My name is Anne, and I am a 30-something mother of 6 who lives in Minnesota. I work outside the home part-time as a nurse, but my full-time job is in the home caring for my family.
I was raised in the Episcopal Church but my personal road of faith has been a long winding journey which has led me to examine the basics of many faiths and Christian denominations. At my core I am a Christian who believes in the Love of God.
The recent push within the Christian Community to encourage women to adhere to a very narrow definition of what a woman should be, I find frightening. Apparently that makes me a whitewashed feminist, and worthy of suspicion. But in truth, I am just a sister seeker. So, I’ll embrace my pretty white-wash, finish it with a cranberry trim and try to keep it free of the tiny fingerprints of my children, while I rejoice in my liberty.
On a more personal level I’m harder to explain. I love rain if I can sit inside with a good cup of tea and a book. I love Science Fiction and Fantasy novels, I don’t get the dislike of Harry Potter, and I have a not-so-secret addiction to a popular online role playing game. I have struggled with my faith. In many ways, I’m the Samaritan Woman, the woman at the well whom Jesus knows to be a sinner, and to whom he reaches out. Which is yet another reason that I’m so incredibly disheartened by the Patriarchy movement which I believe offers no place to my kind of woman, nor many others to whom Jesus reached out. I do know that I am far from perfect, and rely on the mercy and grace of God to strengthen me and see me through.
Jennifer/Cally and I have been friends for almost twenty years, and hopefully she will continue to challenge me here.
You can also visit me at Muse Mama.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My name is Jennifer (aka Cally Tyrol) and I’m a 30 something wife and mom of three kids, two living and one deceased. If not being a die-hard patriarchalist is what qualifies one as “whitewashed” then I guess I am one… except that my trim is of the cafe latte variety. I’m a full time, SAHM mom just starting my homeschool journey. I enjoy cooking, reading, traveling, and playing with my kids. I am very interested in nutrition and regularly bore my friends with all the cool stuff I’m learning- especially about raw foods. No Nourishing Traditions here! They are very patient, though. My food philosophy these days is mostly this- if it doesn’t have a shelf life, it doesn’t belong in my house. I’ve also recently adopted a vegan diet, so if I talk naughty about eating animals, you’ll have to forgive me. I’ll try my best not to offend 
I was raised in a Christian home and cannot imagine a time when I was not a believer. My husband, children, and I are members of a local United Reformed Church. Doctrinally, I subscribe to the ecumenical creeds (Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian) and the Three Forms of Unity (Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession, Canons of Dordt). Yes, I’m a Calvinist and yes, I will defend it.
After the death of my first child, I fell into patriarchy. For some reason, all the rules seemed to appeal to me. It made sense in a world that had just come crashing down on me. As time marched on and I studied it more, I began to see many disturbing aspects in it. A year ago, I stumbled onto this discussion on the True Womanhood blog and everything changed for me. I’m now “happily agnostic” about gender roles and loving it.
Former Contributors:
Laura Croft: Forgive the pseudonym, but my husband doesn’t want me writing under my real name at this point… but I am a real person, I promise.
Oh, all these labels. I see so many good things within the complementarian movement, but they are taken to such extremes in patriarchy it makes me mad. I’m a former feminist, but I don’t know if I’d be a whitewashed feminist either.
I look forward to seeing what you gals have to say!
Cally,I describe myself as being somewhere in the cozy middle on what I believe is a continuum. “clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with you!”
Miss Cally, you said, “My food philosophy these days is mostly this- if it doesn’t have a shelf life, it doesn’t belong in my house.” but I think you meant to say: “My food philosophy these days is mostly this- if it HAS a shelf life, it doesn’t belong in my house.” Or maybe your house if full of Cup-O-Noodles and Captain Crunch? lol
But see, Cup-O-Noodles doesn’t have a shelf life. It lasts forever. Lettuce has a shelf life- only a few days and then its dead. Or am I totally off?
So maybe I’m off, but doesn’t a shelf-life mean that it can survive long or indefinitely on your shelf without being refrigerated? ??
Just because you guys made me curious:
So, I think in this circumstance, she wants food that has a shelf-life. More importantly, she wants food with a short shelf-life.
Maybe I should revise it then- if it doesn’t grow in the ground or eat stuff that grows in the ground, it doesn’t belong in my house.
I’m so confused!!!
Anne, you’ve got it! That’s what I was thinking of!
Laura- you are killing me! Absolutely hilarious!
Ladies-
I have enjoyed reading the posts on your blog. Keep up the good work standing for your freedom in Christ and the NT’s clear teaching regarding the New Priesthood under the New Covenant, the priesthood of the believer.
Did you know that Al Mohler tried (I am not sure if he succeeded) to get the Baptist Faith and Message changed to state: the priesthood of believers instead of the priesthood of the believer?
Can you figure out why he and others want to add that (s)?
Hutch
My food philosophy is: Get up, Peter, kill and eat! Acts 10:13
and I like Mark 7:19 especially the last part: …thus He declared “all” foods clean.
My wife and I had lunch this afternoon and we had raw oysters, crawfish gumbo and crab cakes. Now that is not kosher, but it sure is “Good Eats”
Hutch, sometimes I wish I could get into that “down home cookin’ ” . Hey, at least your gumbo was FRESH!!! Anne LOVES seafood of all kinds so I’m sure you won her over.
And you’re right- all food is clean
But then, I remember Paul’s old adage that “everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial” LOL!!
Jennifer’s right. I’m a seafood fanatic. For mother’s day my son made me a card that said if he could give me anything it would be a King Crab.
Well, and we made sure to have calamari at my rehearsal dinner just for you
It was really good calamari.
I just came across your guys blog and I think I am going to enjoy and learn. (Wow, I love when that happens!) By the way, I agree that Lara Croft is cool…
Added you guys to my sidebar.
OMG I LOVE you girls!!!
Hey – where’s NormalMiddle’s bio?
I’d be happy to post a bio for normalmiddle. I just need to get one first. lol
Let me write it. I could have fun writing a bio of someone I don’t know.
Thanks for the bio, NormalLindsayMiddle. I don’t know why, but it helps to know a little bit more about those who are posting the articles.
“Did you know that Al Mohler tried (I am not sure if he succeeded) to get the Baptist Faith and Message changed to state: the priesthood of believers instead of the priesthood of the believer?
Can you figure out why he and others want to add that (s)?”
Yes, he succeeded. here is a response to that and other parts of the BF&M changes:
http://www.baptiststandard.com/2001/5_14/pages/dilday.html
Wow, I had to break out the dictionary just to find out what half of you mean to say … lol. .. and I’m 30 something +; you’d think I’d know a word or two.
Personally, I find myself content with the title that my Father has given me; Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
I AM a wife, friend, lover, admirer, play mate but above all HELP MEET.
I don’t have a problem with my God given roll although this world did manage to brain wash me long enough into believing that I would be much happier “fullfilling self.”
This for me could not be farther from the truth!
Ladies, I feel blessed! I get to stay home, raise and school the children, cook to my hearts desire, play on request, make a beautiful home, please a hard working hubby and not have to worry about how it will all work out in the finish.
No, I am not delusional! I just choose to believe and follow God’s plan for the home. Which is a far better one than any one could have ever concieved.
Don’t get me wrong, someday when the kids are grown and my work at home is done I will take time to pursue other interest. In the mean time, I chose to mary to raise kids and please a husband.
Not to fullfill myself and my “wants” but to be what God has called me to be first and formost.
Discussion, questions or comments?: little_wings_74athotmaildotcom
I don’t think any of us are not content with being helpmeets to our husbands. We simply disagree with the very narrow definition that word has been given.
So are we.
I agree with what you’ve said here, but I suspect that our definition of what our “God given role” is may be different.
Good for you! No one is saying that you should go out and get a job. I do all those things. But in addition I hold down a part-time job. Doing so allows me to be a helpmeet to my husband and serve God’s precious elderly children.
No one said you were.
The only problem with that statement is that it carries with it the implication that anyone not doing things the way you do, don’t believe or follow God’s plan. That couldn’t be further from the truth.
Following God’s path for us will always be a good thing, I agree.
Good for you. I do those things too. In addition, my husband works hard and takes joy in pleasing me.
I find that really insulting. I don’t work outside the home to fulfill my “wants” and myself. I do it because we need things like electricity, gas, and food. I do it because my husbands income needs supplemented. And I do it because someone has to take care of the elderly who need help. I am doing what God has called me to do. I’m helping my husband and serving my family. It may not look in my home exactly the way it does in yours, but it doesn’t make what I’m doing any less valid.
You seem to think that we at WWF are putting down Stay-at-home-moms. Well most of the time, I am a Stay-at-home-mom. And I think most of us here have been at one time or another. We know the great joys and rewards that come with that job. But you seem to be putting down what we do, and it’s so unnecessary.
Anne, Laura, NormalMiddle, and I are all SAHMs… and yet, we are all faced with the reality that our husbands’ incomes are just not enough to afford even the basics. Normal said it in one of her posts- cutting cable isn’t going to cut it. Heck, we don’t even have cable! DH works 40+ hours a week (nights), so he can go to school 15-17 hours during the day, along with raising our children and studying. His income almost makes enough for the barest essentials. I have to work. There’s no ifs ands or buts about it. Its not about denying a “God-given” role… its about having electricity, car insurance, food, and shelter.
Believe me, I don’t work because I WANT to, although I’m not so sure there’s anything wrong with that either…
Please excuse the rudeness of this comment –
I think part of the problem with men looking at women as property or something along those lines (as lessers-than, in some way) stems from the old-fashioned term “help meet.”
Here’s the crude part: I have met quite a few men who think of this (and speak of this) as “help MEAT.” I have even heard pastors speak of this phrase in this way. It parallels the incredibly crude cultural view of women as a piece of meat. And that, in the minds of men, typically is referring to sex only – not sex plus love, or sex plus relationship, or sex plus child bearing, but sex … as in “wham, bam, thank you ma’am” (maybe without the “thank you”).
The insistence on KJV only contributes heavily to this misinterpretation. In Genesis 2:18, when God says “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him,” (KJV) He is saying in more contemporary English, ““It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (ESV). Or, as in the New King James, “a helper comparable to him.
In the context of Genesis 2 it is obvious that God is saying that he is going to make a human female (“comparable to him”) as opposed to all the female animals that Adam has named and noticed the male and female situation existing among them.
I think it would serve us well to refer to this aspect of the woman as “helper” and not “help meet.” I know this term has been used for a long, long time, but I think in today’s language and considering today’s issues (the patriarchy, etc.) we ought to try to avoid language that is outdated and could lead to a misunderstanding.
Wordpress really loves those little winky faces. Perhaps someone should let the developers of Word Press know about parentheses.
|-)
Richard, I couldn’t agree with you more. Right now I’m leaving home as a SAHM of 7 years to be that kind of helper. I’m helping pay the mortgage and electric bill and those other “frivolous wants” you know?
I could continue to stay home and we could all lose our house, be homeless on the street, and wait for people like ladywings to take us in and meet our needs since she’s got it all figured out.
Not one time has anyone on this blog said ANYTHING about women shouldn’t be homemakers.
These drive-by readers/commenters (probably driven from those blogs out there who are anti-WWF) are missing a great deal of the discussion that takes place.
I for one don’t let it bother me that I don’t fit her definition as a “help meet”. As long as God and my husband considers me his help meet, it really doesn’t matter what ladywings or whoever defines it as.
The insistance of the word “helpmeet” kinda rubs me the wrong way. (And no, that’s not because my inner Gloria Steiman is trying to break loose.) I think it is because the implication is that word is somehow holier than “helper”. “I’m not a helper; I’m a helpMEET.” Um, that was just the word that was used in the days of King James. I don’t think it was a word that Jesus used or anything. If one insists on the word helpmeet, they might as well walk around, saying things like “Hast thou no bread to make a PB & J sandwich?” The word isn’t anymore godly than helper; it was just the language in the time period that the KJV was printed.
Oh, but don’t you know that the KJV is ever so much holier than any other kind of bible? It’s the inspired word of God in English! Or at least that’s what some websites say.
Having learned about the KJV bible translation, I don’t agree. I recommend the book “God’s Secrataries” for a good historical on how the KJV bible was translated.
For a historic translation perspective I’d like to add the recommendation of “The King James Only Controversy” by James White.
I think Satan is attacking the Church of Jesus Christ by trying to create factions within the body that veiw each other as evil. Two of these fronts are the Patriarchy movement, which paints all its detractors as evil (i.e., White Washed Feminists) and KJV-Onlyism, which paints all its detractors as evil (i.e., “liberals” and “neo-Evangelicals”).
Lot’s of ad hominem; very little exegesis.
Ridiculous! Just once I’d like to read a drive-by’s description of the process by which the Holy Spirit directed them to leave a drive-by comment on someone else’s blog. It would be different if the OP had ANY idea who Little Wings even is, and had been critical of her, and she were setting the record straight or engaging the criticism. But no. Nothing of the sort.
I wonder if she’s noticed a lack of takers on visiting her blog with “discussion, questions of comments.” Her “invitation” was hardly gracious or inviting.
Sock-puppets. That’s my current theory about the recent drive-bys here and at TW.
Richard, you said:
“Lot’s of ad hominem; very little exegesis.”
Lots and little, indeed. They CAN’T exegete their position, so what’s left other than ad hom? Maybe if they smear their unilaterally declared “enemies” long and loud enough, people won’t notice the scriptural bankruptcy of their lifestyle preferences. To say nothing of how at-odds they are with the U.S. Constitution or the good and neutral social norms of the culture in which they live. Or their historical reconstruction efforts, or…any of the other inventions in their rhetoric.
IF their ways were so good and godly, it wouldn’t take smear campaigns to promote them.
Psalmist – “IF their ways were so good and godly, it wouldn’t take smear campaigns to promote them.”
This is one of those general principles that I think we would all do well to remember. Kind of like “follow the money.” These tactics say so much negative about those who use them that anything they proclaim should be rejected out of hand until external evidence is produced to show them to be correct.
In other words, if the VF-types say the sky is blue, I will reject that proclamation until a non-VFer shows it to be, in fact, blue.
And I’m not smearing them by saying this. I am simply telling all the readers (drive-bys included) how I attempt to determine truth when the facts are not yet known.
Wow, I struck a chord! I stumbled upon ya’lls site by pure curiosity. Am I a drive by? Whatever that constitutes?
No, I have not taken the time to read through all the postings … who has that kind of time?
I was merely sharing my stance … but I guess the white washed took offence …{oops, my bad}!
Why should someone who is “secure” in their role take offence? I don’t take any at ya’lls take on life matters.
But I guess that sharing would warrant some feed back be it postive or not.
You know, I see a lot of bashing here and a lot of stances on what saith the creed.
How about what saith the Lord?
Matt 5: 18-19 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Better yet: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book. Rev 22:19
Oh, but I guess ya’ll preffer the more “enlighten” perversions… oh sorry, I mean translations.
Of course your are not going to agree, too much enlightment in all the other translations to just settle for the good old King James.
Ps 12:6 The words of the LORD [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
I can see that no point proven here will be accepted until someone finds it in their heart to accept the infallibility of the word of God. You say you do, yet you openly mock the King James calling it antiquated. How sad.
I wasn’t bashing moms who work outside the home. I too did that for a season. But I guess that’s how it was seen. I was merely engaging in dialouge here sharing my current calling to my family and home. Living by faith and within our means on a single income.
As for the rest of you ladies that need to “pay bills:” I know many a family with 6+ children living on one income, by faith, tithing and reaping the benifits of our Lords blessings. Or do ya’ll not believe in tithing cause that’s old Testament?
I honestly feel a lot of well meaning folk just choose to live above their means, meeting wants more than needs in their families life. But hey, don’t let me offend any one now!
Ps. 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them.
Touchy, touchy!
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:22
By the way Palmist, first time “bloggers” lack the comprehension of some of your cyber lingo … give us a chance, we’ll catch up; I promise.
Forgive our unsaviness and lack of “understaning” in your cyber world.
And that invite … well, I guess I lack your etiquett.
I live my life through faith in God, and in an effort to follow Him daily. It’s hard not to take offense when someone comes along saying that they’re doing it God’s way and implying that you’re not.
How would you know what our take is on life matters? You stated you hadn’t read through the site, so you wouldn’t be able to judge. You made assumptions about each of the four authors of this site that were uncharitable.
What sayeth the creed?
The Nicened creed is based on the bible. It’s the basics of the faith.
I laughed so hard I snorted my soda. Thanks for that. I especially like that you misspelled “enlightened”. It just added a special something.
I love the KJV. I own two. But I don’t think it’s the best perversion, oops, I mean translation out there.
Everyone here accepts the infallibility of the word of God. Not using only the KJV has no bearing on that.
Thank you for clearing that up.
Good for them. But what does it have to do with us or this site?
We believe in the Old Testament.
Perhaps that’s true. But it’s not for my family. It’s not for a lot of families. And who are we to judge them?
My advice to you would be to read through this site and learn what we actually believe before you assume that you know us and what we stand for.
Then I’d say that if you’re attacking something that we believe, go for it. We’ll dialogue with you. We’re all learning here and we want to do what’s right. But you’ll have to own what you say.
It seems to me that you came in here and decided that we were all a bunch of working women, meeting the needs of our own “self” and ignoring the word of God. And then you proceeded to explain why you’re so much better than us because you are living a life following God rather than the world.
If you believe that, more power to you. But don’t insult us and say that we read it all wrong. It will be so much easier to discuss the heart of these issues and get somewhere if we all admit what we really believe and what we’re really trying to say.
Ah, yes, KJV-only. That explains a lot.
This is actually kind of funny.
Little wings, just what “lingo” is it that I used that you find difficult to decipher? You know, if you’d ask, rather than accuse, you might get answers…if it’s actually answers you’re interested in.
Your unsupported general accusations continue. “Dialogue” entails actually engaging people in civil conversation, not hurling accusations then expecting them to follow you back to your blog to “discuss, comment, or question.” You put it on somebody else’s blog, expect it to get discussed there. You let on that you’re not coming back (“come to my blog” demand), you can expect it to be considered a drive-by comment. And enough with the “touchy, touchy” nonsense, OK? We tend to discuss critically (that is, in a thinking, logical manner) what people comment here, and elsewhere. I consider that part of being a Berean. If your public words can’t stand up to scrutiny, it’s not because we’re touchy. We simply read with comprehension and hold opinions about what we read. People aren’t simply going to agree with all your opinions just because you inject them into the ongoing discussion here, especially if you don’t engage in the conversation.
Again, your accusations are so off-base, they’re (somewhat) amusing.
And Little wings, I suggest you take the warning inherent in a contextually sound reading of Romans 1:22 for yourself. Setting youself up as the wise one among “fools” could backfire on you. You might notice the three fingers of your own pointing back at you when you point one at us.
And, may I suggest….learn to use spellcheck, please.
Your position usually stands much stronger when you use the correct spelling of words. Constant error makes you look ignorant.
Sorry, my last comment was out of line. I apologize. My buttons were pushed and my hair was on fire because some stranger insinuated my going back to work had something to do with “living above my means.”
I guess paying your bills (fyi–we don’t have credit cards) and getting caught up on a mortgage and feeding the children without being on WIC & foodstamps is a frivolous, “above your means” kind of thing.
And for the record—some Christian women are completely content to constantly live below the poverty line eating mayonaise sandwiches and wearing sackcloth in order to live on one income. I’ve been an AT HOME mother FULL TIME for over 7 years. I know all the tips and tricks, and guess what? I’m tired of eating mayonaise sandwiches, thank you very much!
Please don’t be so judgemental when you don’t know personal circumstances.
You know, the TW discussion on Christians who accuse other Christians, is illustrated (sadly) very well here. And sometimes, as we just saw here, the accusers even try to deny they’re doing it! The mind boggles.
Lyndsey, I know you didn’t mean to sound so harsh when you told Littlewings to use spellcheck, but you did have a point.
When we’re discussing a topic on the internet, one appears only as bright as their writing. We might be geniuses but if we can’t spell it doesn’t come across.
So, while I would NOT say that Littlewings is ignorant, her spelling and grammatical errors are akin to hearing someone speak very poor English.
We work with the medium we have, and while no one expects perfect spelling and grammar all the time, numerous overt spelling and/or grammatical errors make communication a bit difficult.
“You know, I see a lot of bashing here and a lot of stances on what saith the creed.”
That’s just amusing, Wings. I was going to retort by saying that you and the fellow VF members love bashing all the time, but then I remembered that subtle inclinations about you being right and everyone else being wrong is more to y’alls style. Silly me
Well, subtly attacking people and putting them down is so much more ladylike than saying what you mean and “offending them boldly”. But I’d much prefer to have to stand up and apologize, or change my position on something than to spend all that time trying to maneuver so that it looks like I’m saying something without really saying it.
How exhausting!
Oh, subtle insults are ladylike!! Of course, how silly of me. Isn’t there a book written on this unpleasant female trait? “The Subtle Knife?”
Ouch, my feelings are hurt *sigh.*
I lack the intellectualism of the majority of you folks!
What do I know? I never even went to college, grew up in the ghetto and was always underprivileged.
Sorry if I forgot to use spell check, I can’t always be perfect.
Funny it seemed like I was clearly understood; innuendos and all.
This time I will try to type slower and use my spell check instead of getting over excited and overly stimulated about the actual grown up conversations taking place here; I promise *smile*.
Anne, I have read, some. So I’m going off of the tidbits, forgive me if I am not abreast on all subject matters.
I never said any of you ladies were personally doing things out of God’s order. I SHARED my life position never once referring to ya’lls (I mean) to you ladies.
“It seems to me that you came in here and decided that we were all a bunch of working women, meeting the needs of our own “self” and ignoring the word of God. And then you proceeded to explain why you’re so much better than us because you are living a life following God rather than the world.”
I never said I was better… you read too far into that one. And how would I know or judge how many of you actually work outside the home; where did that supposition come from?
As for Palmist (I mean) Psalmist, that was my personal e-mail not “my blog.” I wasn’t sure how this would go … some of the other sites I have visited take longer than snail mail on their reply. So get off of it already and focus! Half of what I shared included some scripture; but I supposed I am the one taking it out of contextual application? Are you male by the way … lol … just asking so that it might be obliged with a reply (and not accusing)? I have never thought myself to be “clever or wise” and some may count that as low self “esteem,” so be it.
Normalmiddle, I actually had taken a liking to you *sneer* after reading your little bio. But ouch, slap me!
“I guess paying your bills (fyi–we don’t have credit cards) and getting caught up on a mortgage and feeding the children without being on WIC & foodstamps
(food stamps is two words by the way, not compound)
is a frivolous, “above your means” kind of thing.
And for the record—some Christian women are completely content to constantly live below the poverty line eating mayonaise
(mayonnaise, I believe has two “n’s”)
sandwiches and wearing sackcloth in order to live on one income. I’ve been an AT HOME mother FULL TIME for over 7 years. I know all the tips and tricks, and guess what? I’m tired of eating mayonaise
(the 2 “n” thing again)
sandwiches, thank you very much!”
That is so nice to know that you don’t live in credit debt, good for you.
I really hope you were not implying that my friends or I live off of WIC and government help? I am asking because of your comment. My husband actually works for “our so called” government and pays into taxes; how about that?
Personally I like my mayo wiches with a little strawberry jam, you should try it; it’s rather delish … lol. As for sackcloth, is that in fashion these days? I miss so much without the advent of cable.
But seriously, you were living on mayo wiches?
You all sound like highly intelligent folks, really. That was one of the aspects that drew me to this site. Despite all the “assumptions” flying about, I like you people; you (I mean) you’re smart and quick with thought!
How about I share a little about me so that you all can draw a clearer conclusion as to what you believe I may be about?
Happily married twelve years, mother of two boys whom we home educate. No pets, love plants, books and all things herbs to include natural medicine. Love to cook from scratch and preferably organic. Enjoy camping and fishing as well as butchering my own meat when the boys bring it home. Sewing, crafting, writing, singing and proudly standing behind my husband as he serves his 3rd tour in Iraq.
I may not believe in the purpose but I believe it to be his calling.
1 Pet. 2:13-14 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
By the way Anne, you are welcomed for the good laugh; I personally enjoy a good one as often as I can.
Littlewings – I personally didn’t see why the ladies here were upset by your first comment. But your more recent ones have shown me that their instincts were right.
You said that the ladies here took offense (by the way, that word is spelled with an “s,” not a “c,” but lack o’ spell check can cause such errors for those who have admitted to not having been educated), but you seemed to take much greater offense at the mere mention of the fact that the KJV was written in a language that is no longer used.
To address that issue only, I don’t believe anyone here was “mocking” the KJV. But now that you’ve brought it up in the same comment in which you admitted that you’re not an educated person, I think I should point out that without an advanced education in a foreign language, you really should probably not be pontificating about what is said in a foreign language bible.
Some of what was written in the King James meant precisely the opposite of what it means to our ears today. And much of the rest of it has changed meaning so much as to render the KJV useless to those who have not been educated in either ancient languages or in the original Greek and Hebrew – or all of the above.
You may, of course, rely on the education of others and hope that they tell you the truth about what the antiquated language means, but I’d be very careful if the ones guiding you on that path are proclaiming the KJV as the only translation to be used. The simple proclamation of that concept already shows those folks to intellectually dishonest, so you’re placing your eternal soul in the hands of a deceiver and that’s probably not a secure place to be.
Richard,
Main Entry: of·fense
Variant(s): or of·fence \ə-ˈfen(t)s, especially for 3 ˈä-ˌfen(t)s, ˈȯ-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin offensa, from feminine of offensus, past participle of offendere
You state:
“The simple proclamation of that concept already shows those folks to intellectually dishonest, so you’re placing your eternal soul in the hands of a deceiver and that’s probably not a secure place to be.”
My eternal soul rests in the hands of the one that died at Calvary; our Lord Christ Jesus! Because I have by faith in my heart believed and with my tounge confessed!
Not in the hands of any deceiver.
It is true, I have not as you stated educated my self in these ancient languages.
“useless to those who have not been educated in either ancient languages or in the original Greek and Hebrew – or all of the above. ”
But I did do extensive study, prayer and research on “why the King James.”
Tell me Richard, why not the King James? Do you know where most “modern” translations are derived from? What text was used in bringing forth the new translations?
Of course, if you are catholic I am sure the conversation stops here. They believe in only one true church “the roman apostolic watchamacallit” and I’m not sure to this day about their “bible”.
I was most certainly not mocking the Bible. I was mocking the language of King James’ day which, to my knowledge, has not been proclaimed as holy writ. My point was simply that if someone is saying that only word allowable to describe a wife (helpmeet) is simply because that is the word used in the KJV, then why is that same person not walking around, speaking in the Old English that was present in England in the time of the translation of the KJV? To me, that’s exactly what the KJV is: A version. The original Word of God was written in Hebrew and Greek (someone correct me if that is wrong or incomplete) so any version from that WILL be a translation. Which is a good thing because I can’t read Hebrew or Greek.
Wipe out her sarcasm, and littlewings is a perfect Christian!
It’s not a degree or where you come from that makes you an intelligent person able to converse politely with people who disagree with you. I may be a nurse, but I started out as a high school dropout, and I still don’t have a college degree.
See, now that’s better. At least now you’re admitting that you were trying to be insulting because you’re doing it God’s way and we aren’t. Now, isn’t that better?
Well, as much as I appreciate that, the real issue was that you had no idea at all where we stood but were making wild assumptions about us. That’s a problem.
Oh, so now we’re back to the “I wasn’t saying that” thing again? Seriously, there would be no need to share your life position unless you were trying to make a statement. Especially with the way you worded it. For goodness sake, if you believe that you’re doing it the right way, stand up and say so boldly. Anything else will not be tolerated here. You’ll be allowed to say it, but you’ll also be called on it. We’re pretty honest here because we’re all trying to learn. Well, except for you, maybe. You seem to have it all figured out.
Because this is the authors page and we all said so. Seriously, did you just come in here posting on something that you hadn’t even read? Very bad netiquette there.
No one implied that. Only that some people do, or that it comes down to someone else getting a job, or taking all the government services for which one is eligible.
Wecome to the WWF
Me too. If only it weren’t so sad, that you actually believe that the only translation worth using is the KJV.
Forgive me, but I’m highly suspicious of your study. Not on your part, but on the part of the people who wrote it. The articles I’ve found on the internet appear to be written by people who are woefully misinformed on matters of history, language, the process of translation, etc. etc.
I’ll answer, even though I’m not Richard. I don’t use the King James as my primary translation because those who translated it did not have access to as many texts, nor were the texts they had as old as the texts that more modern translations had access to. In addition, the KJV was under the direct authority of the King of England who was the head of the church. Thus, he had final say on how things were translated. There’s more, but really, that’s enough. The language is beautiful, but it is simply not as accurate a translation as some more recent version.
The phrase is “we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church”. Even many protestants say that, because the word “catholic” means “universal” and apostolic means that there’s a direct descent from the apostles. And you put bible in quotations? Really? That’s like someone saying something about the King James “bible” for you. It’s rude an unnecessary.
The bible that Catholics read is just like anyone else’s bible. I had no issues with the translation. Where Protestants and Catholics differ is in the inclusion of four books that Protestants don’t believe to be canonical and Catholics do.
Well, that could be said of me, too from time to time. But one has to wonder why she’s come here, guns-a-blazing unless she’s trying to pick a fight. Me, I love a good argument, I’ll just pop some popcorn and take her on. But I’m hoping that perhaps she’ll bring the rhetoric down a bit and actually read and dialog here. I know, I’m an optimist.
Palmist, eh? That smear hardly represents Christian perfection, IMO. Accusations and innuendo (admitted) and just plain nastiness abound in your comments, Little Wings. Oh, and as I’ve said often before, I’m a woman. Not that that should matter in how you respond to me; I doubt that if you’ve thought I was male, I’d have got any more respectful response for being female, whatever you meant by “so that it might be obliged with a reply…”.
I stand corrected; yes, you referred people to your e-mail address, rather than your blog. I apologize for making that error in representing what you said. A demand to refer further interaction to e-mail fits even better, actually; there’s no public accountability in anything said in e-mail.
And yes, you provided out-of-context verses to supposedly support your position. That’s proof-texting. I know it’s a religiously popular thing to do, but it does violence to the holy word of God and is nothing less than taking the Lord’s name in vain to “prove” God says something that God most certainly does NOT say. I see it all the time from Christians, most of them sincere in thinking God really does support their pet causes. I grieve for them, and I grieve for you, that you are deceived so as to think you’ve “proved” the various things you set out to prove by proof-text verses.
You were the one who signed off one comment with the out-of-context quote from Romans 1:22. I just happened to notice and comment on how that leaves you self-judged. You brought up wise vs. foolish in your very obvious judgment of the participants here. That carries with it a responsibility, LW. You’ve tried to wiggle out of having said what you said. That doesn’t work. You made an unsupported accusation, and you used a Bible verse to do it.
You know, I haven’t until now said anything about how you handle the English language. However, you said that you educate your children. For their sake, as well as your own, I suggest you find a writing course to take. It can no longer be expected that the educational system (whether public, private, or home) is turning out competent writers. Many don’t realize how badly they write. You, LW, write poorly. Please note that I mean nothing more nor less than exactly that, by that statement. If you would teach your children, I think it is imperative that you recognize your own weaknesses and take remedial steps so that you are able to judge your children’s good work from poor. One who cannot write well herself, cannot teach others to write well.
Yes, I know that online is considered a “casual” environment as far as writing is concerned. Many take little or no care to use good writing skills, especially in comments. Many probably do write better “in real life” than they do online. So if this shoe fits (and I honestly believe that it does, or else I wouldn’t have written it), please consider wearing it. If you’re convinced your writing is just fine and you’d be proud of your children’s writing if they emulate you at your writing best, then of course, just ignore the suggestion.
A personal aside, for the few who know me well enough to know my schedule:
I’m online during “church hours” because this is a rare weekend of vacation for me. I’m also feeling under the weather, so I’m not going to try to visit another congregation.
So yes, I’m staying home today, but it’s “sanctioned.” And I”m even going to have another weekend off next weekend, and I’m going to the hill country for an overnight. I can hardly wait!
(Back to your regularly-scheduled blog commentage…)
<~ I fell under conviction this morning while in service. I realized that I was wrong for sharing my bashing opinions and bad grammatical skills with you ladies and gentlemen as well as my standard on “how I’m living.”
I see you all are very good at scrutinizing down to the last comma and errors are obviously a representation of my “intellect here.”
You are right; I went from sharing to supposing much like all of you did. Can we say meow?
Despite the fact I have been made to feel intellectually inferior here, I have enjoyed my visit.
By the way Anne, most of my reading comes from books, not the internet. But next time I pick up a book I shall have to see to it that I scrutinize the author, his background, authenticity, intellect and above all his/her grammatical skills. Then and only then will I be able to “judge” for myself if they speak in truth and are wholly perfect in their representation of the given subject matter.
Psalmist, my apologies.
*edited by Anne to show quote*
oops, how did those smileys get there? those were not intentional.
ps. Psalmist:
IMO (?)
proof-texting (?)
it does violence to the holy word (?)
Does that mean that I cannot take individual verses and cling to them as promises to me on behalf of my God? because they were given to David or Abraham or Paul so on and so forth?
Just asking? I fear lest I too take that out of context.
Thanks
Oh, can someone please grade my typing before I hit send next time to make sure that it meets the standard?
Littlewings, you missed the point entirely. I always say that if I have no misspellings, it was pure luck. The issue is that if your comment or post is full of grammatical errors or misspellings, it’s like talking to someone with a bad speech impediment. Like it or not, the written word is the way we communicate here, and if you can’t take a minute to proofread your post and correct glaring and distracting errors, it impedes the ability to communicate, and makes you look less intelligent than you are.
I don’t know you well enough to know if you’re intellectually inferior. So, I’m sorry if you’ve been made to feel that you are. Even if you were, intellect does not a good person make, and you’d be more than welcome here.
But, I do think that you’ve hit something with this statement. While no one will ever be wholly perfect in their knowledge on a subject, but one can’t decide how much stock to put in their opinions until one knows their background. It’s a good thing to make sure an author knows what he/she is talking about.
As for the article you’ve provided, I think the basis for deciding which biblical texts are to be translated based on where they’re found is patently ridiculous. The early church went all over, as did the gospels and other writings.
Tell me, if they find a KJV of the bible in Egypt should they disregard it because it was found there? Or did I miss the point of that article?
And, for the record, I believe in God’s Bible, inerrant in it’s original language. And I read an imperfect translation of it, regardless of which translation I read.
Littlewings –
Your eternal soul rests in your relationship with Jesus Christ. If you continue to worship your Bible version, your idolatry should indicate to you that you are worshiping the wrong thing. Therefor, you would be well-advised to seek counselors who point you to Christ, not to the Textus Receptus (or to British orthography, for that matter).
—”But I did do extensive study, prayer and research on ‘why the King James.’”—
Again – you would be well-advised to study the King James bible rather than studying, as you said, “Why the King James.” This is such an incredible point of distraction that I wonder why anyone at all does not see this as a direct satanic attack on Christians. Get off the JKV bandwagon and just search the scriptures.
—”Tell me Richard, why not the King James? Do you know where most “modern” translations are derived from? What text was used in bringing forth the new translations?—
I use the King James every day – alongside the New American Standard Bible, The Amplified Bible, a Greek New Testament (Byzantine majority), and my favored translation – the English Standard Version. I never said “_not the King James_” – I only said that it is written in language that requires significantly more education to decipher than one of the versions actually translated into our language.
I am well aware of where most of the more well-known good translations of the bible are derived from. I am well aware of the philosophical differences between the translators and the need to balance dynamic equivalency with exact word-for-word translation. I am aware of the desire of the English monarch King James to destroy the accepted and well-read bible version of the time (the Geneva Bible) by creating a new translation that was designed to lessen the Calvinistic impact of the Geneva bible’s notes. I am aware of the fear-mongering of the KJV-onlyists who try to cast aspersions on Nestle-Aland and Westcott-Hort.
I am aware that Erasmus was accused of deleting verses from scripture when he did not include the Comma Johanneum just as the bible versions you deplore are accused of deleting verses when they see that the most reliable manuscripts don’t contain those reasonably questionable verses. I am aware that KJV-onlyists use the KJV as the standard rather than the originals and their derivatives as the standard so they ask “Why has John 5:14 been deleted from the bible?” instead of asking the more appropriate question, “Is John 5:14 an addition on the part of some later texts or a deletion on the part of the earlier ones?” The answer to that question would be obvious to all except those who have no ears to hear, so the KJV onlyists must use emotionally charged language like “deleted,” “omitted,” and “removed.”
I am aware that the KJV translation of Acts 9:2 indicates to today’s sensibilities that some who are believers have not yet received the Holy Spirit when it says “”Have ye received the Holy Ghost _since_ ye believed?” instead of the more accurate translation, which results in proper theology: “”Did you receive the Holy Spirit _when_ you believed?”
I am aware that the KJV translated names in the Bible inconsistently, causing no end of confusion to even those who have been life-long students of the scriptures (in KJV English). Some of these names are rendered at times in their Greek form, in other places in their Hebrew form, and in still other places in their Latin form (of all things since the bible was originally written in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic – not Latin).
I am aware that the KJV-onlyists insist on the 1611 version of the KJV bible, but few use it because the number of misspellings and grammatical errors is so high as to make it hard for even the most dedicated translation worshiper to understand, so they proclaim their commitment to the 1611 KJV while they use later updates that have fixed the abundant 1611 version’s errors (errors that some KJV-onlyists say are divinely inspired).
I am aware that in John 19:14 the KJV refers to the Jews preparing for “Easter,” when, in fact, the holiday we know as Easter had not yet been invented and the Jews would not likely have been preparing for Resurrection Sunday since the text goes on to say “then were the days of unleavened bread,” which is why all the more recent good translations refer to the preparation of the Passover in that passage.
I am aware that the archaic language used in the KJV translation causes difficulties in understanding for those of us who speak contemporary English or contemporary American English. Most of us would not understand what happened in 2 Kings 3:9 when “the king of Israel went and the king of Judah, and the king of Edom; and they _fetched a compass_ of seven days’ journey.” But that passage is quite clear in the New American Standard Bible when it says “the king of Israel went with the king of Judah and the king of Edom; and they _made a circuit_ of seven days’ journey.”
I am aware that many young children think that Goliath was a really cocky because he actually wore a “target of brass between his shoulders.” If they were only allowed to read 1 Samuel 17:6 in a translation intended for contemporary ears they would realize that the word that was translated “target” in King James’ time is translated today as “javelin,” so that the NASB renders it: “a bronze javelin slung betweeen his shoulders.”
I am aware that when the KJV says that turtles were singing (leaving the children reading these passages in Sunday school wondering if this is actually a Disney movie) it would be translated today as “turtledoves” (leaving the children with a full understanding and no images of Timone and Pumba in their heads).
—-Of course, if you are catholic I am sure the conversation stops here. They believe in only one true church “the roman apostolic watchamacallit” and I’m not sure to this day about their “bible”.—-
I am part of the holy and catholic Church. I am not a Catholic, but rather a Baptist. But your statement here reveals another flaw in your character – that of looking down on others who may very well be your brothers and sisters in Christ. I have worked with many Catholics and have had only one woman mention that the “Catholic” Church was the only true Church. All the others (including Washington, DC, Cardinal McKerrick whom I spoke with about this about a month ago) view all believers as their brothers and sisters in Christ and part of the “holy and catholic Church.”
I hope that answers your questions. I am not able to give a full answer since this comment is already too long, but will be glad to answer any specifics should you desire to ask.
Richard ~ *insert me clapping wildly here*
Richard, I don’t “worship” my Bible … just because I say that I am KJB only and prefer it, it does not constitute worship.
I don’t understand: Catholic dogma to ME, never spoke of One true Savior. I understand that over the past years the catholics have as a whole changed their stance, perhaps. But for the most part it was always about “sacraments.”
But Jesus never changes, he’s always the same.
From my understanding they are more Mary worshippers “saint” followers and ecumenist than anything.
What you are sharing with me today is new to me. I, as a Baptist would never have considered myself to be “part” of the holy and catholic church.
Perhaps the life years I spent in catholosism served to make more questions rather than answer any specific.
“holy catholic church?”
I truly understand that there are well meaning saved folk within many denominational groups, but the vast majority within the “catholic” spectrum (from my perspective) never truly have understood salvation.
It took me twenty-five years to humble myself and learn of Jesus as my personal Savior. In the process of this time I stumbled from belief to belief. None of the ones I came across were adherent to the true word of God.
It is truly sad how many will point the way of man or “doctrines” but few truly point to Christ alone… i.e. mormon, jw’s, charasmatics, catholisism, pentecostal, calvanist… to name a few of my encounters.
The reason why I stated “why the king james” is due in part to the fact that I came as a doubting “Thomas” to the Lord. My parents were not Christian. I wanted to know what made people so sure God had left behind His true word for us.
I study and ready my Bible joyfully and when I come across what people tout about as truth my final authority on the matter is the word of God.
I respect your stance and have given diligent thought to what you wrote although I do not agree wholly.
The ladies took offen”s”e when I originally wrote:
“Personally, I find myself content with the title that my Father has given me; Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
I AM a wife, friend, lover, admirer, play mate but above all HELP MEET.”
Why did they all have to see it as a personal attack? I wasn’t always at peace with my current stand. I was more than happy to get “caught up” in the ensuing cat paws … lol. But I was wrong.
None of that pointed to my “Christlikeness” and to add insult to injury I bring reproach upon my Saviors name. It is so easy to walk in the flesh and let old habits control.
But I guess we all showed that … “:(”
Tell me Richard, is my grammar so bad to constitute as anne so eloquently put it “it’s like talking to someone with a bad speech impediment”?
Geesh … I keep “missing the point”
I get to go back to church now … ttyl. *smile*
“I believe in the Holy Spirit and the holy catholic church” has absolutely nothing to do with THE Catholic Church. It means the universal church, the worldwide body of Christ. This is part of the Apostle’s Creed, which is recited in PROTESTANT churches worldwide. I attend a reformed Presbyterian church and we recite it quite often.
We recite the Apostles’ Creed every single Sunday in my REFORMED church – we are about as far from Rome as you can possible get. I assure you that catholic and Catholic are two entirely different things.
Seriously, have we Protestants become some afraid of being identified with Rome that we are becoming ignorant of the faith once for all delivered to the saints as summarized in the ancient and ACCURATE creeds devised by our spiritual fathers? These men fought and studied for years to summarize what Scripture teaches- to determine what is orthodox (true doctrine) so that the gospel and God’s people could be preserved. Some of these men DIED to preserve the truth.
Mormons use the KJV Bible… and so I ask what separates your church, Little Wings, from your local Mormon Ward?
Littlewings, you said you apologize, but did not say for what. I would assume the “meowishness” of your “Palmist” smear, but since you didn’t specify, I can’t tell.
IMO = “in my opinion.”
I provided you with an explanation of what “proof-texting” is. Again, it’s ripping a verse out of its context in order to support an opinion that the verse, especially contextually read, does not support at all. You’ve done this numerous times. No, it doesn’t mean you can’t cling to whatever individual verses you wish. I treasure a lot of individual verses for the very promises you mention. But using them out of context to support extrabiblical opinions is proof-texting, and it does violence to the biblical text (that is, it rips it apart and misuses it).
No one can “make” you feel inferior without your permission. All I was saying is that if you purport to be your children’s writing teacher, your revealed writing skills are lacking. As I feared, you read far more into my suggestion that you improve your writing skills than the statement merited or I intended for it to. You can say “meow” all you wish, but I answered what you’ve brought up and made an honest suggestion that, if you were to follow it, would benefit you and your children. No “meows” here, except from the two cats with which I share my small home. Actually, they couldn’t care less, and have made no comment at all on any of this.
Your intellect is an unknown quantity. Like any of God’s gifts, intellect is granted to us. Like most gifts, what we do with it is our responsibility. No one here can know much about your actual intellect, unless you choose to reveal your IQ score (and that isn’t all that accurate a test of intelligence; there are, after all, multiple intelligences and we all have varying degrees of them). So any assumptions you are making about what people here think of your intelligence are your own. People HAVE commented on how you express yourself in this written medium, based both on the content of your comments and your developed skill in communicating those comments. And by doing so, we all set ourselves up for having both our content and writing skills examined and critiqued as well. So hammer away at my typos, if you wish, and engage in some actual dialog over my own expressed ideas, if you like. But please don’t presume to know what anyone here thinks of your intelligence. No one but you has said, and I frankly think you were too harsh with yourself about that, and certainly falsely harsh in attributing assessments of your intelligence to the rest of us.
How about discussion of the topic, LW? Wouldn’t that be more fruitful?
Does anyone happen to have a more complete citation for LW’s “Dr. Gipp” quotation (or was it a copy of an entire pamphlet)? It reads quite bizarrely to me, and I’d like to read it in context, either with the rest of the work it was lifted from, or else in conjunction with some other “Dr. Gipp” works.
What’s wrong with sacraments? Even Protestants have Sacraments.
Definition of sacrament: “A rite ordained by the church as an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace” These were things started in the bible by Jesus and commanded for us to do. For most Protestants there are two: Communion and Baptism. In the Roman Catholic Church there are 7. But sacraments don’t bring salvation in and of themselves, not even in the Catholic Church. I think you know very little about the church in which you were raised. Sadly, that’s common with many adults who grew up Catholic.
No Catholic would dispute that.
Then perhaps you need to broaden your understanding.
Well, then, you learn something new every day.
All Christians are part of the catholic or universal church.
I’m sorry you have such a poor perspective on Catholics. But if I may remind you, your opinion does not make it fact. And that statement is highly insulting to the many sincerely devoted Catholics who love the Lord.
Really? Do you believe in the trinity, father, son, holy spirit? Because that’s not specifically mentioned in the bible. It’s a biblically sound belief and doctrine however.
Creeds were ways of summing up basic theology and doctrine and teaching it to a highly illiterate population who could never read the bible for themselves.
Creeds or knowing one’s doctrine is not giving up on Jesus or the bible. Perhaps one of our WWF’s should tackle this as a post. Because I really think you’re talking out of genuine misunderstanding.
Congratulations. You’ve just embraced the doctrine of Sola Scriptura
Yes I did. Because you appeared to be writing it as something that made you different from us. It doesn’t. I am all those things to my husband. What we’re pointing out here is that being a helper to one’s husband can look different in my family than it does in yours.
You and me both.
I think you took that the wrong way. I said, “The issue is that if your comment or post is full of grammatical errors or misspellings, it’s like talking to someone with a bad speech impediment.”
I didn’t say that you were that bad, but instead tried to point out the importance of trying to cut out errors whenever possible. I’m sorry if it was insulting, that was not my intention.
Anne – Baptists (we’re a weird lot) don’t actually believe in sacraments. We hold to two “ordinances” – baptism and communion (which we tend to call The Lord’s Table). The word ordinances is used as we see these things as having been ordained by God as particular local church functions. We don’t use the term “sacrament” as that indicates that grace is imparted through the observance of the sacrament and we don’t believe that any grace is garnered by participation in the Lord’s Supper or baptism – they are steps of outward obedience only.
I sense that Little Wing is not overly familiar with other denominational practices and beliefs and has been told many less than positive things about those outside of her church’s narrow sphere. That, unfortunately, could probably be described as another Baptist “ordinance,” as I have encountered this sort of “us versus them” mentality in essentially every Baptist church I have ever been associated with.
Little Wing – you came into the WWF site with guns blazing and that is likely to get a pretty strong response from people. Even your first post, which I don’t think you intended as an attack, came across that way because I think you have been taught that your view (or your church’s view) of everything related to religion is superior to others, which I think we all believe or else we’d switch churches. But when teaching that our own views are superior – or more correct – than others’ views, we must be very careful not to demonize those who hold to a different view than ours.
From your manner of presentation and your way of speaking, I sense that you are part of an Independent Fundamental Baptist church. Possibly even a church that is part of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches. I was raised in this group and have great respect for many of the folks there. But I have seen so much belittling of others come out of that group of people. It’s very sad. I thought that Southern Baptists weren’t saved when I was growing up – not because I was actually told that, but because the way I was taught about our differences indicated to me that these people were evil. They’re not (or not anymore than all of us are).
I now attend a Southern Baptist Church. I have also helped plant Grace Brethren churches and Evangelical Free churches. My family attended a Calvary Chapel church for a while and we have also attended Independent Bible churches and two Presbyterian churches. They’re all different in small ways and they are all similar in many, many (much more important) ways. My ecclesiastical journey has helped me to recognize that there are believers everywhere and that they are all my brothers and sisters in Christ. Of course I’d like for them to agree with me on theological matters and other matters, but I must get to know them, show them love and concern and then have a reasoned discussion of the issues with them. At the end of it all, we may have an agreement – or we may not. But we part as friends who love and respect each other.
I think if you can tone down your rhetoric a few notches, you’ll find the ladies here (and the few of us men that they graciously allow to lurk in the shadows) to be quite reasonable and willing to discuss our differences openly and respectfully. We also get a little fired up at times. But we’re still friends and we still respect one another.
Some of our differences are profound and we have to determine whether or not we will enter the fray on a given subject. But that doesn’t change the fact that we still respect one another and have friendships here.
Join me in a chorus of Kum Ba Ya, folks
You know, Richard, I actually hope she sticks around. I think she’ll give us a really good sense of what we need to write about. And she’ll keep us honest.
So, the Apostle’s Creed was especially written for/by Calvinism?
No. It’s very very old and has been said by Christians for well over 1500 years. A great article can be found here
I appreciated this page on the Apostles’ Creed, from a site that provides links for a large number of historic and modern credal statements:
http://www.creeds.net/ancient/apostles.htm
I just hate the part that says, “no hair falls from my head outside your will”. VERY Calvinistic, that. I really don’t think Calvinists think all the way through when they say “nothing” happens outside God’s will. In that case, no child is abused, no heart is broken, no life is ruined outside His will. I may not know God, but I know Him better than that.
Um, that’s from the Heidelberg Catechism, not the Apostles creed.
And for what its worth, I’m a full, five-point Calvinist and I assure you that I have thought it through. That line from the Heidelberg that you quoted- Not a hair can fall from my head without the will of my Father in Heaven- is meant to bring peace and comfort to the believer. Even in the darkest pit, we are HIS! HE IS DEEPER STILL!! That is what that line in the catechism is saying. God allows sin- that is a totally Biblical idea. And He will have His vengeance on those who abuse and terrorize others.
Ok folks, I’m baaackkk … lol. I always wanted to write that!
All kidding aside:
Richard, I must admit I like your eloquence much better than Anne’s (she scares me
). She’s a bit aggressive for my taste, IMO .
“Anne – Baptists (we’re a weird lot) don’t actually believe in sacraments. We hold to two “ordinances” – baptism and communion (which we tend to call The Lord’s Table). The word ordinances is used as we see these things as having been ordained by God as particular local church functions. We don’t use the term “sacrament” as that indicates that grace is imparted through the observance of the sacrament and we don’t believe that any grace is garnered by participation in the Lord’s Supper or baptism – they are steps of outward obedience only.”
~Well put.
“I sense that Little Wing is not overly familiar with other denominational practices and beliefs and has been told many less than positive things about those outside of her church’s narrow sphere.”
~Richard, is this an assumption on your part? I’m trying to understand because the picture I have painted comes from personal experience. Not what those within my “narrow sphere” have said.
“I think you have been taught that your view (or your church’s view) of everything related to religion is superior to others, which I think we all believe or else we’d switch churches. But when teaching that our own views are superior – or more correct – than others’ views, we must be very careful not to demonize those who hold to a different view than ours.”
~I believe that what God sets forth is above any standard man can conceive Baptist or not. Will I ever be able to fulfill it to the letter; not as long as I dwell in this flesh. I am not trying to “demonize” as you put it, others belief. I am simply stating that it is black or white, you are either hot or cold, no shades of grey. If it does not line up with scripture it is not spiritual.
“From your manner of presentation and your way of speaking, I sense that you are part of an Independent Fundamental Baptist church. Possibly even a church that is part of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches.”
~IFB is correct but we have no “association.” We are an independent local body (church) of Christ. The only time at which I will be part of a “universal body” of believers will be about a second into the rapture. I belong to a “local” body of believers. I cannot be a sister in Christ to my “aunt” who is way off doctrinally nor to an “unsaved” catholic, or a JW. They do not believe the Bible as it stands and follow after the ordinances of man.
“I thought that Southern Baptists weren’t saved when I was growing up – not because I was actually told that, but because the way I was taught about our differences indicated to me that these people were evil.”
~I have never heard this school of thought before; it’s a first to me.
~Cally,
“Mormons use the KJV Bible… and so I ask what separates your church, Little Wings, from your local Mormon Ward?”
~Oh, you can’t be seriously asking that right? Mormons are so “out there” with their beliefs, it borders on insanity. I have an “aunt” who is Mormon; she has shared with me extensively on her faith and then believes we actually believe in the same god. I am sorry but my Jesus was no brother to lucifer. I could go on and on but I would take pages. Seriously?
~Psalmist~ “Littlewings, you said you apologize, but did not say for what. I would assume the “meowishness” of your “Palmist” smear, but since you didn’t specify, I can’t tell.”
~Yes. That.
“Does anyone happen to have a more complete citation for LW’s “Dr. Gipp””
http://samgipp.com/answer/gipp_answer_index.html
~Anne
~ Richard answered as I would have on the subject matter of “sacraments.”
“I think you know very little about the church in which you were raised. Sadly, that’s common with many adults who grew up Catholic.”
~I can’t break out my doctrinal manual; I threw that out with the garbage years ago. But here is what I know and was taught me from a wee lad:
“Rome’s gospel centers in the Catholic Church, the pope, and the sacraments. While Catholicism teaches that Christ died on the cross to purchase man’s salvation, it is not satisfied simply to invite men to receive this salvation by faith directly from the resurrected Christ. Rome teaches that Christ, having purchased redemption by His blood and death, delivered it to the Catholic Church to be distributed to men. Consider the following quotes from the Vatican II Council:
“For ‘God’s only-begotten Son … has won a treasure for the militant Church … he has entrusted it to blessed Peter, the key-bearer of heaven, and to his successors who are Christ’s vicars on earth, so that they may distribute it to the faithful for their salvation. They may apply it with mercy for reasonable causes to all who have repented for and have confessed their sins. At times they may remit completely, and at other times only partially, the temporal punishment due to sin in a general as well as in special ways (insofar as they judge it to be fitting in the sight of the Lord). The merits of the Blessed Mother of God and of all the elect … are known to add further to this treasury’” (ellipsis are in the original) (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Apostolic Constitution on the Revision of Indulgences, Chap. 4, 7, p. 80).
“For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help towards salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the people of God” (Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism, chap. 1, 3, p. 415). “
“The First Step is Baptism. According to Rome, salvation begins with baptism. It can be infant baptism for those born into Catholic homes or adult baptism for those who approach the Roman Church later in life. Either way, the Catholic Church teaches that through baptism a person receives spiritual life.
“By the sacrament of Baptism, whenever it is properly conferred in the way the Lord determined and received with the proper dispositions of soul, man becomes truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ and is reborn to a sharing of the divine life” (Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism, chap. 3, II, 22, p. 427).
Next Steps are the Other Church Sacraments.
After baptism a person is considered to be born again and part of the body of Christ, the Church. This new life is said to be nurtured and kept alive through Confirmation, Mass, Penance and the other sacraments.”
~Ok, that is my summation. Need I quote more?
“All Christians are part of the catholic or universal church.”
~Not I Shirley, (self quoting -> “The only time at which I will be part of a “universal body” of believers will be about a second into the rapture.”
“I’m sorry you have such a poor perspective on Catholics. But if I may remind you, your opinion does not make it fact. And that statement is highly insulting to the many sincerely devoted Catholics who love the Lord.”
~Refer to above, up, up.
“Really? Do you believe in the trinity, father, son, holy spirit? Because that’s not specifically mentioned in the bible.
It’s a biblically sound belief and doctrine however.”
~The word trinity is not in it of itself found in scripture (but you already know that) but I do believe.
1John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Littlewings, I am serious. Mormons use your same Bible (the KJV) and I want to know how YOU know they are a cult. (I know plenty about Mormonism, so I’m not asking what the differences are… only HOW you know they are different…)
How do you know to believe in the Trinity? Because 1700 years ago, a group of men spent years and YEARS hammering out the doctrine of the Trinity that you yourself hold. I’m assuming you believe in One God, eternally existent in three persons- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Your pastor didn’t come up with it just by reading the Bible, I assure you.
Sorry to disappoint you, but if you confess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, then you ARE a part of the holy catholic and apostolic church- not the ROMAN Catholic church- but the invisible church, that is the body of believers throughout all time.
And FWIW, nobody here is Roman Catholic to my knowledge, so you don’t need to go on posting stuff about what Rome teachings unless it is relevant to the topic at hand.
Cally,
~hmm, I guess you are speaking/writing out of line.
Anne was saying she believed I had a poor view on real catholisism. I grew up in that church and was addressing her.
So uhm thanks for that, but next time read. As I was so asked to do before speaking.
As for your mormon address. I know first hand from my “aunt” who has been in service to her church 30 yrs. +
I never said the word “cult” but that their beliefs border on insane.
Uhhmm, spiritual babies, my own planet, and self like god, ritiualistic sacraments, and plates of gold containing the words of god to joseph smith and “jesus” walking the continent of America to bring forth his true mormon church and real day prophets …. yada yada yada.
Should I continue?
Ok, Ms Cally, read the post thoroughly before you comment *again*
I believe in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit because God said it!
What do you mean “HOW DO I KNOW?”
Duh …?
Did I say my pastor said so? Cally?
I don’t believe I have used that word “pastor” at all here.
What happened to my last comment?
Woah, Jennifer- I don’t know. I responded to it and my response isn’t there either. Let me check the comment log and see what i can do.
Jennifer, is it #74?
LW- I did read your responses carefully. I apologize if I misunderstood your response to Anne. My point is that I don’t think you need to go on and on about Roman Catholicism because it is completely irrelevant to the discussion. You brought it up above when you said you had an issue with the use of the word “catholic” in the Apostles’ Creed. Several people have subsequently told you that the word “catholic” is referring to the church universal, meaning all believers in all times and in all places, rather than the Roman Catholic church proper.
As for the Mormon thing- I’m going to let that go. I don’t think I can make my point very well, so I’m just going to drop it. I think we’re going to end up talking past each other on this point anyway.
If you’re looking for some more information on the value of creeds, I wrote a new post on it just now.
LW- one more thing- How do you know what you know about the Trinity? You quoted one verse up there from 1 John and that is GREAT! However, it doesn’t tell me anything about the Trinity. It only suggests that there is one. It doesn’t say anything about who they are, what their roles are, their natures, their persons, their relationships with each other, who begat whom, from whom does the Holy Spirit proceed, whether or not the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father, whether or not Jesus was a created being…
Now, the Bible does speak to all of these issues, but not explicitly. Hundreds of men had to spend many many years studying the Bible very carefully to determine what is true about the Trinity. The very doctrine you hold to today (or the one I assume that you hold) was hammered out 1700 years ago by the Council of Nicaea. Please don’t take the doctrine of the Trinity for granted. Men died to preserve the Biblical truth of this doctrine and to just blow off the question with a “well God said it!”, well, let’s just say that I think it does those men a disservice. That God said it is true in one sense- He did say it in His Word, but it took a lot of work to figure out what He was saying.
I think that is Anne’s ultimate point about the Trinity.
Okay, going to bed now.
Thanks Cally, it’s there.
As to your reply, God allowing sin (as he promised would happen if Eve and Adam disobeyed Him) is not the same as ordaining every sin or hardship that occurs. I just had my heart broken. And far worse in the world: a local 13-year-old girl was murdered. I don’t think that was ordained by God.
Jennifer, I don’t believe that poor girl’s death was ordained by God, either, but I do believe that it was allowed. My belief is that God has given Satan a measure of authority over our world (he is called the prince of this world). Much like when Satan came to God to ask permission to inflict Job with all of his trials, Satan continues to do nothing without God’s allowance of it.
Jennifer, things like that really can get my theology out of whack.
I don’t have pretty answers for why children suffer or die and why things are allowed to happen. I don’t think God sits on high with a magic wand and makes things happen. I also don’t think He is oblivious to us either. I think somewhere in between we have free will, and unfortunately people do bad things and make bad choices, and for whatever reason God does not intervene in the way we would like.
A young man at my church just died in a motorcycle accident a few weeks ago. He was newly married by only a few weeks and was 21 years old. But—at his funeral, there were like 40 people saved. I don’t know WHY it happened, but I do know some good came from it.
The mind boggles in situations like this. I have to just let it go at times.
Jennifer, Johanna, Normal – I struggled with that for quite some time as well – does God ordain everything that happens, good and evil, or does he allow evil to happen and ordain only good.
What really helped me come to terms with this was a personally humbling realization that this world and all that is in it was created to bring glory to God – not pleasure or comfort to us. If we want to avoid the frustrations of wondering how God could “let this happen,” we have to understand that it really is not about us.
If I may present a scenario that I think answers the question of “why would God ordain evil?”
The more we know about God, the more He is glorified. Since the entirety of creation was intended to bring glory to God, the original sin of Adam was ordained by God, perhaps, in order that we could gain an understanding of God’s justice, God’s grace, God’s mercy, God’s love, God’s salvation. None of these things could be known (or shown) were it not for sin and evil.
If we look at ourselves and think ourselves to be important to the whole scheme of things, we take offense at the idea that God would ordain things that would cause so much suffering to us. But it isn’t about us. We are the pots and the potter has the right to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor.
I believe that this view of things is biblical, but I also understand that in my finite humanness I am often wrong.
LW, please explain something for me. You have spoken of being content in your role as helpmeet to your husband, but you said this, prefatory to quoting but not citing what you believe about Roman catholicism:
“But here is what I know and was taught me from a wee lad”
By your own words, you say you were a wee lad, but you have previously presented yourself pretty clearly as a lass. Could you clarify which it is, please? Especially given your insistence on knowing whether I’m male or female, as though that should have anything to do with how you respond to me or to anyone else.
And now that I’ve had to guess what you said you were apologizing for, and you gave your two-word confirmation of my guess, LW:
I accept.
I apologize; LW did provide a citation of sorts for what she quoted about Catholicism.
Allowing things and giving Satan permission to do things are not the same. And no, the idea that God strikes people down (including children, Richard) to bring Himself glory is not comforting in the least. We are at least SOMEWHAT more important than that.
“the original sin of Adam was ordained by God”
That’s the most evil idea of all, save that God ordains who goes to hell.
“None of these things could be known (or shown) were it not for sin and evil.”
So abuse the children, mutilate the people, rape the women, torture the believers, crush God’s Son and send His children to everlasting torment and suffering just to demonstrate His “justice” and “mercy”. I’m not impressed.
And gee, God forbid we see ourselves as more than clay or pieces to be used. When we turn broken hearts and tear-streaked faces to God and ask Him why, I certainly hope the God of all wisdom and mercy has something much better to say than, “Hey baby, you’re my clay and here to suffer so I’m glorified.” I’m sure the parents of every tortured soldier and every dead abused little girl would be really comforted by that horrific answer.
Who says I’m struggling with this, Richard? The only thing I struggle with is the fact that people believe God ordains everything. I don’t need an answer for why everything happens. The answer’s clear enough: it’s a fallen world and crap happens. I’m perfectly content to say that some bad things happen with no explanation, rather than being so determined to know the answer that I decide to go with the conclusion that it must all be God’s will.
Normal, your answer has been the most reassuring; that’s pretty much what I believe. Thanks
Jennifer – I tried to make my comment as gentle and respectful as possible. I think it would benefit all seekers of truth if we all tried to retain that air.
I’ve heard what you said from the mouths of others, Richard. There’s nothing gentle about it.
And truthfully, that was just me being honest. I’m really NOT impressed by a God so caught up in Himself that He eternally punishes His children to show His divine “love”. Thank goodness I don’t believe in that God.
I can assure you that when we go to God in tears, He cries right along with us. I’ve been in the midst of a struggle for the past 3 years and I’ve cried countless tears. God has been right there with me through them all. I don’t know why He brought this trial into my life but I do believe He allowed (or ordained…my belief is that they are one and the same) it for His glory. I might not know WHY until I see Him face to face but I do know that He’s promised that He’ll cause ALL things to work together for good to those who are loved Him and are called by Him.
This is getting into an area where, like Normal, I just have to “let it go”. Jennifer, I’m not implying that you should; I am just saying from my own experience. There are so many things about God that I don’t understand or that don’t seem “fair” to my human interpretation of justice. But I’ve just had to let it go. The Bible speaks of there being secret things that belong to the Lord; things that only He knows and understands. I’ve come to accept that I won’t understand why some things happen. (For example, to speak of my struggle, why a drug-addicted woman can have baby after baby, yet my husband and I, who want children so desperately, are struggling to have them.)
Johanna – I agree completely. God cries with us through the sufferings we endure, which I believe he ordains for his glory. I pray that God will continue to comfort you throughout your situation. Life can sure be hard at times.
I would agree with you that truth is not relative, and that there is an absolute truth. But the way you’ve phrased this makes it sound like you know, on all points, what the truth is. It is wise for all of us to maintain a humble heart and keep in mind that we might be in error on one point or another. As the bible says, we see through a glass darkly. It is that spirit of humility and charity which we must show to one another. Because one day we’re all going to find out we were wrong about something. Including you.
Well, whether one calls them sacraments or ordinances, they are fundamentally the same idea. I hope it will give you a better understanding of what that means.
I don’t really need a primer on Roman Catholic Doctrine. I went through the adult education program there about 5 years ago. And while I’ve recently come to the conclusion that I am no longer a Roman Catholic, I see much misrepresentation of their beliefs in what you’ve stated thus far. The sacraments to Catholics are a vital part of church life. They bring a beleiver closer to God. They are things one can actively do to deepen one’s faith and relationship with God. Much like bible reading or prayer (both of which are encouraged in the Catholic church) are in many Protestant churches.
That Catholics have doctrinal differences does not change the fact that they believe all the things stated in the Nicene creed. Catholics believe the main points upon which all Christians agree.
We are one body in Christ Jesus. Upon what scripture do you base that you are not?
Read it. Still think what I said there.
And there’s where the good old KJV can trip you up. The words “are one” (not originally written in KJ English) can also be translated as “agreement”. I think it highly likely that the KJV translators decided to translate it as “are one” to make the trinity appear more obvious. But to the early Christians the trinity wasn’t obvious. And as I said, even when the canon was in place and we finally had a bible, most people couldn’t read it for themselves, nor would they ever be able to own one.
But thank goodness for us, the early church fathers took the time to hammer out that doctrine, and teach it to the believers as creeds, or statements of faith, so that even those who would never be able to read God’s word would know the truth of their faith.
I think you owe more to the believers who came before you than you realize.
*edited by Anne to fix a quote for clarity.*
I know He brings trials, but that’s not the same as ordaining every truly horrific thing in the world, especially those that benefit no one. The idea that He would weep over the same horrors that He causes would be laughable if it weren’t awful. A god who makes others suffer unimaginable horrors for his glory is corrupt and selfish; a god who tears an upright person’s heart up to allegedly benefit them is sick, the equivalent of a mother tripping her baby son just so she could comfort him when he cries. As for the ultimate pre-destination idea that God decides who will burn in hell before they’re born..that’s just too sick to contemplate.
I will let the topic go here, Johanna. I just can’t see how anyone would believe that a loving God would ordain evil, which He is incapable of doing.
Little Wings, I’m at a loss to the reason that you’re here. Except for possibly your last post, almost everything you’ve said has been overly, blatantly sarcastic and it almost seems like you’re trying to make yourself look ridiculous. Calling Psalmist “palmist”? Pretending you don’t know why all the smileys were in your post? One thing’s for sure: I’m not grouping you with the VF. Although they’re definitely royal idiots in my book, they’re at least usually consistent.
Jennifer, I think you may have a different definition for the word “ordain” than others here. Not that he causes the horrors, but that he allows them to happen and doesn’t stop them when He has the power to do so. And His reasons are His, they will somehow bring glory to Him, or serve some purpose that we can’t see.
Sin is our fault, not God’s. But He allows us to live with the temporal consequences so that He might be glorified somehow. He offers us a way to be forgiven so that we might spend eternity in paradise. And He offers us the hope that those we love will not be taken from us forever, but that we may be reunited with them in eternity.
That’s more or less what I believe, Anne.
Jennifer, I want to respond to what you’ve written here because I think its such an important issue. I’m going to do a post about it, so I hope that you’ll read it and offer your thoughts.
FWIW- Calvinists do not believe that God predestines people to burn in hell. Any Calvinist who makes that claim is ignorant of both Calvin and of the Bible.
Ladies, I have read what all of you have written.
First, let me state to Jenifer that I jumped in out of interest. I didn’t realize that I needed “permission” to be in here. A response (from any) to a comment on my behalf precludes my being here. Are you asking me to leave?
I thought all “opinions or views” were encouraged here? If that not be the case, I can bid ado.
Secondly, I read what you all are saying. I understand by reading your posts that the majority of the ladies here are all well “versed” in historical matters pertaining to bible.
I don’t feel I owe anyone “anything.”
I don’t mean to sound callous in saying that; it’s just that many have given so much that we may “enjoy” or partake of the life we live today. By that reasoning, I would “constantly feel” that my hubby was “due” something for his “daily service” to our nation. Let me state less I am misunderstood that that is not my stance.
This is in reference to Cally commenting:
“Now, the Bible does speak to all of these issues, but not explicitly. Hundreds of men had to spend many many years studying the Bible very carefully to determine what is true about the Trinity. The very doctrine you hold to today (or the one I assume that you hold) was hammered out 1700 years ago by the Council of Nicaea. Please don’t take the doctrine of the Trinity for granted. Men died to preserve the Biblical truth of this doctrine and to just blow off the question with a “well God said it!”, well, let’s just say that I think it does those men a disservice. That God said it is true in one sense- He did say it in His Word, but it took a lot of work to figure out what He was saying.”
Anne had stated:
“I think you owe more to the believers who came before you than you realize.”
~Anne,
“But the way you’ve phrased this makes it sound like you know, on all points, what the truth is. It is wise for all of us to maintain a humble heart and keep in mind that we might be in error on one point or another. As the bible says, we see through a glass darkly. It is that spirit of humility and charity which we must show to one another. Because one day we’re all going to find out we were wrong about something. Including you.”
What tone or phrasing should I use in order to not sound like “I know it all?”
I have merely stated that the Bible is MY final authority on all life matters. I never said “I had it all figured out.” Nor is it my intention to sound like I know all. I am stating that in dealing with all life issues I run to the Bible for my answers. Do I try to live my life by the book? Yes! Do I succeed? More often than not, I fail!
I believe that God “ordained” for us today in the English language a copy of His “entire thoughts, for us.” I don’t know firsthand (except for what I have read and studied) exactly how it all came to be, detail for detail. But I do know that I believe that the copy of the word of God I hold in my hand is his ultimate love letter to me. My point is not to “argue” away who I “owe” it to, to thank for it. The only one worthy of that gratefulness on my part is Christ Jesus ALONE! Not man or his role in the whole matter.
Finally, if I may be allowed to share? Why the suffering?
God created Adam and Eve, for his glory and pleasure, He gave them free will. He could have made “robots” to love and to love him back but He didn’t, he made us, free will and all. Adam and Eve chose to disobey; the one thing they could not have, is the one they “coveted” thus causing them to sin and fall from grace and taste death. This you all know.
Likewise now if we have all read, it is satan and his hosts that now have dominion here.
Eph. 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
John 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
1 John 3;8a He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.
I am including these verses is to say this; it is sin and sin alone that causes the greater part of the heartache that we as humans “suffer.”
For the child of Christ, we know that in this present world we will have tribulation. God means that for our good. But for the un-regenerated man, it is his sin or the sin that abounds around him that brings such “horrid” things to pass. One who is not saved cannot understand or comprehend why a just God would allow such suffering, but not all things that happen are for his glory.
Sin has consequences, some comes from generational sin. Example: a woman who is a harlot may have a child born with aids (that child did not choose to be born into a world of sin). The woman by her fornication has produced this seed which must now “suffer” the sin of its mother. God did not “allow this” nor did he prevent it, that woman had free will to choose.
If God lead us all in the direction of perfection we would have a perfect world and thus would come to him by his doing and not by our free will.
Nobody wants that kind of love, people want to know that the person that loves them “chose freely” to love them and does not do it out of “obligation.” (Sorry for the run on ….)
But if you believe as the majority of the “Calvinist” do, then you have an understanding that “all is God’s doing.” I do not agree. Else why the “free will?”
On another note:
Anne ~“Well, whether one calls them sacraments or ordinances, they are fundamentally the same idea. I hope it will give you a better understanding of what that means. ”
~ NOT THE SAME … see Richards post.
~Anne: “We are one body in Christ Jesus. Upon what scripture do you base that you are not?”
As I had stated previously, a brother or a sister would constitute those who are of one accord “doctrinally on the gospel of Christ.” One who denies the virgin birth or Jesus as Lord, or His Deity is not of the same mind, hence, no relation. We must agree on that, first and foremost.
How you choose to “worship” is a different matter entirely.
IMO, Catholicism always “added” to the finished work of Calvary.
How can you say those things help you in your walk? When the church clearly states that they are necessary! Where in the bible does it state that?!
For what its worth- Calvinists do not deny free will. We believe that the will is in bondage- it is either in bondage to sin or it is in bondage to Christ. It is not free in the sense that there is nothing influencing the will. We certainly believe in the ability to make choices, but those choices will be based on where your allegiance lies- either with sin or with Christ.
Littlewings,
It looks to me like you are a woman who really has a passion for God and a desire to live fully for Him. I know we probably wouldn’t see eye to eye on a lot of things, but I just wanted to share that I respect your passion and your your drive to search out truth.
Warmly,
Molly
Jennifer didn’t insinuate that you shouldn’t be here, but asked what your purpose was. Thank you for sharing it.
That will be for you to figure out. All I can tell you is how you’re currently coming across. In fairness, I have a tendency to do the same thing. Humility is sometimes a difficult lesson to learn.
That’s great! But lot’s of people think that and still believe something wrongly. One day we’ll have all the answers and realize that all of us have messed up somewhere. But the way you were phrasing things made it sound like you believed that there was A: your way, the right way, the biblical way, God’s way and B: everyone who didn’t agree with you.
Slightly different in that some of us see it as something that adds grace or sanctification, and some of us don’t. But they are traditions instituted in the bible that we take part in as a body of believers as either an outward sign of an inward grace, or because we are commanded to. I can’t see that the idea of what a sacrament is should separate those whom you believe to be Christian from those who are not.
If you believe that, then my statement of being one body of believers or catholic in the universal sense would still be accurate. It would just be that you don’t include as many in the term “catholic” as I do. I don’t consider someone who doesn’t believe in the basics of the faith to be part of the catholic church. That would just be silly!
And you’re certainly entitled to that opinion. I don’t think that it makes all Roman Catholics non-Christians.
I’m not sure I understand your question. The bible does command us to be baptised and to take part in the Lord’s Supper. We are also commanded to pray and do other things. Why command those things if not for our benefit? God doesn’t need our prayer, or our faithfulness. We do. Because following God is good for us. Now, we don’t get to heaven with our works, and I’m not remotely implying that we do. But faith without works is dead. And works aren’t just feeding the hungry, but taking that time to pray, read the bible, go to church, take communion, be baptised, etc.
Wow, Little Wings. I never thought I’d agree with you, but the answer for the “why” of suffering that you gave is right-on. Thanks!
for what it’s worth, your last couple of posts have been more serious and indicative that you do care about what you say. Thanks for this
Molly, Jenny (if I may) you are both welcome … *insert me smiling here*
*no, here* ji ji ji …. lol
Anne~ I guess we are both going in different directions.
1. Baptizing is commanded, right. We (Baptist), do this as an outward profession of our inward faith. Of course it is not needed for salvation that would be adding works to the finished work of Christ on the cross.
2. We celebrate the Lord’s Supper “in remembrance” as stated in 1 Cor 11:24-25 And when he had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
But we, do not believe in “communion” as it is done elsewhere. Nor do we celebrate “holy communions,” confirmations or infant baptisms, etc..
In order for one to be baptized he must be a “willing” candidate.
That is what I was pointing to when talking “sacraments.”
“That’s great! But lots of people think that and still believe something wrongly. One day we’ll have all the answers and realize that all of us have messed up somewhere. But the way you were phrasing things made it sound like you believed that there was A: your way, the right way, the biblical way, God’s way and B: everyone who didn’t agree with you. ”
I agree with the first part and apologize for sounding like your depiction in point A.
The Bible is always right! Do I always understand it as God meant for me to? No, there is a lot I have yet to comprehend and furthermore I do agree that when we all get to heaven we might be surprised by many areas in where we thought ourselves to hold “truth” but were actually wrong.
I was just discussing that very thing with my Pastor.
Cally~ “For what its worth- Calvinists do not deny free will. We believe that the will is in bondage- it is either in bondage to sin or it is in bondage to Christ. It is not free in the sense that there is nothing influencing the will. We certainly believe in the ability to make choices, but those choices will be based on where your allegiance lies- either with sin or with Christ”
Bondage to Christ? this word somehow does not “fit” for me. I willingly came to Christ and he in turn gave me eternal life for believing in Him. But I don’t see that as a bondage thing.
Perhaps the word bondage holds a negative meaning for me and does not speak of a relationship.
Answer for me if you will please: Don’t Calvinist believe that we are all “predestined” to salvation? And that those “who are called” only, will be saved?
Please clear that up for me as I would like to know firsthand from a proffessed Calvinist, so that I will not make “assumptions.”
That’s all well and good, and certainly something worth discussing. But regardless of what you believe about baptism or the Lord’s Supper, you do them as we are commanded to do, as do other Christians. Sacraments or ordinances, in and of themselves, are not anti-Christian nor do they take the place of the Gospel, which was the point I was trying to make.
Then you’re a better woman that I. I sounded more like the bible passage that says “Why do you kick against the goads?”. As for the rest of it, there are some very good answers but I think I’ll let Cally/Jennifer answer them. I certainly have an opinion but believe that you can disagree and still be a Christian. That’s something I don’t see from you. It seems that if someone disagrees with you on a point of doctrine, they’re not real Christians. That’s what bothers me about your writings thus far.
I’m going to let Jennifer answer this, but I have a question for you: Aren’t we all created by God and His to do with as He pleases?
LW- In terms of “bondage”, I am speaking of the concept that we are servants (doulos) of Jesus Christ. Doulos in the Greek translates as follows:
“1) a slave, bondman, man of servile condition
a) a slave
b) metaph., one who gives himself up to another’s will those whose service is used by Christ in extending and advancing his cause among men
c) devoted to another to the disregard of one’s own interests
2) a servant, attendant”
Paul teaches this concept in Romans 6:16, 17:
“Know yet not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered to you.”
When Paul uses the word “servant” in these passages, he is talking about people who are basically slaves… in the same way that we were slaves to sin before coming to faith in Christ, we are now slaves to Christ.
And as for your second point:
Answer for me if you will please: Don’t Calvinist believe that we are all “predestined” to salvation? And that those “who are called” only, will be saved?
Calvinists believe in the predestination or election, yes. God, in His great goodness and mercy elected some unto life. I like the way Anne put it in our phone call earlier: we were all hell-bound and were all deserving of God’s justice. All of us. And yet God chose to save some of us. He didn’t have to save any of us. I cannot think of anything more merciful- that he stooped to save even a one when we were all deserving of the eternal fire. Or as the Belgic Confession puts it:
“We believe that God, after all the offspring of Adam thus fell head over heels into perdition and destruction by the guilt of the first man, demonstrated and put forth His very self as such a kind as He is: both merciful and also just. Indeed, merciful in freeing and saving from damnation and ruin those whom in His eternal council He elected, out of gratuity apart from any work, according to His goodness through our Lord Jesus Christ. Truly just, in leaving behind others in their fall and ruin into which they threw their very selves head over heals.”
In general, there are two views of predestination:
1) The view I described above
2) The view that, in eternity past, God looked down the corridor of time to see who would choose him if given the chance and then elected based on that human choice.
I’m not here to debate Calvinism. I only want to discuss it when it has not been rightly represented, so I’m not going to get into why option #2 doesn’t jive with Scripture.
Suffice it to say that there is an elect people of God. The Bible is replete with examples. However you view it coming into being, there will be a finite number of people in Heaven whom God has elected.
For view #1, here are some references to check out:
Ephesians 1:4-5, 11
Romans 8:28-33
John 15:16
Psalm 65:4
Acts 13:48
Romans 9:16
Romans 11:5
Titus 1:1
2 Timothy 2:9
As for your second question- only those who respond in faith to the Gospel will be saved. “Many are called, but few are chosen.” Anyone who hears the gospel of Jesus Christ is called to repent and believe… however their rejection of the gospel is not what condemns them. Their sin nature and their sin has already condemned them (as it did me and every other believer before coming to faith).
What I really think you are asking is if I believe that only the elect will be saved. And my answer is yes.
Anne~
“Sacraments or ordinances, in and of themselves, are not anti-Christian nor do they take the place of the Gospel, which was the point I was trying to make.”
Yeah, this is where we are going in two directions. What I said is that if it “adds” to the finished work of Christ, then certainly it is. I will lay this to rest on the note that during the time I served within the catholic church, I was told that all those things were “needed” to draw one in the” direction” of God. They were like steps and it made it complicated for the child trying to understand God.
Salvation is very simple, so simple that many miss it. It is by faith, in Christ, and not of works.
I shared that because we were on the subject of the church and salvation. There, it was never made as plain and simple as God had put it.
“That’s something I don’t see from you. It seems that if someone disagrees with you on a point of doctrine, they’re not real Christians. That’s what bothers me about your writings thus far.”
I never stated that, I said that if it goes against the word of God. Furthermore I never stated that they are not “real” Christians Anne. You and I both know very well that it is God that sees the heart and we only see the external. You are adding to what I have written and taking it somewhere else making me out to be some kind of “self-righteous” freak.
Cally~
I am not here to “argue” Calvinism with you either. I asked (nicely I believe) where you stood on the matter and to elaborate (as you have) on their stance.
Maybe I still don’t have a clear picture. I will say this however; I took to heart and read the scripture verses that you provided.
Some of those verses are talking about men that God literally calls outs for his service. That is fine; I too believe that God “calls” upon certain men to do His bidding.
As for the rest of us, we are all given the gift of grace but like a gift we have to accept it. Otherwise why would it be “whosoever will may come?”
John 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
John 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
Acts 2:21 And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
And so on and so forth. What I am reading and understanding from you is that God has only called out “certain” people, is that right?
The “remnant” which you refer to in the scripture given is referring to the Jewish (God’s chosen) not the “whosoever wills.”
Ladies, please try not to sound like you take offence to what I write. If you are firm on your stance and know that biblically it is supported, why take it as if I’m right, you’re wrong and so forth.
If what is said to me, does not line up to God’s word well … that settle’s (for me) that matter.
I am reading with an open heart and mind wanting to understand and participate. I have peace because I know (directly from the Bible) whether what is said lines up or not.
You happen to be sharing on a matter which is very dear to my heart and I cherish.
Yes, we’re going in two different directions, but I’m trying to get you to see my point, whether or not you agree with it. Again, I think this highlights your own misunderstanding of the church you were raised in. Faith is all one needs, and Roman Catholics believe that there will be many in heaven who did only that. Sacraments are for people who already believe, yes to draw one closer to God, but not to add to the work of Christ. Sacraments don’t make salvation for Roman Catholics. They are things done for the benefit of the believer to help them grow in the faith they already have.
And we all do things to grow in our faith. Those things are the works that bring our faith alive. A living faith is not static, but active.
No one here would argue that. Not even a Roman Catholic. But, like I said, a true faith is not static. The bible says that faith saves us, but faith without works is dead. A true faith that brings with it salvation will want to do things that bring the believer’s life in step with God.
Many churches have that problem and it’s sad.
I didn’t say that’s how you meant to come across, simply that it’s how you appear to me. I’m glad to hear that’s not how you really feel.
And this is exactly the kind of statement that gives me the wrong impression of you. We are ALL looking to be right, and to follow the word of God. The word of God settles the matter for all of us here. We’re just coming to a different conclusion based on the texts.
I appreciate your time and your patience here. But I’m also hoping that perhaps you can learn to be a bit more gracious with differing opinions. We here want, just as much as you do, to follow God rightly. And the bible is our ultimate authority too.
Littlewings, should I simply assume that your statement about what was “taught to [you] from a wee lad” was a misstatement, and that you meant to say “…from a wee lass”? Or were you meaning to quote someone else’s words, but missed the quotation marks?
I’m asking this again because unless I missed your response, you haven’t yet answered my question. I think it’s important because you previously insisted on my repeating for your benefit that I am a woman, and you had presented yourself as a wife, but with that statement portrayed yourself as a grown-up “lad.” I think it’s fair to ask you to explain the inconsistency.
Anne, the way you worded that last statement made good sense to me.
I believe what you say to be true about the “church” as it paints a very clear picture.
Unfortunately like you and I agreed “Many churches have that problem and it’s sad.”
I have many a Catholic friend and still the majority of my family both on mine and my husband’s side. Not one of them can give me a clear “testimony” of salvation or of what they believe for that matter. Many “feel” that if they are “good enough” they “hope” they can be “made” worthy to enter heaven if not purgatory (although a faithful friend of mine -catholic- told me the church was moving away from this long held belief) for sure.
I am not far from where I am coming as this is a prevalent “train of thought” amongst many “would be, self professed” Catholics. At least on the west coast it is.
More than 99.9% of the time when approached with the gospel, they take offense and prefer to change the subject.
I have a hard time with that.
When something “great” happens in a person’s life they can hardly wait to share. They want to “shout it out” from the highest mountain. Yet try and speak about God … and ohhh, you have opened Pandora’s Box it seems.
Psalmist;
I’m not sure why you ask about the “lad” comment. Perhaps like so many times before I used that word out of context. Actually, I heard an old Irish Catholic man say that. I thought it was funny … but, does that mean boy? lol….
I hope this clears that up.
Psalmist~ is this what you meant by a way earlier comment on “my inconsistency?”
And what is “VF?”
“What I am reading and understanding from you is that God has only called out “certain” people, is that right?”
I wouldn’t use the word “called” because everyone who hears the Gospel preached is called by God to repent and believe. But to answer your question, yes, He has elected some out of eternal damnation.
VF= Vision Forum
I’m going to consider this discussion closed for me. I have not been offended by a single thing you’ve written, LittleWings. I just don’t have the time to spend defending my beliefs on this particular issue. Please know that its not because I don’t have an answer for your queries or that I can’t be bothered to find one if I don’t know it. But, franky, its beyond the scope of the blog. If anyone else wants to continue the discussion, go right ahead.
Blessings,
Cally
Just as a last note, Cally, God elected everyone out of eternal damnation. That’s why he died for the world.
“yet God chose to save some of us”
God chose to save ALL of us. He stooped to save ALL of us. The choice to refuse Him is not His, it’s ours; He would never choose such a thing. He created us to love and serve Him, not as playthings or chess pieces He could burn selectively so He could show His mercy to those He spared.
You asked, Little Wings, “Don’t Calvinist believe that we are all “predestined” to salvation?”
Apparently not, though the answer they would give sounds like both yes and no. Anne and Cally are both more graceful in explaining their beliefs than any Calvinist I’ve ever seen before, but John Calvin’s beliefs, to me, are still like a serpent whose head swallows its tail: too twist-around, self-contradictory and brain-warping to possibly be by God’s design. God’s Salvation is remarkably easy; only Satan authorizes confusion.
Jennifer, will all people be saved?
Edited to add: I ask this because if you’re saying that he died to save everyone, then his blood will save everyone. In the end, after all, it is the blood of Christ that saves us- the blood that covers a multitude of sins. I know this is a sticky subject even for some Calvinists because there are passages in Scripture which talk about “whomsoever will” and all that. My answer to that would be that the blood of Christ is sufficient to save everyone, but that it doesn’t actually save everyone because then we’d be universalists, basically. The Bible is replete with talk of hell and weeping and gnashing of teeth and all that, so we know that not everyone will be in heaven. Does that mean that the blood of Christ wasn’t sufficient to save them?
I am totally rambling here because its late and I’ve spent waaaay too much time on the TW blog tonight for my own good. I’m going to bed now.
And your comment about Anne and me means a lot to me. I know that Calvinists have a notorious reputation for being pushy and judgmental and not so very nice about communicating what we believe. I used to be one of those angry Calvinists when I first embraced the Doctrines of Grace ten years ago. (Oh My Gas! Has it been THAT LONG??) I think I need to go back and apologize to all those people I was rude to LOL! The long and short of it for me is that I believe that Reformed theology (Calvinism, the Five Solas, and Covenant theology) is biblical and I can honestly say that I would die for those beliefs. Or at least, I’d like to fancy that I would… Suffice it to say that I believe them with my heart and soul. I’m not going down for Old-Earth Creationism or Amillennialism (both of which, I hold to)… or even White-Washed Feminism… but the other stuff, yeah, those pretty much make up my theological perspective. In the end, I have to say that while those are theological systems, I do believe they are 100% supported by Holy Scripture, my ultimate and final authority.
But as I’ve grown up, honestly, I have become less and less concerned with bugging people about their beliefs. Each person must be convinced in his own mind what he believes. It all needs to stand up to Scripture. If it doesn’t, we are obligated to dump it… but that’s where it get’s tricky, doesn’t it? We don’t all see it the same way. I mean, ultimately, there is only one right interpretation of every single word in the Bible… including the “prayer of Jabez” and all that jazz… but as Anne said above, for now, we see through a glass darkly. No one is going to get it all right. The best we can do is know our Bibles, DEVOUR THEM (like I did today when responding to LW- thanks so much for that!!), and test everything we see, hear, and think in light of the truth found within it.
I’m done rambling for the night.
Cheers!
Littlewings, that “lad” means “boy” (as in, exclusive of its ever meaning “girl” ) is a well-known fact for English-speakers. Thank you for clearing up that you used the word without knowing what it meant. Yes, that is what I meant about your inconsistency. You made a couple of statements that, on the surface, made it sound as though you are a woman. That statement, however, clearly sounded as though you were male. That is a definite inconsistency, based on common English usage.
I was slammed with work yesterday (left for work at 3:15 am and returned home this morning at 1:30 am – no breaks throughout the day, not even lunch), so I haven’t been able to be a part of the continuing and very interesting conversation.
Regarding Calvinism – many of the comments in this thread and others have mentioned that we hold scripture to be our ultimate authority. We believe it holds the absolute answer. And yet, many of the arguments laid out here have been of the emotional variety or of the philosophical and logical variety and not supported by scripture. I don’t mean this as an attack on anyone – we all do this from time to time. But statements such as “I can’t believe that because it seems cruel” or “because I can’t worship a God like that” or “because that’s just wrong” are not biblically-based thought processes. If we think something is really terrible, but the Bible says that it is true of God and the Bible says that God is righteous, we have to realize that our finite minds apparently are wrong if we think something is bad but the Bible says it is true of God.
My understanding of the Bible (and, again, I am finite and prone to being wrong – but I must go with what appears to be the truth of scripture) is that God calls all people to repentance, but we humans are bound in sin (dead in trespasses and sins – Eph 2:1) and therefor cannot respond positively to the call of God unto salvation (Romans 8:7-8 ) unless God makes us alive (regeneration – Col 2:13) apart from anything that we do or don’t do.
Anyone who repents of their sins and turns to Christ alone for salvation will be saved (John 6:37). That same verse also says that everyone whom God has given to Jesus will come to him, showing that those who come are the elect of God. Once regenerated they turn to Christ in repentance because God has granted that ability to them at that point (2 Timothy 2:25).
This is the basis of the biblical doctrine of salvation. These concepts have been called by many different monikers over the years (currently Calvinism, before that – Augustinianism, and before that Paulism). But none of these men are the source of these doctrines. They spring from scripture, the apostle Paul being one of the writers of scripture who most clearly and concisely spoke to these doctrines, thus the term “Paulism.”
It is true that many folks present “Calvinism” in a pushy and unkind way. Some of these folks are simply trying to share something they find beautiful in the nature of the God they love and they simply aren’t doing it well. Others are pushing a theological system and are using that system as a bludgeon against others. Neither of these presentation is particularly appealing. What we should all be doing is presenting God’s way of salvation. This means that I preach Calvinism. But God’s salvation is loving and merciful – not spiteful and mean. It’s when we get in the way of God’s design for salvation that the watching world sees our human weaknesses and not Christ’s glory.
“if you’re saying that he died to save everyone, then his blood will save everyone”
It WILL save everyone who believes. It WOULD save everyone on the planet if everyone on the planet believed; this is what I meant. It’s loop-around logic, I think, to say that since some people will not accept Christ (which we all know), God ORDAINED this. If God had His original plan fulfilled, everyone would be saved and this would be a perfect world, but that won’t happen. Not because God isn’t all-powerful, but because He gave us free will and we chose sin.
Richard, all my arguments are based on Scripture. Calvinism isn’t Scripturally founded. It’s simply a theory based on a certain interpretation of the Bible, whereas IN the Bible, God states over and over that Christ died for everyone and that evil is NOT His doing and Satan works against His will. It IS Scripturally true that our God would not use us as playthings; it IS Scripturally true that our God would not warp His own perfect Eden in order to make some suffer, manipulate Adam’s actions into sin, and condemn others to hell before they were even born to show His “mercy”, which would not be mercy anyway. It IS true, by both common sense ( a great gift from God, I might add) and from Scripture that such a god would be a mockery of the one we worship.
Jennifer, I don’t think Calvinists believe what you wrote in your last paragraph, at all.
I’m going to do my best to explain, without the benefit of lengthy study on Calvinism. So bear with me.
“evil is NOT His doing”
No, evil is our doing. He made a perfect world and created Adam and Eve to live in it. They, by not following God’s direction brought sin into the world, and condemned everyone.
“It IS Scripturally true that our God would not use us as playthings; it IS Scripturally true that our God would not warp His own perfect Eden in order to make some suffer, manipulate Adam’s actions into sin, and condemn others to hell before they were even born to show His “mercy”, which would not be mercy anyway.”
Calvinists don’t teach that God manipulated Adam, but that Adam with his free will chose to sin and condemn all of mankind. We are all deserving of His wrath, and are slaves to sin. But He is merciful and chooses to save some of us for His purpose. That is merciful. He could let all of us perish and would be wholly just in doing so. Because none of us deserve heaven.
And while you may disagree with Calvinism, I think it’s unfair to call it a “mockery”.
Forgive me, but I’d like to end the Calvinist discussion here and move it to a post. So, if you’d like to quote me or anyone from this post and carry it over, please feel free to do so.
Sorry Anne, any time I refer to Calvinism as a mockery, I’m referring mainly to John Calvin the monster himself and the really hard-core Calvinists I’ve met whose views are just disgusting. Anyway, I stressed that God didn’t cause evil or manipulate Adam into sin because Richard suggested that God caused Adam to sin so He could show His “glory”. Other than that, I agree with everything you said. Since you and Cally at least seem to agree that God could never cause evil, I’m wondering why any Calvinist who thinks like you would state that God ordains every event that occurs on earth..even if it’s evil.
By all means, I’m looking forward to your new post!!
Richard et al: I’d really like to respect the ladies’ wishes to end Calvinism talk here as well, so PLEASE email me privately if you have anything further to say!! I’m pretty sure my email’s available through my profile, but if not, here ya go: ceebcorry@aol.com
I read this today, as quoted by Dr. Cloud and found it very poignant. I liken this to the “experiences” I had within certian denominational circles.
Phariseeism is supplanting the Word of God with man-made tradition and thereby making the Word of God of none effect.
“Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:7-9).
I can’t speak for all Bible-believing fundamentalists and fundamental Baptists, but I can speak for myself; and I have no confidence in my “righteousness.” I know that I have no righteousness apart from Jesus Christ. I look down upon no man, for I know that any spiritual victory I have enjoyed and any blessing in my life is only because of the grace of Christ. When I attempt to expose false teaching and sin, I am not looking down upon other men; I am simply striving to obey the Word of God.
The modern Pharisee would be more akin to the Roman Catholic priest with his sacramental gospel and his traditions exalted to the place of Scripture and his long history of persecuting the saints. The ecumenical crowd doesn’t call Catholic priests Pharisees, though. They don’t seem to be concerned about all of the souls who have been led astray by these contemporary Pharisees.
The only men they seem to be concerned about are those dreadful old fundamentalists with their strong Bible convictions and their refusal to smile at error. Oh, those dreadful old fundamentalist Pharisees!”
Pharisees didn’t do “good works” to earn salvation- they did it so that everyone would see their “righteousness” and fall all over themselves trying to be like them. They did their good works so they could lord their righteousness over others.
The modern day equivalent to a Pharisee is not the Roman Catholic who believes that his salvation is found in doing grace-infused works but is more like the patriocentrist who stands around condemning everybody who doesn’t live like them or interpret the Bible the way they do.
You might be interested in reading a post I wrote a while back on Legalism, Phariseeism, and Patriocentricity. Just do a search for it.
Blessings.
Jennifer, you say your arguments are Scripturally founded, but you aren’t offering any as proof that what you say is based on the Word of God.
“If God had His original plan fulfilled, everyone would be saved and this would be a perfect world, but that won’t happen.”
Can you please explain what you mean by this?
The question is this- what does the blood of Christ ACTUALLY do- does it merely make men savable, and then man does his part and believes? It does it ACTUALLY save? If it actually saves, then it doesn’t save everyone.
“Does it ACTUALLY save? If it actually saves, then it doesn’t save everyone.”
Cally, it’s very simple: His blood saves everyone and anyone who accepts it!! Why is this hard to understand? What Calvinists don’t seem to get is that WE have some choice in this matter. God makes the offer, we accept or we don’t; He doesn’t decide for us. THIS is Scripturally based and I shouldn’t have to point out particular Scripture that says that God meant for us all to live with Him in Eden before Adam and Eve messed things up or that God cannot abide (or cause) evil. This should be clear in the Bible Anywhere you look.
“I’d like to end the Calvinist discussion here and move it to a post.”
Oh my sweet Christ. That’s what you meant? Moving Calvinism to it’s own post? I thought you meant you’d put a fresh post here about another topic. I never expected my worst enemy to show up here. I abhor Calvinism more than I’ve ever hated patriocentricity.
I’m sorry I got so vehement. I just have a very personal history with both Calvinism and anxiety over anything that hurts me. Calvinism + anxiety = a very volatile Jennifer.
Well, Jennifer, we’ll have to agree to disagree. God’s plan has never been usurped by human will or by the devil. To suggest otherwise it to deny his omnipotence and his sovereignty. Ordain is NOT the same as “cause” as Anne pointed out to you above. I know this sounds like determinism, but it really isn’t. I’m sorry I don’t have the time to devote to going around and around with you.
Your view is that the blood of Jesus makes men savable. Man’s belief has to basically “turn it on” to make it effective. And yet, there is absolutely no basis to say that man will EVER turn to God of his own accord. Ever. We are God-haters, sons of the devil and lovers of sin. There is NO ONE righteous. No one who seeks God. None who does good. If what you say is true, there would be no Christians, because none have the ability to choose him. Our wills are not free- they are in bondage to sin. They cannot and will not ever choose God without the supernatural regeneration of the Holy Spirit.
You’ve offered virtually no Scriptural support for your views of God. You tell me “its obvious” but there’s not a single person involved in this conversation who has said that they agree with you. Your position seems to be based on emotion and what makes sense to you. You say you shouldn’t have to point it out in Scripture because its everywhere and I’m sorry, I just don’t see it. You’ll have to help me out here.
I find that I’m getting a little too fired up about this. I’m going to let it lie, so please forgive me if I end this discussion here. I can feel the angry Calvinist coming to the surface and I’d really like to stay the nice and gracious one. Please forgive me if I’ve failed in that endeavor.
I’d like to add, that I have no problem, whatsoever, with the fact that you disagree with me. I’m not about “converting” people to the Doctrines of Grace. I think you’re wrong. You think I’m wrong. Let’s be friends
Let’s unite over what we agree on and move forward. I really really want to do this 
No need to explain, Jennifer. We had already noticed that.
It’s okay. We all get upset over certain things. That’s the way we’re wired.
Richard- you’re so right! Everyone has their “thing” that makes them just a little bit crazy. For me, its clutter and Arminianism
And women shouldn’t go to college… that too!
Cally – this is off-topic a bit (but we’re on the Authors page, so what really is the topic anyway?) but your comment about women not going to college made me think of this.
My wife and I discussed recently the different women on Fox News. We have strong opinions about them. We really like some of them and really dislike others. My wife and I agree on who we like and who we dislike. We were curious about what made us feel the way we did. They are all attractive and well-spoken and non of them show a particular bias in their reporting.
What we realized after thinking it through is that we prefer the ones that present themselves as thoughtful, intelligent, and competent women. The others seem to do a dumb blond act – using their looks rather than their intelligence to communicate with others.
We loved E.D. Hill when she was one of the morning folks. We really like Lauren Green. And we really like the blond lady on Fox & Friends that replaced E.D. when she took her own time slot later in the day. But we are both turned off by Alison and by others whose name’s I can’t remember right now.
My mother has three bachelor’s degrees a masters and a PhD. My sister has a bachelors and a masters. They are both very intelligent and use that intelligence to communicate even though both of them are also very attractive. I just thought this was an interesting thing.
“there is absolutely no basis to say that man will EVER turn to God of his own accord. Ever.”
Yes there is: free will. God can woo us all He desires, but the decision is ours. This is another thing I hate about Calvinism: the confusion. The MINUTE I think I’m relating to or understanding something about it, it turns out to mean something else. Calvinists believe in free will, but they don’t. God’s salvation is for everyone, but it’s not. God ordains every evil thing, but then He doesn’t.
Either we have free will or we don’t, Cally, but we can’t have it in some half-baked way. Salvation is the exact same way.
“You’ve offered virtually no Scriptural support for your views of God.”
God is Good; He is pure, He is love. NO Scripture denies this. A pure God does not make His children suffer rape, torture, abuse, hell, just to show His glory. He does not claim to be good and then ordain evil in the world, He does NOT confuse us by offering the self-contradicting and ridiculously confusing doctrine that the chauvinistic and sadistic John Calvin did. Scripture says, “God so loved the WORLD”, “WHOMSOEVER may preach.” Salvation is for everyone, or God is a liar.
“To suggest otherwise it to deny his omnipotence and his sovereignty.”
No it’s not; it’s to acknowledge that God allows consequences for the first sin just as He promised. It’s a screwed up world that defies His will all the time and it has been so ever since Adam of his OWN will broke the rules with Eve. That’s another thing: Calvinists think they’re doing God a favor by giving Him credit for everything in the world. They’re not; Satan’s work is not God’s and He will not thank anyone for saying it is. You cannot speak of God’s goodness and then paint His hands with the blood Satan spilled.
“You tell me “its obvious” but there’s not a single person involved in this conversation who has said that they agree with you.”
That’s because the rest of you are mostly Calvinists. It should be obvious: you yourself quoted the Scriptures I have in my conviction.
Please forgive me if I have been too sharp; there’s no need for you to apologize.
I love you Cally, and you haven’t failed in anything here except to convince me that Calvinism is pure and true. But that’s okay; no one will ever succeed in that.
As for letting it lie, I’m done if you are.
“And women shouldn’t go to college… that too!”
You’re saying that you don’t like that belief-am I right, Cally?
Yes, you’re right
And I’m done too
We could sit here all day going back and forth about it and that would be A-okay with me if I didn’t have a kitchen floor to mop and about a thousand other things to do.
{{HUGS}} to you, my friend.
Bear hugs to you too
And if I’m the one who started this (can’t remember), sorry!
Jennifer, I agree.
Thanks Wings
Good to have you on this blog, and I’m sorry I misunderstood you originally.
Richard, thanks for understanding. And I agree, I love competent ladies! That’s what drew me to this blog
*moved by Admin*
Littlewings, I respectfully asked that this topic of conversation be moved to a thread specifically started to deal with the particular issue of Calvinism. Thus, I have moved your comment there.
Yo, girls of WWF!
I’m not sure how to email all of you, so if you want to email, catch me at judahATacsalaskaDOTnet
In the meantime, I’m writing you about the forum I’m starting, and wanted to ask if you feel that I shouldn’t use the WWF name. I really didn’t think about it until just now, and then gasped and got really worried! I was thinking of the name just because it’s been so used and laughed over at the TW forum, NOT NOT NOT because I want to copy you guys.
If you feel that you’d prefer to keep the WWF name to yourselves on this blog, I’d be happy to change the name. I really really really meant NO ill will or desire to steal your thunder. I think your thunder is GREAT and have no plans on stealing anything!
Richard, that includes your WWF graphic. Would you prefer it NOT be used on the forum? If so, please let me know. I don’t want to swipe anything of yours, either.
Love to all,
Molly
Molly, I say go for it. Yay for your forum!!
That goes for me too, Molly. You’re welcome to use the graphics.
Phew. Thanks. I had a moment where I got really worried.
If the King James was good enough for Jesus, its good enough me!
Grin.
Drat!
Make that:
If the King James was good enough for Jesus, its good enough for me!
Grin
No joke, that is a quote from a little old lady I was helping in the bible department of a Christian book store I worked at 18 years ago!
Priceless.
Hello, Lindsey,
What a small world–I used to read your blog and came across this site today!
I also used to teach in public schools and now homeschool. I want to ask you if you don’t have any convictions about teaching as only a means of paying the mortgage (did y’all buy a new house? If so, congrats!!)?
I started homeschooling my oldest son the year after he was in a classroom with a teacher who was only teaching for the paycheck. She had moved from a Christian school into the public school district because the district pays higher and she was paying for her children’s college expenses.
I am not saying that you will be an ineffective teacher (my son’s teacher taught from her desk–2nd grade!), but if my children were in public school, I would want them in classrooms with teachers who are there because teaching is their passion. (And, an aside–not the point of my question–the paycheck is not going to be enough for all of the work entailed to make anyone but a passionate teacher satisfied).
Thanks!
Katherine
wow! i’m exhausted!
:~)
Is this board still active or does it die with Laura Croft?
If it lives, is there going to be a replacement for the lovely toumbraider?