Is Continuationism or Cessationism a hard doctrine to prove?

[Saint Steven]

No harm done after escaping and overcoming through personal bible study.

So you are attempting to rescue us from something that caused you no harm?

 

[Dave L]

So you are attempting to rescue us from something that caused you no harm?

Not permanent harm. But it takes study to reclaim your mind.

 

[Saint Steven]

This is what I'm saying, nobody understands Acts less that Charismatics and Pentecostals. Nobody...

Here's the problem. And this doesn't really apply as much to you as others.

We end up with people who have never spoken in tongues telling those who do, what it is and when it can be used. Thus trumpeting their ignorance.

And you are fueling the problem with what you are up to. That is, attempting to rescue us from something that caused you no real harm.

What are you doing? !!!!

 

[Saint Steven]

Not permanent harm. But it takes study to reclaim your mind.

I'll let you know when you get there. Until then...

 

[NBB]

Actually we have a big problem if God is supposed to be infinitely powerful. Because the concept of infinitely large number or quantity - as a real existing thing - doesn't make sense. What does that even mean? Still growing? If God is still growing into His infinite capacity, then, at any given moment, He is still finite and incomplete. That's insanity.


Where did I say THAT? He is all powerful in the sense that He rules everything. He rules 100 billion galaxies, last I checked. He's a pretty big guy. Are YOU going to overthrow Him? And if not you, then who?


You're asking me to explain to you, the insanity brainwashed into you for the last 2,000 years. Which is precisely my contention that I CANNOT do.

The notion of a timeless God, as taught by mainstream Christianity, is insanity. It makes no sense at all to the human mind. Which means it's not a real doctrine. It's like someone speaking to you in Chinese if you don't know the language and then saying, 'I gave you a solution to your problem. Just accept it!'

Are you going to accept it?

If you're willing to listen, I will give you a solution that you CAN understand, based on what you see everyday. What moves your body? Free will! Metabolism/muscles merely CONTRIBUTE to the impetus, but the primary controlling impetus MUST be free will. Why so? Because if your free will wasn't in sovereign control, then we couldn't blame you for crimes and sin (we'd have to blame your metabolism). Your soul moves by free will (picture it as currents of thoughts), which in turn pushes/pulls your body in any direction chosen by your MIND. (Of course this proves that the soul must be physical, as to push/pull the body).

Ok now let's apply this to God. Picture the Totality. When was its first thought/motion? It had to have a first thought/motion, right? Because if an infinite number of motions/thoughts had to transpire before today was reached, then today would never have been reached. What CAUSED that first thought/motion? Free will! And so part of the Totality - at least 13 billion years ago - 'awoke' (like a fetus in a womb having its first thought), and that part is the person that we now know as God.

If he didn't have to work, learn, labor, practice, study (etc) to become holy - you can't praise Him, He would merit no praise. Merit is a status achieved only by freely choosing to labor/suffer for a righteous cause over an extended period of time (there is no other possible definition of merit). He is Ancient of Days - but not INFINITE of days, nor is He timeless. Again, a timeless God would merit no praise, for lack of merit. (Picture the cross without any time spent in actual suffering - it would have no merit. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Nothing!).

No problem for a shape shifting material God. Right?

The term he used was pneumatic. Goto Amazon and purchase me a pneumatic tool - a spirit powered tool. I'd like to see it. You'll find it means a wind-powered tool.

You can't cut a soul or spirit in half...
The sun is going to stop giving light and explode... the earth is cooling and eroding, in a nature cycle that is constant change, any material can be damaged and the atom can be destroyed like in a atomic bomb.
So everything is subject to corruption, but soul/spirit are not subject to corruption. a spirit doesn't gets old and you are not supposed to be able to break it.

God was born because of free will? what? and he became good you say? he was created somehow? because part of a totality? mmh i think this teaching is worse in my mind than cessationism, a least they don't change the nature of God, thats is just how this strikes me, don't blame me. You believe God evolved from a totality? and why you believe in a uncaused eternal?? totality, what caused it? it makes more sense if God is eternal because if that 'totality' was created then who created the cause, and so on...

 

[Dave L]

Here's the problem. And this doesn't really apply as much to you as others.

We end up with people who have never spoken in tongues telling those who do, what it is and when it can be used. Thus trumpeting their ignorance.

And you are fueling the problem with what you are up to. That is, attempting to rescue us from something that caused you no real harm.

What are you doing? !!!!

False doctrine binds. The truth sets free. I experienced both. And carefully replaced all of my former indoctrination with the truth through years of independent and deliberately objective study.

 

[JAL]

You can't cut a soul or spirit in half...

Who can't cut a physical soul in half? You? Me? God?

That's a silly argument, right? I mean I don't have the ability, personally, to split some particles (they are too small, and I lack the tools). Some kinds of particles aren't accessible to me (e.g. I don't have a supply of uranium in my room).

God hasn't made the soul accessible to our tools. He's hidden it from them, just like the heavenly city. So? And?

The sun is going to stop giving light and explode... the earth is cooling and eroding, in a nature cycle that is constant change, any material can be damaged and the atom can be destroyed like in a atomic bomb.
So everything is subject to corruption, but soul/spirit are not subject to corruption. a spirit doesn't gets old and you are not supposed to be able to break it.

Again, I've been arguing for the soul being tangible - it need not be molecular/atomic as I said earlier. Therefore the laws of decay need not apply.

God was born because of free will? what? and he became good you say? he was created somehow? because part of a totality? mmh i think this teaching is worse in my mind than cessationism, a least they don't change the nature of God, thats is just how this strikes me, don't blame me. You believe God evolved from a totality? and why you believe in a uncaused eternal?? totality, what caused it? it makes more sense if God is eternal because if that 'totality' was created then who created the cause, and so on...

OF COURSE my conclusions are SUPPOSED to sound crazy after 2,000 years of brainwashing. Haven't we already established that?

(Sigh) As a result, I don't give a HOOT what you think about my conclusions - only my REASONS leading up to them. For example:

(1) I postulated that there is only ONE possible definition of merit. NO ONE in the last 2000 years has found another. EVERYONE agrees on this point. EVERY SERMON is based on it. THAT was my REASON for claiming that God had to labour to become holy as to merit praise. (Well I have more arguments but I'm trying to keep this short). You did NOT provide an alternative definition of merit (there isn't one). No one has. No one can. I even gave you an EXAMPLE - I said that a cross devoid of suffering would have no merit. You can't refute that argument. I gave you an IRREFUTABLE ARGUMENT and you respond with - nothing?

(2) I gave you PROOF that the soul is physical. How can an immaterial soul move the body? That's insanity. This is the classic mind-body problem. No ONE HAS SOLVED THIS PROBLEM. Most theology textbooks never mention it. Charles Hodge did - and he admitted we have NO SOLUTION. Want more proof? Suppose I want your mind to fail a math test. How do I do it? Physically! I can just spike your food with drugs or alcohol. Huh? How can physical drugs impact an immaterial mind? That's insanity. And why does physical brain damage impair mental capacity, if the mind is nonphysical? That's insanity.

As a toddler, you didn't think about the opposite sex, did you? Those thoughts didn't much cross your mind. But notice what happened to your mind when hormones kicked in - physically!

To summarize: Please don't address my CONCLUSIONS. Address my REASONS. That's all I ask. And when you do that, you'll find yourself, like Charles Hodge (see above), faced with contradictions that you CANNOT resolve. To PERSIST in those contradictions is, in my opinion, a kind of insanity.

Consider this your wake-up call. You can take the blue pill or the red pill. Sadly enough, I think you've already decided what you WANT to believe, contrary to where the FACTS lead.

 

[Saint Steven]

False doctrine binds. The truth sets free. I experienced both. And carefully replaced all of my former indoctrination with the truth through years of independent and deliberately objective study.

The same thing happened to me, but we started and ended at opposite ends of the spectrum. I find that fascinating. And you?

I think we agree on the black and white issues but disagree in the gray areas.
However, I think you see our disagreements as being in the black and white.
Even though you claim no real long-term harm.

 

[Dave L]

The same thing happened to me, but we started and ended at opposite ends of the spectrum. I find that fascinating. And you?

I think we agree on the black and white issues but disagree in the gray areas.
However, I think you see our disagreements as being in the black and white.
Even though you claim no real long-term harm.

I doubt if your changes were more than slight. I was set up to slide into Pentecostalism. As I said, I was an Arminian and Dispensationalist. Which is 2/3 of Pentecostalism. I only needed an introduction to the rest before I swallowed it hook , line and sinker.

 

[JAL]

God was born because of free will?

He had to have a first thought, just like any child. That's all I'm saying. Otherwise time goes back - forever? With no beginning? An infinite regress? THAT'S your position? How is that not insanity?

You'll then respond, 'God is timeless. He then created time.' Ok so when He was out there in this timelessness, was He conscious, that is, was He doing any thinking? I guess not, since a thought takes a moment of time. So he was essentially unconscious and then awakens to have His first thought? Isn't that MY position? Seems my position is inescapable.

what? and he became good you say?

He became holy. The term 'holy' refers to the sum total of all God's perfections (knowledge, zeal for righteousness, skills, etc).

he was created somehow?

Where did I say THAT? Created by whom? I said He was the first person to exist.

why you believe in a uncaused eternal?? totality, what caused it?

Huh? Why do YOU believe in an uncaused eternal?

 

[Saint Steven]

I doubt if your changes were more than slight. I was set up to slide into Pentecostalism. As I said, I was an Arminian and Dispensationalist. Which is 2/3 of Pentecostalism. I only needed an introduction to the rest before I swallowed it hook , line and sinker.

I agree, the changes (doctrinally) were only slight. I didn't really give up anything except the fear and ignorance that Cessationists are motivated by. I kept the solid doctrines I attained in protestant evangelicalism and introduced the possibility of the full list of spiritual gifts and the baptism with the Holy Spirit as a subsequent event. Which turned out to be only a re-filling with manifestations, since I had received the Filling of the Holy Spirit as a result of a Bill Bright pamphlet on the subject. (when I was a teen)

I sympathize with you and the bad experience you had. Please don't let bitterness fuel a backlash against us. Settle the matter and let it go. If there is anything I can do to help, feel free to PM me about it. Love, in Christ.

 

[NBB]

Who can't cut a physical soul in half? You? Me? God?

That's a silly argument, right? I mean I don't have the ability, personally, to split some particles (they are too small, and I lack the tools). Some kinds of particles aren't accessible to me (e.g. I don't have a supply of uranium in my room).

God hasn't made the soul accessible to our tools. He's hidden it from them, just like the heavenly city. So? And?

Again, I've been arguing for the soul being tangible - it need not be molecular/atomic as I said earlier. Therefore the laws of decay need not apply.

OF COURSE my conclusions are SUPPOSED to sound crazy after 2,000 years of brainwashing. Haven't we already established that?

(Sigh) As a result, I don't give a HOOT what you think about my conclusions - only my REASONS leading up to them. For example:

(1) I postulated that there is only ONE possible definition of merit. NO ONE in the last 2000 years has found another. EVERYONE agrees on this point. EVERY SERMON is based on it. THAT was my REASON for claiming that God had to labour to become holy as to merit praise. (Well I have more arguments but I'm trying to keep this short). You did NOT provide an alternative definition of merit (there isn't one). No one has. No one can. I even gave you an EXAMPLE - I said that a cross devoid of suffering would have no merit. You can't refute that argument. I gave you an IRREFUTABLE ARGUMENT and you respond with - nothing?

(2) I gave you PROOF that the soul is physical. How can an immaterial soul move the body? That's insanity. This is the classic mind-body problem. No ONE HAS SOLVED THIS PROBLEM. Most theology textbooks never mention it. Charles Hodge did - and he admitted we have NO SOLUTION. Want more proof? Suppose I want your mind to fail a math test. How do I do it? Physically! I can just spike your food with drugs or alcohol. Huh? How can physical drugs impact an immaterial mind? That's insanity. And why does physical brain damage impair mental capacity, if the mind is nonphysical? That's insanity.

As a toddler, you didn't think about the opposite sex, did you? Those thoughts didn't much cross your mind. But notice what happened to your mind when hormones kicked in - physically!

To summarize: Please don't address my CONCLUSIONS. Address my REASONS. That's all I ask. And when you do that, you'll find yourself, like Charles Hodge (see above), faced with contradictions that you CANNOT resolve. To PERSIST in those contradictions is, in my opinion, a kind of insanity.

Consider this your wake-up call. You can take the blue pill or the red pill. Sadly enough, I think you've already decided what you WANT to believe, contrary to where the FACTS lead.

I agree the soul gives orders to the body, but it has to be physical?, or can be that spiritual things can 'grab' flesh. Get mixed with flesh, but remains spiritual. 'the spirit gives life to the body'.

But the worse part of what you say,
That God is not eternal, then what created this 'totality'???.
The bible says God doesn't change.

 

[NBB]

He had to have a first thought, just like any child. That's all I'm saying. Otherwise time goes back - forever? With no beginning? An infinite regress? THAT'S your position? How is that not insanity?

You'll then respond, 'God is timeless. He then created time.' Ok so when He was out there in this timelessness, was He conscious, that is, was He doing any thinking? I guess not, since a thought takes a moment of time. So he was essentially unconscious and then awakens to have His first thought? Isn't that MY position? Seems my position is inescapable.

He became holy. The term 'holy' refers to the sum total of all God's perfections (knowledge, zeal for righteousness, skills, etc).

Where did I say THAT? Created by whom? I said He was the first person to exist.

Huh? Why do YOU believe in an uncaused eternal?

Because either God is eternal, or he was created, or started to exist somehow, but that doens't make sense, but if you say God started because of this totality, what created the totality? or you say is eternal?
If God started to think and develop, where he did came from?

 

[Dave L]

I agree, the changes (doctrinally) were only slight. I didn't really give up anything except the fear and ignorance that Cessationists are motivated by. I kept the solid doctrines I attained in protestant evangelicalism and introduced the possibility of the full list of spiritual gifts and the baptism with the Holy Spirit as a subsequent event. Which turned out to be only a re-filling with manifestations, since I had received the Filling of the Holy Spirit as a result of a Bill Bright pamphlet on the subject. (when I was a teen)

I sympathize with you and the bad experience you had. Please don't let bitterness fuel a backlash against us. Settle the matter and let it go. If there is anything I can do to help, feel free to PM me about it. Love, in Christ.

The Pentecostals fed on all the errors that proceeded them. They were ripe for the picking. It isn't until you return to the tincture of scriptures in the historic creeds that you even have a chance at seeing Pentecostalism for what it is.

I was in a Charismatic church one evening when they were teaching against Limited Atonement, point 3 in the 5 points of Calvinism. I heard the truth of this doctrine for the first time even though they were trying to prove it wrong. That is all it took. That was my last involvement with ANY form of Pentecostalism. Since then I began challenging all of my beliefs, uprooting many along the way.

 

[Saint Steven]

The bible says God doesn't change.

That doesn't mean what most claim it means.
Why is there a new covenant if God doesn't change?

Hebrews 8:7, 13
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ...
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

 

[NBB]

I agree, the changes (doctrinally) were only slight. I didn't really give up anything except the fear and ignorance that Cessationists are motivated by. I kept the solid doctrines I attained in protestant evangelicalism and introduced the possibility of the full list of spiritual gifts and the baptism with the Holy Spirit as a subsequent event. Which turned out to be only a re-filling with manifestations, since I had received the Filling of the Holy Spirit as a result of a Bill Bright pamphlet on the subject. (when I was a teen)

I sympathize with you and the bad experience you had. Please don't let bitterness fuel a backlash against us. Settle the matter and let it go. If there is anything I can do to help, feel free to PM me about it. Love, in Christ.

Yes man, too much bad propaganda or experiences, i get sad, because i received the Holy spirit in a pentecostal church, an altough is not perfect at all and has problems, God backing it up like that says something, it really does. At least the doctrine should be good if God is there, i would have not met God if not for that, i would have been lost, now i'm looking to please him the way i can, altough i have difficulties, at least i know God grabbed me, and nobody can tell me God doesn't exists.

 

[NBB]

That doesn't mean what most claim it means.
Why is there a new covenant if God doesn't change?

Hebrews 8:7, 13
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. ...
13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

But that is not God changing his nature, its just changing his disposition towards people, i don't know.

 

[Saint Steven]

The Pentecostals fed on all the errors that proceeded them. They were ripe for the picking. It isn't until you return to the tincture of scriptures in the historic creeds that you even have a chance at seeing Pentecostalism for what it is.

I was in a Charismatic church one evening when they were teaching against Limited Atonement, point 3 in the 5 points of Calvinism. I heard the truth of this doctrine for the first time even though they were trying to prove it wrong. That is all it took. That was my last involvement with ANY form of Pentecostalism. Since then I began challenging all of my beliefs, uprooting many along the way.

Why project the problems you had with one church across the entirety of Pentecostalism and Charismatic churches? And frankly, there is not much orthodoxy in where you have ended up. You make some strange claims that I have never heard before anywhere.

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes man, too much bad propaganda or experiences, i get sad, because i received the Holy spirit in a pentecostal church, an altough is not perfect at all and has problems, God backing it up like that says something, it really does. At least the doctrine should be good if God is there, i would have not met God if not for that, i would have been lost, now i'm looking to please him the way i can, altough i have difficulties, at least i know God grabbed me, and nobody can tell me God doesn't exists.

If there is anything I can do to help, just ask. God bless.

 

[Dave L]

Why project the problems you had with one church across the entirety of Pentecostalism and Charismatic churches? And frankly, there is not much orthodoxy in where you have ended up. You make some strange claims that I have never heard before anywhere.

The whole thing is steeped in error.