These few things I know.

[Israel]

There is something about the way we study the bible that makes lovers fools.

 

[gordon 2]

And remember God's natural garden is without weeds, but man's garden is full of suckers and weeds. Remember this this coming Spring when you shop the catalogue to lovingly cultivate your own little bit of paradise.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Calvinist, Situationalist, Armenian, Fundamentalist, Mutt theory, or mutt Soteriology.

For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

Ole Paul was a wise man. He would have played the dickens in here. So many people bowing at the altar of theology convinced their knowledge is gonna save them. SMH

 

[gordon 2]

Somethin occurred in my little brain last night as I was thinking of why some people might " see" and organize their spiritual understanding differently than others and yet still be in the way. We all know and learn differently because?

The set of mind for people of faith is different for all individuals as it is in the population in general. We all have different personalities. With regards to spiritual knowledge the knowledge we absorb comes to us mainly for our personalities' ability to process knowledge, express it and question it from information given by individuals with different personalities.

Jesus and the apostles all had different personalities. As individuals Peter has a different personality from Jesus and Paul and so does Paul have a different personality from Peter or Jesus yet all of them have in common an engagement with life in the present through Christ.

John has a different personality than all of them. Luke is different in personality than all of them. Matthew, Mark.... etc... What seems to be plain to all of them is the content of their minds. The way of their minds as to thinking about their subjects, they all "think" and communicate differently for their personalities, but we can think that the content of what they think is somehow similar.

Paul declares the old bromide that all he knows is Christ crucified. Peter says all I can give you is what I have and what I have is not money. John starts his Gospel with a description of Christ as if it was his purpose for it. Matthews gospel is basically a description of Jesus present within his social context. etc...

Get the "picture"? All these different personalities despite obvious and sometimes very different personalities put forward Christ present, or God present in the now, in their lives and the lives of people in their times, in their past, but also in the times to come.

When Christ is locked up to only one kind of personality, especially one's own which is vastly different then Christ's, we might have a problem when we study scripture.

What is the mind of Christ? What kind of personality is his? Is he philosophical in communication? Is he poetic? Is he political and calculating? Does Jesus give the impression he paused to weigh his words. Is he quick witted and snaps back answers when questioned? When he is teaching is he direct without an available supply of information with examples from life?

When Jesus uses scripture is it to describe men or God? When Jesus describes the Father in relationship with himself is ever the Father not present to him and therefore not engaged in the events of living?

Now what is my problem with Calvin's Sovereignty doctrine? and with those who parrot that God is in control totally? It is to be honest that I think it is my personality and Calvin's personality are at odds. It is not so much what he says, but it is the personality that permits to stay what he says that I mistrust. I mistrust his personality to such a degree that I would never follow his voice to be as the voice of Christ which I could follow in other men or women. This is not a judgement of John Calvin, it is a judgement I have for myself.

Simply put if this Calvin's declaration was the voice of Christ issued from Christ's personality I would not follow it.... ( from this I can suppose all kinds of things from my and Calvin's perspective regards about myself and salvation.)


"By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal ****ation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death."

So yea... there is something impaired in the capture of the Divine for me in Calvin's declaration... I admit a discomfort with it. It is too concrete for my personality and the personality I understand Christ to have.

If Calvin was to walk into my house with all his personality intact, I would respect him. Even though he darkens any room for me by sucking out the air needed to my personality which is the personality I met Christ with. It is hard for me to see Christ present in Calvin's declarations. I just don't see the personality of Christ in it to the extent that it is a conclusion one can claim as final and as fixed in concreate.

Also perhaps more than this I worry who "we" is in the statement..." By predestination "we" mean..." Who is "we"? Who is Calvin in agreement with? Is "we" the item of himself with Christ? a few friends? a gathering of a few learned scholars or clergy who have submitted papers on such and such theological topics? etc...

So I respect Calvin. I respect his personality. But I respect mine also. I hope that when and where Jesus calls we both go. But I must admit that my problem is just that my problem... that with Calvin I have discomfort. His personality seems to have done what mine can't... is seems to me that Calvin has God locked up to a place where God has a personality indifferent to life, rigid, stiff necked, humped backed and in pain from some tightened muscle.

The Christ I know was like this in personality:

"As they were walking along the road, someone said to Jesus, “I will follow You wherever You go.” 58 Jesus replied, “ Foxes have dens and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head.” 59Then He said to another man, “Follow Me.”

Now that is the kind of personality I'm attracted to. One who can say to one man " Can you follow me?" and to another "Just do it." in the same breath. A man like that I can trust... I'm not sure why. But my personality lets me. Perhaps it is because there is not declaration of " Don't bother to try following me, you just can't. and " Don't bother some of y'all are in. Some are not. I got the wheel on that."

Now my personality lets me know from scripture the occasions when God is present in the lives of people and it is this presence that I can latch onto for I can make a claim in common that as they broke their bread I do so still. When I read Calvin I simply find little bread on the table for which it would be comfortable to live in the present and with all of Christ in mind and with Christ present and with many the other personalities at the table.


When I read scripture I must admit that Christ read it also. I try my best to align myself to his personality when I read it... because the Holy Spirit told me to do it. The Holy Spirit says " It don't matter what So and So said, follow me." and "Y'all know my voice, so follow it."

 

[gemcgrew]

Ole Paul was a wise man. He would have played the dickens in here. So many people bowing at the altar of theology convinced their knowledge is gonna save them. SMH

Without theology, you would not know that Paul was a wise man or that bowing at an altar will not save you.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Without theology, you would not know that Paul was a wise man or that bowing at an altar will not save you.

Definition of theology

1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Funny. I can't recall one instance of Christ saying "Hit the books, and study hard." We are called to know Him, not dissect him. His teachings are so easy a child can understand and apply them, yet a simplistic little post has turned into a theological debate of competing egos in an battle of who can display the most high-mindedness. This place is full of self-appreciating intellect. There's no doubt about that, but it's about as useful and uplifting as a rotting corpse. Odd, that given the Title Spiritual Discussion and Study, there's only obscure doctrinal debate/showmanship.

 

[Israel]

Calvin got introduced into this discussion some time back. For what reason I can only surmise, but I would guess it has more to do with "whose water are you carrying" than anything else. "Tell me whose water you are carrying and I will tailor my response to you accordingly" seemed pretty much the way of it.

As I recall Hummer (whom I have never seen treat anyone with less than an almost painful respect...suffering to an almost exasperation) both saw it, and saw through it. I know others did too, just preferred not to comment upon it. Probably (in my estimation) seeing it was being handled.

Call this a theological prescription or not, call it whatever one cares to, it matters not. Those that know it, live in it, those that don't...simply don't...yet. But I am also quite convinced none of does not find the extreme of benefit of reminder to it, if even we have let it slip in our consciousness. There's not a one of us who need "try and be transparent". We just are. Trying to hide transparency by "trying to be" is as silly an effort as trying to be like Christ to the convincing of others.

(Does one need that equation explained?) That folly?

But, why would any of us need to be reminded of its truth...and benefit? Probably because none of us like to be seen through...generally it's not pleasant to have one's motives exposed to a greater degree than one understands them themselves. To have it made so plain that a man does not even know himself to the measure he imagines he does. And...made too plain...that if a man does not even know himself very well, (if at all) everything else is so skewed and screwed up according to that misinformation as to be mostly...spuriously spewed data.

Do you hear spirits?

Do you know what answer doesn't matter at all to that question?

Any.

Do you know God?

Ditto.

Yet...even as God needs no one to explain either Himself nor His motives, unless one has been carried away to dumb idols thinking it (them) is/are God, there's gonna be a whole lot of "why do you gotta be that way?" veiled in as much dumbness a man can muster to hide his own self...from himself. Serving a dumb idol.

No doubt we all like to assume we know what love "feels like".

Till someone we think we love comes along and we offer our best effort to let them know we do...and they respond..."get thee behind me Satan"

Do you hear spirits?

 

[hummerpoo]

In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety. Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

Concerning him we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.

Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. And this we will do, if God permits.

 

[Ray357]

Definition of theology

1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experienceespecially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world

Funny. I can't recall one instance of Christ saying "Hit the books, and study hard." We are called to know Him, not dissect him. His teachings are so easy a child can understand and apply them, yet a simplistic little post has turned into a theological debate of competing egos in an battle of who can display the most high-mindedness. This place is full of self-appreciating intellect. There's no doubt about that, but it's about as useful and uplifting as a rotting corpse. Odd, that given the Title Spiritual Discussion and Study, there's only obscure doctrinal debate/showmanship.

You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.

 

[gemcgrew]

But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.

That he understandeth and knoweth me.

Theology is the knowledge of God and His revelation, but I am under no delusion that theology is for everybody.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.

That he understandeth and knoweth me.

Theology is the knowledge of God and His revelation, but I am under no delusion that theology is for everybody.

I'm under no delusion that all the high-mindedness and intellectual puffery that goes on here benefits a soul other than the pride of the ones who engage in it.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.

Yes he was, yet what did he count it as? Did he say "Y'all all study to become like me so you can argue high and obscure theological doctrines in lofty circles??? Paul didn't go about planting seminary schools. He planted churches. And he taught essentials. That's what lost people need to know....essentials and how to apply them to their daily life. How to find God, find forgiveness, find peace, find that relationship with God. That's where the spiritual life is, not in all these other squabbles over the ologies and the isms.

 

[gemcgrew]

I'm under no delusion that all the high-mindedness and intellectual puffery that goes on here benefits a soul other than the pride of the ones who engage in it.

If I was anti-knowledge, I'm sure that I would feel the same way.

 

[Israel]

Makes me think of Gordon's recent post about persons, personalities, spiritual conclusions...and even to (specifically) all the differences that might be found along the way of those...even in "the way"

Think of Christ, having them (as many as are)...inside...and we may begin to understand the Lord's suffering and death. Learn the cost of casting none aside, and one begins to see the cost of themselves being "kept"...quite joyfully.

 

[Ray357]

Yes he was, yet what did he count it as? Did he say "Y'all all study to become like me so you can argue high and obscure theological doctrines in lofty circles??? Paul didn't go about planting seminary schools. He planted churches. And he taught essentials. That's what lost people need to know....essentials and how to apply them to their daily life. How to find God, find forgiveness, find peace, find that relationship with God. That's where the spiritual life is, not in all these other squabbles over the ologies and the isms.

Actually Paul went around doing quite a bit of debating with both saved and lost.
There is a definite order in which a convert needs to be discipled. You act like they can only be taught a few things and then education must stop. If you read closely, you will immediately see the apostles disputed among themselves.
Christians need to have a basic knowledge of systematic theology. They also need to know why they believe what they believe about soteriology and eschatological thinking.

 

[Israel]

You use Paul as an example and he was a theologian of theologians. I will be the first to call seminary a cemetery. I also recognize that Biblical knowledge is essential. I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology and they use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.

Is there a recommendation here?

What is it you are saying?

I think many people are too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology

while that many(?) are also those who

use being taught by The Spirit as an excuse.

Is that what you are saying...that "the many" (too lazy to learn The Bible and learn theology) are also those who use (are full of?) excuse?

Is that it?

Lotsa folks on here have been accused of being "crytpic", vague...not plain enough...maybe even too high falutin'...and this ain't no new experience. Many here have been "on" over a decade.

So, help a brother out...cause generally to me, when I hear a man say another is lazy it's not only far from an admirable observation, but usually a form of accusation of inferior motive...and no less if or when one says someone relies on excuses.

So here's your opportunity to correct me if my thinking inclines toward your voicing a recommendation against being "like" the many and I hear you wrongly.

But you may then want to reconsider this post:

You hold a position that puts you on a theological Island with a miniscule few for company.

How unlike the many...should a man be?

It's almost funny how peculiarly common man can be, thinking he's unique.

Man...is that cryptic?

Man...where are you?

Is hope found in being among the many...or few?

Or with only One?

Do you mind if I chuckle that you felt it needful to tell Gem his estate of being rare in being held by a rare view? That he might even endure at times the (mere) feeling of being alone?

It's quite amazing how much "feeling" our Lord endured in conquering the lie that God has left man alone and hopeless and helpless. (One could ask for the vision of that conquering and where it led, and, as Hummer was led to mention as reminder...it did not exclude "loud cries and tears")

Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

Do you have an "eye out"?

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into **** fire:

An eye out for the one willing to appear alone...who isn't?

And PS.
I was less than clear when mentioning Hummer's patience in respect to others to an almost exasperation...the almost exasperation is mine, not his.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

You act like they can only be taught a few things and then education must stop

Nope. Neither said nor implied.

 

[Ray357]

Nope. Neither said nor implied.

Yep, said and implied.

 

[Ray357]

Is there a recommendation here?

What is it you are saying?



while that many(?) are also those who



Is that what you are saying...that "the many" are also those who use (are full of?) excuse?

Is that it?

Lotsa folks on here have been accused of being "crytpic", vague...not plain enough...maybe even too high falutin'...and this ain't no new experience. Many here have been "on" over a decade.

So, help a brother out...cause generally to me, when I hear a man say another is lazy it's not only far from an admirable observation, but usually a form of accusation of inferior motive...and no less if or when one says someone relies on excuses.

So here's your opportunity to correct me if my thinking inclines toward your voicing a recommendation against being "like" the many and I hear you wrongly.

But you may then want to reconsider this post:



How unlike the many...should a man be?

It's almost funny how peculiarly common man can be, thinking he's unique.

Man...is that cryptic?

Man...where are you?

Is hope found in being among the many...or few?

Or with only One?

Do you mind if I chuckle that you felt it needful to tell Gem his estate of being rare? That he might even endure at times the (mere) feeling of being alone?

It's quite amazing how much "feeling" our Lord endured in conquering the lie that God has left man alone and hopeless and helpless.

Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

Do you have an "eye out"?

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into **** fire:

An eye out for the one willing to appear alone...who isn't?

And PS.
I was less than clear when mentioning Hummer's patience in respect to others to an almost exasperation...the almost exasperation is mine, not his.

You got the cart leading the horse. My statements were in response to being criticized for studying and valuing systematic theology and soteriology. I did not come out of the blue and accuse anyone of anything. I replied to a criticism leveled against me for the value I place on Biblical scholarship. I fully stand by what I said.

 

[Israel]

Your first statement was a correction...or do I misread?

God is in complete control but does not control everything.

And I listen for acoustics when I hear Paul played or "taught".



And I am not the only.