that?
Warm Regards, John
|
|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Aug 29, 2008 9:33:15 GMT -5
We shall put that to the test.....
|
|
|
Post by alyfireman on Aug 29, 2008 14:50:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 30, 2008 9:39:49 GMT -5
I linked to this in my first post. Click on the words Calvinist Blog that are highlighted. The owner of the blog wouldn't even allow me to respond to some of the false charges brought against me. What a coward he is...
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 30, 2008 21:24:27 GMT -5
Well, I looked at the Calvinist's blog, it is no wonder they won't let you respond brother. It is filled with deceptions. I even saw someone that stated they couldn't buy tracts from PinPoint anymore because of this 'heresy' that has been falsely charged. Here is my response to the blog but I doubt that the blog author will have the courage to post that either> Why do Christians speak and write this way? Let's examine some of the items posted here: 1. Kerrigan Skelly and John Mcglone are Pinpoint Evangelism. Jesse Morrell has worked with us, but his ministry is Open Air Outreach. 2. As far as Open Theism goes, I have not come to conclusion about this yet. I would rather not believe it as it has many enemies esp. Calvinists. Kerrigan would agree with me on this I believe but you would have to speak to him. 3. Matt Tilley, he never says that we have been perfect. Rom 3:25 But, that we should be perfect as Jesus commands. We could not begin this work without Jesus as our Savior. 4. Cambellite theos is incorrect. We do hold to the Kingdom of Christ theology, that agrees with the Bible that Jesus is the King of kings and Lord of lords and we should obey Him as He has commanded. We agree with most but not all of Finney's teachings. 5. Pastor Dustin, if Finney is a heretic as you charge what is his heresy? What exactly have you read of his? How does that compare to the Bible? You have never emailed me that I know of and offered any correction of any kind, yet you spread gossip about me without even confronting me personally? We agree God is sovereign brother. He rules over the universe..He is not a despot though. He did not make Lucifer, Eve, or Adam sin, He does not make an individual sin either. If He did how could they be responsible for it? Somehow I doubt this post makes it past the comment moderator. 6. Open Theism is not well defended by the few who hold to it. I would say that Jesse gives the best defenses I have ever heard, but as I outlined before I am not sure I agree with all of it. Open Theism does NOT say that God does not know any of the future. That would be ridiculous. It DOES say that God knows that which can be known. For example, God the Father knows the hour and day that Christ will return in vengeance. He is orchestrating the universe to that end(Omega). He is moving and dealing with the freewill choices of mankind to bring about His final Judgment Day. Of course, all the prophecies are covered by this concept of God knowing that which can be known by Him. Lastly, on this subject; Did God ever repent of making man? Why? 7. Jack, we pray that you would reconsider your position. God bless you. 8. Joel T. you proved nothing from all of your statements except that you are a Calvinist. Have you ever heard of the: Anabaptists, Waldensians, Donatists, Mennonites, or the Ante-Nicean Fathers? Study to show yourselves approved brothers. You might want to try some other sources of information that may lead to a better understanding of our positions. For PinPoint Evangelism's Statement of Faith go here: www.pinpointevangelism.com/whatwebelieve.htmIf you would like to discuss these matters openly you are invited to listen to Refining Fire Radio beginning Sept 7. www.blogtalkradio.com/Kerrigan-Skelly/2008/09/07/Refining-Fire-RadioThis is our introductory show, we may have some call in time for you to get your questions answered. Warm Regards in Christ, John McGlone
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 30, 2008 21:55:39 GMT -5
What do you know? The blog owner actually allowed John's post. I wonder how long it will remain though...
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 30, 2008 22:14:07 GMT -5
Praise God, hopefully he will keep it there and reconsider your post. Kind of ironic the name of the blog and then censuring your writings.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Aug 31, 2008 22:11:03 GMT -5
Truth matters blog anon states: I need to remain anonymous so they don't know who I am on their board but Jesse's Board is discussing this Blog and Kerrigan Skelly writes "I linked to this in my first post. Click on the words Calvinist Blog that are highlighted. The owner of the blog wouldn't even allow me to respond to some of the false charges brought against me. What a coward he is... " Notice Kerrigan saying "what a coward he is". Is this the Spirit of God? No! This is the attitude of MGT advocates. Unfortunately, Kerrigan Skelly has bitten Jesse Morrell's doctrines hook, line and sinker Pastor Dustin, is this you? Whoever you are you are welcome to come out into the light of open and free discussion. We don't want to be deceptive with you or anyone else. God bless you, we are praying for you.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Sept 1, 2008 15:30:28 GMT -5
6. Open Theism is not well defended by the few who hold to it. I would say that Jesse gives the best defenses I have ever heard, but as I outlined before I am not sure I agree with all of it. Open Theism does NOT say that God does not know any of the future. That would be ridiculous. It DOES say that God knows that which can be known. For example, God the Father knows the hour and day that Christ will return in vengeance. He is orchestrating the universe to that end(Omega). He is moving and dealing with the freewill choices of mankind to bring about His final Judgment Day. Of course, all the prophecies are covered by this concept of God knowing that which can be known by Him. Lastly, on this subject; Did God ever repent of making man? Why? God knows that which can been known ....So does that says that there are things that can't be known , not even by God ? If this statement represents well this belief, this belief does not represent God very well, rather it represents God as someone who has a good sight , but not a perfect one.
|
|
|
Post by prespilot68 on Sept 1, 2008 15:54:42 GMT -5
Debonnaire
Can God make a round triangle or a married bachelor? Of course not as these would be self-contradictory concepts. Therefore the same can be said about certain aspects of the future events. Since God only does that which is logical or that which is not self-contradictory, he knows only that which is "knowable". Its not that God "Can't" know something, but God can only know that which is not self-contradictory or illogical. Open Theist would put forth that since certain future events have not yet occurred then it is illogical for them to be known, as they have yet to exist or occur.
My response back to you debonnaire is this: If God knows the future exhaustively, then can God ever have a "new" experience???
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Sept 1, 2008 17:21:44 GMT -5
Debonnaire,
It does not take away from the perfection of God to say that God knows reality as it is.
If the future was entirely determined, settled, or certain, God would have to know it as such since He is omniscient. If He didn't know reality as it is, He would not be perfect.
But if the future is only partly determined, settled, and certain, but also partly open, contingent, or unsure, then God would have to know it as such since He is omniscient. If the future was partly open, but God didn't know the future as it is, then God would not be perfect.
God's perfection is not in question here. The nature of the future is in point of debate. God is perfect so He knows the future as it is. The real question is whether or not the future is exhaustively settled, certain, or determined, or if it is partly open, contingent, or undecided.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Sept 1, 2008 19:53:04 GMT -5
Truth matters blog anon states: I need to remain anonymous so they don't know who I am on their board but Jesse's Board is discussing this Blog and Kerrigan Skelly writes "I linked to this in my first post. Click on the words Calvinist Blog that are highlighted. The owner of the blog wouldn't even allow me to respond to some of the false charges brought against me. What a coward he is... " Notice Kerrigan saying "what a coward he is". Is this the Spirit of God? No! This is the attitude of MGT advocates. Unfortunately, Kerrigan Skelly has bitten Jesse Morrell's doctrines hook, line and sinker Pastor Dustin, is this you? Whoever you are you are welcome to come out into the light of open and free discussion. We don't want to be deceptive with you or anyone else. God bless you, we are praying for you. Nah, that's not Dustin. Dustin didn't approach me first, which is Biblical and what he should have done, but he has been out in the open about his identity when it comes to coming against me. I'll give him that much. I have a pretty good idea who it is...it sounds just like that bitter Dan Lirette. Some of the very things that he says on that blog, he said to me in an email one time. If that is you Dan, then you are being deceptive. Jesse has made it very clear over and again that he doesn't want you on his message board... For the record, I didn't get what I believe from Jesse Morrell. Jesse can attest to this as does the whole doctrine and theology section of this message board! I used to argue with Jesse and Micah like crazy about things like conditional security, perfection, etc. My doctrine changed around last February (2007) when I started really studying the Atonement in Scripture. Changing your atonement view can really change your theology! I also started reconsidering my stance on eternal security in light of the atonement. Another thing that really impacted my theology was studying the Early Church Fathers (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, etc.). As far as my stances against Original Sin and Unconditional Election as well as Limited Atonement and Irresistible Grace, I have NEVER believed in these things. NOT in my WHOLE LIFE! Sadly, I used to believe in a "sinful nature", but that was mostly due to bad translations of the Bible and just believing what I was taught. As far as me calling someone a coward and that not being from the Holy Spirit...go read Revelation 21:8, written by John under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It says that the cowardly will NOT inherit the Kingdom of God. My comment post that I tried to make on that blog was only made to clarify some lies about me, yet he didn't allow it. That is cowardly, simple as that. In fact, I would say that it is almost cult-like.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Sept 1, 2008 22:18:01 GMT -5
We shall put that to the test..... See this video start at time 2:50 www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzgs6iO09_oThe sinners love to blame God for the origins of sin vs. accepting blame for thier own wickedness before God. Nothing new under the sun brother. Satan up to his old foolery.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Sept 2, 2008 2:53:45 GMT -5
Debonnaire, It does not take away from the perfection of God to say that God knows reality as it is. If the future was entirely determined, settled, or certain, God would have to know it as such since He is omniscient. If He didn't know reality as it is, He would not be perfect. But if the future is only partly determined, settled, and certain, but also partly open, contingent, or unsure, then God would have to know it as such since He is omniscient. If the future was partly open, but God didn't know the future as it is, then God would not be perfect. God's perfection is not in question here. The nature of the future is in point of debate. God is perfect so He knows the future as it is. The real question is whether or not the future is exhaustively settled, certain, or determined, or if it is partly open, contingent, or undecided. Firstly I want to say that the fact that God knows the end like He knows the beginning does not take anything of the Free will of man. What I believe is not that God has predetermined everything and acts or speaks from this basis, but He certainly knows what will be the end of everything, even the end of every man , depending on their life and their response to God’s invitation. Even if God knows who –in the end- will end up in Hell that does not mean these people were destined to end up there by His will. God was grieved in the times of Noah ‘s generation, Jesus too was grieved and wept on Jerusalem who kills prophets. He said to Jerusalem “how I have wished to gather you like a hen gather her chicken under her wings, but you have no wanted it”. And He said to the Pharisees : how will you escape the gehenna of fire and brimstone. Guess what ? Jesus knew that many of them would end up in Hell, but He preached to them so to snatch some of them out of it. Perfect knowledge does not take anything of man’s free will and does not temper the zeal to save the lost. “It does not take away from the perfection of God to say that God knows reality as it is”. I agree with that statement. It is important to say that God judges (discerns) according to what is reality today in the heart and life of the people, God does not judge according to what will be the end of these people. For that would be unfair. He is a righteous judge, so yes a perfect God knows according to present righteousness (or absence of it) according to what has been sown ; that does not contradict the fact that God can see everything of their future. However it is not important for man to know that. Debonnaire Can God make a round triangle or a married bachelor? Of course not as these would be self-contradictory concepts. Therefore the same can be said about certain aspects of the future events. Since God only does that which is logical or that which is not self-contradictory, he knows only that which is "knowable". Its not that God "Can't" know something, but God can only know that which is not self-contradictory or illogical. Open Theist would put forth that since certain future events have not yet occurred then it is illogical for them to be known, as they have yet to exist or occur. My response back to you debonnaire is this: If God knows the future exhaustively, then can God ever have a "new" experience??? “new experience” ? The fact that mankind has failed to fulfill the righteousness of the Old Covenant takes nothing away of the perfection of the New Covenant by the blood of the Redeemer who , by the way, has been prophesied since the book of Genesis, before the Old Covenant was given. Certain future events have not occurred yet, but they will occur according to what the Word of God says of them. For example God knew that in the last generation there will be a great crowd who will overcome the Beast in the great tribulation. A Beast that received a fatal wound but came back to life. Is such an event logical ? I don’t know , anyway God knew it. By the way the good principle of knowing the end from the reality today does not work here, as there is no particular reason to know that a defeated kingdom will surface again. Truly, God's omniscience and intelligence are mind boggling for a man. We can't really rationalize it, although we can see in part.
|
|
|
Post by John McGlone on Sept 2, 2008 6:32:48 GMT -5
Eric, Open Theism agrees that God knows that which can be known, ie. prophecies, etc. But, He operates in the present as the future has not occured yet.
|
|
|
Post by debonnaire on Sept 2, 2008 10:16:34 GMT -5
Thanks for explaining clearly what Open Theism can be , John. If i understand , Open Theism does not claim to explain it all (how could it be otherwise?). It would be wrong to call it Truth , a useful tool should be more appropriate to define it. On the whole I don't disagree with that particular view of the knowledge/ dimension of God, that us -limited men- can grasp and understand.
|
|
|
Post by Paul A. Kaiser on Sept 2, 2008 23:57:08 GMT -5
We shall put that to the test..... See this video start at time 2:50 www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzgs6iO09_oThe sinners love to blame God for the origins of sin vs. accepting blame for thier own wickedness before God. Nothing new under the sun brother. Satan up to his old foolery. I'm not sure I'm getting your point....? What I am planning on doing is just what you said.... "Ask people If babies are born innocent and if they are born sinners..." I do not disagree that sinners will find all sorts of ways to justify themselves. However our discussion is revolving around your assertion that "if the world agrees with your theological doctrines one should re-evaluate their position." I am arguing that is a false premise and if you were to hold to your very own assertion you would in fact be the one forced to re-evaluate your position. So I am devising a little test and look forward to the results...
|
|