ECT Heaven, when do we go there?

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
The answer to this common attempt to discount Scripture's dichotomous view of man is plainly stated therein.

In the article attempting to establish dichotomy the author claims that the terms soul and spirit are interchangeable.

We know that the spirit in humans is non-material but what about a soul? We know that humans don't have a soul, they are a soul.

Genesis 2:7 KJV And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.​

When a person loses the breath of life they become a dead soul and their spirit returns to God who gave it.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Yes, a contemporary major theologian. And if you knew anything about Richard Muller, his doctoral teacher, you would know this. :AMR:

See: http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/welcome/

AMR
Yes, I understand that you're very proud of your knowledge of major theologians. It shows more with every post.

Personally, I believe that God wants everyone to understand His Word and not just those with fancy pedigrees. The Bible does not take a PhD in "Theology" to understand.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Yes, I understand that you're very proud of your knowledge of major theologians. It shows more with every post.

Personally, I believe that God wants everyone to understand His Word and not just those with fancy pedigrees. The Bible does not take a PhD in "Theology" to understand.
Where have I intimated what you claim of me? Please do not put words into my mouth.

My post made many years earlier in response to another member herein has been deleted with the past database updates, but it bears repeating:

All the other epistles in the New Testament are just practical applications of these two commandments. Do you really need to have a high degree of education to interpret these two commandments? Do you have to have all of the doctrinal statements that religions impose upon us to follow these two commandments?

Nowhere in Scripture are we admonished to remain at the milk level of our understanding of our faith. In fact, we are explicitly told to study and prove out that which we believe.

Theology and practice are separable only verbally and are inseparable for salvation. There are two basic questions in life: “Who is Jesus?” and “Who is God?” We all know how easy it is to create pictures and images in our minds, which turn out not to have any basis in reality. This is especially easy when dealing with something transcendent (like God) or seemingly paradoxical (like Incarnate Christ): there has to be some foundation against which we can check our interior life, so that we do not create some sort of idols or false ideas in the idol factories of our minds and then go worshipping them.

There are many that sincerely believe this or that, but sincerity is never the test of the validity of one's belief. Sincere people around the world have constructed idols from their beliefs and worship them. There are many herein that eschew any sort of appeal to the theological inclined that have preceded us, thinking that they are able to discern complex doctrines by simply reading the Scriptures, never testing what they have concluded against the community of the saints, or wrongly assuming anything men have written outside of the Scriptures is unworthy of study or consideration. Very few can lay claim to a solitary achievement of mastery of the complexities of doctrine
that is why we read the works of such persons preceding us while checking them against the Word of God. Taking every word captive for the glory of God (2 Cor. 10:5) means just that...learning from others, digesting the meat of their words while casting aside the bones.

The study of God, theology as taught in Scripture, is every Christian's calling in order that we may prove out our beliefs, be ready to defend them, and not bring shame to God. Every true believer is a theologian.

Looked at from another direction, if our view of God is wrong, no amount of good works can erase the idolatry we have erected in our heart. So, both go together: faith (theological growth in progress) and praxis (life). One guides, corrects, and balances the other. What if our faith is in something we have imagined? What if we have created an intellectual idol? The Scripture's theology is the guarantor, the check point, and the touchstone, that our faith is legitimate.

Thus, theologians, whether formally trained practitioners or the devoted believer as a student of Scripture, are something like grammarians than like scientists or detectives. Such theologians show us from Scripture how to think, and how not to think, about God, and thusly how to talk about Him. What we should say, and what we should not say. Such theologians do not control what we may say; they simply indicate the rules of intelligible speech.

Finally, gathering up all our studies of God's theology will result in a systematic viewpoint. Systematic theology is a fence that guards our exegesis from error. If our systematic theology actually comes from the organic unfolding progressive nature of Scripture, then it will not be a straight-jacket, but rather the fence that keeps the children from going out into the dangerous road.

AMR
 

Cross Reference

New member
Where have I intimated what you claim of me? Please do not put words into my mouth.

My post made many years earlier in response to another member herein has been deleted with the past database updates, but it bears repeating:



Nowhere in Scripture are we admonished to remain at the milk level of our understanding of our faith. In fact, we are explicitly told to study and prove out that which we believe.

Theology and practice are separable only verbally and are inseparable for salvation. There are two basic questions in life: “Who is Jesus?” and “Who is God?” We all know how easy it is to create pictures and images in our minds, which turn out not to have any basis in reality. This is especially easy when dealing with something transcendent (like God) or seemingly paradoxical (like Incarnate Christ): there has to be some foundation against which we can check our interior life, so that we do not create some sort of idols or false ideas in the idol factories of our minds and then go worshipping them.

There are many that sincerely believe this or that, but sincerity is never the test of the validity of one's belief. Sincere people around the world have constructed idols from their beliefs and worship them. There are many herein that eschew any sort of appeal to the theological inclined that have preceded us, thinking that they are able to discern complex doctrines by simply reading the Scriptures, never testing what they have concluded against the community of the saints, or wrongly assuming anything men have written outside of the Scriptures is unworthy of study or consideration. Very few can lay claim to a solitary achievement of mastery of the complexities of doctrine
that is why we read the works of such persons preceding us while checking them against the Word of God. Taking every word captive for the glory of God (2 Cor. 10:5) means just that...learning from others, digesting the meat of their words while casting aside the bones.

The study of God, theology as taught in Scripture, is every Christian's calling in order that we may prove out our beliefs, be ready to defend them, and not bring shame to God. Every true believer is a theologian.

Looked at from another direction, if our view of God is wrong, no amount of good works can erase the idolatry we have erected in our heart. So, both go together: faith (theological growth in progress) and praxis (life). One guides, corrects, and balances the other. What if our faith is in something we have imagined? What if we have created an intellectual idol? The Scripture's theology is the guarantor, the check point, and the touchstone, that our faith is legitimate.

Thus, theologians, whether formally trained practitioners or the devoted believer as a student of Scripture, are something like grammarians than like scientists or detectives. Such theologians show us from Scripture how to think, and how not to think, about God, and thusly how to talk about Him. What we should say, and what we should not say. Such theologians do not control what we may say; they simply indicate the rules of intelligible speech.

Finally, gathering up all our studies of God's theology will result in a systematic viewpoint. Systematic theology is a fence that guards our exegesis from error. If our systematic theology actually comes from the organic unfolding progressive nature of Scripture, then it will not be a straight-jacket, but rather the fence that keeps the children from going out into the dangerous road.

AMR


Ah yes, "Prove", the operable word here___ but not distort, which you have a habit of doing, <sigh> I guess you should thank your "contemporary" mentors for your educated 'irrational' mindset that has contaminated this forum with your cessationistic anti-insight dogma.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Where have I intimated what you claim of me? Please do not put words into my mouth.

My post made many years earlier in response to another member herein has been deleted with the past database updates, but it bears repeating:

Nowhere in Scripture are we admonished to remain at the milk level of our understanding of our faith. In fact, we are explicitly told to study and prove out that which we believe.
There is an enormousness difference between studying the scripture and growing in grace and the kind of pompous arrogance that goes along with "major theologians" and the completely bogus clergy/laity dichotomy.

Theology and practice are separable only verbally and are inseparable for salvation. There are two basic questions in life: “Who is Jesus?” and “Who is God?” We all know how easy it is to create pictures and images in our minds, which turn out not to have any basis in reality. This is especially easy when dealing with something transcendent (like God) or seemingly paradoxical (like Incarnate Christ): there has to be some foundation against which we can check our interior life, so that we do not create some sort of idols or false ideas in the idol factories of our minds and then go worshipping them.

What an incredibly bold and candid admittance that you reject the gospel of the grace of God. I would never have thought that you'd come right out and admit something like that!
 

DAN P

Well-known member
That's a very poor response AMR.

Do you really think that there is a division between clergy and laity in the body of Christ?

Do you really think that salvation comes by the "practice" of religion?


Hi RD , and he has YET to answer whether we as Grace people are under the NEW COVENANT , you have him !!

dan p
 

Ask Mr. Religion

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Do you really think that there is a division between clergy and laity in the body of Christ?
Clearly, there is a division of roles within the visible vestige of Our Lord's Bride, else Scripture's teachings about the qualifications of those for ordained servantship is for naught. Persons that deny this are usually seeking to avoid covenanting themselves to corporate assembly for worship of God, teaching by those properly called, service to the local assembly, and subjecting themselves to discipline by the local church.

Do you really think that salvation comes by the "practice" of religion?
Where have I ever intimated this? You seem to enjoy putting words into my mouth so you have some reason to cackle before the mob and be seen. I genuinely wonder about your ability to actually read and understand the words of others. Try setting aside your eristic tendencies for a while and see how discussion with others proceeds. Christianity is a religion, the one, true religion. Those that are Christians were not made Christians by the practice of what Scripture commands for worship of God. They practice their faith because they are Christians.

AMR
 

Ask Mr. Religion

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Hi and just refresh me , ARE UNDER THE NEW COVENANT , YES or NO !!

dan p
Stop shouting and try to construct an actual grammatically correct sentence and maybe someone will be able to answer you. The above is not decipherable by anyone that speak's the English common tongue.

AMR
 

Right Divider

Body part
Clearly, there is a division of roles within the visible vestige of Our Lord's Bride, else Scripture's teachings about the qualifications of those for ordained servantship is for naught. Persons that deny this are usually seeking to avoid covenanting themselves to corporate assembly for worship of God, teaching by those properly called, service to the local assembly, and subjecting themselves to discipline by the local church.
The division of "roles" in the body of Christ is by no means a dichotomy of clergy and laity. That is a false breakdown that feeds the egos of the "clergy" and removes responsibility of the "laity".

You, like many, prefer to confuse the types of hierarchy that God gave to Israel and different nature of the body of Christ.


Where have I ever intimated this?

I RE-QUOTED it in THIS very post that you REPLIED to.

Theology and practice are separable only verbally and are inseparable for salvation.
Just exactly HOW is practice inseparable FOR salvation. You clearly do not understand salvation in the dispensation of the grace of God if that is what you believe.

You seem to enjoy putting words into my mouth so you have some reason to cackle before the mob and be seen.

No, I just QUOTE what you wrote. I don't need to "put words in your mouth".

I genuinely wonder about your ability to actually read and understand the words of others. Try setting aside your eristic tendencies for a while and see how discussion with others proceeds. Christianity is a religion, the one, true religion. Those that are Christians were not made Christians by the practice of what Scripture commands for worship of God. They practice their faith because they are Christians.

AMR
Then go ahead and explain your strange statement QUOTED again here for your reading pleasure.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Stop shouting and try to construct an actual grammatically correct sentence and maybe someone will be able to answer you. The above is not decipherable by anyone that speak's the English common tongue.

AMR


Hi and then it is YES , that you are a NEW COVENANT believer , thanks and leave my English alone , please !!

I speak DISPENSATIONALISM !!

dan p
 

Ask Mr. Religion

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The division of "roles" in the body of Christ is by no means a dichotomy of clergy and laity. That is a false breakdown that feeds the egos of the "clergy" and removes responsibility of the "laity".

I have not adopted your claim to dichotomy in my response, so you are reading into my response and arguing against something not in evidence. I see no opposition in the roles Scripture assigns to ordained servants from that of the flock. I am thoroughly complementarian when it comes to roles of individuals described in Scripture.

Just exactly HOW is practice inseparable FOR salvation.
Our faith rests upon the object, Our Lord. If we do not understand exactly who He is, then our faith is built upon intellectual idols of our making, hence proper practice. Who Our Lord is can be found in Scripture, hence proper theology. True faith comprises knowledge, assent, and trust. Knowledge and assent without trust makes salvation but a matter of education. Trust without knowledge and assent makes salvation the blind leap that is contrary to all of Scripture. All three come as a package, and absent any one, professed faith is not possessed faith. Fortunately God grants what He demands, true faith, when regenerating the unbeliever. ;)

See also here and here and here.


AMR
 
Last edited:

Right Divider

Body part

I have not adopted your claim to dichotomy in my response, so you are reading into my response and arguing against something not in evidence. I see no opposition in the roles Scripture assigns to ordained servants from that of the flock. I am thoroughly complementarian when it comes to roles of individuals described in Scripture.

The dichotomy was in the article that you referred to. I assumed that you agree with it. I would note that the apostle Paul never refers to the body of Christ as a flock in his epistles. But that we are all members one of another.

Our faith rests upon the object, Our Lord. If we do not understand exactly who He is, then our faith is built upon intellectual idols of our making, hence proper practice. Who Our Lord is can be found in Scripture, hence proper theology. True faith comprises knowledge, assent, and trust. Knowledge and assent without trust makes salvation but a matter of education. Trust without knowledge and assent makes salvation the blind leap that is contrary to all of Scripture. All three come as a package, and absent any one, professed faith is not possessed faith. Fortunately God gants what He demands, true faith, when regenerating the unbeliever. ;)

See also here and here and here.


AMR
That's some real fancy "theology proper" there padre.

So your you, salvation is a process; whereas Paul refers to it as a done deal.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
So your you, salvation is a process; whereas Paul refers to it as a done deal.

No.

Again, more reading into my words without warrant. Rather than being so strident and very incorrect, try seasoning your words with some tentativeness, as in, "If I am reading you correctly, you seem to think salvation is a process." ;) This is the reasoned manner for situations where general things are being discussed absent clear declarations.

Salvation, more traditionally understood, versus the punctiliar notion of being born again, refers to the entire Golden Chain of redemption: foreknowledge, predestination, calling, regeneration, faith, repentance, justification, union to Christ, adoption, sanctification, and glorification.

Hence, the now and not yet distinctions often used in Scripture. There is the sense of our being saved during our walk of faith along with the sense given in the promise made, that we are now saved. Emphasizing one or the other too much leads to despair and doubt in the one case, antinomianism in the other.

AMR
 

Danoh

New member

I have not adopted your claim to dichotomy in my response, so you are reading into my response and arguing against something not in evidence. I see no opposition in the roles Scripture assigns to ordained servants from that of the flock. I am thoroughly complementarian when it comes to roles of individuals described in Scripture.


Our faith rests upon the object, Our Lord. If we do not understand exactly who He is, then our faith is built upon intellectual idols of our making, hence proper practice. Who Our Lord is can be found in Scripture, hence proper theology. True faith comprises knowledge, assent, and trust. Knowledge and assent without trust makes salvation but a matter of education. Trust without knowledge and assent makes salvation the blind leap that is contrary to all of Scripture. All three come as a package, and absent any one, professed faith is not possessed faith. Fortunately God gants what He demands, true faith, when regenerating the unbeliever. ;)

See also here and here and here.


AMR

Lol - I was in mostly in agreement with you on the knowledge, assent, trust...til that last sentence.
 
Top