Pristine Grace
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 5 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 179

Thread: Our Unreasonable Faith

  1. #81
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    [quotegerhard]The 1549 Book of Common Prayer translated the Athanasian Creed ("Immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus Spiritus Sanctus") as "The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible." The 1549 BCP translation has been used by English speaking congregations for hundreds of years. So, incomprehensibility is an historic confession at least in English speaking countries.

    Modern translations have rendered "Immensus" as "infinite." I do not know which translation is more accurate but I agree with both translations.[/quote]

    Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I've tried to look into this some more. Unfortunately I don't have an ecclesiastical Latin dictionary. The Latin dictionaries that I do have on hand list the meaning as "vast or boundless" and I'm guessing that's how they get to "infinite" in modern translations.

    Webster's dictionary lists "having or subject to no limits" as an archaic meaning of the English word "incomprehensible." So I was wrong. I was reading a modern definition into the word when it had a different meaning when it was written.

    Anyhow I don't really have anything else to say on the subject. I do believe that God is incomprehensible apart from what has been directly revealed to us by Him but I'll just leave it at that. I was having a bad day and I apologize for the way in which I responded previously.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  2. #82
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    93
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    After I posted this, I remembered the axiom: "finitum non capax infiniti" which can be translated as either "the finite cannot contain the infinite" or "the finite cannot grasp the infinite." This axiom was used by the Reformed in opposition to the Lutheran view of the nature of the hypostatic union.

    Nature reason and the Reformed axiom are wrong. Divine omniscience and divine omnipresence are communicated to the human nature of Christ without ever becoming an attribute of the human nature. The finite has received the infinite. How is this possible? It is impossible according to man's reason but it must be believed (John 3:35). An unreasonable faith!
    Furthermore, you are mistaken again about the omnipresence being communicated to the human nature of Christ. The divine attributes are predicated of the Person of Christ, not to either of his natures. It is not a nature that is with his people but Jesus Christ the Person , who is both divine and human, who is with us. The predication is always of the Person. You err greatly in your explanation of the communicatio idiomatum, like Luther before you!!!

    TZ
    proorismenos.

    "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
    To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved."

    Ephesians 1:5-6.

  3. #83
    Moderator Saint Nicholas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    New Castle, PA
    Posts
    711
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    Anybody else see the change from discussing "reasonableness" to "incomprehensible?"

    Once again, when faced with truth that contradicts his beliefs, Chuck changes the premise....
    You are right! Most of us know this. Also Charles is great at creating straw man arguments. I will present one of his strawman arguments tonight or tomorrow.

    Thanks,
    Nicholas
    My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand..........John 10:27,28

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by proorismenos View Post
    You are mistaken, the truth of the incarnation as revealed in scripture is not unreasonable. With the hermeneutic tools of communicatio idiomatum, and the theological extra-Calvinisticum, the hypostatic Union makes perfect sense. God nowhere asks us to believe in absurdities. For the evidence see my dissertation:

    The Omnipresence of Jesus Christ: A Neglected Aspect of Evangelical Christology (SBTS 2004).

    TZ
    Hi Theodore,

    I've been really helped by your posts!

    You say:

    "God nowhere asks us to believe in absurdities..."

    Yes, I do agree! In other words, God may determine NOT to reveal some aspects of knowledge and truth to us, for reasons only known to himself...which means those aspects of knowledge and truth are UNPROVABLE AND UNKNOWABLE FOR US! (by deliberate Divine Intent!)

    However, when God reveals His truth - that He wants us to know - in PROPOSITIONS IN SCRIPTURE then that truth, of necessity, MUST be rational, logical and orderly. God, as you say, does NOT speak with forked tongue or ask us to believe in absurdities.

    Well said! I have learnt here...I am a Believer!

    God bless you, In Christ Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by proorismenos View Post
    Furthermore, you are mistaken again about the omnipresence being communicated to the human nature of Christ. The divine attributes are predicated of the Person of Christ, not to either of his natures. It is not a nature that is with his people but Jesus Christ the Person , who is both divine and human, who is with us. The predication is always of the Person. You err greatly in your explanation of the communicatio idiomatum, like Luther before you!!!

    TZ

    Again, I have learned something SUBSTANTIAL here! I DO believe it is the truth!

    Thank you, In Christ Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  6. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I've tried to look into this some more. Unfortunately I don't have an ecclesiastical Latin dictionary. The Latin dictionaries that I do have on hand list the meaning as "vast or boundless" and I'm guessing that's how they get to "infinite" in modern translations.

    Webster's dictionary lists "having or subject to no limits" as an archaic meaning of the English word "incomprehensible." So I was wrong. I was reading a modern definition into the word when it had a different meaning when it was written.

    Anyhow I don't really have anything else to say on the subject. I do believe that God is incomprehensible apart from what has been directly revealed to us by Him but I'll just leave it at that.
    The 1549 BCP translation of the Athanasian Creed has gotten better with age. I prefer it to modern translations. For example, the first line, "whoever will be saved" was questionable at best when it was written but, today, it is a splendid confession. Likewise, in an age of feminism, manhood is a better confession than humanity.

    Just about everyone who believes in God believes God is infinite but not everyone who believes in God believes that God is incomprehensible. The humanists prefer a God they can explain since "man is the measure of all things." The rationalists who exalt man's reason above scripture also refuse to acknowledge a God who is incomprehensible.

  7. #87
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by proorismenos View Post
    You are mistaken, the truth of the incarnation as revealed in scripture is not unreasonable. With the hermeneutic tools of communicatio idiomatum, and the theological extra-Calvinisticum, the hypostatic Union makes perfect sense. God nowhere asks us to believe in absurdities. . .

    Furthermore, you are mistaken again about the omnipresence being communicated to the human nature of Christ. The divine attributes are predicated of the Person of Christ, not to either of his natures. It is not a nature that is with his people but Jesus Christ the Person , who is both divine and human, who is with us. The predication is always of the Person. You err greatly in your explanation of the communicatio idiomatum, like Luther before you!!!
    In Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 2:9). How can all the fullness of the deity exist in a body? It is incomprehensible. It is unreasonable. But it is not absurd. Absurdity is putting human reason above scripture.

  8. #88
    Moderator Rlhuckle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Lockhart, tx
    Posts
    661
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Please do not conflate the issues being addressed here; the totality of God IS incomprehensible (in regards to his infiniteness), but God has promised to make himself comprehensible to His own.

    The concept of incomprehensibility is merely the concept of "mystery" in disguise and therefore tends to promote the maintenence of a churchian hierarchy (IOW: don't question the "mystery" we preach or else be labeled a rationalist or a humanist). Hogwash.

    One need not know the how to know the who; one need not know ALL to know SOME.

    According to that standard; I am incomprehensible--yet you read my posts and comprehend me and have formed an opinion of who I am and use that comprehension as a premise. Do you know me from my writings? Am I incomprehensible? Come, let us reason together....

  9. #89
    Administrator Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,138
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    15
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    Come, let us reason together....
    Can one reason if the other is unreasonable?
    Isaiah 45:7, (KJV), I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  10. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    Please do not conflate the issues being addressed here; the totality of God IS incomprehensible (in regards to his infiniteness), but God has promised to make himself comprehensible to His own.
    Yes, through faith in Christ. We know the incomprehensible power and wisdom of God through the humiliation and suffering of the cross (1 Cor. 1:18-21).

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    The concept of incomprehensibility is merely the concept of "mystery" in disguise and therefore tends to promote the maintenence of a churchian hierarchy (IOW: don't question the "mystery" we preach or else be labeled a rationalist or a humanist). Hogwash.
    It's my experience that the "churchian hierarchy" favors comprehensibility. The hierarchy wants to create a god who will be popular and understandable to the mass of pew sitters.

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    One need not know the how to know the who; one need not know ALL to know SOME.
    Yes, natural reason knows something about God (Romans 1:19-21).

    Quote Originally Posted by rlhuckle View Post
    According to that standard; I am incomprehensible--yet you read my posts and comprehend me and have formed an opinion of who I am and use that comprehension as a premise. Do you know me from my writings? Am I incomprehensible? Come, let us reason together....
    You are a man. It is an attribute of manhood to be finite and, therefore, potentially comprehensible. Jesus is a man and has manly attributes. Jesus is also God. It is an attribute of God to be infinite and incomprehensible. No exercise of the "hermeneutic tools of communicatio idiomatum, and the theological extra-Calvinisticum" logic can reason out the unreasonable.

  11. #91
    Moderator Saint Nicholas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    New Castle, PA
    Posts
    711
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Below is my original post to Craig.


    Craig Kennedy,

    Below is a link to a thread and discussion a while back that deals with the Lutheran heresy that a believer can fall away and lose(to give up) their salvation.

    These poor Lutheran souls can love Christ then not love Him anymore because they love someone else (or themselves more). Can you imagine that!???? To truly know, love, and be in union with God almighty is not good enough that they should give Him up?

    What blasphemy!!!!!

    Read thread please!!




    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post

    All of us to one degree or another give up God on a daily basis. Every single time we sin we show that we love someone or something more than God. So if St. Nicholas' statements are true by logical deduction we would either have to conclude that St. Nicholas does not believe that he is a sinner or that he is not in union with God. Of course if you believe that you are not a sinner then you are outside of union with God so either way if your premise is true you are outside of union with God.


    Above is Charles response to my original post to Craig Kennedy. I want to point out the “strawman” Chuck creates by changing the premise of the argument. Then Chuck spends his efforts on defeating the “strawman” to dismiss my original premise.

    My original statement to Craig was very clear in that Lutherans believe that they can fall from Grace by
    GIVING UP THEIR FAITH!! Not by acts of sin. Even Chuck has stated in the past that one can give up their gift of faith and fall from salvation/Grace. So sin or acts of sin has no bearing to my premise at all. When I stated that Lutherans can at one moment love Christ (by faith in context) then not love Him anymore (by choosing to not believe in Him), my conclusion to this giving up of Christ was equal to loving someone or themselves more more than Christ.

    Now let us examine Chucks response more closely.
    WB: “All of us to one degree or another give up God on a daily basis”

    Do true regenerate believers fall from Grace on a daily basis and give up their salvation? NO!! That's the premise!!

    WB: “Every single time we sin we show that we love someone or something more than God.”

    What does sin have to do with the original premise of the argument? Chuck is building a SIN argument not a faith one. Can you see the change of context and premise?

    Now Chuck in the next statement builds on his “strawman”.

    WB: “So if St. Nicholas' statements are true by logical deduction we would either have to conclude that St. Nicholas does not believe that he is a sinner or that he is not in union with God.”

    My statements in context were true and logical. However by him misrepresenting my premise with his “strawman” he thus tries to connect his false argument against me by stating that I don't believe I'm a sinner. How preposterous!! Of course I am a sinner. However a sinner saved by Grace through Faith Alone. A faith that can never fall away for Christ is able to keep me from falling away.

    WB: “Of course if you believe that you are not a sinner then you are outside of union with God so either way if your premise is true you are outside of union with God.”

    In Chuck's conclusion he states “if your premise is true”. However Chuck never dealt with my premise at all but rather substituted his own strawman premise. Then has the audacity to infer his “strawman” premise is mine.

    I will just end by saying this. Charles, I will never ever be outside of union with God. Not by sin nor by unbelief. From now and through eternity I will forever be with Him.

    Now my dear fellow, according to your Lutheran confessions and dogmas, you cannot make that statement can you? And please, you do not have to answer this question with all sorts of other non related topics.

    Chuck just a word of advice. Your gig is up! Most on this forum see through your clever devices and confusion tactics. You are not hear to learn or have honest dialogue. This is obvious. Why do you hang around?

    It is my opinion that you would be in better company if you joined onto some Roman Catholic forum.

    You can argue and discuss all day the below:

    2 Sacraments or 7 ?
    Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation.?
    How real is the presence of Christ in the Eucharist?
    What color robes must the clergy wear?
    The office of the Keys?
    Should woman be ordained?
    How many different ways can a regenerate (baby sprinkled) person fall from Grace?
    What types, color, sizes, and metal should Chalices be made of to contain the BLOOD of Christ.?
    Can ordained ministers literally forgive sins though confession or confessionals?
    Should sanctuaries contain Alters?
    What different kinds of monastic chanting should be allowed?
    What iconic pictures of Christ should be displayed?
    What type of literal bread should be used to transform into the Eucharist?
    Is Apostolic succession true? Is the Pope the head of the Body of Christ?
    Is there salvation outside the church?
    Is one saved who refuse the Sacraments?
    The role of Mary in divine Liturgy?
    Divine Liturgy and what it constitutes?

    There is much more for you to discuss with these Catholics Chuck. Who knows? Maybe you will convert one of these Papists to the LCMS.
    For most of us here on this forum, we have settled the above issues. We flat out deny them as stupid churchian dogma and traditions of men.

    Chuck you are wasting your time here on this forum. Your are confused to say the least. You are not even able to understand the context of an argument. Rather than responding you should ask questions to clarify the issue in discussion.

    Please do not take this personal. You truly would be better of spending your efforts on a Catholic forum. Both you and them use similar ways and techniques to argue a position.


    Said with Love,
    Nicholas
    My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand..........John 10:27,28

  12. #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by St. Nick
    What does sin have to do with the original premise of the argument? Chuck is building a SIN argument not a faith one. Can you see the change of context and premise?
    Because sin is an act of unbelief. If we had perfect faith and truly believed every moment of the day we would not sin. Sin is a demonstration of lack of faith. So, no I am not building a straw man. A straw man is a misrepresentation of somebody else's position. You may disagree with my premise that sin is an act of unbelief but I am not misrepresenting your position. Every believer, because he is both saint and sinner, falls into unbelief even in the midst of believing which is why the man could say to Jesus "I believe, help my unbelief." I was not changing the original premise but showing the logical result of your argument. What you could have done to show that my argument is false is to show that sin is not a demonstration of unbelief. Then my premise would be false. If my premise is true that sin is a demonstration of unbelief then everything else follows that I posted if we are following your argument.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  13. #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    Because sin is an act of unbelief. If we had perfect faith and truly believed every moment of the day we would not sin. Sin is a demonstration of lack of faith. So, no I am not building a straw man. A straw man is a misrepresentation of somebody else's position. You may disagree with my premise that sin is an act of unbelief but I am not misrepresenting your position. Every believer, because he is both saint and sinner, falls into unbelief even in the midst of believing which is why the man could say to Jesus "I believe, help my unbelief." I was not changing the original premise but showing the logical result of your argument. What you could have done to show that my argument is false is to show that sin is not a demonstration of unbelief. Then my premise would be false. If my premise is true that sin is a demonstration of unbelief then everything else follows that I posted if we are following your argument.


  14. #94
    Moderator Rlhuckle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Lockhart, tx
    Posts
    661
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    Yes, through faith in Christ. We know the incomprehensible power and wisdom of God through the humiliation and suffering of the cross (1 Cor. 1:18-21).
    I agree that faith is the gift by which we comprehend Christ. You should have posted 1Cor 2:5-10 instead. We are not discussing just natural reason--we are discussing God revealing Christ to His own (at least I was) and making Himself compehensible.



    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    It's my experience that the "churchian hierarchy" favors comprehensibility. The hierarchy wants to create a god who will be popular and understandable to the mass of pew sitters.
    "Churchian hierarchy" favors their own comprehension of incomprehensibility above all others so THEY can continue to be the ones explaining how incomprehensible their god is to the pew sitters....



    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    Yes, natural reason knows something about God (Romans 1:19-21).
    Irrelevant. Don't conlfate.



    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    You are a man. It is an attribute of manhood to be finite and, therefore, potentially comprehensible. Jesus is a man and has manly attributes. Jesus is also God. It is an attribute of God to be infinite and incomprehensible. No exercise of the "hermeneutic tools of communicatio idiomatum, and the theological extra-Calvinisticum" logic can reason out the unreasonable.
    I refer you to 1Cor 2:5-10 again. Don't be so unreasonable. 'nuff said.

  15. #95
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    93
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by gerhard View Post
    In Christ dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 2:9). How can all the fullness of the deity exist in a body? It is incomprehensible. It is unreasonable. But it is not absurd. Absurdity is putting human reason above scripture.
    Greetings.

    Playing with words won't help you.

    You do not even realize the meaning of the terms you are using! I have been using the term incomprehensible in its standard definition today, that which is beyond comprehension. It is in this sense that you have been arguing about God.

    What is it that is incomprehensible? Oh, God fully revealed in Christ incarnate! I see, you have just said something about a subject that is by definition incomprehensible. Do you not see the plain folly of your assertion?

    The ancient use of the English word incomprehensible spoke of that which was without limitation. I am not denying this. That God is without limit is not in question. What is in question is how is it possible for us to know anything about incomprehensibles in the common parlance of today. To say anything meaningful about anything that is incomprehensible is to deny its very incomprehensibleness. Appealing to revelation will not help you! You cannot say that God reveals to us that something is incomprehensible, and at the same time to know what it is. We may know that there are incomprehensibles, if indeed God revealed such things, i.e., that there are such things as incomprehensibles, but we would never be at liberty in discussing any partucular one of them, as by definition they would be unknowable.

    God has not said anything about Himself that is beyond reason to comprehend. Reason is not above scripture but is the God given means whereby one can understand scripture. Reason is not the same as rationalism. Rationalism is the enlightenment concept that the independent and autonomous human reason needs no revelation to arrive at the knowledge of the truth. No Born-Again Christian could affirm that, so stop accusing us of rationalism. Please understand the terms you are using and apply them appropriately. Libel wins no points for you, so to speak.

    Furthermore, please demonstrate in any of my writings where I categorically state that reason is above scripture. Otherwise, as noted above stop making unfounded accusations.

    Sincerely,
    TZ
    proorismenos.

    "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
    To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved."

    Ephesians 1:5-6.

  16. #96
    Administrator Greg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    1,138
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    15
    Thanked in
    8 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    Yep.
    Isaiah 45:7, (KJV), I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

  17. #97
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Middleville, MI
    Posts
    3,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Apparently I'm not communicating very effectively.

    Quote Originally Posted by St. Nicholas
    These poor Lutheran souls can love Christ then not love Him anymore because they love someone else (or themselves more). Can you imagine that!???? To truly know, love, and be in union with God almighty is not good enough that they should give Him up?
    Quote Originally Posted by St. Nicholas
    Do true regenerate believers fall from Grace on a daily basis and give up their salvation? NO!! That's the premise!!
    Quote Originally Posted by St. Nicholas
    What does sin have to do with the original premise of the argument? Chuck is building a SIN argument not a faith one. Can you see the change of context and premise?
    My point is that every act of sin is a demonstration of a lack of faith so these cannot be separated. I confess that I believe that God sees and knows everything but by my act of sinning I either am confessing that I do not really believe that God sees and knows everything or that I don't really think it matters that God sees or knows everything. In either case there would be a lack of faith. Orthodoxy and orthopraxy cannot be separated from one another. So I'm not trying to be tricky by switching words and terms around. It may very well be that at any moment of the day if you walked up to St. Nicholas and asked him if he believed that the Lord Jesus Christ has taken away his sins that he would say, "Yes." (Just as I would). But if you looked at his activities throughout the day you would find that he really doesn't all the time (Just as you would if you looked at my life). Despite what we might say at any given moment our actual activities and thoughts demonstrate a lack of faith.

    When Peter confessed that Jesus was the Christ he showed that the Holy Spirit had given him faith. When Peter tried to talk Jesus out of the crucifixion he showed a lack of faith and Jesus referred to Him as Satan. When Peter denied Christ three times he showed a lack of faith. But Christ absolved him and restored Peter to the faith. Since Jesus said that Peter's confession was the result of the Holy Spirit I'm not going to pretend Peter was just paying lip-service and didn't know what he was talking about. Since Peter later denied the need for the crucifixion I'm not going to pretend Peter was just confused since Jesus calls him Satan. Since Peter denies Christ I'm not going to pretend that Peter did not fall away from the faith and love his own skin more than Christ.

    Most in America at least do not have to face the intense persecution that Peter did but we deny Christ in a variety of ways anyhow. And every single time we sin we deny Christ and show that we love something else better than Christ.

    I hope that even if you guys still disagree you can at least understand what I wrote above. If I'm not communicating effectively I would be more than willing to answer specific questions.
    For whatever strength of arm he may have who swims in the open sea, yet in time he is carried away and sunk, mastered by the greatness of its waves. Need then there is that we be in the ship, that is, that we be carried in the wood, that we may be able to cross this sea. Now this Wood in which our weakness is carried is the Cross of the Lord, by which we are signed, and delivered from the dangerous tempests of this world.--St. Augustine

  18. #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    343
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    21
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    Apparently I'm not communicating very effectively.

    My point is that every act of sin is a demonstration of a lack of faith so these cannot be separated. I confess that I believe that God sees and knows everything but by my act of sinning I either am confessing that I do not really believe that God sees and knows everything or that I don't really think it matters that God sees or knows everything. In either case there would be a lack of faith. Orthodoxy and orthopraxy cannot be separated from one another. So I'm not trying to be tricky by switching words and terms around. It may very well be that at any moment of the day if you walked up to St. Nicholas and asked him if he believed that the Lord Jesus Christ has taken away his sins that he would say, "Yes." (Just as I would). But if you looked at his activities throughout the day you would find that he really doesn't all the time (Just as you would if you looked at my life). Despite what we might say at any given moment our actual activities and thoughts demonstrate a lack of faith.

    When Peter confessed that Jesus was the Christ he showed that the Holy Spirit had given him faith. When Peter tried to talk Jesus out of the crucifixion he showed a lack of faith and Jesus referred to Him as Satan. When Peter denied Christ three times he showed a lack of faith. But Christ absolved him and restored Peter to the faith. Since Jesus said that Peter's confession was the result of the Holy Spirit I'm not going to pretend Peter was just paying lip-service and didn't know what he was talking about. Since Peter later denied the need for the crucifixion I'm not going to pretend Peter was just confused since Jesus calls him Satan. Since Peter denies Christ I'm not going to pretend that Peter did not fall away from the faith and love his own skin more than Christ.

    Most in America at least do not have to face the intense persecution that Peter did but we deny Christ in a variety of ways anyhow. And every single time we sin we deny Christ and show that we love something else better than Christ.

    I hope that even if you guys still disagree you can at least understand what I wrote above. If I'm not communicating effectively I would be more than willing to answer specific questions.
    Sorry buddy, I disagree! The bible says, anyone who says they don't have sin is a liar. This is elect individuals God is talking about. He's NOT talking about the reprobates.

    Elect individuals are elect. The gifts and callings of God are WITHOUT repentance.

    I pray God will reveal these vital truths to you.

    Kevin.

  19. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    321
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hawker View Post
    Sorry buddy, I disagree! The bible says, anyone who says they don't have sin is a liar. This is elect individuals God is talking about. He's NOT talking about the reprobates.

    Elect individuals are elect. The gifts and callings of God are WITHOUT repentance.

    I pray God will reveal these vital truths to you.

    Kevin.
    I most DEFINITELY agree!

    In Christ, Craig
    I believe I am ETERNALLY SECURE based on the FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST! My faith is belief In Christ
    apart from works (Romans 4:5).

    "...for whatever is born of God conquers the world. And this is the victory that conquers the world, our faith. Who is it that conquers the world but the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"
    (1 John 5:4-5 NRSV)

  20. #100
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,304
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    3 Posts

    Re: Our Unreasonable Faith

    Quote Originally Posted by wildboar View Post
    When Peter confessed that Jesus was the Christ he showed that the Holy Spirit had given him faith. When Peter tried to talk Jesus out of the crucifixion he showed a lack of faith and Jesus referred to Him as Satan. When Peter denied Christ three times he showed a lack of faith. But Christ absolved him and restored Peter to the faith. Since Jesus said that Peter's confession was the result of the Holy Spirit I'm not going to pretend Peter was just paying lip-service and didn't know what he was talking about. Since Peter later denied the need for the crucifixion I'm not going to pretend Peter was just confused since Jesus calls him Satan. Since Peter denies Christ I'm not going to pretend that Peter did not fall away from the faith and love his own skin more than Christ.
    Yeah I have a question from what you wrote here, are you saying Peter is not a child of God? I believe when they say lack of faith its not some saving faith... our faith isn't what saves us in the end its Jesus dieing on the cross. If we are unfaithful God is still faithful, and able to save us. Which God did at the cross He saved His children.. so even though we may be unfaithful we are still Gods children and our position in Christ doesn't change.
    I hope you are not saying that falling away from the faith means not being saved at that point in time, because that makes no sense. falling away to me would be they are not being faithful to their first love, they are following after their own sinful desires instead of being Christ like. But doesn't mean just because we sin and we disobey God for a time that we are not saved. Our salvation doesn't depend on anything we do or dont do... if Christ died for us then we are saved period no matter if we rebel our whole lives against God except maybe in our last dieing hour. It doesn't depend on our faith but on God being faithful to us.
    A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour rather than silver and gold. - Wisdom

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 5 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Scheduled Meeting Tonight June 29
    By Bob Higby in forum News & Announcements Archive
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-29-08, 04:08 PM
  2. John Calvin on 1 John 2:2
    By Bob Higby in forum Predestinarian Doctrine Archive
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 01-14-06, 04:25 PM
  3. The Gospel Way Website Changed and Updated
    By Tobias Crisp in forum General Discussion Archive
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-30-05, 11:52 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-28-05, 01:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •