Forums

Reasons for Joy; In Gentleness, and Respect.

Profile of ATheisticSeeker

Show Posts

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ATheisticSeeker

1
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 04:53:33 pm »
They overlap insofar as Pentecostals are a particularly nasty subset of Charismatics

2
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 03:46:54 pm »
Quote
We all have our experiences, right?  In my experience, every charismatic I've met has been either a liar or a fraud.  Therefore, I'm suspicious of charismatics.  I see all of Pentecostalism as an utterly satanic movement.  But.........I could be wrong.


Here's the problem I'm seeing.  You seem to be stating that everyone who is not a cessasionist is a charismatic.  You also seem to have used charismatic and pentecostal as interchangeable terms.

1. I am not a cessasionist
2. I am not a charismatic.
3. I am certainly not Pentecostal

You need to recognize that there is a very large portion of Christianity that are both not cessasionists and not charismatic.  Myself, Grudem, and Piper would all be examples.


Non cessationists say charismatic gifts may persist.  Charismatics are actively involved in experiencing the charismatic gifts.  Pentecostals are satanic frauds who base a religion on speaking gibberish and handling snakes.

Yes, I recognize the differences and degrees.  I don't have a problem with mere "non-cessationism".  But my suspicion arises at Charismatic, and I completely distrust Penteccostals.

I get the difference.

My impression, though, was that Grudem was more Charismatic than merely "not a cessationist".  But if I'm wrong about that, then, again, my apologies to Dr. Grudem.

3
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Losing Faith
« on: October 12, 2016, 03:22:15 pm »
Keep in mind we are talking about God's justice!

Why have you changed form a moral metaphor to a mechanical metaphor (maybe because your a determinist), you would not punish gravity for hurting the apple would you!


I wouldn't punish gravity for hurting the apple.  But gravity punishes the apple.  That's just the way it is.

And, of course, I use deterministic analogies because I'm a determinist.

IMO, the problem is, you're condemning determinism from a free will perspective.  On the free will perspective, morality is based on concepts like "ability to do otherwise".  And this makes sense to us, because as humans, we know how we think about things.  We know that if we tell ourselves "Don't steal this bicycle", then we won't steal the bike.  If I tell myself, "I want to lift this pencil", then I both can and do.  If I tell myself, "I want to lift this building", then it's not happening.  IOW, you could fault me for not lifting a pencil, but you can't fault me for not lifting a building--it's not "possible".

On the deterministic perspective, morality is more of a matter of consequences. 

4
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 02:56:39 pm »
I will say this, though.

If I had to face God upon Judgement as either

A.  A person who lived his whole life as an atheist, but then falls on his face when brought before Christ.

or

B.  A lifelong Pentecostal,

I'd definitely go with A.

5
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Trump and the "locker room" talk
« on: October 12, 2016, 02:44:22 pm »
Therefore, if you don't want HRC, you pretty much have to vote for Trump.
Not at all. One can find both despicable and refuse to endorse them with your vote. There are other candidates and abstaining from the Presidential vote while voting locally is also an option.


I'd agree that voting for a morally solid third party candidate is probably the most Biblical move.  The notion of faithfully supporting the "right thing", even when all appearances suggest it will fail is practically a theme in scripture.

But for this to work, this third party candidate would have to be someone that God personally rose up (like David to fight Goliath).  And for this to happen, God would have to have some kind of desire to improve and fix America.  Alas, though, I'm worried that might not be the case.  My guess is that He's given us up.

 

6
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 02:39:36 pm »
Quote
Well, if I'm wrong, and charismatic gifts do persist...then Grudem is not a counterfeit, right?

If anything, if that were the case, a much more likely implication would be that I am the counterfeit.
This really sounds like you're attempting to say that every Christian who is not a cessasionist is a "counterfeit Christian".  Surely you wouldn't actually think something that outlandish.


How did I say that?

I said that if charismatic gifts do, in fact, persist, then Grudem is right and I am wrong.

You're the one who studied under him.  If you know the man, and if you think he's a good guy, then that's all well and good.  He probably is.  I never said he definitely wasn't. 

We all have our experiences, right?  In my experience, every charismatic I've met has been either a liar or a fraud.  Therefore, I'm suspicious of charismatics.  I see all of Pentecostalism as an utterly satanic movement.  But.........I could be wrong.

But if Dr. Grudem would reject the label of "Charismatic-leaning", then so be it, my apologies.  But if he WOULDN'T reject that label, then I remain unapologetically suspicious of him.


7
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Trump and the "locker room" talk
« on: October 12, 2016, 02:20:00 pm »
Who among us would even be surprised if Trump was ever involved in something like what happened in the movie Hostel, where rich people pay for the opportunity to torture and kill kidnapped hitchhikers and backpackers in Europe?  From what I know about Trump, that kind of thing wouldn't have ever surprised me at all.  In fact, I'd probably be more surprised to learn that Trump's never committed a crime at least equal in severity to rape.  However, the fact of the matter is, this is a two party system.  Therefore, if you don't want HRC, you pretty much have to vote for Trump.

8
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 01:56:42 pm »
So he's the good kind of "counterfeit"?


Well, if I'm wrong, and charismatic gifts do persist...then Grudem is not a counterfeit, right?

If anything, if that were the case, a much more likely implication would be that I am the counterfeit. 

9
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 01:48:34 pm »
Even if he was charismatic, that shouldn't be an insult. But ATS means it to be an insult, I believe. From a secular point of view, charismatic services are only bad if they conduct fake healings and other forms of medical quackery. Otherwise it is just heretic-hunting to denigrate a church service that might be more mystical and lively.


Actually, even though SPF seemed to blow up over that, I didn't mean it as an insult.

My comment simply reflects the fact that I'm suspicious of anyone who claims charismatic gifts persist.  Nor will I apologize for being suspicious.  Keep in mind, I explicitly said he may not be a fraud, and he may have genuinely repented from what he said about Trump.

For all I know, Grudem is a fine theologian.  For all I know, charismatic gifts persist.  But based on my experience, every Charismatic is either a liar or a fraud.  Therefore, I'm suspicious of them.  And given Grudem's article on the "moral good" of supporting Trump, I am doubly suspicious of him.

If SPF wants to insist that I'm grossly uncharitable for being suspicious of such a person under such circumstances, so be it.  I've always been happy to post positive comments to things SPF has written, and this is a forum where Calvinists are personae non grata.  But, if I'm grossly uncharitable, then I'm grossly uncharitable.

10
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 01:30:52 pm »
Quote
Grudem's Charismatic leanings are not hidden.
Why exactly do you think the label Charismatic is appropriate to apply to Grudem? Is this just another example of your uncharitable and gross exaggerations? I would like to know why you think the Charismatic label is befitting for Grudem.

Chapters 52 & 53 of his Systematic Theology, for starters.  Also his Wikipedia page. 

Also, what does calling Grudem "Charismatic LEANING" have to do with me being uncharitable?  I'm surprised you, of all people, would level "uncharitable" against me, anyway.  I've always commented positively to your posts.

11
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Are RF Christians sexist?
« on: October 12, 2016, 12:21:37 pm »


We may wonder which of the previous centuries would consider typical 20/21st century American Christians as even Christian.  I suspect folks like John Edwards or John Bunyan would be pretty appalled by modern Christianity.

Also, I notice a bit of a European accent in your posts.  It seems that European churches tend to be even more progressive than American ones.

So, perhaps the relevant question is, Are progressive churches simply "getting with the times"...Or might something much more sinister be going on, such as an apostasy trick engineered by Satan?

I'll leave that for Christians to decide, but I don't think you will reach a consensus among Christians on this matter.


Absolutely...it's clear that there wouldn't be a consensus among Christians on this.  Progressive Christians certainly wouldn't say, "Yeah, I'm basically a pawn of Satan, corrupting the church with modernism."  And none of the hardliners would say, "Nah, there's no demonic influence among the Progressives--they just interpret a few of the more vague and debatable passages a bit differently than we do."

12
What makes Hillary particularly pernicious is that she is a counterfeit Christian.  She actively presents herself as Christian, and proudly wears the label.  And so, it's very easy for the devil to get a foothold.  For example, people hear Hillary say things like certain groups are irredeemable, and since she is a public Christian, people may on some (sub)conscious level be hearing something like, "The blood of Jesus is not sufficient for certain sins."

With Trump, what we see is what we get.  We know what kind of man he is.  Some folks act "surprised" at his "locker room talk" for political reasons, but I think any reasonably level-headed person should know that even rape or murder would be fully consistent with Trump's character.  We know he is thoroughly corrupt and depraved. 

So, Trump's "theology" is at least more honest that HRC's.  Don't get me wrong, Trump is clearly a liar.  But at least his actions are honest, and his motives transparent.

13
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Are RF Christians sexist?
« on: October 12, 2016, 11:55:35 am »
Husbands head of the wife; wives to obey husband
Women to wear head covering in church; men to have head uncovered
Women to have long hair; men short
Only men to teach in church; women to 'remain silent'
Only men can be bishops
Only men can be priests
Only men can be elders
Only men can be apostles
Women have primary child-care duties and repsonsibilities
Men have greater responsibility to use protective physical violence
Men have greater responsibility to earn/provide for family



If believing the above makes me somehow "sexist", then so be it, I suppose I am...

I have lots of Christian friends (most of them Catholics), but I don't think any of them agree to this. They all live in the 21st century.


We may wonder which of the previous centuries would consider typical 20/21st century American Christians as even Christian.  I suspect folks like John Edwards or John Bunyan would be pretty appalled by modern Christianity.

Also, I notice a bit of a European accent in your posts.  It seems that European churches tend to be even more progressive than American ones.

So, perhaps the relevant question is, Are progressive churches simply "getting with the times"...Or might something much more sinister be going on, such as an apostasy trick engineered by Satan?

14
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Grudem also figures out Trump
« on: October 12, 2016, 11:40:08 am »
Quote
Given his Charismatic leanings, though, it's no surprise to me that he would be a fraud.
ATS, for the record, I think you are extremely careless and uncharitable with your words.

Charismatic leanings? You do realize that Dr.Grudem is a reformed theologian, a Calvinist, right?

His Systematic Theology is a standard in Christianity. 

'“As a theology professor at Biola University where our students have to take three semesters of Christian doctrine I feel like I co-teach all my classes with Wayne Grudem. His Systematic Theology provides the core theology content for all my classes and most of the other undergraduate theology courses at the University. It excels in its clarity, readability, and biblically based approach that seeks to get theology into real life. Systematic Theology consistently accomplishes its obvious goal throughout---to lead the reader to greater knowledge and worship of the God of the Bible.' Talbot School of Theology of Biola University -- K. Erik Thoennes

“Our college has chosen this work as a standard textbook for all theology students over the last 10 years. No other theology text combines readability, range of views, and the ever-essential quality of reinforcing our systematic theologies with scripture… Each chapter closes with application questions, special terms, additional bibliography, a cross-section of other systematic texts with page numbers, a passage for memory, and a hymn…all centered on the theology of that chapter. A treasure chest of theological resource and relevance---and that’s only the end of each chapter!” Toccoa Falls College -- W. Brian Shelton


Grudem's Charismatic leanings are not hidden.  Professing the TULIP doesn't compensate for buying into Charismaticism.  John Piper is another example. 

So, what can I say?  I will not apologize for being suspicious of any Charismatic.  It's a movement based on delusions and lies, and it serves only to discredit Christianity and lead folks astray.

15
Apologetics and Theology / Re: Losing Faith
« on: October 12, 2016, 11:21:40 am »
Something seems very wrong here.

God is not a respecter of persons - He does not have buddies who get a preferential treatment.  That would be the utter opposite of justice, as He Himself taught us time and again.  God wants all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9), which is why Jesus came as a ransom for all (Isaiah 53:6; John 3:17; 1 Timothy 2:6; 1 John 2:2; and many others).
If some accept and some don't, that may be a mystery, but we can be sure it is not because God helped some but did not help others along the way - it is not because God is a monster who didn't care enough about some of his creatures to allow them salvation.


Something seems wrong, right?  Calvinism is a horrible, unfair, and grim doctrine, right?

God is morally obligated to us, right?  If Calvinism is true, then the fact that God divinely changed the wills of some men, but not others, makes Him a total failure in His duties to us,  right?  Unconditionally electing some men unto salvation, but not others, makes God not only a monster, but a respecter of persons, right? 

God must ultimately answer to man.  If it turns out that Calvinism is true, then there needs to be a big riot in Heaven.  The saints and angels need to remove God from His throne.  God owes each and every man salvation.
Huh?


My impression of your post was that Calvinism makes God into a "moral monster".  My point is that God owes us nothing.  Moreover, we're in no position to judge Him or His actions, whatsoever.

Pages : [1] 2 3 ... 163