- Aug 27, 2011
- 1,775
- 35
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I did become a bit sceptical when I googled "senile old skunk" and this thread was the only result!
He simply 'stepped over the line' on occasion or went a bit 'over the top', just an imperfection. By your logic we can simply excuse all manner of sin.Take John Calvin: he was the leader of a church police state that was responsible for the murder of many "heretics". It is likely he directly participated in the torture and murder of some (if not many) who did not hold his theological position. Yet, many Christians call themselves "Calvinists"!
If you follow your own logic, and if we all agree that murder is an example of "sinful behaviour", we should have nothing to do with the teachings of John Calvin and certainly shouldn't claim allegiance to his ideas of Christian doctrine? There are plenty of other Christian leaders in history with the same views as his, who were far more "Christlike" and peaceful...
I'm not claiming you can not listen to a preacher because they are sinful human beings, you couldn't go to listen to any preacher then. I'm saying we should be honest about their failings, something you seem reluctant to do.
And what about claiming that Satan has raised up other preachers who he, essentially, just disagrees with? Claiming that Satan is the power behind another person's Christian ministry isn't far off what the Pharisees accused Jesus of.
This I wholeheartedly disagree with. he's not targeting preachers he simply disagrees with, he's targeting preaching who he believes (right or wrong) that what they teach is dangerous and unscriptual, which certainly is not coming from the right source and can pull people away from truth.
This spiritual life is not a big round table debate, it's a battle where satan WILL try to use Christians wherever he can to veer from the path, I've seen some shocking examples within churches.
Fine, and the point I made earlier was that who's to say that Jacob Prasch isn't the one that Satan has raised up? I certainly think it is, and this ain't a round table debate.
Fine, and the point I made earlier was that who's to say that Jacob Prasch isn't the one that Satan has raised up? I certainly think it is, and this ain't a round table debate.
Good ! Then let the testing begin !
Search the Scriptures, and point out how the doctrines he teaches are NOT in agreement with the Bible. If you can demonstrate his TEACHING is unBiblical, you will then convince me that Satan "raised him up"!
The Bible is full of warnings about false teachers. We are commanded to test any teaching against the Bible (Acts 17:11).
To make this strong accusation that Satan has raised up Jacob Prasch, you have to show how his doctrine is not sound?
I asked you this many posts ago - so far, you have accused him of a multitude of sins and pointed out every single flaw in his character, but not once done what Scripture exhorts us to do. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11
Search the Scriptures, and point out how the doctrines he teaches are NOT in agreement with the Bible. If you can demonstrate his TEACHING is unBiblical, you will then convince me that Satan "raised him up"!
You keep missing the point, I don't think that Satan has raised him up, I wouldn't try to make such an outrageous claim. I simply think it's sinful to make that accusation of another Christian leader whose doctrinal position I might happen to disagree with. To do so is tantamount to what the Pharisees tried to accuse Christ of (I even showed this from scripture!)
To put it into perspective, either the entire Baptist movement has been raised up by Satan, or the paedo-baptists have, so which is it?
From what I've seen, Jacobs strongest criticism is reserved for those who are either demonstrable false prophets (he points out many who make predictions that do not happen) or those who preach a false gospel.
Surely, it is a good thing to have a teacher exposing these two forms of dangerous practice?
Either paedobaptism is biblical or it isn't, if it isn't then by your logic then those who teach it can be accused of having been raised up by Satan because it is unbiblical.Sorry - I misunderstood your last post.
I personally believe infant baptism is unbiblical (because it does not appear in the Bible!) but the important thing it to determine is whether someones teaches that a baby is SAVED through baptism without having the ability to choose for themselves.
At the end of the day, infant baptism just makes a baby a bit wet - there is no harm in that! If, however, the church is teaching that the baby's sins are being forgiven through infant baptism, this is clearly a false gospel as an individual can ONLY be saved through repentance of their own sins. A baby cannot choose to repent for his/her sins! If infant baptism is being used as a nice tradition and photo opportunity, it may be pointless but as least its less harmful - if someones teaches that infant baptism saves the baby, this is a false gospel and should be strongly opposed.
From what I've seen, Jacobs strongest criticism is reserved for those who are either demonstrable false prophets (he points out many who make predictions that do not happen) or those who preach a false gospel.
Never mind the fact that your understanding of paedobaptism is at best woefully ill-informed.Surely, it is a good thing to have a teacher exposing these two forms of dangerous practice?
Either paedobaptism is biblical or it isn't
But ... the very thing that Stott was called out for, annihilsm, does have a Biblical basis. It is not a traditional view, but is based in the Bible.
One of their verses is John 3:16 ... which suggests you either "perish" or have everlasting life.
There are many sincere, intelligent, Godly, people who hold to a position of annihilism.
So, based on compaing with the Bible, even the so called heretics are right.
I'd put annihilationism into the same category as universalism which is basically "wishful thinking"
Be careful, discussion of these things is not permitted on these forums except in the unorthodox theology section.
Though I would love to discuss your "wishful thinking", Ian.
Regards,
Mike
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?