Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | DocTrinsograce | 220028 | ||
Hi, Dodoy... What you are espousing is called synergistic soterism: universal atonement and libertarian free will. It was first espoused in Christendom by a monk named Pelagius Bretto -- hence it is often called Pelagianism. The theological view of libertarians are held by Socinians, Molinists, Arminians, and Open Theists. (The Romanists hold a view very similar to yours called Semi-pelagianism, denying any real effect of original sin on human nature.) In Pelagianism, human nature is neither good nor bad, but simply ignorant -- given the facts, man is able to choose salvation. Hence, man is in need of a tutor. In Semipelagianism, human nature is neither good nor bad, but simply injured -- given healing, man is able to choose salvation. Hence, man is in need of a physician. By contrast, orthodox Monergism asserts the Biblical perspective that man is dead (Ephesians 2:1, Colossians 2:13), lacking the moral ability to change his nature (Jeremiah 13:23) -- given regeneration (2 Corinthians 5:17) man is able to walk in righteousness (1 John 3:7, 10). Hence, man is in need of a Savior (John 1:13; 6:44). I now understand your reticence to respond to my questions, or tell us with whom you are studying. The presupposition that allows you to build your philosophical structure, is a heterodoxical definition of sin. Milliard Erickson renders a very good summation of the orthodox Christian definition: "Sin is any lack of conformity, active or passive, to the moral law of God. This may be a matter of act, of thought, or of inner disposition or state." You see, man is born in sin with an evil and wicked nature (Matthew 7:11, Ephesians 2:3), sharing the same evil nature as Satan (John 8:44). Man sins by choice and by the motivation of his very nature. Sin fills every aspect of his being from head to toe (Isaiah 1:5-6). His heart and mind is filled with it (Ecclesiastes 9:3, Ephesians 4:17-19, Titus 1:15, 1 Timothy 3:8, 6:5). There remains no good in men (Romans 7:18). Man is basically evil, not good. His heart is as hard as stone (Ezekiel 11:19, Jeremiah 23:29). Man imagines that he is only sick, but the Bible says he is dead (Ephesians 2:1, Colossians 2:13). Man feels he is, at worst, near-sighted, but Scripture says he is blind (2 Corinthians 3:14). Man shrugs off his vices as minor, but the Word says he is a slave (John 8:44, Ephesians 2:2, 2 Timothy 2:26). As I pointed out before, man lacks the moral ability to change his nature (Jeremiah 13:23). He can't stop sinning or even want to stop sinning (2 Peter 2:14). Everything he does has a sinful motive behind it, even when his actions outwardly appear good (Genesis 6:5). Man is unable to obey God (Matthew 7:18, Romans 8:7-8). He never seeks God (Romans 3:11). He is unwilling and unable to come to God for help (John 3:19-20, John 5:40, John 6:44, 65). Man is always set against God. His will is not neutral or self-determining. He always wills in accordance with his nature. Since his nature is evil, his thoughts and motives are always evil. But this moral inability does not annul his responsibility. Quite the contrary it compounds his guilt. Remember, this sinfulness is self-inflicted. God does not cancel Man's debt simply because Man has squandered the loan and is unable to pay God back. Man is guilty and deserves to go to Hell (Romans 6:23). This is the doctrine traditionally called total depravity. It is a question of extent and degree. Tim Challies writes, "We can put one drop of deadly poison in that glass and it renders that entire glass poisonous so that if you were to drink it, you would quickly drop dead. That one drop extended to every part of the glass even though the entire vessel is not filled with poison. This represents humans after the Fall. While they are not wholly corrupt, the corruption they do have extends to every part. And finally consider a third glass which is filled entirely with poison. From top to bottom there is nothing but deadly poison. This represents Satan, who the Bible portrays as being absolutely corrupt so there is no good left whatsoever, but this does not represent humans here on earth. Humans are not as depraved as they could possibly be." In Him, Dco |
||||||
2 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | lightedsteps | 220058 | ||
Hi Doc In my attempt to better understand your teaching posted to dodoy I have gone back to your post 220028 Whereby I am finding it hard to nail down any definitions for a word and a term which you have used. (Heterodoxical) Heterodoxical or heretical groups, the Middle Ages involved constant attempts to renegotiate and redefine relationships among people. .....Technorati (Orthodox Christian) This is all I am able to find for your use of this term. I am sure this cannot be what you are saying. Where could I find the definition as you are using it. The Orthodox Christian belongs to the Body of Christ, the Church of Christ. This Eastern Orthodox Church is organically the same congregation (or ecclesia) which was born at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem on Pentecost, a direct continuation from the Apostles by laying on of hands from each generation of priests to the next. The Orthodox Christian recognizes the rich Christian heritage and proclaims that he belongs to this Church, which corresponds to the Church of the Apostles as does a grown-up person correspond to a picture taken of him as a child. The Orthodox Christian has been baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity and follows the ideals and beliefs of both the Scriptures and Sacred Tradition. He believes in a living and loving God, Whose Grace protects and guides him in the path of redemption. He believes that God has revealed Himself in the Bible through the Prophets and especially in the Person of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son who is man's Savior. He especially believes in the Incarnation of Christ as God-Man, in His Crucifixion and Resurrection, in His Gospel and Commandments, and in the world to come. ......Orthodox Christian Page Thank you for your indulgence lightedsteps |
||||||
3 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | DocTrinsograce | 220061 | ||
Dear lightedsteps, Thank you for the questions. The word orthodoxy comes from two Greek root words: ortho (right or correct) and doxa (opinion or thinking). In theology, when we use the word, we mean the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. The word heterodoxy uses a Greek root word heteros (different or other). We use the word to man those teachings that are contrary to orthodoxy. The Eastern Orthodox Church capitalizes the word. In the same way, the Roman Catholic Church capitalizes catholic -- which simply means universal or ubiquitous. Don't hesitate to ask such questions. We only effectively communicate when our terms are clearly defined for one another. In Him, Doc |
||||||
4 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | lightedsteps | 220062 | ||
Hi Doc A little deeper clarification if you don't mind. you said in regard to Christian ( orthodoxy ) "In theology, when we use the word, we mean the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. 1) Does this refer to the most basic doctrines that all denominations can agree on or are they the doctrines of only certain denominations? What I am seeking for is the understanding of who is being specifically spoken of. 2) When you say ( orthodoxy ) would this be the same as I would say Christendom meaning all Christians regardless of denomination? Where I would be speaking about or on behalf of the Christian Faith in the general sense. 3) In your using the word ( orthodoxy ) does it encompass the Pentecostals and Catholics within this term because of the differences found in their doctrinal beliefs? you say ( heterodoxy ) "We use the word to mean those teachings that are contrary to orthodoxy." 4) Is it as simple as a different or other opinion or thinking? Or does it lean more in the direction of heresy idolatrous schismatic unorthodox something more on the order of contrary to and opposite in nature or character to the held theology? The reason I ask is that neither the term ( Christian orthodoxy ) nor the word ( heterodoxy ) have a very benign sound to them. Forgive me for saying it this way but they convey the feeling of being very staid and absolutely without any room for question. In Jesus lightedsteps |
||||||
5 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | Beja | 220066 | ||
Light, Doc can certainly answer the question for himself, but I thought I might be able to help you understand it. Basically what the term boils down to, is the teaching that has been what Christians have principally believed throughout the time between Christ's birth and now. Now this isn't to suggest they all believed the same thing. But that on many doctrines any time somebody did disagree it was obvious that they were outside the traditional Christian teaching on the subject. The basically is referring to the teachings of the apostles, the early church, some of what the Catholic Church has believed especially during its earlier time depending on exactly where you want to see it to have begun and ended; then especially what was recovered through the protestant reformation and during the puritan era, all the way up to the last 100 or so years where we have seen such an unbelievable casting off of the old teachings of Christianity for everybody to decide what is right in their own eyes. You would be surprised how much substantial teachings were agreed upon during these time periods. At least agreed upon to the point that the ones that disagreed stood out pretty clearly. Now here is what the word gives us in practical terms. When you believe something that is heterodoxy (different from what Christians have always believed) then in order for you to be right, the entire history of Christian religion must have been wrong in order for you to be right. Now...I heartily agree that just because people have always believed something doesn't make it right. And orthodoxy is not an absolute proof of truth. I am a baptist. I believe that only professing believers should receive baptism, yet if you look at Christian history the vast majority has held to infant Baptism. So I do think sometimes the historical position of Christianity is wrong. (Thought I do not think the apostolic church baptised infants.) Yet at the same time our indipendent times lead us to another error. We need to think long and hard about how serious it is to hold to a heterodoxy opinion. You are saying that you alone have come upon some special wisdom that no soul throughout two thousand years of Christianity has figured out but you. You are saying that throughout all Christianity God has seen fit to leave His people in the dark on a subject, until your brilliance has cast light on what He has left hidden. Once again, I'm willing to weigh all views against scripture, but at the same time I think a man must grasp the seriousness of this. And it should be with great fear and trembling, and with expectations that we may be missunderstanding something that any man should disagree with the entire Christian history of thinkers, in which I assure you there were greater men than you and I applying their minds to such things. So in my opinion it is this practical implication of the word "orthodoxy" that makes it significant to us. I hope this helps. Save me if I've explained this poorly, Doc. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
6 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | lightedsteps | 220115 | ||
Hi Beja I appreciate the time you have taken to respond to my questions. Thank You. lightedsteps |
||||||