James 1:23-25
For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror;for {once} he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was. But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the {law} of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does.
Mike Ditka is considered to be one of the best and by some, the best NFL coach of all time. He retired as a player in 1972 and Ditka was immediately hired as an assistant coach by Cowboys’ head coach Tom Landry. Ditka spent nine seasons as an assistant coach with the Cowboys. During his tenure, the Cowboys made the playoffs eight times, won six division titles and three NFC Championships, including the one preceding their Super Bowl victory in 1977. Ditka coached the Chicago Bears for 11 years and New Orleans Saints for 3 years. Ditka and Tom Flores are the only two people to win Super Bowls as a player, an assistant coach and a head coach. Ditka was the only individual to participate in the last two Chicago Bears’ championships, as a player in 1963 and as head coach in 1985.
Now being a coach or a trainer in sports does not mean that you are able to do what you expect done as well as the players you coach. Most coaches or trainers speak from past experiences or have done a lengthy study of the duties and tasks that they require of you and this is why what they speak is cherished so. Can you think back to Mike Tyson or Muhammad Ali in their prime? Can you imagine them losing their belts or titles to their coaches. The thought is insane and we all realize that just because you can logically put things in order does not necessarily mean that you yourselves can do them. So can we accurately say that Calvin, Whitefield, Edwards were just really good coaches who had our best interests at heart but chose not to implement these truths in their lives? Or to be 100% accurate, they chose to allow Christ to infiltrate some parts of their lives but not all. Is this something we all possess since no one is perfect? I would like to express some thoughts that were in before in the back of my mind but I now found the time to closer examine them. They are questions such as these:
- How could George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards own slaves?
- How could John Calvin brutally have Michael Servetus killed?
- How can we call abortionist murderers but not apply that logic to these men?
- What does the Bible say about people like these men?
First and foremost let me say that I understand that the Elect of God are all one in Christ and I along with many others strive to build God’s church. I, being a black man do not have a bone to pick with these men but I think we have to be consistent with how we look at these so called “Great” men. I can surely see the providence of God in the Atlantic slave trade. Some may say I am scrutinizing great men who led flawless lives with the exception of this one minor detail. Simply because they contributed greatly by coining certain phrases(TULIP) and writing great sermons does not mean they were born of God. I know that is a bold statement but according to correct understanding of the scriptures as quoted above, people who hear the Word and do not practice are declared hypocrites. I am simply opening this up for discussion merely out of curiosity and insight from others.
Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield were both very busy and intelligent men. Whitefield from England and Edwards born in the states. These men knew the scriptures well.. here are some great facts…
- Studied 13 hours a day from the scriptures
- Missionary to the Native Americans
- Whitefield traveled back and forth from America and England for the furtherance of the Gospel
- Preached great sermons like “Sinners in the Hands of A Angry God”(one of my favorites)
- Responsible for the “Great Awakening.”
- Raised funds for orphanages.
John Calvin the great French Theologian a few centuries before also had a commendable life. He did great works in clearly articulating the “Faith” and did much to restore Biblical doctrines first put forth by Christ and His Apostles and many others like Augustine and the list goes on. Calvin had many face to face conversations with Michael Servetus(who was clearly a heretic) regarding doctrine and the Trinity. Calvin simply lost patience with this man and he and the other ministers asked that he be spared being burnt at the stake and be beheaded instead. This was refused and on 27 October, Servetus was burnt alive at the Plateau of Champel at the edge of Geneva.
Some Arguments I hear on Slavery….
- Slavery is in the Bible and it is ok.
- Cultural Relevance-this was the normal behavior in that day.
- As Long as he didn’t whip them like Kunta Kinte-he’s ok with me!!!
Slaves is as old as mankind itself and we see the scriptures portray slavery in a positive and negative manner. In the Bible the greek word doulosis used over 100 times for slave, servant, or bond servant depending on what translation you possess. Paul uses this to describe us as once being a slave to sin but now we are slaves to Christ. This relationship would not be similar to the Hebrew-Egyptian relationship in the time of Moses or it would not be similar to a slave being mistreated like in the human trafficking in the Atlantic Slave trade. The book of Phileman is regarding slavery as well. In the Greco-Roman environment around the time before and after Christ we see slaves being in bondage for various reasons such as debt and just by choice. In this time area 1 out 3 persons were enslaved and this is why Paul taught that Christian slaves ought to serve their masters wholeheartedly, “as unto the Lord, and not to men.” And which attitude he also required the slave masters to have, treating their slaves fairly and without threatening, as they too had a Master in Heaven.
The Cultural argument can be addressed on two different levels. The first being simply that we are not called to be culturally relevant but distinct and contradicting the culture by being Christ-like. Secondly, history speaks to us in the life of Philliss Wheatley. Wheatley being raptured up so to speak to the America’s from Gambia at the age of 7. Purchased by the Boston Wheatley Family. These people were exceptional by teaching her how to read and encouraged her to write poetry. She later was free after publishing writings in England and other countries. She was in the same time era as Whitefield. This is evidence that people at this time were not all treating their slaves as animals but to the contrary treating them like Philemon’s master was challenged to do so. Certainly if Edwards or Whitefield were doing such things they would be know for it.
I don’t quite understand the disconnect in these great men. It is no question that these men led exception lives for the Gospel. Maybe Ephesians wasn’t published in America or England at that time…Maybe they forgot to read how we are commanded to treat our slaves…..Maybe Maybe Maybe…… I am still searching for these answers and hope to get a better understanding. But until then when I hear these great men’s sermons, read their books, hear great stories about them; I will unfortunately think of James chapter 1 and wonder if they fell in this category. With all the great knowledge and wisdom I have obtained from these men I definitely hope not.
What are you thoughts?
Tyris Horton
Tyris,
Let me first say that Edward’s slaves were treated “biblically”. If biblically means I can keep a person that has been kidnapped against their own will, and keep them in free nonpay labor for the rest of their natural lives. Not to mention you can trade them and by law not allow them to have rights that other humans with lighter skin have. Then sure it was biblical! Now on to my points.
1. In Reformed though right theology is better than right living as long as it isn’t homosexuality. So a man who writes good books can own and perpetuate the demonized institution called slavery, because of culture and a lot of good theology. However, if a Reformed Bishop arose today who could pontificate the same theology Mr. Edwards did he would be mocked and rejected because of his sexuality.
2. For some reason people have brought into the ridiculous notion that somehow slavery produced salvation for Africans (and colonization and conquest) as if God uses the means of something He hates to bring about something He wants. I am not for such a notion. Salvation for Africans were to be holistic not one deminsional. So God wanted the saved and He was more concerned about their salvation but didn’t care if they were beaten, raped, mutilated all in the name of some pseudo-jesus, these gentleman created.
3. It is funny that I see for sale the commentary on the bible of Mr. John Calvin but in the same breath he couldn’t figure out this verse “love you enemy as yourself”. For a man to be considered a genius on everything in the bible and somehow miss what the entire New Testament coveys (love) is a ridiculous notion to me. However, again his great abstract theology allows him to get a pass, that somehow, he could endorse the burning of a man and the imprisonment of others because they disagreed with my theology, while Jesus went to the cross for those who hated Him! Quite mysterious!
4. Finally it is funny that we are more concerned with a man who preaches a prosperity gospel, but who seems to be quite the loving fella but we praise and esteem men who displayed total disregard for his neighbor. This is whack! By the way Edwards wrote a book on “Love and its fruit” but somehow ignore “Love and its fruit”! So again a woman preacher is looked at with utter disdain while a slave owner and a man who have no problem with murderers are praised! It is funny that White Horse Inn is doing a conference on Calvin while mocking Joel Olsteen! Dude the hypocrisy frustrates me!
Lionel and Tyrus,
I’m glad you both are starting to question some of these so called “Christian men” who seem to more fit the quote about the Pharisses that you used (Lionel) in your vain attempt to describe me (one of the true brethren in Christ).
Are you still not seeing what I and many others believe to be the obvious?
Remember, let the blind lead the blind and they both fall into a ditch!
Yes, here I go again.
Do you not see the connection with the false doctrine of eternal hell and the false teachers who have had a major impact in spreading this lie. The Bible clearly tells us that Christ is our example of how to treat our enemies (love them, be patient with them, gentle, respectful to them) yet these so called great men of God have changed the truth of God and the character of God into a lie. They make God out to be crueler than any man in history and make Him out to be a great failure. This is why I’m so persistent (shouts out to Hutch) in trying to shed light on this great lie. I have used scripture that you guys seem to twist and change or simply avoid based on your current warped theology. The scriptures say God is reconciling all of creation to which you say He is not but only some and the rest of humankind (that was not selected by God) will suffer unimaginable torture for eternity. This makes no sense whatsoever based on logic and on the scriptures rightly discerned! The same men who seemed to be big on human suffering and torture in their lifetime seem to be the same main perpurtraters of this lie that God will torture all of His enemies forever. Doesn’t make sense (at all) when God upholds us to a greater standard of love and compassion for our enemies than He does Himself. Are we more loving and merciful than God?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!
“Hell was invented by men of power who felt it
was the only way to hold the masses of ignorant people under their power. It is the same today. If the people of power today REALLY believed the myths they
are perpetuating, they themselves would behave MUCH differently than they are. Seeing their own corrupt behavior should make it plain to anyone, these
political, business, and especially religious leaders have not the slightest faith in these things themselves; they do not think them at all necessary to regulate their
own lives, or keep them in order; but it is for the average people, the dumb sheep who must be restrained with fears of great terror in the afterlife. One cannot help noting the resemblance between those wise men of old and some of our own day, who seem so anxious to maintain the doctrine (eternal hell) on the ground
that it is necessary to restrain men from sin. I think it is time we “dumb sheep” wise up and get out from under the myths these men of corruption have used to hold
the fetters of our minds in check and check ourselves in at the sheepfold of the Good Shepherd who knows how to restrain HIS sheep with love, not fear.”
Here are some quotes from some of the men that many of you hold so dear and have greatly been influenced by.
Jonathan Edwards (A Calvinist of the “Great Awakening” fame. Newspapers reported people leaving his sermons and committing suicide from the fear he instilled in them.)
“The world will probably be converted into a great lake or liquid globe of fire, in which the wicked shall be overwhelmed, which will always be in tempest, in
which they shall be tossed to and fro, having no rest day and night, vast waves and billows of fire continually rolling over their heads, of which they shall forever be full of a quick sense within and without; their heads, their eyes, their tongues, their hands, their feet, their loins and their vitals, shall forever be full of a flowing, melting fire, fierce enough to melt the very rocks and elements; and also, they
shall eternally be full of the most quick and lively sense to feel the torments; not for one minute, not for one day, not for one age, not for two ages, not for a hundred ages, nor for ten thousand millions of ages, one after another, but
forever and ever, without any end at all, and never to be delivered.”
John Calvin (Who had some of his theological enemies burned to death in greenslow-burning wood.):
Calvin describes hell as: “Forever harrassed with a dreadful tempest, they shall
feel themselves torn asunder by an angry God, and transfixed and penetrated
by mortal stings, terrified by the thunderbolts of God, and broken by the weight
of his hand, so that to sink into any gulf would be more tolerable than to stand
for a moment in these terrors.”
The Reverend C. H. Spurgeon in his sermon Sermon on the Resurrection of theDead:
“When thou diest, thy soul will be tormented alone; that will be a hell for it, but at
the day of judgment they body will join they soul, and then thou wilt have twin
hells, thy soul sweating drops of blood, and thy body suffused with agony. In fire
exactly like that which we have on earth thy body will lie, asbestos-like, forever
unconsumed, all they veins roads for the feet of pain to travel on, every nerve a
string on which the devil shall forever play his diabolical tune of ‘Hell’s Unutterable
Lament.”’ (Quoted from Christ Triumphant by Thomas Allin)
Excerpt from http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/TheInventorsandPerpetratorsofHell.pdf
Jon,
Dude we don’t believe in the doctrine of hell because it is taught by theologians. Just like I don’t believe in Christ because theologians teach it. Fall back bro. We believe in because it is biblical. The bible is where we deduce this doctrine.
Jon,
Hey, I really have a couple of more questions. I am going to give you a couple of verses. Lets ignore the “eternal” word, and lets focus on destruction. I was reading my New Testament and I want to know how you reconcile a universal redemption when both Paul and Peter talk of the “destruction” of these indivduals. If you upheld anniahlationism I would say I can see where you are coming from, but the language of seperation and destruction are to plain in the scriptures for me. So here are the verses let me know how you handle them.
2 Thess 1
5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— 6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.
2 Peter 3:
3:1 This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3 knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. 4 They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the
day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
How do you reconcile this to a universal atonement bro?
Lionel-
Good point, even though the Annihilationist is just as wrong as the Universalist, the Annihilationist does have a better argument than the Universalist does.
Hutch,
I actually believe an annihlationist could qualify to be considered in the pale of orthodoxy. I think one can uphold the Gospel while also holding to annihalationsim. I still disagree but I would not call them nonbelievers. However Jon’s and other universalist perspective can’t qualify.
Lionel,
I abhor what happened to Servetus, but I would counsel you and some of your correspondents who jump on the bandwaggon to learn your church history a little more thoroughly.
We need to understand the context in which these events happened, before we point our finger towards these people, whether Calvinist or Arminian. Some of the Reformers wer responsible for many unjust deaths, why single out Calvin? By the way, when we point our finger at others there are three fingers pointing back at ourselves.
By the way, as Loraine Boettner, points out, ” Calvin has, however, often been criticized with undue severity as though the responsibility rested upon him alone, when as a matter of fact Servetus was given a court trial lasting over two months and was sentenced by the full session of the civil Council, and that in accordance with the laws which were then recognized throughout Christendom.
“….Calvin and the men of his time are not to be judged strictly and solely by the advanced standards of our twentieth century, but must to a certain extent be considered in the light of their own sixteenth century………………. The error of those who advocated and practiced what would be considered intolerance today, was the general error of the age. it should not, in fairness, be permitted to give an unfavorable impression of their character and motives, and much less should it be allowed to prejudice us against their doctrines on other and more important subjects.”
It would behove us to remember Jesus words to the Pharisees who wanted the adulterous woman stoned to death, “You who are without sin cast the first stone”.
My dear brothers, as much as I loathe what many of our forebears did, I cannot point my finger in disgust at them, because I am just as much a sinner as they. You and I cannot do that, because if we do, we fall into the same, “look-at-how-righteous-I-am” swamp in which the Pharisees wallowed.
How do I know? I was there once, and must still exercise much effort to avoid falling in again.
The stench is awful!
Avoid it at all costs!
It muddies the precious Name of the One, who didn’t point His finger at you, even though He was sinless, and you and I deserved it!
It was only because of the sovereign grace of our great God that, seventy years ago, I was born in a much more enlightened time. Many years later, you fellows also. By His grace you were not born, nor have to live, in the ignorant, dark days of the Reformers.
recognized throughout Christendom
A “Christendom” that would put a man to death for disagreements about doctrine no matter how egregious is a Christendom that knows nothing of what Christ taught, it is an apostate Christendom.
John Calvin and those who would do what Tyris mentioned namely studying the scriptures for 13 hours a day and the ungodly system they created is a perfect example of John 5:37-40.
You cannot read the NT as a born again believer withteh guidance of the Holy Spirit and arrive at a system that put hundreds of thousands of people to death supposedly in the name of Christ but in reality in the name of money and power.
Aussiejohn-
During the ignorant and dark days of the reformers there were true regenerate beleivers who obeyed Christ.
I really want to get in deeply on this discussion. If I write much, though, it won’t be today because I have to get a lab report written and a grad school application finished, both for tomorrow. It’s also looking like a busy rest of finals week. However, if I get in nothing else, let me ask two questions:
1. How well does any of us know the lives of Calvin, Edwards, or Whitefield?
I know little about them beyond when/where they lived and that they were prolifically writing and preaching Calvinistic Protestants. I also have some idea of what they taught, and that they are highly regarded by America’s Reformed big dogs (e.g., Dever, Duncan, Horton, Mahaney, Piper). But briefly reading up just now on Edwards and slavery – see relevant portion of Marsden’s biography – suggests some of the preceding comments are patently unfair, maybe even in Matt. 7:1-5 territory. I am all for critically examining these men’s lives, but let’s please try to be at least as careful assessing them as we should be assessing each other. I say that as someone who falls short in this area, too.
2. What does it mean to love our neighbor (i.e., in what ways is that love proven)? How do we know whether a particular person is/isn’t adequately obeying the numerous biblical commands to love others?
Beyond the difficulty of really knowing another person’s life, how do we assess the abundance or lack of love evidenced? How do temperament, gifting, and culture shape the depth and expression of love in the Christian? These issues are not simple! God help us if we ourselves were ultimately judged by fellow sinners’ favorite tests of “real love”; not because the favorite tests are not good (they are often stunningly insightful, and the Bible itself is full of tests for love of God and neighbor!), but because by themselves they are faulty indicators of justifying faith.
Mike-
Martin Luther was a highly regarded man in the reformation, here is what he decreed:
Martin Luther and his colleagues met at Speyer on the Rhein in 1529. They gathered to define the evangelical liberties of the new Protestant states of Germany, and to establish the Protestant church in “peace, liberty, and the blessing of God.” At the same meeting they passed a resolution: “Every Anabaptist, both male and female, shall be put to death by fire, sword, or in some other way.”
Remember that scripture tells us no murderer has eternal life residing in him.
Hutch,
I have no other option than to assume that you are a true regenerate believer!
Tell me! Do you sin?
Did this earlier in another thread where the issue of slavery was brought up…but I Figured I’d give out this article on the issue (as it came to my mind today) so that people could see another side of the issue for themselves——as I brought up the issue of Edwards on slavery and someone responded saying that there’s no such proof on the issue.
http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/mhr/4/minkema.html
This is a extensive writing from Edwards on the issue of slavery and him being in favor of it. Bear in mind, by the way, that I believe it was John Wesley who was a contemporary of Edwards and who argued vehemently against slavery and argued in the complete opposite direction of Edwards and joined with the abolitionist cause….
Going along with that, thought I’d place out some information by another who actually WAS a slave and what his thoughts were on the issue—especially when it came to Christianity being used to justify the malicious treatment of slaves in the name of how “IT’S THE WAY GOD SET IT UP—SO HONOR YOUR MASTER..”
From Fredrick Douglass’s Auto-Biography “My Bondage and My FREEDOM”:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/DouMybo.html
Giving out this as well, as it is one of the resources I studied on the issue of slavery seeing that there has been much debate on the issue of whether the kind of slavery discussed in the Bible’s the same kind that occured in the NEW WORLD and whether or not it can be justified biblically. Pray that it blesses someone out there:
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslavent.html
Aussie and Mike,
I mean no disrespect but I want you to answer some honest questions for me if you could. If so can you please answer directly!
1. Do you believe Jim Jones to be a Christian Leader? Why or why not.
2. Do you believe a man today can be a Christian while embracing a Homosexual lifestyle?
3. If a homosexual writes a book on the same theological insight and clarity as Calvin’s Institutes and lets say Charity and Its Fruits would you embrace that book today and allow your church (if you were pastoring a local church) to study it and disciple young men and women through it? Why or why not?
4. Who more lines up with scripture. Calvin or Olsteen? Both life and word? Would you read Olsteen first or Calvin? Why?
5. Which of the Sins in 1 Timothy 1:10 should we say we are perfectly fine in letting it dominate a persons life and not questioning them?
6. If you were a pastor today and a guy owned slaves from China and he was a fellow elder would you discipline him or allow him to teach in your congregation? Do you think a man today can own slaves and be in harmony with the Gospel?
7. Aussie. What if a man started to kill Jehovah Witnesses and then our country allowed the death of all who were Jehovah Witnesses and I started to post blogs about how we should kill and imprison the “heretics” how would you embrace me today?
Thanks in advance
Aussiejohn-
Yes I do.
There is a big difference between a murderer who is saved by garce through faith who is given a new life in Christ and one who claims to be a believer who then methodically and systematically with premeditation sanctioned the killing of hundreds of thousands of people.
His actions over teh entire course of his “post-conversion” life proved that he did not have new life in Christ.
Do you beleive that man can murder that many people and be saved just because he said he is saved?
Aussie,
What if I moved in with my co-worker and lover and left my family. Would you still consider me a regenerate Christian if I lived like that the rest of my life? Would you allow me to fellowship with you? Its only sin Sir.
Spellchecked version:
Aussiejohn-
Yes I do.
There is a big difference between a murderer who is saved by grace through faith who is given a new life in Christ and one who claims to be a believer who then methodically and systematically with premeditation sanctioned the killing of hundreds of thousands of people.
His actions over the entire course of his “post-conversion” life proved that he did not have new life in Christ.
Are you saying that you believe that a man can murder that many people and be saved just because he said he is saved?
Someone brought this to my attention once. Because in light of the things we denounce that our government or churches allow (i.e. abortion, pornagraphy, same-sex marriages and the “Gay Christian” movement, etc)—for the sake of having a good legacy for our children looking back so they’ll be able to say “They stood up for truth..”—we have organizations currently fighting them such as “Focus on the Family” and others….and if one were to say “Well, it’s just part of the times we live in…so it cannot be condemned, plus the law allows it”, many would either ignore or scoff saying “Does God’s Word in the NT promote it?”
And they’d be more than on point for saying so—-as whether somethings happening as part of the times doesn’t justify the reality of what it was or deal with how others will look back at it to see who did or did not do something about it. But if approaching history, when it comes to those in the Reformation and other times following it, many will say “Well, it was just the times they lived in..so it’s not a big deal since the law allowed it”—and thus they get a free pass when they shouldn’t of since the Bible condemned it and does not change.
That, and the fact that there were others in those times who stood against it (and sometimes suffered for it). Whether with executing people for heresy/religious belief and persecuting another group for thinking differently ( //www.wayoflife.org/fbns/calvin-and-persecution.html )…or in standing against things such as the institution of slavery as seen in the examples of Jonathan Edwards vs John Wesley, as Edwards supported it/wrote in favor of it while Wesley vehemently denounced it and fought against it when others didn’t) …or whether with many of the American Colonies who persecuted other groups (the ones I originally had in mind concering persecutions of famous Protestant Groups, though it can get confusing after awhile trying to remember them all)–such as with how many who were Anabaptist were treated when in certain colonies ( //www.wayoflife.org/fbns/protestant-persecutions.html ), the point is that others in that time said something…….and we look back and congradulate them for their examples when saying that the same dynamics are the same today..
I’m reminded of another dialouge in which the issue was discussed—in which the issue was brought up regarding Inquisitions/Witch Hunts. The person stated that Calvin, like the Roman Catholic Inquisitors, were just products of their age in this respect — and that they came by this kind of behavior honestly…and in his perception, obviously was going to seem horrific to us and it is very easy for us to condemn it as such, what with our liberal democracy, separation of Church and State, universal human right decrees, etc. But such institutional safechecks simply did not exist back then.
And as another said in response, Being a product of whatever age one is caught in is certainly expected however when one comes to Christ, he is no longer of the age he is in. Supposedly, he becomes a new creation, abiding in Christ…and argument of “products of their age justifies their actions”… assumes that different carnal ages allow for more or less heinous activity yet Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever.
Looking at our Wesleyan brethren, for example, we see no such persecutions yet the Arminian faith comes from the same Reformation. How do you reconcile such a stance when the same scriptural admonishments regarding holiness apply in all ages?
Hutch and Lionel,
Sin is sin, and God justifies as He pleases. You might be right that highly-regarded theologians with skeletons in their closets — like Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Edwards, and Whitefield — did not know God, and lived lives ending in damnation. How am I supposed to know? But how are you? For all of your clever rhetorical shots, neither of you has made an explicit case, weighing these men’s lives in context with the Scriptures in context (both of which you understand near well enough as God, apparently, to insinuate that they were false professors) to justify your views.
It does presently seem to me that anyone who does the following, without eventual conviction of sin and repentance, cannot have new life in Christ:
* coerces people into slavery
* abuses people as perpetual slaves for comfort or profit
* licenses murder of heretics to “keep the gospel pure”
* founds a cult village on diabolical lies, closes show with mass suicide
* licenses sexual immorality as innocent or virtuous
Those are my beliefs. I think they are consistent with the Bible, I hold myself to them, I would contend for them with any professed Christian who pursues such activity. But as this all pertains, to Edwards, Calvin, etc., I’ll note that
A. I’m not certain that I am right
B. Other than Jones, it’s not obvious where these charges apply
C. The validity of someone’s teaching is separate from his purity of life
Also, it drives me nuts for you to take direct thwacks at my (perceived) inconsistency without even engaging my original post. At the moment, I am sorely irritated and need to work on other stuff. Reflections on James introduced the post, and reading James 3:1-12 would probably be good for all of us. I’ll be back tomorrow.
It seems to me that my opening remark about my abhorence of what happened, has been overlooked. I’m not going to answer your questions directly because I think they are straw men.
Put yourselves in Calvin’s shoes: You are an employee of the Geneva City council, who made it illegal to believe differently to them. After long two months court trial, a decision was made, by the full council, not by Calvin, that Servetus be put to death.
Indeed, Calvin, who could no more overturn the laws of the land than you or I can, nor change the outcome of a judicial decision, tried to offer some mercy by suggesting the sword be used rather than fire. The one being immediate, the other, depending on the heat of the fire, at least minutes of agony.
The straw men you erect, and ourselves, have not had to exist in a climate like that which existed in Geneva. The Protestants were ridding themselves of the intolerant shackles of Rome, an intolerance which had infected them and shich was quite normal, especially when dealing with unbelievers, like Servetus, a Spaniard who was neither Catholic nor Protestant.
There is much that I dislike, and even reject, no matter whether Calvinism or Arminianism, Christianism, or any other “ism” you want to debate, but I do know we give the enemy of souls the greatest of pleasure when we argue the point on these issues, at the expense of words which would cause others to become disciples of Christ.
Charles Spurgeon was right when he said, “To this day, pure Christianity, in its outward appearance, is an equally unattractive object, and wears upon its surface few royal tokens. It is without form or comeliness, and when men see it, there is no beauty that they should desire it. True, there is a nominal Christianity which is accepted and approved of men, but the pure gospel is still despised and rejected. The real Christ of to-day, among men, is unknown and unrecognised.”
At this time of the year, I am reminded of the Jesus I know. I have His Spirit and His written, trustworthy word.
Even though I like some of what they have imperfectly written, I don’t know Calvin, Arminius, Wesley or Luther, because I only have their imperfect history written by imperfect sinners like me. Neither their words, or the words written about them are perfectly trustworthy.
wow…nothing really to say..but AMEN!!
My husband has been talking to me a great deal about this lately..
our conversations have mainly been about the Puritains…wow…
what has amazed me as well is how evangelicals speak highly of the Puritians who some were VERY selectively biblical..thundered on personal sin but quiet about social evils
thanks for this post!! It provokes me greatly to think biblically and differently!!
Amen again 🙂
Hypothetical Conversation Between Edwards and a Slave Trader:
Slave Trader: Hey Mr. Edwards what do you think about this slave trade stuff. You know we go in with rifles and these Africans have arrows and spears and stuff. We go in and kill a few of their chiefs and anyone else rebelling. We then put them on a ship for a voyage across the Atlantic. They have menstrual cycles on one another, they are starving, the ones who die are thrown overboard so that sharks follow our ships. We then sale them and treat them like animals. As a pastor you think this is “loving our neighbor as ourselves”? You are so a respected theologian. What do you think Jesus would say?
Mr. Edwards: Oh, don’t worry about that God is Sovereign now pass me a couple of them Africans! What they go for in these parts?
Lionel,
Great questions. I wondered about scriptures like these too when I first begin studying this subject.
Utter or permanent annihilation cannot be the true meaning of death and destruction in any of these cases.
Destruction is the prerequisite for subsequent change.
Is this not what the cross is all about in the life of the believer?
He kills andmakes alive. He destroys to make new.
Destruction and judgment are the only way for fallen creatures to be delivered from their bondage, and brought back to God’s life in His kingdom. This is a point of all importance. It lies at the very root of the cross of Christ and ofHis members. It is the clue to all His judgments, who “kills and makes alive,” who “brings down to the grave and brings up” (1Sa. 2:6; Dt. 32:39). The way of life is and must be through death…and cannot be otherwise
Our salvation is not brought to perfection until we have died to sin and live to righteousness (Ro. 6). Death is not optional. Only in dying to our self-will do we truly live and bear fruit to God (Jn. 12:24).
The change agents are HIS SPIRIT AND WORD (symbolized by the Fire and the Sword). The fire is never sent to destroy the PERSON, but to purge out all that hinders and separates him from his God, to consume the pride, arrogance, hostility, defiance, and rebellion of the flesh, the carnal mind, that He might then be wooed and drawn by the Holy Spirit unto the Father of Spirits and live.
Lionel,
In addition to my last post:
One of the works of God in this world will be the destruction of the world (order) by penal fire. That will change all things. That will melt all the elements, so that no man can tell you where his original grab was. It will burn up all the governments, institutions, systems, and fruitage of the carnal mind. It will melt all the customs, cultures, traditions, and practices of society and make of this earth a new earth wherein dwells righteousness. Every man’s work will eventually be tested in this fire. The fire will try every man’s work of what sort it is. If you and I build into our walls wood, hay, and stubble, that fire will find it out, and the wall will come tumbling down.
Philliss Wheatley has an amazing story and if what she accomplished with her life was truly beautiful.
Sorry that I came a little late to partake in the dialogue that I started. Work keeps me oh so busy. I work nights so when i respond most of you are sleeping,,,LOL
JR Miller yes Mrs Wheatley had a interesting life, sad because she died so young
Nicole thanks for your your comments and visiting, cool blog by the way. The Puritans are a whole different story. They primarily focused on killing sin but I really think they should have focused more on Christ. I definitely see the LAW differently than they did, they are more along with the dispensational camp views of the law and its purpose. God Bless you
Aussiejohn,
Thanks for you comments. I think you view is incredibly flawed in many ways. We do not need to put ourselves in Calvin’s shoes. Calvin needs to put himself in Christ shoes and follow the Holy Spirits leading or even just read the scriptures on how Christ said to treat one’s enemies. who cares what the lands rules were? That has nothing to do with what Christ has called us as believers to do and act like. Regardless Calvin was wrong in this situation and sought to kill his enemy rather than to follow Christ example and commands throughout the scriptures. I could only imagine if Paul had done the same things to Agrippa given the chance or better yet Christ and Pontus. Just some thoughts….
We cannot be partial of our assessment of these men just because they had correct doctrine(and we like them) on what we consider essential issues. Calvin and other great men did much for the Faith but some of the issues i brought up in the article just makes you wonder, that’s all.
You know Jonathan Edwards has effected John Piper’s ministry a whole lot. He is a great preacher but I wonder if he had slaves today or killed muslims/would we give him a pass as well?
thanks again/In Christ
Mike Odlyzko
Do not be irritated bro. If we were in a different setting hopefully this dialogue would make you expand your thoughts and us alike. Just conversation and dialogue and I am sure no offense was intentional. sometimes it is easy to read something with a tone that is not there. thank you for visiting bro and sorry i couldn’t engage in the conversation earlier. God Bless in Christ
John Paden.
Speaking of irritation….You know what has bothered me for all of my 28 years? Is the fact that I put my name at the end of the article and it is on the top of the page next to Lionel’s and people still spell it Tyrus? why John Why? My name is spelled TYRIS and has been for a while. Let us work on that people!! LOL Just joking/but serious too!!!
John, don’t know what to tell you about this Hell stuff bro? Your explanation to Lionel’s questions fell short. I have read your refutations before and it just don’t make sense man. But I won’t go there. thank you for your comments and visiting.
Gabriel what up homie? I miss talking to you bro. How come you can’t call a brother. I tell you what, I need to send my son to that High school you went to in Georgia because you are a beast!!! in a good way of course. Smart dude for your age and thanks for the articles. Seems like everytime Lionel and I come across something interesting to us, you always seem to have a link or something. Do you have a rolodex of controversial topics or something on you desk or will you come out with the first african american encylopedia? God Bless you bro thanks
Tyris,
My apologies with the name. But what’s up with “John”. Why Tyris why? My name is spelled Jon and has been this way for a while. LOL Just joking!
People who try and defend the indefensible, in the lives of Whitfield, Calvin, and others, just because they were esteemed theologians and were “right” about doctrine, have the same type of mindset that would’ve justified, or turned a blind eye, to the injustices these men perpetuated: ENSLAVING HUMAN BEINGS AND KILLING FOLKS FOR DOCTRINAL HERESY.
Why not admit that these men were wrong, and had severe character flaws, despite their supposed brilliance in interpreting scripture. Folks think that just because someone is pure on their knowledge of scripture, that this somehow translates into a purity of heart, which is manifested in their lives-WHICH OFTENTIMES IT’S NOT.
Some of the most coldest, dryest, and hideously mean people I’ve ever met, were those who were wrapped up in knowing, and quoting the bible, whether they were Calvinst, or Arminian.
Hypothetical Conversation Between Johnathan Edwards and a Slave:
Slave: Master Edwards may I speak with you Sir?
Master Edwards: Yes, go ahead.
Slave: Well I was listening to the sermon you preached on Philemon and what struck me was the fact that the Apostle Paul appealed to Philemon to not only forgive Onesimus but also to no longer regard him as a slave but now as a brother.
Master Edwards: Yes that is an amazing picture of God’s grace towards us who were once slaves and enemies but are now friends and children of God.
Slave: Well Mr. Edwards, I want to share with you something.
Master Edwards: Go ahead.
Slave: Well Master Edwards I have been a slave since I was 11 years old. I had a good family in Africa Sir. My dad was a wood carver and my mother was lovely. I had 4 siblings. 2 brothers and 2 sisters. My dad was a hardworker and he loved us and taught us the value of hard work. Well one day while we were preparing for dinner. We heard a big commotion and then crying and screaming, people were running everywhere Sir. My daddy picked up his spear and ran outside to see what was going on. When he did 5 white men had a rifle pointed in his face. They drug the rest of the family out of our home. They began to treat us badly and had chains in their hands. Well they went to put a chain around my oldest brother neck and my father charged him! They shot him in the face and we saw him bleed to death.
Next the began to strip my sisters of their clothing and my mother tried to protect them. She was stabbed and shot and we also saw her bleed to death. There was so much crying and screaming and blood throughout the village that I thought it was a bad dream. They put the sackles around our necks and feet and walked us for miles through the jungle to the ocean. There we were kept in this deep dark building with no water or food. It must have been a week or so.
When they finally let us out there was a big ship waiting for us. There were men with a bunch of rifles and all you could hear are cries and whips and gun shots, and you can smell the dead flesh.
Well they led us to the boat and from there we were layered on top of each other. For weeks we had to endure the smell of decaying flesh, all you could hear were people screaming for their loved ones. Quite a few of the women that were with child died because of starvation. We had feces drop on our face and the only water we received was when they poured it into our mouths. One of my sisters and one of my brothers were thrown overboard. They died from some type of sickness. They did receive a proper burial.
When we got to the shore we were treated like animals, we were all naked and they pointed at our genitals to show them that we were good for breeding. Where were called niggers and wenches. Good for hard work.
Master Edwards: That sounds horrible lad.
Slave: It was Masta! And now as the Apostle appealed to Philemon I appeal to you as a brother, to let me go and go with me to the government to tell them about these atrocities. I know that you are a man of God who loves the Lord. Would you free me from this demonic bondage and help me stop this wicked, wicked slavery?
Master Edwards: Oh, no! God is Sovereign now go cut me some firewood.
LOL@ Jon!
Lionel-
You have illustrated the situation well.
Even those who would appeal in error to the Old Covenant binding upon the Jewish people up until its abolition in order to support or excuse the enslavement of Africans in the Uk and America, they still have a few problems scripturally:
1) Slavery/Servitude was a temporary means to pay off a debt and was not be for a lifetime.
2) In the year of Jubilee the slaves/servants were to go free and be restored to their land/inheritance.
3) The slaves/servants were not to be mistreated in any way.
A servant/slave could voluntarily choose not to go free in the year of Jubilee if he wished to stay with his master for life and become a “bond-slave”. The motivation given for such a decision is due to love of the master and the desire to stay with him in his house for life.
This gives us the beautiful picture of a “bond-slave” to Jesus Christ in the New Covenant.
Before salvation, we are slaves to sin and death, after salvation we are set free from bondage as Christ is our year of Jubilee and since we love or new master and desire to be with Him for eternity we become his “bond-slaves” for life and on into eternity!
Obviously the kidnapped Africans did not owe a financial debt to their captors or eventual masters, not to mention the fact that they were not Jews under the Old Covenant.
No those who received Christ if they owned slaves released them and spoke out against the atrocity.
That is why the mass murder program perpetrated by the “Reformers” against the Anabaptist was really more about money and power than doctrine as the Anabaptists among other things spoke against the institution of slavery.
In the same way the Pharisees looked for a supposedly doctrinal reason to put Christ to death when in reality they wanted to put Him to death because of jealousy and envy and fear of losing the positions of power.
The “Reformers” murdered the Anabaptists for the very same reasons.
Jesus told the Pharisees who their real father was as evidenced by their actions, their real father was the ancient liar and murderer himself.
I look at Luther kind of like Hitler, it is very unlikely that Hitler actually personally killed any Jews and Luther himself probably never got his hands dirty killing a single Anabaptist. But both of these men devised and implemented a system and government of mass murder under their respective governments that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands and even millions of people.
Both men said they were doing God’s work.
It really is the same a profession of faith, a religious system or a study of scripture that does not produce Christlikeness is a counterfeit Christianity.
New life in Christ will not lead you to do the murderous works of the Destroyer.
Tyris-
You said it:
We do not need to put ourselves in Calvin’s shoes. Calvin needs to put himself in Christ shoes and follow the Holy Spirits leading or even just read the scriptures on how Christ said to treat one’s enemies. who cares what the lands rules were? That has nothing to do with what Christ has called us as believers to do and act like.
Though one would have to do more research from other PRIMARY sources, I wanted to bring up another article I researched on CALVIN AND PERSECUTION….which was cool since it had direct Quotes from John Calvin, for those saying “Well, we do not know much of where they stand from their writings…”
CALVIN’S STATEMENTS SUPPORTING PERSECUTION
The answer is very easy. SIN.
There are no great men of God. Just a GREAT GOD!!
Adam – sinned
Noah – Drunk as a skunk
Abraham – Adulterer, liar, and deciever
Isaac – Pretty much the same as his dad
Jacob – Deciever (family triat)
Jacob’s sons (a bunch of morons)
Moses – Anger issues
David – Adulterer and murdered; o yeah and a really bad dad.
Jesus – PERFECT
Peter – sword swinging foul mouthed hypocrite
Luther – Anti Semite (Nazi Germany used his writings to justify the Holocaust)
Calvin – as you mentioned (Servius)
The list goes on
Let me add an arminian or two:
Charles Finney a flat out Racist Redneck
Was an abolistionist but did not believe that blacks should sit next to whites in church.
Billy Graham – Had mixed outdoor meetings but Refused to march with Dr. MLK jr. due to preer pressure.
Me – I Love God but do some really Stupid stuff and have tolerated things God would never approve of.
YOU – You can fill in the blanks_____________________
I get your point. But if your looking for an answer that will satisfy you, you will be looking for a long time. Man is wicked and sinful. The best of us can do and tolerate horrible things. That is why we need a Savior, EVERYDAY.
Philippians 3:13-14
Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
I wonder what future generations will say about us? “How could they call themselves Christians when they did such and such”.
Steve
Steve let me ask.
What is the difference between a practing homosexual bishop and a slave owning bishop? Which is worse and which is not a Christian or is either?
What is the difference between a murdering bishop and a gay bishop? Which is worse and which is not a Christian and which shouldn’t be a bisop (elder/pastor/theologian)?
Steve I am asking.
Would you reject the thriving loving work of Christ in the heart of a practicing homosexual and if not why would you do it for a murderer and a slave owner?
Reply to Jon Paden
You claim
Reconciliation of All
Lam. 3:31, 32; Isa. 54:7, 8, and 57:16-18; Heb. 12:7-11; Ps. 89:30-35, and 119:67
We believe the Lord will not cast off forever; but though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the
multitude of his mercies; that he will not contend forever, nor be always angry, lest the spirit should fail before him, and the
souls He has made; that although he may apparently forsake his children for a small moment, but with everlasting kindness
will He have mercy on them, and heal them, and lead them also, and restore comforts unto them; that whom he loves he
chastens (and he loves and chastens all) for their profit, that they may be partakers of his holiness.
So hell is not real? So if God is reconciling all things. Does it matter then if people beleive or not? Who cares, there is no hell. Everyone is reconciled. You sound like Carlton Peirson.
What happnens to those who die outside of Grace? They just die and never exist? Sounds like Jehovah Witness or Clark Pinnock.
Why did Jesus suffer and die then? What did he save me from? If all are reconciled what does it matter what I do?
If I am just going to cease to exist if I die outside of Grace WHO CARES!! I will never know anyway so I might as well just let it all hang out. Do My Thing. Becase there is no punishment.
I like that Idea. I think I am going to Move to a deserted Island and start my own Country.
I will let men rape little girls, because hey, who cares God would never punish someoene for that, besides his punishment cannot be experienced because of either two options. 1. God will accept him in the end no matter how much of a bad boy he was, it was only a silly little rape or murder anyway. Or he will cease to exist so who really cares and why would I want to serve Jesus. In the end I will not even exist to know about. On my Island people can rape and molest children, murder, steal, abuse and its all good. Because God is not a BIG MEAN MONSTER and would ever hurt a fly. Hell is so mean and silly. God is not like that. He skips around in heaven amongst the heavenly tulips waiving an equal rights for gays and lesbians and bisexual and transgender flag because hey, they all are going to heaven anyway.
Lionel,
My answer is probably not going to answer the question. I don’t get it either. But My answer is this.
The bible explicitly says homosexuality is a sin and those who practice such things will not enter the kingdom of God.
I do not see any verses that say the same about slavery. Not saying I agree with slavery and correct me if I am wrong, I could be missing some verses. But that is the only answer I can give.
Steve,
I am so glad you asked. Here is an obscure verse (for some odd reason obscure especially due to all of the attention the “pastoral” epistles receive).
Now we have to ask. How do we define the word “enslaver” (this is the ESV). Here is the greek word: “andrapodistēs” . What does it mean?
Blue letter bible defines it like this:
1) a slave-dealer, kidnapper, man-stealer
a) of one who unjustly reduces free men to slavery
b) of one who steals the slaves of others and sells them
Does that answer your question? Not to mention it is mentioned right after “homosexual” correct? Again look at my scenario. Do you believe Mr. Edwards was oblivious to how slaves were enslaved? Do you believe a man with such intelligence had no clue that these people were kidnapped, raped, murdered, stolen from their homeland, transported worse than chickens, and then sold into lifelong slavery with no chance of being let free?
Finally the bible talks about loving others way more than it talks about homosexuals. Do you believe Mr. Edwards was oblivious to the laws and daily atrocities perpetrated against slaves in the name of domination and submission?
LIonel, Tyris, and Hutch,
Let preface this with “I am not disagreeing with you so I am not looking for heavy dialogue.”
My question about the slave issue, is do you think Edwards and Whitfield mis-interpreted the scriptures concerning slaves? I am coming at it this way, as you all are showing me and I am seeing in the word on how we read into something from scripture that was actually written for the Jews.
The slaves in the bible were of the Jews and the law. Correct? So in that case these men may have thought they had “unfounded” justification for having and owning other slaves.
Would that be correct?
Again just a question and not something I am trying to get heavily involved in. Because I actually had brought some of these same points to my old pastor for basically the same reason as this post.
Steven
Lionel,
I see it in plain black and white. So I ask you this. Was Philemon a false Christian?
1Paul,(A) a prisoner for Christ Jesus, and(B) Timothy our brother,
To Philemon our beloved fellow worker 2and Apphia our sister and(C) Archippus our(D) fellow soldier, and(E) the church in your house:
3(F) Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Philemon’s Love and Faith
4(G) I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers, 5because I(H) hear of your love and(I) of the faith that you have toward the Lord Jesus and for all the saints, 6and I pray that the sharing of your faith may become effective for the full(J) knowledge of every good thing that is in us for the sake of Christ.[a] 7For I have derived much joy and(K) comfort from your love, my brother, because the hearts of the saints(L) have been refreshed through you.
PAUL DOES NOT CALL HIM AN EVIL WICKED PERSON BUT A FELLOW WORKER AND A BASICALLY GOOD GUY.
Paul’s Plea for Onesimus
8Accordingly,(M) though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do(N) what is required, 9yet for love’s sake I prefer to appeal to you—
PAUL DOES SAY THAT HE COULD HAVE COMMANDED PHILEMON TO DO WHAT IS REQUIRED. TO WHICH I WOULD BELIEVE HE MEANT FREE ONESIMUS BECAUSE SLAVERY IS WRONG.
BUT PAUL DOES NOT SAY HE IS NOT A CHRISTIAN.??
I am not saying Salvery was ok, but I am just saying is if Paul did not condemn Philemon should we condemn others who were guilty of the same sin? Just thinking out loud on this. Very interesting.
SO,
That is a good question. If I say yes, then it is leading me to only one logical conclusion (with a bunch of subpoints).
1. So could someone be confused on the Trinity and embrace oneness pentecostalism,
2. So could someone be confused on women pastors
3. So could someone be confused on homosexuality and its place in the canon.
4. So could someone be confused about the prosperity “gospel” and not only support it but be a proponent of it.
5. So could somone be confused on marriage and divorce.
6. So could somone be confused on being seeker sensitive (Rick Warren, Billy Hypels)
7. So could someone be confused on the virgin birth.
8. So could someone be confused on the emerging church.
See where I am going. Where do we draw the line? If it is all grace then it is all grace, but I think you and I think otherwise. I am hardpressed to believe that a man who is a biblical scholar somehow skipped the verse on reducing free men to slaves and even if not, he saw that many of these men and women wanted to be free and treated like humans, did a man who wrote a theological treastie on “Charity” somehow overlook the fact that the best way to extend charity to someone who was reduced to cattle is to give them full human status? I don’t know Steve O
God isn’t looking for “A Few Good Men”. He already knows there aren’t any.
-kg
Steve,
You mistake Philemon (Roman) slavery with that of American slavery. Onesimus would have become a slave by owing a debt that is why Paul says in 1 Timothy 1:10 “one who reduces a free man”. African slavery was kidnapping! That is why Onesimus could walk the streets of Rome and not be stopped. Let my great-great grandfather walk down the streets of Georgia in the early 1800’s and whistiling and singing and see what would have happened to him. They would have skinned him alive then hung him. Onesimus was not a slave because the color of his skin or because he was a barbarian (that is what whites thought of Africans). Most likely Onesimus was a Roman Citizen who became a slave by something of his own doing! So again I think you have made a category mistake.
Kieth,
Elaborate sir! Or should I add “shall we continue in sin that grace my abound”? I think Paul’s answer was “May it never be”. If that is the case can you answer my homosexual bishop question please.
Lionel,
Slavery is slavery but I do see your point. I have never really studied the topic of slavery in scripture though funny enough purchased a book for my seminary class on biblical theology about 2 months ago from Intervarsity Press but have not gotten around to reading it.
Slave of Christ
A New Testament Metaphor for Total Devotion to Christ
Volume 8, New Studies in Biblical Theology
By Murray J. Harris
It does shed light on slavery throughough OT and NT.
Question. What is your conclusion to all of this? What answer have you come up with? Just curious.
Keith-
I agree.
God takes murderers and gives them new life in Christ, not sinless perfection rather progressive sanctification as God conforms His children into the image of His Son our Lord Jesus Christ.
Do you think one can come to Christ receive a new heart and be baptzied and sealed with the Holy Spirit and then become an unrepentant mass murderer?
BTW: A reading of the historical scriptures in the OT as well as the Psalms inform us that David was a man of deep repentance when confronted with his sin.
A redeemed believers life will be evidenced by a lifestyle of repentance as we are no longer slaves to sin but rather wrestle with it.
Luther never gave any indication of repentance for his genocide.
Sin will have no dominion over you…
Hey Steve,
My conclusion is that there are blaring inconsistencies. And Christ Centered Love is not the standard for being a Christian. Great Theology is. I have also discovered that a man like Rick Warren is labeled a “false teacher” because he is seeker sensitive but a man like Edwards can perpetuate the demonic institution of slavery and be considered a “pillar” of the Christian faith. I have discovered that the church praises a man for his theology but rejects a woman who teaches from the “pulpit”. I have discovered that the emerging guys are considered dangerous because they have more questions than answers, but a man who wants people murdered because they don’t agree with his theology (Luther and Calvin) and slave owners (Whitflield and Edwards) are perfectly fine because they have a lot of answers, though they refuse to apply them by simply loving someone who they could grant freedom to. I guess in Reformed thought seeker sensitivism, homosexuality and women preachers are not accepted but murders and slave owners can be praised with a few disclaimers.
I guess I have found out that head knowledge is much more important the heart application. I have figured out that a man gets a pass if he believes and can articulate theology and I have found that most of what I have been taught by those who considered themselves “reformed” will be examined with even more intense scrutiny! So I guess I am saying that my conclusion will result in a subsequent dereformation, because I have found it very shallow on the heart and very heavy on the head.
One more thought on this issue: Many a “Reformed Baptist” congregation today will turn a brother over to Satan and consider him to be an unbeliever for unrepentant adultry-yet, if you question them about their “Reformed” (obviously they used the term lightly)hero’s in the faith such as Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Edwards who were unrepentant enslavers and or mass murderers they act as if you are calling Christ Himself a sinner!
How about a little consistency, and how come those brothers were not disciplined by teh church for tehir actions?
Oh, I forgot obedience to scripture and church discipline is not for a great theologian-whatever that is!
Lionel I would have to agree with you on your statement. By far a good summation of what the reformation has presented.
“subsequent dereformation”
interesting use of words……
Steve,
You stated:
“You claim
Reconciliation of All”
I base this in part off of scriptures such as this:
Colossians 1:20
and by Him to reconcile ALL things to Himself, by Him, WHETHER THINGS ON EARTH OR THINGS IN HEAVEN, HAVING MADE PEACE THROUGH THE BLOOD OF HIS CROSS
To me it’s obvious that the scriptures claim this.
You also asked:
“So hell is not real?”
Let me ask you and others a few questions about this “hell” that you believe in.
1) If Hell is real, since SOME English translations use the word Hell for the Greek word “Gehenna,” in the New Testament, why didn’t this same place (Gehenna) get translated Hell in the many places where it appears in the Hebrew form “ga ben Hinnom” in the Old Testament? If the Jews did not understand this valley as a symbol of everlasting torture, why do SOME English translations give this word such a meaning? And who burned who in this valley? And what was God’s response for Israel doing such a horrible thing to their children? (Jer. 32:33-35) And how could God say “such a thing never entered His mind” if in fact He is going to do the very same thing to most of His own children?
2) If Hell was real, why did the early church appoint an avowed universalist as the President of the second council of the church in Constantinople in the fourth century? (Gregory Nazianzen, 325-381)
3) If Hell was real, why did Church leaders as late as the fourth century AD acknowledge that the majority of Christians believed in the salvation of all mankind?
4) If Hell was real and a place of no escape, why did the early church teach Jesus went to Hell (Hades), preached to them and led captivity captive? (Eph. 4:8,9; Psalm 68:18; 1 Peter 3:18-20)
5) If Hell was real and the grave settled the matter forever, why did the early Christians offer up prayers for the dead?
6) If Hell was real, why did the first comparatively complete systematic statement of Christian doctrine ever given to the world by Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 180, contain the tenet of universal salvation? (Ref. #1)
7) If Hell was real, why did the first complete presentation of Christianity (Origen, 220 A.D.) contain the doctrine of universal salvation?
8) If Hell was real, why did not a single Christian writer of the first 3 centuries declare universalism as a heresy?
9) If Hell was real why did not a single Church council for the first five hundred years condemn Universalism as heresy considering the fact that they made many declarations of heresy on other teachings?
10) If Hell was real, why did most of the early church’s leading scholars and most revered saints advocate universal salvation?
11) If the wages of sin is eternal punishment in Hell, then Jesus would have to be eternally punished if in fact He died for my sins. But the Bible says the wages of sin is death which is exactly what Jesus did–died. So how can you say people will be eternally tortured in Hell? Is Jesus presently being eternally tortured in place of those who accepted Him as Lord?
12) If Hell is real and describes a real place, why does the English word “Hell” come from a pagan source instead of the ancient Hebrew writings of the Bible? Why is the word “Hell” not found in the Jew’s Bible which is the Christian’s Old Testament?
13) If Hell is real and if good people go to heaven and bad people go to Hell, why does EVERYONE, good or bad, go to the same place in the Old Testament? They ALL go to Sheol which the King James Version translated “Hell” thirty-0ne times, “grave” thirty-one times and “pit” three times? Are we all destined to go to Hell or did the King’s translators make some gross translation errors?
14) If Hell doesn’t exist in the Old Testament, how could Jesus and his disciples teach that salvation was deliverance from a place that is not even found in their Scriptures? (There was only the Old Testament at that time.) Would that not make Him appear like a false teacher? Or could it be that Jesus never taught such a concept in the first place? Could it be that this concept has been added to the church and SOME Bibles through “traditions of men?”
-Excerpt from:
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/hell_test.html
I think that’s enough for you to get my point. THERE IS INDEED A GREAT PROBLEM IN BELIEVING IN A PLACE OF ETERNAL FIRE TORMENT CALLED HELL.
Finally you stated:
“So if God is reconciling all things. Does it matter then if people beleive or not? Who cares, there is no hell.”
If you love Christ you will obey His commandments. It is amazing how quick people will turn back to their carnal ways if the threat of a literal buring fire hell is removed from their theology. My question to you then would be.
Do you really love Christ?
Or are you just serving Him to avoid buring in hell for eternity?
Would you not rather be alive to God and dead to sin now, in this present age (aion or eon)?
(Rom 7:23) For the wages of sin is death
(Rom 8:7) For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spirtually minded is life and peace.
(Rom 5:9) we shall be saved from the wrath through Him
I and others who hold to this position believe it is of utmost importance to proclaim the gospel (good news). What is the good news? That Jesus is the savior of the world. And that through His sacrifical death on the cross all mankind can now be reconciled to God by grace through faith. We no longer have to remain bound by sin. We can be healed of our spiritual sickness. We can now be made alive to God through Christ. We can now be made joint-heirs with Christ, ruling and reigning with Him. We can now inherit the kingdom of God. There is also hope for all of the dead. That in the age of judgment to come, all others will be drawn to the cross and repent and profess Christ (second death or cast into the lake of fire – God’s fire of refinement/correction). And at the consumation of the ages, God will be all in all.
Hutch, what you said about many of reformed baptist is some of what I experienced when I questioned Calvin.
I was using him as an example of how house church wasn’t wrong when I found out how Calvin was allowing men to be killed etc. for their faith.
Steven O
This is addressed to Steve,
Don’t get to involved with Mr. Paden and what he is teaching as it is a never ending dialgue.
Just ask Hutch, Lionel and the energizer bunny!!!
No offense Jon!
Steven O
LOL@ Steve-O
“Just ask Hutch, Lionel and the energizer bunny!!!”
I agree with you totally. That Is why I will never follow a man but Christ Alone.
But here what about these scriptures it seems God permitted purchasing slaves from other nations? Strange verse……..
As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from the nations that are round about you.
You may also buy from among the strangers who sojourn with you and their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.
You may bequeath them to your sons after you, to inherit as a possession forever; you may make slaves of them, but over your brethren the people of Israel you shall not rule, one over another, with harshness.”
– Leviticus 25.44
It is easy to condemn a man from anther era when you were not living in those times. But to base your faith or to choose to base your faith on wether or not the adherents to that faith did not live a totally sinless life is kind of foolish.
Peter was a big hypocrite and did not want to be seen with the gentiles and Paul had to rebuke him to his face. Shows what was really in his heart.
You can go over to the Arminian side and let the teachings of Charles Finney encourage you. But you would not be allowed to sit with him or even near him in his church in NYC because he despised blacks socializing with whites, even though he was an abolitionst. He hated slavery but not racism.
If you are making this an issue I feel sorry for you my brother. You were never a slave. You were born free. To make this an issue 150 years later is kind of foolish don’t you think?
You are going to find that MANY of the preachers and teachers of old were probably not always on the right side of social issues. E.M. Bounds was a minister to the Confederate soldiers who were fighting for slavery. He was an Arminian.
You are going to have a real miserable life if you choose to go down this road and I pray that God will give you peace.
Let me ask you a question. Why do you read the Pslams?
Most were written by an adulterous, murderous man. He mistreated his enemies tortured them with iron instruments.
You need to have the Spirit of Joseph. He was a slave, you were not. He forgave his brothers and wept on their necks.
I hope you find peace my brother. I really do. It is a very heavy burden you must be carrying.
Steve
But you must say that the brother is relentless.
WARNING, WARNING, WARNING-Will Robinson!
WARNING: Jon Paden, teaches that nobody will exist forever separated from God in a state of literal conscious torment in clear contradiction to the teachings of Christ and His Word.
E-bunny
Jon
Nice little disortation there. but all pretense brother you have your facts WRONG!
And you did not answer my question. If there is not a hell where do people go?
Jon You are a False Teacher.
To Whomever,
I’m unwilling to desist from further comment, but I think there is more heat than light, more emotion than wisdom being created by this conversation.
I have deep sorrow in my heart for those who are developing in the faith, and who fall. Even greater is my sorrow for those who are caught in the swamp of sin an do not know Christ.
But my heart grieves also for those, who, like I did as a yuounger man, think every matter of faith is pure black and white. Such thinking causes so much distress in the Body of Christ.
Having an ideal view of what we believe is good, but I can assure you that, unless our idealism is balanced with realism, we will, do ourselves, not only personal, but public harm. The cause of Christ is not enhanced at all, even though we may have the dubious personal satisfaction of making the point we want to make.
As an old fellow, I have seen this scenario repeated ad infinitum.
Most of those who were adamant that they had the answers, and were qualified (always on the basis of their interpretation of Scripture) to rail on about the failures of others, whom God raised up to further His purpose (as with some of those mentioned in the comments), ended up falling into sin themselves.
It seems to me that the record of Scripture reveals that God used some rather unsavoury people to further His purpose, as He did with those of more recent history.
I’m confident of this, at this stage of life, I know infinitely less than I thought I did when I was in the first twenty or so years of adult life, and that when I get to be with the Lord there are going to be some surprises as to who receives the greater reward.
After preaching and teaching Jesus Christ as both Lord and Saviour for more than 50 years, I also know that I am at least as great a sinner as Calvin, or any of the Reformers who willfully murdered people who thought differently than themselves, because they thought they were doing God’s will.
Steve-
Jon teaches that everyone eventually goes to heven after being purified in the lake of fire.
You can read through a bunch of Lionels back issues/posts and read all the dialogue if your bored.
Steve ,
I must also disagree with you on the fact that this is foolish. whether you agree or not this has had a lasting effect even in modern day churches. No, I was not a slave but the effects of slavery has had a major impact on my life. I do not have hatred in my heart for whites but I am also not oblivious to the fact that slavery happen.
Hutch,
Naaa. I know what the truth is and its not my job to try to convince someone who’s only goal is to convert me to his side. He has the scriptures. I pray for him. I back out of this argument.
Also I am very saddened that Lionel would actually play the slavery trump card so I too back out of this whole blog.
God bless all and I pray blessings.
STeve
Steve,
What in the heck are you talking about dude? LOL!!! Find peace! I can only hear a violin playing with a man close by with a flute!
Do you want to play the Leviticus game today? Before we start I will ask if you would like to recant your heretical use of the law 8) (that is what Calvin would have said before he endorsed the roasting of his theological opponents). By the way what was the rule? You can make slaves of those who were not of Israel even so the year of Jubilee cleared all of that up right? I think Hutch already exegeted that brother.
Its funny. Let me ask you again. What do you think of Homosexual Bishops and Joel Olsteen? I see those of the Reformed Heritage have no problem calling them false professors and nonbelievers. By the way who said this was easy?
LOL! Who says I want to be an “Arminian” and follow Finney? That is like believe a girl who says she doesn’t want to date you right now must want to be a Lesbian! That dog don’t hunt here my friend.
That is usually what many white americans say. “You were not a slave, whats the big deal”. That is like telling a Jew, who cares about the Holocaust you weren’t in the concentration camp! Do you believe that? If so I wouldn’t say it too loud. But again this isn’t about the issue of slavery my friend. This is about the issue of inconsistency. I am asking how can a man be consider the pillar of the Christian Church when he didn’t think slavery was an issue. I have seen about 8-10 books released and libraries of his writing come up and people saying we should read this man, when his life didn’t match his doctrine! The same goes for a man who has been dead for about 400 plus years who’s doctrine is the cornerstone of those who consider themselves Reformed but for some reason couldn’t figure out that endorsign the roasting of a human being was wrong!
I read the Psalms because they are God’s word. By the way have you ever read Psalms 51 or 2nd Samuel 12? Christians sin but a lifestyle of unrepentant sin doesn’t line up with scripture does it? What seminary are you at?
What makes you think I haven’t forgiven people for slavery? Again you make very broad assumptions.
I found peace quite a while ago in the cross of Christ and His ressurection. This post isn’t about peace it is about blatant inconsistencies that continue to plague us. Its funny that you still have not addressed my questions on Homosexual Bishops and Joel Olsteen and T.D Jakes. Whats your thoughts on them?
Jon,
Hutch brought the WARNING FLAG and I will present the scripture to back him up.
“we preach Christ crucified”
to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness..”
So again Mr. Paden you are going Greek on us.
Do yourself a favor and get your own blog so Lionel, Hutch, myself and others can interrupt your agenda as you are continually interrupting the topics on this site.
Steven O
Steve,
BTW I didn’t write this blog. Tyris did! Look at the author. I am as innoncent and you can see that the glove doesn’t fit!
Brian I was about to leave but I will comment.
I am not black. I will never know what is is to be black. But I am a christian and I know rejectio from every nationality. I also know that this country has made some very positive progress. I have been in a mostly black church for 20 years. I am not unaware of the struggles and prejudice remarks even made to me by some Christians who said “oh you go to church with THOSE people” or “so how are you BLACK brothers”. So I am not a complete moron.
Slavery was horrible. But if you are a believer and if Lionel is a believer I do not think Christ would want you to look back at what those white people did to your ancestors. I am Irish and Italian. Do you know What England did to the Irish???? Study it and then get back to me. Not much worse then what blacks went through. But what? Am I going to go back and then have a problem listening to a English preacher?
The past is the past. You or I cannot change it. But we can be an instrument of change today by God’s Grace. I was in reform school when I was 12 years old in Florida School for Boys. I was only one of three white kids out of 50 mostly black. Roots just came out (1976) I got beat up everyday. Called a cracker, honky etc.. One of the counselors who was suppose to protect me was black. He was also a supposed Christian. He always turned the other cheek when I would have a blanket thrown over my head and beat up or cornered by 5 or 6 in the hallway and beat up. 9 months I went thorugh that. Does that mean I cannot listen to a Black Preacher or Christian because of one Christian who did not do the right thing?
Funny, but my 20 years in a church where the majority was black I never and repeat NEVER heard any of my friends, brothers or sisters in Christ amke an issue of slavery, or make an excuse either. They are some of the most loving and godly Christians and there were no color lines or black or white. We were REDEEMED CHRISTIANS with Flaws But TRUSTED IN GOD”S MERCY.
If Cory Ten Boom could hug a German Soldier that used to beat her sister in a concentration camp I ask can’t you forgive your Brother in Christ for his wicked sin?????
You can bark up this tree all day long. You will never change the past.
I leave you with that.
Lionel
But you engaged me and made comments about it.
Anyway, I do not wish to continue in endless discussions that will never resolve the past.
God bless you my brother and peace.
Steve,
I think you can address me directly firstly. Secondly where have I had a problem with white people or slave owners? Who says I haven’t forgiven them. As a matter of fact, as you state I was never a slave, so I can’t even know what they experienced. Read the post again, read my comments again and see where I am coming from. And please can you address my questions? I don’t think it is fair that you throw out what now seems to be racist accusations but won’t take the time to answer the questions I have brought up. It isn’t about forgiving anyone. This is about theology! And the fact that head knowledge is way more important than living out our lives in Christian love and obedience.
Lionel
Sorry if I misunderstood your comments just sounded very harsh so If I misjudged you I apologize. that is why chatting can be so dangerous you cannot hear the tone.
But you have to understand I AM ITALIAN/IRISH and we love a good scrap!!!!
My point on leviticus was simply that it was in the bible not condoning slavery.
SO I HAVE A GREAT IDEA THAT WILL SETTLE THIS ARGUMENT.
LETS GO DIG UP THEIR BONES AND BURN THEM!!!! I think Edwards is burried in New England somewhere. Not sure whree Whitefield is burried. 🙂
But Lionel How Do I know that they never repented???
I was not there. Edwards freed his slaves when he died. I don’t think he had too? But I will leg God judge him. But if it makes you happy I got 2 shovels 🙂
I don’t want to settle the arguement brother. I want to discuss inconsistencies. We can settle this right now if you want to. Tell me about Olsteen, Jakes and the Homosexual Bishop. What do you think of such fellas? What do you think of Rick Warren’s Christianity?
Steve-
Are you trying to tell me that we have to love the British too?
That is just too much for me to handle..their program of ethnic cleansing sent my Scottish ancestors to Canada during their forced immigration of the highlanders.
I have a shirt that reads, American Highlander fighting British oppression on two continents! Grin.
Yes, my tongue is firmly in cheek, I know we are to love and forgive everyone, our brothers, neighbors, enemies and even those who assualt us physically.
I do not think the point of teh post, unless I missed it, is forgiving a brother who has offended thee, but rather a post about inconsistency between doctrine and practice.
Steve,
Check the intent of the blog and then form your statements. This was never about listening or believing a person has sound teaching. It is about calling to the floor the character of men of who were suppose to be fathers of the faith. Did they contribute to the faith, of course? But does that excuse them for what they did.
Tyris is presenting a clear message that these men were not above reproach. So you angst is pointed in the wrong direction? We are not having gatherings to go and challenge the legitimacy of the teaching of these men but we do not understand how these men can be look at with such reverence when they did such atrocities.
So please fall back on thinking that this is a racial issue brother. This is a blog where questions of this nature can be chopped up and looked at through cross shaped lens. Whether you want to believe it or not this is still going on…..trust I live in the Deep South.
Hutch,
I agree………
OK ALL, I ADMIT MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD. I APOLOGIZE. I am man enough to admit that I misread your meaning.
Lionel Here is my answer. I dont think anything is wrong with a homosexual minister who does not repent. I don’t think Joel Osteen is really that Bad and T.D. Jakes wears nice shoes (dont’ forget I am half Italian). The Bible Does not condemn Homosexuality it is ok. Because I have seen the light and through this blog have come to the truth by rejecting the teachings of man. ITS ALL OK. THERE IS NO HELL. WE ARE ALL GOING TO HEAVEN!!!
Thanks Jon!!!!
🙂
For real though. I think it was wrong. I do see the inconsistency. It troubles me. I have experienced this in my own life with Leaders who seem to turn a deaf ear to the word when it offends them.
It is Hypocricy. We have slavery today, modern Slavery called abortion. And the same hypocricy that dealt with slavery is doing the same to abortion. ( I will explain later)
I have to go 5:00 PM School tonight
No Hard Feelings!! I am sorry if I misunderstood!
Peace
I have to go now.
Lionel, when you siad to I want to settle this right now I though you were going to tell me to step outside so we can have it out 🙂 LOL!! Good Night.
Lionel, et al,
I am in agreement with the essential message you’re conveying: That many of our great Church Fathers were more political (power) oriented than Christ-oriented.
However, I also see a flaw in the argument that we could/should dismiss someone’s ministry or theology simply, or only, because they were sinful, selfish, moral failures.
A good friend asked me yesterday what it meant to be a “righteous man” based on the verse that says, “The effectual, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much” and I had to answer: “No one is righteous”
In my studies and research regarding the Anabaptists and their vicious persecution at the hands of the ‘Reformed” and the Romanist alike. I have found this idea of living a hypocritical Christainity where ones faith and practice do not match to be fairly common.
The Reformers seemed to tecah a form of extreme easy believism!
They actually mocked the Anabaptists for attempting to follow Christ’s commands.
Note teh last quote it is priceless:
From The Secret of the Strength:
Reformed preachers from the canton of Bern informed the Swiss court in 1532: The Anabaptists have the semblance of outward piety to a far greater degree than we and all the churches that unitedly confess Christ with us. They avoid offensive sins that are very commonamong us.19
These facts disturbed Heinrich Bullinger, a leader of the Swiss Reformed church, very much. He wrote several books against the “shameless rabble” (the Anabaptists) in which he said: Those who unite with them will be received into their church by rebaptism for repentance and newness of life. Then they lead their lives under a semblance of a quite spiritual conduct. They denounce covetousness, pride, profanity, the lewd conversation, and immorality of the world. They shun drinking and gluttony. In short, their hypocrisy is great and manifold.20
The Jesuit priest, Christoph Andreas Fischer, leader of the counter-reformation in Austria spoke of the Anabaptists:
They call each other brothers and sisters. They use no profanity nor harsh speech. They do not swear nor carry weapons. In the beginning they would not even carry knives. They are modest in eating and drinking. They do not wear stylish clothes. They do not go to law before the magistrates, but they suffer everything in makebelieve
patience.21
In 1582, Franz Agricola, Roman Catholic theologian of the Dutch province of Limburg, wrote in his book Against the terrible errors of the Anabaptists: Among the existing heretical sects there is none which in appearance leads a more modest or pious life than the Anabaptists. They are irreproachable in their outward public life. They do not say
lies. They do not deceive, swear, fight nor speak harshly. They avoid intemperate eating and drinking. No personal outward display is found among them, but humility, patience, uprightness, neatness, honesty, temperance and straightforwardness in such measure that one would suppose they had the Holy Spirit of God!22
So Kieth,
What about the homosexual bishop? Would you accept an open homosexual as a brother? And would you allow your church to be discipled by his teaching?
SOwen,
You last two comments to me make no sense considering the arguments that I have presented. I too preach/teach Christ and Him crucified.
Steve,
You make no sense either. I do believe in judgment. I do believe in the wrath to come on all the unrepentant. I just don’t believe in an “eternal hell of literal fire torment”.
BTW: Hutch, SOwen, Steve, and all others who it applies to. Your hyprocrisy is being manifested on this blog through many of your comments that you present to simply make a mockery of me, call me names, twist my views, etc. You seem to do with your words what some of the “Reformers” did with their words and deeds to all who rejected their biblical understanding. Never once have I denied Christ and that He is the only way that man can be reconciled to God. Never once have I denied His crucifixtion or resurrection. Never once have I denied God’s wrath on all sinners. Never once have I denied the future resurrection and judgment. Never once have I denied that one must place faith in Christ and Christ alone in order that they may be saved. NEVER ONCE!!! I difference seems mainly to be in what we consider God’s future judgments entail. But just like the Anabaptist and others who have been misunderstood, we are called heretics, decievers, children of Satan, etc. by some of our fellow brethren in Christ.
Please forgive me for my (at times) OVERBEARING ZEAL to share and discuss what I currently believe to be in truth. I realize that I have at times allowed my flesh to lead me rather than God’s Spirit when dealing with others on this great issue.
I pray that God continues to help us all see more clearly His truth through Christ.
To all,
Stay Encouraged In Christ
Jon Paden
Jon-
I asked you point blank on another post if anyone will be seperated from God in literal conscious eternal torment and you answered no.
You then told me that you believe that everyone will eventually be in heaven with God some by accepting Christ in this life and those who do not will be refined and perfected in the lake of fire and their final end will be the same as those who accepted Christ in this lifetime.
I do not believe that I have misrepresented your position that everyone will eventually be in heaven with God.
If I am mistaken or if you have changed your position, please let us know.
We can look up your comments if you like.
Lionel,
You ask: “What about the homosexual bishop?”
Answer: I don’t recognize bishops.
You ask: “Would you accept an open homosexual as a brother? And would you allow your church to be discipled by his teaching?”
Answer: It would depend. I currently accept drug addicts and liars and gossipers as brothers and sisters in Christ, so if there was someone who loved Christ and struggled with their orientation I suppose I would accept them. Now, if they were unrepentant gossipers/drug addicts/liars, etc. then I might have to have a conversation with them about their sin, but they would still be my brother and/or sister in Christ.
Would I allow our church to be discipled by their teaching? Again, it would depend on if they were openly and unrepentangly practicing their sin or not.
-kg
Mr. Paden,
As I also have stated I am not trying to bring anything to you, but the truth thru Christ.
I have stated that as every post that comes up on this blog you end up trying to sway people to your point. Which in almost every post has nothing to do with what the original topic is about. Then when new people come on you try to discuss the same with them.
I don’t mean any disrespect to you Sir, but as with Hutch and Lionel I don’t go with what your saying.
I have a deep conviction of what the bible says and that is it.
That’s why as Paul states I come to you stating Christ and Him Crucified. The issue of being Greek is not a slander, but an issue that they only wanted more knowledge and didn’t want just Jesus.
So I am not trying to offend you in anything I say. I am only trying to present the truth in love. In no way does the gospel need defended. As it is truth. And the truth will set you free. There is a literal hell and God made it that way. Otherwise why would there have been a need for a Savior in the first place? Let’s all go and do as we please since according to your doctrine in the end we will all end up in paradise.
That doesn’t work with the bible I read. It doesn’t work with Genisis thru Revelation.
I can’t call you a brother, but I can call you a neighbor and as such I have love for you and will pray for you.
My heart breaks sincerely for you, but it is only God who can raise the people into new life. As on one of my post on my blog there are a lot of dead men walking out in the world. So please seek the living and true God and repent.
I appreciate your urgency, but it is directed at the wrong group.
Steven O
Kieth
I could not have said it better myself
Keith Said:
However, I also see a flaw in the argument that we could/should dismiss someone’s ministry or theology simply, or only, because they were sinful, selfish, moral failures.
This thread has catapulted What’s A Couple of Slaves When You Have Good Theology? into top post! Sheesh, guys, we’re at 88 comments. No way I’m touching most of the thousands of words written today. However, a few points, by topic:
1. Faith and works
The head/heart issue truly is a big deal. I trust that even those who would be most generous to Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Owen, Edwards, Whitefield, etc. agree about this. The consistent testimony of Scripture is that yes, sentiments of idolatry and self-righteousness are putrid, but so is sinful conduct (both harm and neglect). People justified by God are not only forgiven their sins, but changed from the inside out — this is the consistent testimony of the Bible, Genesis-Revelation. Whether the Puritans or Joel Osteen, we properly give pause if things turn up ugly in professed Christians’ speech and action.
2. Judging others
However, judging others is dangerous! Even with people we see and hear, we tend to notice all manner of specks in their eyes without touching the logs in our own; we do the reverse on virtue, readily amplifying our own while ignoring or demeaning others’. How much worse are we with historical figures? On the hearsay testimony of some web documents telling us how nasty Calvin, Luther, and Edwards were, we mock them as absurd hypocrites (and conclude, of course, that their present-day admirers are a bunch of theology-obsessed hacks woefully lacking in discernment). Please, I say this to myself as much as anyone else, tread carefully assessing your neighbors, but even more so historical figures of turbulent and complex times. How carefully are cases made against the dead folks we’re putting on trial in our minds? There are charges flying around that would get shot down by folks who know these men’s lives better, but aren’t being heard because they don’t show up here to comment! Regarding persistent shots at Edwards specifically, I think Marsden’s discussion of Edwards and slavery should embarrass some of you. Bottom line: please know your subject, and be fair! But even then…
3. Criticism vs. exhortation
It is so easy to criticize prominent people, of this age and others past, for sins and errors. This has a place in discerning whom to trust and be taught by (and in what areas!), as well as for lovingly helping others do the same. But such conversations tend high on rash judgments and low on edifying exhortation. My suggestion: follow this discussion up with some posts and discussions hashing out the distinctives of true and false faith (yes, we know a lot of verses, but maybe gathering them from across the Scriptures by themes such as worship, care for neighbor, humility, peacefulness, self-control, love of justice, thanksgiving, treasuring of God’s word, etc. would be a profitable exercise for us – just a thought). Perhaps this would help not only examine one another more fairly, but actually spur each other on in the Spirit beyond “God keep us from condoning, let alone committing, murder, exploitative violence, and other wickedness, keep us from being Christians who separate head and heart.”
Brother Mike,
Perhaps it’s just me—but minus the fact that the excerpt of the book you linked to did not define the whole of the book (or show its references it/of itself), I read the excerpts on slavery…..and in all realness, I was a bit amazed at seeing how it seemed that there was NO REFERENCE to or dealing with Edwards explicit comments on slavery
One that keeps coming to mind is this: http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/mhr/4/minkema.html
I also read the arguments…and I honestly don’t find them convincing in light of things Edwards explicitly said. I also gave out the works of Fredrick Douglas—who was a slave during the time of Edwards, if I’m not mistaken…and I also noticed that the author DID NOT address in his work or the thoughts of others involved in being slave—which to me indicates a bit of a clear bias…..and granted that the author was covering the works of Edwards/Historical context…but it’s hard to really take seriously the claim for one to listen to another regarding Historical context when they will not address the thoughts of others contrasting with Edwards views.
For Douglas, what were HIs views as a slave in contrast with anything happening from Edwards? Because that makes a significant difference in any arguments made on behalf of Edwards….
Kieth, Steven, Mike & Aussie John,
I want to say, that I really enjoyed dialoguing on a issue that is near and dear to my heart. As one who embraces a Reformed Perspective (or at least my favorite theologians) and one who is passionate about Christianity’s history in some of the most gross sins perpetuated against other humans. I want to say you guys handled yourselves well (other than Steve calling me a Nation of Islam Racist).
Mike I really enjoyed your last exhortation/admonishment. This really stood out to me given all the comments:
“My suggestion: follow this discussion up with some posts and discussions hashing out the distinctives of true and false faith (yes, we know a lot of verses, but maybe gathering them from across the Scriptures by themes such as worship, care for neighbor, humility, peacefulness, self-control, love of justice, thanksgiving, treasuring of God’s word, etc. would be a profitable exercise for us – just a thought). Perhaps this would help not only examine one another more fairly, but actually spur each other on in the Spirit beyond “God keep us from condoning, let alone committing, murder, exploitative violence, and other wickedness, keep us from being Christians who separate head and heart.”
God bless until the next heated discussion LOL!!!
For anyone who missed it, I’d HIGHLY suggest seeing things from the perspectives of those who WERE SLAVES and BELIEVERS…and for reference, please read what Fredrick Douglas had to say on the issue in his auto-biography.
From Fredrick Douglass’s Auto-Biography “My Bondage and My FREEDOM”:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/DouMybo.html
Others on Edwards views on slavery (one of which was referenced in Brother Mikes link to Mardsen, who discussed it):
http://edwards.yale.edu/archive?path=aHR0cDovL2plYy5hbWluZHNleWUub3JnL2NnaS1iaW4vbmV3cGhpbG8vZ2V0b2JqZWN0LnBsP2MuMTU6NToyMC53amVv
Though again, the link from Mardsen was appreciated. The book has gotten some good reviews and in other things I realize that it was more than justly critical toward Edwards. But on other things, it did indeed seem to be sympathetic without warrent…and it was a bit bothersome/saddening to see that for an issue so controversial/sensitive and with intriguing views/important ramifications expressed by others during that time alongside Edwards—from John Wesley to Fredrick Douglass—it was a bit odd that the book dedicated so much to examining Edwards in various ways only had a brief section on Edwards’ attitude towards slavery.
Spirited Discussion, Brother Lionel….and many thanks for hosting it, as it was a trip….
My bad, as it was Brother Tyris who hosted it…and many thanks, T, for brining up the issue..
Gabriel, thank you for the links on Edwards and slavery. You’re right, Marsden skimps on the issue in comparison, but he does seem to do a reasonable survey of the issue. Even though the excerpt from his Edwards biography is incomplete (the last page or two missing, no source notes), I think it opposes the notion that Edwards’ attitudes about slavery blatantly contradicted his profession of Christ. I haven’t read through the Minkema article word-for-word yet, but his conclusion seems pretty favorable to Edwards:
Our knowledge of the evolution of northern antislavery thought before the Revolutionary era is uneven at best. This is so because, aside from the efforts of the Quakers, we cannot point to any full-fledged movement arising at this time. Instead, we must depend on identifying sentiments reflecting ambivalence towards slavery that accumulated over time. Though Edwards’s position arose largely from evangelical concerns and served, coincidentally, to legitimate a hierarchical outlook, it reflected a distinction between slavery per se and the slave trade that would only become more pronounced through the Revolutionary and antebellum periods. Edwards’s abolitionist disciples, most notably Samuel Hopkins and Jonathan Edwards, Jr., would remain silent on the slaveholding of “Mentor.” At the same time, they amplified and radicalized Edwards’s thoughts, in ways he never intended, to criticize both slavery and the slave trade.
Edwards’s draft notes and the incidents surrounding them help us to see that discussions of and accusations against slave owning and the slave trade were inextricably bound up in the most complicated of social circumstances, in which the antagonists’ motives were mixed and their positions evolving. Edwards’s reconsideration of the slave trade was prompted in large part by revivalism and his millennialist hopes of global conversion; however, this same millennialist fervor energized the Northfield dissenters to promote the revivals locally by taking the radical step of opposing slave owning. Also, if we consider religious allegiance and status, the Doolittle case provides the outline for at least three intermediate or rationalized positions between, on the one hand, unquestioning acceptance of slavery and the slave trade and, on the other, antislavery immediatism. On the popular level, we have Captain Wright and company, who, out of a curious convergence of ideology and expediency, opposed local reliance upon slavery. On the elite level, we find two distinct incarnations. The moderate evangelical Edwards came to oppose the overseas slave trade because of his support for revivalism but defended slavery as an institution and did not free his remaining slaves. Conversely, the Old Light Doolittle opposed the revivals but did free his slave.
Regarding Frederick Douglass, yes, I had heard of him and his influential writing; we actually read Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave (the book that first made him famous, published ten years before My Bondage and My Freedom) for US history class in my suburban Chicago high school. However, Douglass (1818-1895) was born in 19th-century Maryland and didn’t publish his first slave narrative until 1845, all well after Edwards (1703-1758) had already died.
P.S. If anyone wants to embed links in comments, check out this page an acquaintance wrote up for a now-defunct discussion blog.
Lionel,
I sum up this conversation about slavery and your comment that I called you a Nation of Islam Racist I was only responding to your comment that I was a Gomer Pyle Cracker 🙂 lol.
I hope you don’t think that I was every insinuating that you were a Nation of Islam Racist, though I do thank you for the bean pies they were delicious!!! 🙂
I love you in Christ my brother though I never met you. I think you are a very sharp young man and am impressed by your zeal for Christ and your many blogs that cause us all to really stop and think. I guess I just misunderstood the whole slavery thing. I do live in NY and do come across many blacks that are part of the Black Israelite or Nation of Islam and some who claim to be in Christ but hate white people so I guess I misread what was being said and I humbly do apologize.
Steve
Steve,
I was joking! I left off the smiley face by mistake! 8)
BTW,
I have a recipe somewhere. I used to be a 5% and I love some bean pies!
I know you were………….what kind of beans do you use!! 🙂
Navy brother.
Thanks Brother Mike for the extra info..
Though to be clear, in reading it, I’m still less than convinced that Edwards is anywhere in the clear regarding whether his actions on slavery were at all no unbiblical/opposed to the Character of Christ. There’e still far too many factors that I see the book by Mardsen seemed to conviently leave out in the review given on Edwards—which, not surprisingly, is continually favorable toward the man. And if the realties of what slavery was like are not properly addressed, it’s hard to take seriously the rest.
Moreover, I must say that anything in any defense of others such as Edwards does not do justice when it fails to actually address others who were his contemporaries fighting much against ALL forms of slavery…
John Wesley is the main one who comes to mind …
(28 June of 1703 – 2 March 1791)—alongside others in the Methodist Church, whose theology actively made clear the system should’ve been fought against. Methodists, under Wesley’s direction, became leaders in many social justice issues of the day including prison reform and abolitionism movements that involved individuals such as Fredrick Douglass—who came much later (and whom I had to study for my African American Literature Class)—alongside others who were involved in abolishing like William Wilberforce ( 24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833 )….for William Wilberforce was born a year after Edwards died and yet was supported by Wesely STRONGLY, with the man alongside other abolotionists being all able to fight due to much of the Groundwork laid by men of Wesley’s character…
In example, some writings from the life of Wesley on the issue of slavery…
And for more extensive information, one can go here (from one of the bests sites around in regards to British Abolitionists sites)
A quote from Wesley’s Writings:
Witnessing his clear stances against slavery and the drastic differences in comparision with men such as Edwards, I cannot help but side moreso with another who even during Edwards’s time called a spade a spade….and thankfully so, as Movements against slavery were birthed out of the holiness church and the early Free Methodist movement.
Love this thread…..and the discussion, which I thank the host Brother Tyris and others for allowing.
Gabriel (G2)-
Thanks for the great links you have obviously put in the time and effort to study and research the issue.