What About Progressive Sanctification?

[RickReads]

More ad hominem, as expected.

I kinda feel the same way about you.

 

[RickReads]

"Huh" is right. Here's an example of mainstream Christology.
(1) God is immutable.
(2) God became man.

Huh? That's the kind of "thinking" you've bought into (if we really want to dignify it with that classification).

You might want to inspect the merchandise before you buy it.

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

 

[JAL]

I kinda feel the same way about you.

Here's what's interesting to me. I'm not aware of one poster on this forum who has persisted in accusing me of a contradiction in my position. They often START that way - until I give them the details.

There are posters who continue to accuse me of contradiction in the sense of, "What you are saying now is not what you said earlier. You are backpedaling!" To which I respond, "You misunderstood me the first time. I can't fully clarify my position in a few short posts - you mainstream Christians had 2,000 years to clarify your views."

At that point they back off - I honestly don't know of anyone who has persistently accused me of an unresolved contradiction in my position.

I'm pretty sure there AREN'T any. At least not on any major issues. Which is a lot more than I can say for mainstream thinking.

 

[JAL]

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Relevance?

 

[RickReads]

Here's what's interesting to me. I'm not aware of one poster on this forum who has persisted in accusing me of a contradiction in my position. They often START that way - until I give them the details.

There are posters who continue to accuse me of contradiction in the sense of, "What you are saying now is not what you said earlier. You are backpedaling!" To which I respond, "You misunderstood me the first time. I can't fully clarify my position in a few short posts - you mainstream Christians had 2,000 years to clarify your views."

At that point they back off - I honestly don't know of anyone who has persistently accused me of an unresolved contradiction in my position.

I'm pretty sure there AREN'T any. At least not on any major issues. Which is a lot more than I can say for mainstream thinking.

Do you really think anyone here knows what your positions are? I don`t see much more than a slew of big words incoherently thrown together.

 

[JAL]

Do you really think anyone here knows what your positions are? I don`t see much more than a slew of big words incoherently thrown together.

Um...clearly I wasn't referring to "here". I'm talking about years of experience on this forum.

 

[RickReads]

Relevance?

Since your Godhead views are too heretical to talk about I thought maybe we would get back to predestination as everyone who gets saved is.

 

[JAL]

Do you really think anyone here knows what your positions are? I don`t see much more than a slew of big words incoherently thrown together.

And by big, incoherent words, you mean phrases like "hypostatic union", right? That's the kind of thing you had in mind, I take it?

 

[JAL]

Since your Godhead views are too heretical to talk about I thought maybe we would get back to predestination as everyone who gets saved is.

Said the guy who just admitted he doesn't know my position. And then you have the gall to bristle when I call you out for ad hominem?

 

[RickReads]

Um...clearly I wasn't referring to "here". I'm talking about years of experience on this forum.

Good. I was hoping that some of the things you post make sense. I`d hate to think there are 1000+ posts like the ones you put on my thread.

 

[RickReads]

Said the guy who just admitted he doesn't know my position. And then you have the gall to bristle when I call you out for ad hominem?

No bristle at all. I wish everyone was as much fun as you.

 

[JAL]

Since your Godhead views are too heretical to talk about I thought maybe we would get back to predestination as everyone who gets saved is.

Ok what's your resolution to the charge of contradiction made at post 295? How does a perfectly loving Father limit the possibility of election and salvation to a forechosen few? Doesn't such predestine the rest to hell?

And do you believe we are born with a sinful nature? Or are we born perfect like Jesus. Recall that both Moses and Christ spoke with the Father face to face. So if we are born perfect like Jesus, all of us should have that experience.

 

[RickReads]

And by big, incoherent words, you mean phrases like "hypostatic union", right? That's the kind of thing you had in mind, I take it?

I prefer to have normal conversations. I`m adaptable though. I`m starting to warm up to you.

 

[RickReads]

Ok what's your resolution to the charge of contradiction made at post 295? How does a perfectly loving Father limit the possibility of election and salvation to a forechosen few? Doesn't such predestine the rest to hell?

And do you believe we are born with a sinful nature? Or are we born perfect like Jesus. Recall that both Moses and Christ spoke with the Father face to face. So if we are born perfect like Jesus, all of us should have that experience.

I think I already answered some of this but ok, I`m a sport. God does not love everyone and He saves whosoeverwill. I don`t have a solid opinion on the fate of the lost. I believe man is depraved as the Calvins say. Moses did not speak with the Father, He spoke with the Theophany.

I think that covers it. Can`t wait to see your reaction

 

[JAL]

Since your Godhead views are too heretical to talk about I thought maybe we would get back to predestination as everyone who gets saved is.

By "heretical" you mean "contrary to mainstream" thinking. Truth, however, is not democratic. It's not a popularity contest. If you are dedicated to the truth, you should be willing to reflect critically on mainstream thinking.

Heresy should be defined something more like this, "A position demonstrably at so egregiously, offensively, and blasphemously in variance to the biblical God that I cannot fellowship with its proponents in good conscience."

The key word here is "demonstrably" - it doesn't have to be an infallible demonstration but at least very satisfying to someone who is attempting an intellectually honest evaluation.

 

[JAL]

I think I already answered some of this but ok, I`m a sport. God does not love everyone and He saves whosoeverwill. I don`t have a solid opinion on the fate of the lost. I believe man is depraved as the Calvins say. Moses did not speak with the Father, He spoke with the Theophany.

I think that covers it. Can`t wait to see your reaction

No position on the state of the lost? God does not punish the guilty, in your view? You said depraved. No punishment for depravity? God does not practice justice in your view?

 

[RickReads]

By "heretical" you mean "contrary to mainstream" thinking. Truth, however, is not democratic. It's not a popularity contest. If you are dedicated to the truth, you should be willing to reflect critically on mainstream thinking.

Heresy should be defined something more like this, "A position demonstrably at so egregiously, offensively, and blasphemously in variance to the biblical God that I cannot fellowship with its proponents in good conscience."

The key word here is "demonstrably" - it doesn't have to be an infallible demonstration but at least very satisfying to someone who is attempting an intellectually honest evaluation.

Heretical simply means that you hold an abnormal view. I can`t tell you with certainty whether I would agree with it or not because I don`t know what you believe.

 

[RickReads]

No position on the state of the lost? God does not punish the guilty, in your view? You said depraved. No punishment for depravity? God does not practice justice in your view?

I believe God is perfect in his justice which is why I cannot determine what He will do. The guilty will be punished. What that means is a ?

 

[JAL]

I think I already answered some of this but ok, I`m a sport. God does not love everyone and He saves whosoeverwill. I don`t have a solid opinion on the fate of the lost. I believe man is depraved as the Calvins say. Moses did not speak with the Father, He spoke with the Theophany.

I think that covers it. Can`t wait to see your reaction

So a perfectly loving Father has 100 billion (innocent) people born into depravity and a world of suffering. Not acceptable.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I have a feeling you don't know the specifics of the hypostatic union. If you did, you'd admit that it is incomprehensible. Unless you are in denial (a very strong possibility on these forums, it seems).

Here's what theologians admit about the hypostatic union, "No sane study of Christology even pretends to fathom it" (Charles Lee Feinberg, "The Hypostatic Union: Part 2," Bibliotheca Sacra, (1935), p. 412).

Again, if I go into the specifics of the problematical nature of the position, the moderators will shut down the thread.

I know it very well. I have over 20 books in my library of the subject.