Cynic

The following comments on the progressive nature of the biblical revelation of God as tri-personal is from “The Trinity,” by Loraine Boettner. See: http://www.jude3.net/boettner_trinity.htm

The following is from Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments, by Geerhardus Vos (page 356, 2000 edition). Scripture references are, of course, from the Gospel of John.

“The unregenerate man can, through common grace, love his family and he may be a good citizen. He may give a million dollars to build a hospital, but he cannot give even a cup of cold water to a disciple in the name of Jesus. If a drunkard, he may abstain from drink for utilitarian purposes, but he cannot do it out of love for God. All of his common virtues or good works have a fatal defect in that his motives which prompt them are not to glorify God, — a defect so vital that it throws any element of goodness as to man wholly into the shade. It matters not how good the works may be in themselves, for so long as the doer of them is out of harmony with God, none of his works are spiritually acceptable. Furthermore, the good works of the unregenerate have no stable foundation, for his nature is still unchanged; and as naturally and as certainly as the washed sow returns to her wallowing in the mire, so he sooner or later returns to his evil ways.” Loraine Boettner, Total Depravity ( http://www.the-highway.com/depravity_Boettner.html )

The following is a quotation from a work by John Owen called, Vindiciae Evangelicae; Or, The Mystery of the Gospel Vindicated and Socinianism Examined. John Owen has been given the moniker by some of the “Hammer of the Socinians” for his successful critique of and opposition to Socinian dogma that had then risen on its hind legs in England. Owens's arguments seem to ring as loudly in their content today against the teachings of Wierwille, TWI spinoffs, and Anthony Buzzard as they did against those errant teachings that denied Christ's deity in Owens's day.

“Every sin is an act of cosmic treason, a futile attempt to dethrone God in his sovereign authority.” -- R. C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

Happy Birthday, Shellon!!!

ClayJay, Sunesis, Did you make it into the threads that were moved?

George, You should have behaved; it could have been six days. Actually, it seems that GSC is now being hosted on a different server, and it took time for the changed location of the domain name to “propagate” over the internet. My ISP apparently incorporated the change this afternoon, though I managed to get to the forum a little sooner using anonymouse.org .

Let’s try a few things before getting around to considering nefarious possibilities. I’m no geek, but I once had problems for several weeks accessing the main page of a major search engine. The problem turned out to be in my router, and was corrected after I merely unplugged the thing for about 10 seconds, then plugged it back in. If that fails in your case, you might try using a different browser (e.g. IE instead of Firefox, Firefox instead of IE). If you want to cut right to the chase, try a different computer with a different internet connection. Let us know how it turns out.

I was able to access the four moved topics that appear on the first page of the open forum when I was logged in to GSC, but could not access them when I was logged out.

Hey, O’Malley. LTNS. Nice to see you posting.

Amen!

Pawtucket, I did not respond to your comment two years ago, because it seemed to me at the time to do so might lead rather quickly to the deletion of this thread. Responding to your post, however, was never so much a question of will I or won’t I as it was question of when. I did NOT insinuate I had any post deleted because I was promoting a website at GSC. I indicated in my post that my then-recent inclusion of my website’s URL in my signature line and under my avatar was a precautionary action I was taking due to my possible suspension from GSC. A thoughtful reader should have inferred that my announcement of my website followed (rather than preceded) some situation that existed between one or more GSC moderators and me. For everyone's information, the situation was that Modgellan had issued me my "one warning that casting aspersions on a moderator WILL result in suspension of your posting privileges," after I had quipped that a moderator who had deleted an exchange I had with Rocky and Garth in the Politics forum was a "functionally codependent moderator."

I am on Facebook as Mark C. Bowles. http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-C-Bowles/100000206097815

I loathe church gimmicks, but this is one of the more squalid of them. The pastor should read the four gospels. I hope I would be out of there, but am aware I have stayed put in places longer than I should have.

I just saw this, and am shocked. Sorry, Dooj.

Here is a link to a response Richard Gaffin made to a piece by another theologian concerning 1 Corinthians 14:34: http://opc.org/nh.html?article_id=447 The piece to which Gaffin was responding: http://opc.org/nh.html?article_id=440 Due to viewing 1 Cor. 14:34 contextually in a way that does not prohibit women from engaging in any manner of uninspired speech (including uninspired prayer) in the churches, Gaffin's suggestion (i.e. that the prohibition might be against women participating in authoritative evaluations of prophecy) makes for a more plausible position than his opponent's.

I am utterly unfamiliar with Darby’s works, but the following seems to indicate Darby DID (at some time, at least) promote the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church. See also: http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/PROPHET/11006E.html ****

Apparently, Socinians attempted to affirm the reality of sin while denying original sin. Here is one description of Socinian views about human sin nature and original sin I found at http://www.swordofthespiritbibleministries.com/RJSonnet/RJSonnetNOTES/RJS Notes DS1 Doctrine of SIN_Part1.pdf : While I find that statement incoherent, it seems at first glance to be a possible attempt to affirm the reality and presence of sin, while denying that the progeny of Adam (by natural generation) stand guilty before God due to Adam's sin, and are necessarily sinful in their own selves because of an inherited (post-lapsarian) Adamic human nature. ***** Post-lapsarian = after the Fall

Steve, The concept that post-lapsarian humans born by natural generation are afflicted with an indwelling, inescapble proclivity and bondange to sin is certainly scriptural. Pelagians, Faustus Socinus and Christadelphians denied/deny this (the denial fits well with the mere-man Christology of the latter two). Paul wrote: “but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. (Romans 7:23 – NASB) ***** Quiz for the Day Identify the person who famously wrote: “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem, or the Academy with the church? What have heretics to do with Christians? Our doctrine originates with the porch of Solomon, who had himself taught that men must seek the Lord in simplicity of heart. Away with all who attempt to introduce a mottled Christianity of Stoicism and Platonism and dialectic!"

Geisha, :) I read Biblical Theology Old and New Testaments about five years ago, when I was in the process of leaving a church I had been attending and finding a new one. I have never heard of Virkler, but I found that his book was reviewed at John Frame and Vern Poythress site ( http://www.frame-poythress.org/poythress_articles/1982ReviewVirklerHermeneutics.htm ). Maybe you could post a short synopsis or review of it. I am presently reading The Law is Not of Faith: Essays on Works and Grace in the Mosiac Covenant, edited by Bryan D. Estelle, J.V. Fesko, and David VanDrunen -- all of Westminster Seminary, California. One longstanding irritation I have had with Covenant Theology is the practice of some covenant theologians to characterize the Mosaic covenant soley as an administration of the covenant of grace and ignore some plain statements in Paul's epistle to the Galatians. Well, it seems I have not been as alone in harboring a dissenting view as I had thought. The contributors to this book (who are all highly likely to be covenant theologians) are expressing their own theological dissent. Question: Is your husband an ex-Wayfer?

Good topic, Jeff. Bullinger and Wierwille's dispensationalism manufactured discontinuity between the Gospels and the remainder of the New Testament. I agree that there is one eschatological event for God's elect referred to in the Gospels and the Pauline epistles.

Driscoll apparently did participate in a "converging" or "convergent" conference held by a Baptist seminary, though I doubt women were barred from the affair.

WG, Again, the Wittenburg Door piece is satire. It is replete with fictitious conferences, fictitious statements and actions attributed to Driscoll, a fictitious pro-Driscoll blogger, a fictitious church in Kentucky, and a fictitious anti-Driscoll website (try googling the conferences, the Kentucky church, and the anti-Driscoll Wordpress blog). There was no conference mentioned in the piece from which women could have barred. Here is a link to the subject piece (“Mark Driscoll Kicks His Own A$$”): http://tinyurl.com/46bfn7 The level of factuality in Wittenburg Door pieces (though WD does do interviews and occasional somewhat serious exposes) can be assessed by reading: “Virgin Mary Found on Back of Grand Theft Auto” http://www.wittenburgdoor.com/virgin-mary-gta “Victorious Secret: Lingerie for Overcomers” http://www.wittenburgdoor.com/victorious-secret%3A-lingerie-overcomers

I am now thinking The Door's edition cover (which I never saw) purported that Corrie Ten Boom was to marry or go off (something along those lines) with Burt Reynolds. Unfortunately, the particular edition of the magazine happened to come out when Corrie died.