Logical Problems with Calvinism

[ToBeLoved]

Here are the problems with the way people view salvation: that the justice and fair treatment of men demand that ALL should have, either by nature or by grace, power to secure their own salvation with as little or no involvement from God as possible, falling right in line with the way atheists believe. Some would go so far to say that the cause of the regeneration process is the sinner's own act, and that EVERY man has sufficient ability and knowledge to secure his own salvation. Yet for some reason, there are those that simply refuse to act and save themselves, rather to exercise free will to reject God and damn themselves eternally.

But guess what, life is NOT just and fair. There is no argument that anyone can provide to disprove that men in this world find themselves unequally favored, both in inward disposition and outward circumstances. One is born to health, honor, wealth, being of eminently good and wise parents who train him up from infancy in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and who afford him every opportunity of being taught the Truth as it is in Scriptures. Another is born to disease, shame, poverty, being of dissipated and depraved parents who reject and ridicule and despise Christianity, taking care to prevent their child from coming under the influence by hearing the Gospel. Which is most likely to love the Lord and be saved? Both are born sinners, condemned to Hell, which will escape it? The correct answer is; the one that God chooses.

It cannot be said that God acts unjustly toward those who are not included in the plan of salvation, which is why so many reject the Calvinistic view. People who make this objection neglect to take into consideration the fact God is dealing with sinful creatures who are born His enemies. Man is born as such so that the sinner cannot allege he is the one who is unworthy of God's wrath, being some sort of self-made saint worthy of the Reward by his 'good' works. All are originally condemned out of one and the same lump, equally infected with sin and liable to God's vengeance. This being so that the justified may learn from the condemnation of the rest that this would have been their own punishment had not God's grace stepped in to rescue them. Therefore the Lord may give grace to whom He will, because He is merciful, and yet not give it to all because He is a just Judge; giving to some, His grace, which they never deserved.

All those who are His may and should know that they are among those who have been predestined to eternal life. Since faith in Christ, a gift given to us only by God, is the means of salvation, the person having this faith can be assured that he is among the elect. The mere presence of faith, no matter how weak it may be, provided it is real God given faith, is proof of salvation. Faith is a miracle of grace within those who have already been saved - a spiritual token that their salvation was finished on the Cross, and certified by the resurrection. The true Christian knows that the love of God has been shed abroad in their hearts and that the Holy Spirit renews only those who are chosen by the Father and redeemed by the Son.

The subject of salvation, as seen by a Calvinist, is not as many would say, a mere cold and barren theology, nor a speculation which frustrates the minds of men without any benefit at all; but rather a solid discussion eminently adapted to the service of His children, to build each soundly in the faith, training in humility and lifting one another up into an admiration of the unbounded goodness of God towards us, continually praising His great goodness. There is not a more effectual means of building of faith and understanding of His mercy than the election of God, which the Holy Spirit seals upon our heart while we are given the Truth, showing us that it stands in the eternal and immutable goodwill of God towards the undeserving. Understanding that it was God Himself who secured us we are assured that it cannot be removed or altered by any storms of the world or by any assaults by Satan.

Calvinism is taught. Almost every Calvinist was taught this, they did not deduce it from reading the Word by themselves and draw a conclusion.

The problem I find with many man made doctrines that are taught is that people read the Bible looking to validate a particular position, instead of looking at it by itself.

So you grow up outing that belief into action. That's how I see Calvinist's. They have been taught. Calvin is not in the Bible.

 

[tulipbee]

Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?

The only way God is going is the keep his promises is to make sure we're on the right path toward his planned goals.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The only way God is going is the keep his promises is to make sure we're on the right path toward his planned goals.

God ALWAYS keeps His promises.

The planned actions of God are in His Word

 

[ToBeLoved]

Calvinism is taught. Almost every Calvinist was taught this, they did not deduce it from reading the Word by themselves and draw a conclusion.

The problem I find with many man made doctrines that are taught is that people read the Bible looking to validate a particular position, instead of looking at it by itself.

So you grow up adding that belief into action of your understanding. That's how I see Calvinist's. They have been taught. Calvin is not in the Bible.u

 

[FreeGrace2]

This is what I posted:
"Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?"

And, this is the response:

The only way God is going is the keep his promises is to make sure we're on the right path toward his planned goals.

Huh? What does this have to do with my post?

So, I'll ask again: can Calvinists please just understand that simple point about free will?

 

[tulipbee]

God ALWAYS keeps His promises.

The planned actions of God are in His Word

Promises are for his children. All of his children will be saved.

 

[tulipbee]

This is what I posted:
"Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?"

And, this is the response:

Huh? What does this have to do with my post?

So, I'll ask again: can Calvinists please just understand that simple point about free will?

What free will?

 

[Albion]

This is what I posted:
"Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?"

And, this is the response:

Huh? What does this have to do with my post?

So, I'll ask again: can Calvinists please just understand that simple point about free will?

I'd say it's a "no." But you could always try again, carefully explaining your proposition instead of relying upon a series of teasers like you did here.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Promises are for his children. All of his children will be saved.

All of His children are saved. When we are saved we BECOME children of God.

 

[GillDouglas]

Calvinism is taught. Almost every Calvinist was taught this, they did not deduce it from reading the Word by themselves and draw a conclusion.

The problem I find with many man made doctrines that are taught is that people read the Bible looking to validate a particular position, instead of looking at it by itself.

So you grow up outing that belief into action. That's how I see Calvinist's. They have been taught. Calvin is not in the Bible.

This is your opinion, and you have every right to it but you couldn't be more wrong in your lame and idiotic assumption, at least concerning me and those I know. Do you believe that every young Christian who eventually follows the Calvinists held beliefs regarding salvation, who seeks guidance in their new Christian life, is approached by some 'Calvinist' who hands them a pamphlet about the Five Points of Calvinism? I don't know of any 'Calvinist' type church that does this sort of thing, pushing Calvinist Theology. I know that's not where I started learning when I started my new Christian life. I started by reading the Bible, a gift from a Catholic priest who I first spoke with after my life changed for the better. Men didn't teach me about how/why God saved me, I came to the conclusion on my own.

 

[tulipbee]

I'd say it's a "no." But you could always try again, carefully explaining your proposition instead of relying upon a series of teasers like you did here.

She has been teasing me for years

 

[tulipbee]

All of His children are saved. When we are saved we BECOME children of God.

Universalist children in a hellless world.

 

[ToBeLoved]

This is your opinion, and you have every right to it but you couldn't be more wrong in your lame and idiotic assumption, at least concerning me and those I know. Do you believe that every young Christian who eventually follows the Calvinists held beliefs regarding salvation, who seeks guidance in their new Christian life, is approached by some 'Calvinist' who hands them a pamphlet about the Five Points of Calvinism? I don't know of any 'Calvinist' type church that does this sort of thing, pushing Calvinist Theology. I know that's not where I started learning when I started my new Christian life. I started by reading the Bible, a gift from a Catholic priest who I first spoke with after my life changed for the better. Men didn't teach me about how/why God saved me, I came to the conclusion on my own.

It would do you well to read what I said. I said I believe in most people they are taught those beliefs within their church. From youth.

So your entire premise is flawed.

So. Why not respond to what I did actually say.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sir, we have had enough time to see your liberalism doesn't work. This equality that has come from the French Revolution has made our societies a mess. It is not Scriptural. Essentially you are saying that we need to evolve and get past Gods Word. Why can't we do that with the NT then? And isn't that what you people do? Now you ordain women as ministers. You accept homosexuals. And are anti-slavery entirely. This contradicts the New Testament itself which is opposite to all these things. It is a narcissistic world view. You guys think you are more righteous than God. You think you can do better than what his Law says. And apparently agrarian society cannot be successful without slaves. So what do we have now, corporate capitalism which is destroying us. That is what individualism does. How can a house against itself stand? A nation competing with itself isn't going to strengthen it. It will weaken it. The Scriptures do not teach capitalism either. Yeah the womans' rights movement is doing great for America, right? Sir, the whole anti-discrimination thing is un-Scriptural. The Scriptures discriminate all over the place. Your view is inconsistent because you discriminate between animals and children. Your whole views are just arbitrary according to the whims of how you feel in the situation. O yeah dietary laws are utterly barbaric, right? Now when we need them more than ever with all these food perversions like GMO. Yes, unlawful mixture is just o so barbaric. So now we have these abominations called food. We have people making cows that produce spider web from their teets instead of milk to mass produce bullet proof vests. And so much more. O it is so barbaric to let the land have a sabbath rest every seven years. No, it is better to be greedy and let the land be utterly deplete of its nutrients like we have happening today. Let's destroy the earth utterly. These people do that but then they go to global warming scam. They don't care about earth. That is why they suck it dry for oil.

Psa 19:7 The Law of Jehovah is perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of Jehovah is sure, making the simple wise.
Psa 19:8 The Precepts of Jehovah are right, rejoicing the heart; the Commandments of Jehovah are pure, giving light to the eyes. (MKJV)

So David under the influence of the Holy Spirit utterly contradicts what you think about the Law.

Jer 6:16 So says Jehovah, Stand in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths where the good way is, and walk in it, and you shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk in it. (MKJV)

same way Yeshua speaks about his yoke:

Mat 11:29 Take My yoke on you and learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you shall find rest to your souls. (MKJV)

Scripture tells us to look to the old paths to walk in them if we want to be benefited.

Psa 119:45 And I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts. (KJV)

David under the influence of the Holy Spirit says God's Law gives liberty. So much for that perverted NT interpretation that the Law of God is bondage.

Pro 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

Jer 10:23 O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. (KJV)

God tells us not to rely on our feelings and what we think is right in our own mind but to trust in him and have him direct his steps. This is opposite of you. You rely on your own heart and basically say God's word is barbaric and evil.

Rom_7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

The Law is holy, just, and good. Not barbaric, evil, and outdated those neanderthals of the past.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Well, according to you, all Scripture is not profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. A lot of it is outdated and for a barbaric not yet evolved time. We've gotten past that now.

If you would look carefully you would see your liberalism is based on nothing but your feelings and desires and has no logical and Scriptural basis. It's totally arbitrary according to the whims of man tossed to and fro by his emotions and lusts, called progress, LOL.

I really wish you would take the time to study that guy's material because he says it better than me a lot of the time. And he has been dealing with these issues way longer than me and he horribly refutes and exposes this stuff you follow for what it really is.

While I am for you on the side that a believer must submit to God and His Word (i.e. the New Testament Commands) as a part of Soteriology or that a believer can stop sinning in this life, I am not in agreement with you on a couple of things you said here, my friend.

For one, another poster had investigated your link and they proposed that they endorsed the idea that the Earth is flat. I really do hope that was a misunderstanding on his part or that you do not personally endorse a flat Earth. I really cannot see how any person can see that the Earth is flat today (Especially seeing how any person today can fly around the world in an aircraft - if they have enough money).

Second, you are talking from a political standpoint. I really do not see how that has anything to do with God and His Word. There is no nation that is endorsed by God anymore like Israel (Back in the day). So there are no official politics that are endorsed by God because the politics of this world come from unbelievers and not believers. Believers are to be concerned with what God's Word says and strive to live according to His Word and not by what some men say.

Three, this then leads me into disagreeing with your denial of Sola Scriptura. Why do you feel that the BIble is not your only source of spiritual authority? Do you not know that the problem of many religions today is that they distort God's Word by adding another book, or by adding some kind church tradition, etc.? We will be held accountable to some other spiritual book or will be held accountable to God's Word on Judgment day? Anyways, here is my Biblical case for Sola Scriptura:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/100040-biblical-defense-sola-scriptura.html

Four, as for obeying the Law of Moses. Well, actually believers are to obey the New Testament Commands and they are not to go back to the Old Law so as to obey God anymore. The "Law" part in the "Law and the Prophets" was fulfilled upon the cross. The "Prophets" part in the "Law and the Prophets" (sometimes abbreviated as just as the word "Law") has yet to be fulfilled because there are many End Times prophecies in the Old Testament that still needs to happen. In fact, Paul warns us about going back to the Old Testament Law of Moses or to be justified by Pharisee type traditions in the book of Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians. For "circumcision" was a part of the Old Law, was one of the heresies Paul was trying to address within the church. In fact, Hebrews 7:12 says there is a change in the Law. For there is a slight change even with God's moral laws. For the moral laws like not murdering, not stealing, etc. are no longer attached with a death penalty anymore. While we are to obey the Laws of the Land (According to Romans 13): We now have God's grace and mercy to fall back upon, though. For if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Also, at Christ's death upon the cross, the Aaronic priesthood was abolished. The temple veil was torn from top to bottom. So we no longer have to offer animals to a priest as a sacrifice unto God anymore according to the Law. Also, Jesus was making changes in the Law even during His Earthly ministry. He said to no longer render and eye for an eye (Which was according to the Law), but He declared that we are to turn the other cheek if we are smitten on the cheek (i.e. if violence is done towards us). Also, Peter had a vision from God telling him to eat unclean animals now. So we can now eat unclean animals according to the New Testament. So Hebrews 7:12 is correct in that it says there is a change in the Law.

Five, slavery in any shape or form is not endorsed by God or His Word. 1 Timothy 1:10 clearly condemns slavery. Bond servant would be the more appropriate or accurate term to use. Anyways, a good website that I would recommend on this topic is:

http://christianthinktank.com/qnoslavent.html

Anyways, I have to run.
May God bless you.
And may you please be well.

With loving kindness to you in Christ,

Sincerely,

~ Jason.


....

 

[True Science]

Calvinism is taught. Almost every Calvinist was taught this, they did not deduce it from reading the Word by themselves and draw a conclusion.

The problem I find with many man made doctrines that are taught is that people read the Bible looking to validate a particular position, instead of looking at it by itself.

So you grow up adding that belief into action of your understanding. That's how I see Calvinist's. They have been taught. Calvin is not in the Bible.u

You got it. And let me say, these Reformers Luther and Calvin didn't even get their beliefs from the Bible. Yes, they reasoned some new things from their reading of the Bible. But they already were reading the Bible alongside Augustine. They had the Augustine glasses on and then they came up with a more consistent Augustinianism. They didn't bring us back to the truth.

 

[True Science]

tulipbee,

What is wrong with you?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Promises are for his children. All of his children will be saved.

By definition, His children ARE saved.

Jn 1:12 - But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,

Gal 3:26 - For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

 

[FreeGrace2]

This is what I posted:
"Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?"

And, this is the response:

Huh? What does this have to do with my post?

So, I'll ask again: can Calvinists please just understand that simple point about free will?

What free will?

This, instead of an intellectual discussion of what I said.

But this is the kind of response from those who are ignorant of the subject matter; just deny it.

 

[FreeGrace2]

This is what I posted:
"Why do some think that those who believe that God has given man freedom of choice think that free will has any inherent power?

Free will doesn't do anything. Free will is a condition of freedom to make choices.

Consequences come from what has been chosen. There are no consequences from having free will. Free will doesn't create, doesn't do.

Free will simply IS.

Can Calvinists please just understand that simple point?"

And, this is the response:

Huh? What does this have to do with my post?

So, I'll ask again: can Calvinists please just understand that simple point about free will?

I'd say it's a "no." But you could always try again, carefully explaining your proposition instead of relying upon a series of teasers like you did here.

Teasers? My explanation of what free will means was clear enough. What did you not understand about my proposition?

Freedom of choice is just that. Nothing more. Do you understand this proposition?

 

[True Science]

While I am for you on the side that a believer must submit to God and His Word (i.e. the New Testament Commands) as a part of Soteriology or that a believer can stop sinning in this life, I am not in agreement with you on a couple of things you said here, my friend.

For one, another poster had investigated your link and they proposed that they endorsed the idea that the Earth is flat. I really do hope that was a misunderstanding on his part or that you do not personally endorse a flat Earth. I really cannot see how any person can see that the Earth is flat today (Especially seeing how any person today can fly around the world in an aircraft - if they have enough money).

Second, you are talking from a political standpoint. I really do not see how that has anything to do with God and His Word. There is no nation that is endorsed by God anymore like Israel (Back in the day). So there are no official politics that are endorsed by God because the politics of this world come from unbelievers and not believers. Believers are to be concerned with what God's Word says and strive to live according to His Word and not by what some men say.

Three, this then leads me into disagreeing with your denial of Sola Scriptura. Why do you feel that the BIble is not your only source of spiritual authority? Do you not know that the problem of many religions today is that they distort God's Word by adding another book, or by adding some kind church tradition, etc.? We will be held accountable to some other spiritual book or will be held accountable to God's Word on Judgment day? Anyways, here is my Biblical case for Sola Scriptura:

http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/100040-biblical-defense-sola-scriptura.html

Four, as for obeying the Law of Moses. Well, actually believers are to obey the New Testament Commands and they are not to go back to the Old Law so as to obey God anymore. The "Law" part in the "Law and the Prophets" was fulfilled upon the cross. The "Prophets" part in the "Law and the Prophets" (sometimes abbreviated as just as the word "Law") has yet to be fulfilled because there are many End Times prophecies in the Old Testament that still needs to happen. In fact, Paul warns us about going back to the Old Testament Law of Moses or to be justified by Pharisee type traditions in the book of Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians. For "circumcision" was a part of the Old Law, was one of the heresies Paul was trying to address within the church. In fact, Hebrews 7:12 says there is a change in the Law. For there is a slight change even with God's moral laws. For the moral laws like not murdering, not stealing, etc. are no longer attached with a death penalty anymore. While we are to obey the Laws of the Land (According to Romans 13): We now have God's grace and mercy to fall back upon, though. For if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Also, at Christ's death upon the cross, the Aaronic priesthood was abolished. The temple veil was torn from top to bottom. So we no longer have to offer animals to a priest as a sacrifice unto God anymore according to the Law. Also, Jesus was making changes in the Law even during His Earthly ministry. He said to no longer render and eye for an eye (Which was according to the Law), but He declared that we are to turn the other cheek if we are smitten on the cheek (i.e. if violence is done towards us). Also, Peter had a vision from God telling him to eat unclean animals now. So we can now eat unclean animals according to the New Testament. So Hebrews 7:12 is correct in that it says there is a change in the Law.

Five, slavery in any shape or form is not endorsed by God or His Word. 1 Timothy 1:10 clearly condemns slavery. Bond servant would be the more appropriate or accurate term to use. Anyways, a good website that I would recommend on this topic is:

http://christianthinktank.com/qnoslavent.html

Anyways, I have to run.
May God bless you.
And may you please be well.

With loving kindness to you in Christ,

Sincerely,

~ Jason.


....

I said I'm finished with the debating on here so I'm going to try to respond in a way that doesn't provoke more debate on this thread.

1) I'm agnostic on the Flat Earth thing. I'm open to it. More open then to the Globe. I'm very anti-Heliocentricism. I believe NASA uses fake images and footage, the moon landing was a hoaxing, they can't go to space and do the things they say they can. I haven't seen curvature in a plane. My wife recently took a flight and she took pictures of outside the window, all pictures have zero curvature except for maybe one that looks like it may have slight but it could just be an illusion. Google Earth flight at 40000 ft. has clear unmistakable significant curvature. But there's a video on YouTube of a rocket with a non-fisheye lens camcorder and it goes up over 120000 ft. and there is no curvature. Anyway, I don't see why it isn't likely they lie to us about this too if they lie to us about pretty much everything else. Flat Earth could be wrong though. But I have learned about so many things that are wrong with science and how unreliable it is, I don't see any reason to trust it. and I definitely am not going to let it shake my faith in God's Word.

2) I'm merely showing how the ways of the world philosophy do not work. What is called progressive really isn't progressing to working society. As Christians who believe the Bible we shouldn't embrace, support, and sync our faith with worldly ideas like this. for the most part I don't think this can happen, especially now when it looks close to the Beast rising to full power and the Tribulation happening, but it has in the past, but i'm not 100% against if it is clear God has given a society of this world into our hands that we should not take it over and run it by biblical principles, God's Law, a theocracy. Anyway, when the Millennial theocratic reign comes everyone will for sure see how a Torah government under the King of Glory Yeshua is the only government that can perfectly work, it is the only way of life that perfectly lines up with God's created world reality.

3) Scripture itself contradicts Sola Scriptura. Just like it contradicts inerrancy in the copies of Scripture. One example is the issue of the canon. There is no internal support for it in the Bible itself and there are blatantly things in it that contradict it. Like check out what I wrote in response to a guy trying to explain away what Jude is clearly doing in his epistle:

"4. No it's not a logical fallacy and giant leap in logic. When you see them quoting and using the same
language as these books, which many scholars recognize, it is not a giant leap in logic. And it is pure
conjecture upon your part to say that Jude's quote of 1Enoch was just some oral tradition that was true
which got added to the book later. You have zero evidence for this I'm sure. It's only something you
conjured up in your mind or got from others who did so to reason away this blatant quote of 1Enoch and
these blatant allusions to it of him, which aren't even comparable to the quotations of pagan writings by
Paul. Let me now show how illogical and nonsensical it is to believe what you do about Jude's epistle:

Jude wrote a very short epistle. Probably so it could be easily circulated widely and quickly, since in that
time copying was not easy like it is today. And the reason was that he wanted to remind the Church of
"the faith once delivered to saints" and to expose and refute the gainsayers quick and clean. What a
horrible job he did by writing something so confusing by authoritatively quoting to and alluding to
Jewish "pseudepigraphal" writings as legit sources of info about the truth and prophecy; writings that he
no doubt knew that certain of his Jewish contemporaries accepted as true genuine authoritative texts.
He totally just opened the door to pure confusion and the acceptance of heretical writings as Scripture
which are not Scripture. Jude wants to remind his readers about "the faith once delivered to the saints,"
which supposedly contains the all-important doctrine of the Protestant Canon being all the Scripture
there is, but instead of listing the Canon for us so there can be no question on the matter at all, he
authoritatively references extra-canonical texts, that certain Jews accepted as authoritative Scripture, as
sources of prophecy and truth. Now you can have "deceived" people like me using Jude's epistle to say,
"Look, Jude believed there were more Scriptures than just the Bible. And look, they say that the belief
about the fallen angels marrying human woman and producing giants by them is true." What a great job
Jude did in telling us what this "faith once and for all delivered", which supposedly includes the allimportant doctrine of the 66 book Protestant Bible, found nowhere in that very Bible itself, is. But any
unbiased person can see to Jude "the faith once delivered to the saints" included Apocryphal literature,
not just the Pharisaic canon. If Jude was just quoting these writings to make a point, but did not accept
them like people like me do, he could have easily added a disclaimer to protect people who would be
misled, like me. Your oral tradition stuff is totally useless in determining truth since you pick and choose
which majority beliefs of the Ante-Nicene Fathers you want to believe. You reject almost all of them from
what I can tell. Like what they believed about the "sons of God" and the "daughters of man." Whatever
oral traditions were being faithfully passed down are corrupted to you as per the fact that you are in a
restorationist movement and reject most of the things the early Church after the Apostles believed, like
how strict, hard and serious it really is in attaining salvation, and their views on divorce and remarriage.
Your final authority is Scripture and it's really all you have in the end to truly determine the truth. And
nothing in any of the OT Scriptures you accept says or even so much as hints at anything about any fallen
angels teaching humans the sins they were committing in Noah's day and being bound at that time. So
you rely on conjecture that Peter is talking about fallen angels bound in Noah's day though the OT is
silent on this according to your views. And if you don't mind I would like to know where I can find these
Jewish historical texts that say that the angels taught man these things in Noah's Day and were bound
then, but say there was no angel fornication going on. But I would also like to know why we need these
things and they aren't so much as hinted at in the OT and then suddenly appear so vaguely out of
nowhere so as to cause readers so much confusion if the Bible is all-sufficient to equip the man of God
with the full knowledge of the truth."

4) I believe most Christians throughout history have misunderstood the NT, especially Paul, which Peter actually warns about, by looking at it from their gentile presuppositions and not being grounded enough in the OT. They read the NT too much into the OT and their NT interpretations are based on not being familiar with OT and its Hebraic culture, thought and idioms. I am working on things and have already put out some things to correct the anti-Torah misunderstandings out there. One example you gave. The eye for an eye thing in the Torah was originally about the judicial system, not personal vendetta. That is how it was being misapplied in Yeshua's day. Even the OT tells us not to quickly have a bad temper, render evil for evil, and tells us to love our neighbours and even enemies. And yes the Law has changed, and it changed before even the NT. In the OT we see the Letter of Law was changed before the Law was given, at the time the time the Law was given and after the Law was given. But by I do not believe the Law can be changed in such a way as to contradict the Spirit/principles/character of God as revealed in the Law of Moses. I do not believe the Law has been completely done away with or that it has been radically changed beyond recognition in the Law for the New Covenant for today.

5) Well whatever you want to term it. But the text you quoted is talking about kidnapping. When Israel bought slaves from other nations it is highly doubtful they didn't ever buy kidnapped people. At least those people being in a nation that has right laws to deal with bondservants would be a lot better for them than being sold to some gentile nation without God's Law. Anyway, if you think this capitalist atheist way things are now is really better than a Torah government with righteous slave laws in an agrarian society, then I don't know how you can believe Scripture that says God's Law converts the soul, enlightens the heart and is perfection and liberty. The societies are a mess we live in. All the details in Scripture about what Christ's Kingdom will be like are a theocratic Torah worldwide rule. And the evil nations tat went against God's people it says will be put in forced slavery to them. Paul clearly tells slaves to obey their masters and work for them as they would the Lord and doesn't discriminate between who was stolen or who sold himself. Even sends a slave back to his master. We aren't in the New Heavens and New Earth yet. Not everything is perfect so we need perfect laws to deal with imperfect situations.

Thanks for the article. I'll have to check it out sometime.