http://epiphaniesofacommonman.com/blog/archives/171 Finding Christ in the Mundane Sat, 13 Mar 2010 01:08:40 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://epiphaniesofacommonman.com/blog/archives/171/comment-page-1#comment-268 Rich Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:10:46 +0000 http://epiphaniesofacommonman.com/blog/?p=171#comment-268 First, I am sorry that I just now read this post in its entirety. I am definitely guilty of “casually” throwing around the word heretic in a sinful way. However, I don't believe that it is enough to say that teaching must simply coincide with the creeds and the vitals of the faith merely in the meanings of the words. One must go a step further and assert that, the implied hermeneutics must also logically support the creeds. This is what the study of theology is all about. As I am a Calvinist, this is an example of what I see to be one of those situations. The comparison of Free Will and Total Inability. The Calvinist view of Total Inability states that we are 100% unable to atone for our own sin. Only through the gift of grace freely given through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ are we saved. Period. The Armenian view of Free Will, however assumes that God has given us the ability to atone for our sins through good works. Salvation is dependent upon man's decision to choose God. Thus Jesus, died and it's a crap shoot to see who wants in. Thus Jesus doesn't know who will choose him. Is he then sovereign? This goes directly against Matthew 11:27. Is Jesus then not who he says he is? Hermeneutically speaking, this goes against all the aforementioned creeds and thus falls under the definition given above of Heresy. Culturally, we are in a far different state than the Christian community in early Christianity. (ie. Florida…sorry I couldn’t help it). A pastor or member can easily leave a church and find a new one even within walking distance. There is a veritable buffet of Christian teaching, especially in America, we have the options to choose whatever form of God we like. Ultimately, therein lies the problem. I can see it on headline news: “PCA brands Pastor Tom of Tampa FL a heretic for…(it doesn’t even matter)…” Everyone would change the channel thinking, “What else is on?” “Consequently, Pastor Tom decides to plant a independent church in Lutz.” There is no cultural use or relevance for the branding of heretics. My point is that Heresy happens regularly due to various things like buffet Christianity, post modernism, modernism, falsely-called teachers, pastors with no spiritual checks, elders serving out of habit or a lack of options, etc, the list goes on. Heresy is casual or flippant part of everyday life in Christianity. However, love the sinner not the sin. But what are we to do about unrepentant sinners and what does Matthew say about that? Perhaps, a conversation for another post. First, I am sorry that I just now read this post in its entirety. I am definitely guilty of “casually” throwing around the word heretic in a sinful way. However, I don’t believe that it is enough to say that teaching must simply coincide with the creeds and the vitals of the faith merely in the meanings of the words. One must go a step further and assert that, the implied hermeneutics must also logically support the creeds. This is what the study of theology is all about. As I am a Calvinist, this is an example of what I see to be one of those situations.
The comparison of Free Will and Total Inability. The Calvinist view of Total Inability states that we are 100% unable to atone for our own sin. Only through the gift of grace freely given through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ are we saved. Period. The Armenian view of Free Will, however assumes that God has given us the ability to atone for our sins through good works. Salvation is dependent upon man’s decision to choose God. Thus Jesus, died and it’s a crap shoot to see who wants in. Thus Jesus doesn’t know who will choose him. Is he then sovereign? This goes directly against Matthew 11:27. Is Jesus then not who he says he is?
Hermeneutically speaking, this goes against all the aforementioned creeds and thus falls under the definition given above of Heresy.
Culturally, we are in a far different state than the Christian community in early Christianity. (ie. Florida…sorry I couldn’t help it). A pastor or member can easily leave a church and find a new one even within walking distance. There is a veritable buffet of Christian teaching, especially in America, we have the options to choose whatever form of God we like. Ultimately, therein lies the problem. I can see it on headline news: “PCA brands Pastor Tom of Tampa FL a heretic for…(it doesn’t even matter)…” Everyone would change the channel thinking, “What else is on?” “Consequently, Pastor Tom decides to plant a independent church in Lutz.” There is no cultural use or relevance for the branding of heretics. My point is that Heresy happens regularly due to various things like buffet Christianity, post modernism, modernism, falsely-called teachers, pastors with no spiritual checks, elders serving out of habit or a lack of options, etc, the list goes on. Heresy is casual or flippant part of everyday life in Christianity. However, love the sinner not the sin. But what are we to do about unrepentant sinners and what does Matthew say about that? Perhaps, a conversation for another post.

]]> http://epiphaniesofacommonman.com/blog/archives/171/comment-page-1#comment-9 Jason Fri, 03 Oct 2008 01:22:27 +0000 http://epiphaniesofacommonman.com/blog/?p=171#comment-9 I have moved from Arminianism to Calvinism. The two sides have thrown the word heretic at each other. It seems to be how the Scripture is interpreted and what Scriptures are given greater emphasis. I have moved from Arminianism to Calvinism. The two sides have thrown the word heretic at each other. It seems to be how the Scripture is interpreted and what Scriptures are given greater emphasis.

]]>