TheEvan

Honestly, Larry, the only way I could warrant such a conclusion is by analyzing verses or phrases, or even larger stories, without backing up and readig the Bible as the plan of redemption. I assert that if one reads the wider sweep of the story of redemption, limited foreknowledge is an impossible conclusion.

If you take a few steps back and ask where is Jesus in the story of Abraham and Isaac things become clearer. It's when we get lost in the minutia of this or that phrase, phrase-by-phrase that we get lost in the trees.

The story is a picture of Christ to come, of his sacrifice to come, and the grace that comes with yielding our all to God's will. And why would we yield our will to His if He doesn't quite know the way?

In this case, yes. Certainly, the caveat that you can prove most anything using bible verses applies. In this case, I think the weight of scripture as a whole amply supports omniscience.

I see nothing to disabuse me of the trafitional doctrine of omniscience. He is all wise and all knowing.

The limited foreknowledge stuff is utter hooey.

My sister has ridden for 30+ years and has always made safety a high priority. She writes a safety column for her motorcycle club. Maybe that's why she took so long to finally have an accident. As usual, a car pulled out in front of her after making what she thought was eye contact. Elinor was going 45 and hit the passenger door without even hitting her brakes. Thankfully it was a small car, not an SUV or truck, because she launched over the vehicle instead of being splattered against the side of it. Her full protective gear saved her the pain of road rash. But she did break her pelvis in 5 places. She's mostly rehabbed but will always walk a bit funny. She rides again...

If it can happen to her it can happen to anybody.

Locally of late there have been a number of fatalities involving crotch rockets being ridden irresponsibly by young males.

If you're going to bother with history, you'll need to read a number of well-founded books documenting the era. Calvin's behavior needs to be contextualized properly. While I think some of Garth's criticisms are justified (or at the least, arguable), some of the, uh, excess ventilation (aka: huffing and puffing) amounts to criticising the era. It's a bit like pointing the long bony finger at Abraham as the worst profligate of history because he had children by several women, when it was the common and accepted practice of the day.

I got the distinct impression you wouldn't want to try that sort of thing at one of his meetings, to say the least.

Personally, I think a good deal of it is a form of self-hypnosis, which may be something like Danny suggested earlier...a form of emotional ecstasy. Many cultures and religions seem to have somthing similar.

Just some personal observations: It seems that the ladies (yeah, I said 'ladies') seeking attention jump the highest, shout the loudest and fall out first. I also see it as a means a visiting minister will use to validate his ministry. It's a power trip to be able to wave your arms and have grown people fall over. People will say 'wow, this is f'real' and peel off the greenbacks for the offering basket. That's my take.

Not sure about Joyce Myers, but I assume she approves. My wife went to a meeting where the laughter thing was breaking out and Joyce was encouraging the phenomenon.

Cynic, thanks for pointing out the link between the Isaiah citation and the one in John. That's pretty nifty.

Thanks for the Spurgeon excerpt. He expresses my belief better than than I.

Coincidentally, Calvinism and politics intersected today here in Louisiana.

Today the state Dem party rolled out a series of attack ads against Rep. candidate Bobby Jindal, who was raised Hindu (his parents are immigrant Idians) but converted to Catholicism when in high school.

They quoted a paper he wrote when a student at Oxford in England wherein he was expressing aspects of his Catholic choice and making comparisons to other dominant Christian doctrines, including Calvinism.

In the ad, they accuse Bobby of besmirching Protestants by calling them "totally depraved".

HAHAHAHAHA!

How dumb do they think people are??

Um, he was reviewing the 5 points of Calvinism.

Anyway, they ran the ad in (mostly Protestant) north Louisiana. I guess they have other gems for (mostly Catholic) south Louisiana.

But I guess they're desparate, since Bobby is polling upwards of 70% against the entire field of other candidates.

sky, though you have moderated your opening post you're still misrepresenting Calvinist beliefs. Making everyday choices are certainly accounted for in the Calvinist system.

I do accept the Calvinist notions of irresitable grace, the total depravity of man and pre-destination. I stop short at election (the notion that some are ordained to heaven and some to hell no matter what; citations are pulled from Romans 9).

I'm more concerned with the effects on daily living. One thing I admire about the Calvinists (or Covenant believers, as the nomenclature goes these days) is their ability to accept things that happen. The best of them allow their difficulties to deepen and mature them. since they believe that God organized it, they are looking for the deeper lesson and seek to grow thereby. I find that healthy.

Abigail, as far as

Anything can be taken to an extreme. One can say it is all grace and therefore I can do whatever I want to, no matter how evil or hurtful, and I will still go to heaven. Therefore, I'm going to grab all the cookies for myself and it doesn't matter who I have to step on to get them.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in

unawares, who were before of old ordained to

this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the

grace of our God into lasciviousness, and

denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus

Christ.

Here's the good stuff:

Titus 2:11-12 For the grace of God that

bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

eaching us that, denying

ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live

soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present

world;

Calvin was superbly educated at revered institutions. He was a true scholar and a prolific writer. He didn't co-opt others' work. As far as I know, he wasn't a hose monster. I guess the similarities are elsewhere.

Right on Abi. The reason it's not spelled out clearly is because IT DOESN'T MATTER. The number crucified is not the point of the passage, nor is the number of denails the point of the passage. The big point is that all of those picaninny "accuracy of God's Word" studies miss the big point. That's why so many wayfers knew and know quite a bit of holy scripture but are so spiritually shallow and tepid.

A distinction needs to be made between dominionist theology which gives rise to the more political description in the above wiki link. Dominionists believe that more and more souls can be won to Christ resulting in an eventual kingdom of God on earth in the spiritual sense.

I've seen the biblical justifications but they seem rather tortured. I think the Bible teaches exactly the opposite. While I certainly believe in separation of church and state, I think the greater danger is the elimination of church from state. While such fools as Mansfield are the poster child-boogey man for those who fear church incursions into the state, the real evil that lurks around the corner (imo, of course) is wholesale persecution of Christians and Christian ideas.

Dang. Well, I'm glad somebody finally has figured it all out. Thanks

Waysider, Peter Jay is not Peter Quatieri. I know/knew both.

Nicole, thanks for the gift of finding this place and posting about your dad. He was a genuinely good guy.

Thanks, Lifted Up, that was sweet.

Shifra, that was a beautiful and powerful post. Thanks for the inspiration. It brought tears to my eyes.

However I do think it is indicative of a systemic problem where so many in our country are not willing to fund government to adequate levels, state or federal.

I agree the problem is systemic, but I do not believe governments are under funded, certainly not at the federal level. The problem is allocation, and that is a political problem at its worst. Funds are allocated according to political whim. A month of Iraq war funding would solve a good deal of our infrastructure problems. A year would solve them all.

Louisiana just had a historic legislative session wherein the huge windfall of tax money & federal billions in the wake of Katrina was at stake. The governor vetoed the roads & bridges allocations. This, in a state with the worst roads in the nation. Instead, we hired 1300 new state employees (we're already in the top 5 of state workers per capita) and gave huge raises to the rest.

That's why people scream about big gov.

I very much realize that. Your communications are still, often as not, oblique.

Incidentally the biblical reference to those 'zealous for the law' was not to the Pharisees. The rap on them, from Jesus himself, was the 'doctine and commandments of man'.

Yeah, I wanna know what happened to Zorro and his toxic farts.

Wait, that was awhile ago. I guess Zorro would be about 300 in dog years by now. So he's up in guide dog heaven having some hapless human lead him around & sleep under his chair during class...

(Uh, sorry, don't know where Richard is)

Some excellent replies.

What I mean by that is, toss it out, toss it all out. Then reconstruct what you believe from sources outside TWI. If what TWI taught you was the truth, you will then run across it and document it from other sources that are NOT CONTAMINATED by TWI

Yep. "Consider the source" is all important, and a thing taught in the scriptures. VeePee's twisted "I'm thankful for truth even if it came from the devil himself" sounds logical, I suppose. But it's been the ruin of many a poor boy. Er, make that 'many a poor girl'.

"Beware the leaven..."

"A little leaven..."

There are plenty of great (and morally upright) sources out there waiting for you.

Okay, that's cool. You don't have to answer. Carry on.

Do you propose a meaning other than I proposed for those two verses? It seems self-evident to me and pretty straightforward, but I could be wrong.

If I may be so bold, I would rephrase "Some pick freedom and some pick slavery..

You cannot serve two masters" as thus:

Some serve righteousness and some serve sin, and yet both are free. The former is free from sin whil the latter is, sadly, free from righteousness.

Based on the above, I would posit that there is no freedom in a vacuum. Nobody is "just" free. They are free from something. That 'something', in the verses, is either sin or righteousness...

In that sense, everybody is free and everybody is a servant.

QUOTE(TheEvan @ Jul 28 2007, 06:56 PM)

Huh?

Sin is both a (fallen) state and an act.

Now it's a (fear) motivation?

To which Wearword replied:

What part of the word "free" don't you understand?

No trouble there, ww, but I fail to understand how that is a reply to my post. Perhaps you could explain it more clearly?

Speaking of "free", everybody is free. Oh and everybody is in bondage. Yes, everybody. Pick your freedom and pick your slavery:

Rom 6:20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye

were free from righteousness.

Rom 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and

become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto

holiness, and the end everlasting life.

F

Tearing someone down doesn't build me up.

True enough. On the other hand, passing off error as truth does the truth no favors.

As was true for Jeremiah, the path to truth begins with laying the ax to the root, digging up, tearing down, pulling down. All of that is necessary before the true building can be built.