tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post1221958441825421102..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Karate exegesis [requested classic re-post]Phil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger168125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-71235117450048671232011-05-20T07:43:01.399-07:002011-05-20T07:43:01.399-07:00aparently i am since the State of Pennsylvania doe...aparently i am since the State of Pennsylvania does't allow me to change my last name just yet :'(Moonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01385067178930906667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-88239348515031799072011-05-19T18:02:29.625-07:002011-05-19T18:02:29.625-07:00?!
Who's "Rita Martinez"?
:^P?!<br /><br />Who's "Rita <i>Martinez</i>"?<br /><br />:^PDJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-54535811009667062462011-05-19T17:54:14.157-07:002011-05-19T17:54:14.157-07:00Not only was that extremely hilarious but quite ed...Not only was that extremely hilarious but quite educational :) thank you, will keep it in mind for future reference..I did some Karate-Do myself in highschool, never thought i could use it in exegesis :PMoonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01385067178930906667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-42305203410731198752009-07-15T17:51:03.535-07:002009-07-15T17:51:03.535-07:00So the Spirit regenerates all for whom Christ dies...So the Spirit regenerates all for whom Christ dies?<br /><br />Or, put another way, Christ died only for those whom the Spirit will regenerate?<br /><br />Or, put another way, Christ died only for the elect?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-40199765874236759612009-07-15T17:48:08.788-07:002009-07-15T17:48:08.788-07:00100% yes. Although 'another's act' ha...100% yes. Although 'another's act' happens to be the Spirit's regeneration.<br />Close up the meta then, I think it's gone about as far as it needs to go.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21813615423945177422009-07-15T16:57:47.035-07:002009-07-15T16:57:47.035-07:00Just as a sidenote: this post is nearing the botto...Just as a sidenote: this post is nearing the bottom of the page, and thus is about to be closed.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84827743572241178672009-07-15T16:28:31.675-07:002009-07-15T16:28:31.675-07:00Christ's actual sacrifice merely accomplished ...Christ's <i>actual</i> sacrifice merely accomplished <i>contingent</i> redemption, which depended on another's act to become actual?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21812109330262075682009-07-15T16:23:40.370-07:002009-07-15T16:23:40.370-07:00No in the sense that God has already accepted Chri...No in the sense that God has already accepted Christ's death for satisfaction of His wrath, which we see because Christ has risen. <br />Yes in the sense that God the Father did not accept the sacrifice <i> on behalf </i> of the man because he died in unbelief- discharge of sin is contingent on condition of faith. If no faith then God will require a payment from the man just as if Christ had not died for him. Otherwise the elect are saved before faith.<br />But this has been offered up in this meta already.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-5332036255235800862009-07-15T15:20:05.367-07:002009-07-15T15:20:05.367-07:00Let's keep the conversation within the meta.
...Let's keep the conversation within the meta.<br /><br /><b>Phil</b> said:<br /><br /><i>Yes, the people suffer for sins already paid for, which is what Ynottony has already said in an early post.....<br /><br />See also Jude 5, whereby God saves, and then destroys. You can cross the Red Sea, but unless you cross the Jordan as well you won't make it into the promised land.<br /><br />Now what about answering my query por favor? </i><br /><br />You are saying, then, that Christ's sacrifice for them was rejected by the Father?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-697075129733322032009-07-15T15:16:40.038-07:002009-07-15T15:16:40.038-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-18504430642408611692009-07-15T11:18:45.539-07:002009-07-15T11:18:45.539-07:00Yes, often the blow isn't immediately felt. Un...Yes, often the blow isn't immediately felt. Until then, it can seem fun.<br /><br />So these people are suffering in torment for sins Jesus already died for once?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-34874911190914604112009-07-15T11:13:25.787-07:002009-07-15T11:13:25.787-07:00Thanks for asking that Dan, I have mulled over you...Thanks for asking that Dan, I have mulled over your comment 'Did Jesus pay for the sins of people (say who lived in China in 1000BC) who were already beyond the gospel' quite a bit lately, hence the delay.<br /><br />I think the response is 'Yes' He did. Else, how were they afforded <i> any </i> common grace during their lifetime? That puts the burden back on you to show me how God can be merciful apart from the cross. <br />In any case you are right, Karate debate is fun.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-27412439187644010782009-07-15T10:08:19.409-07:002009-07-15T10:08:19.409-07:00Thanks!
I am a pretty regular reader of posts and...Thanks!<br /><br />I am a pretty regular reader of posts and meta...I learn tons here. I was thinking of the NEXTS! as I read your post - I always thought they were clever, it just never clicked that this was something I could do. <br /><br />My default approach would be more "dog and stick", they lob the stick - I run, fetch, and return. Game continues till they get bored and wander off. Nothing gets accomplished. (sigh)<br /><br />Will stay tuned, and can't wait for the post!one busy momhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18087795055010641099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-9383780967063616592009-07-15T04:42:47.080-07:002009-07-15T04:42:47.080-07:00That's what pastors do: make the impossible lo...That's what pastors do: make the impossible look easy.<br /><br />Just kidding, of course. Oh, it isn't easy. In case I've not made it clear, this isn't natural for me, either. I realize I've done both in this very meta — responded frontally when I should have used the very technique I'm talking about. Then when I did, you see that the challenger undid himself pretty quickly.<br /><br />You know, that's actually a great idea. If you remain a regular reader, you'll see that I already have set examples in posts (the Next! ones sometimes are such) and in metas. I will <i>try</i> to keep your request in mind and do something more focused about it. After I finish the book, probably.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-80655271534358385272009-07-15T00:01:14.679-07:002009-07-15T00:01:14.679-07:00ok then....back to the intent of the original post...ok then....back to the intent of the original post...<br /><br />Lunge, sidestep, mayhem What a great technique - and Dan, you make it sound so easy! I always get drawn into the full frontal attack....which accomplishes little, leaves eyes rolling, and me exhausted.<br /><br />I came out of Catholicism many years ago, and seem to be surrounded by those who want to argue its tenants. (Most probably don't want to hear what I have to say - they're just hoping to defend it or drag me back into it) But, IF I could really use this technique well - it would be a great way to shorten long useless arguements and redirect the conversation back to the issue of their salvation or at least force them to defend their theology from Scripture (which can't be done).<br /><br />I would like to see more examples of this fleshed out to get a better feel for how I can apply it. Like Mikehoskins example with the Mormans. Maybe a future post..?? Something along the lines of: given lunge 'a', use mayhem 'b'. <br /><br />If you take requests....one busy momhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18087795055010641099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-8508685604377842582009-07-14T21:23:43.409-07:002009-07-14T21:23:43.409-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Kirby L. Wallacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01825673333919420557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-6292962406823722972009-07-13T16:23:44.305-07:002009-07-13T16:23:44.305-07:00There are universalists who believe everyone will ...There are universalists who believe everyone will be saved; then there are those who think that in some way Jesus died for everyone, to offer salvation to everyone - did everything that needs to be done. All that's missing is our part, deciding for Christ or adding our faith.<br /><br />What I'm talking about took in both.<br /><br />More, I'm talking about an approach to disputes.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-4456009540190096212009-07-13T16:14:51.033-07:002009-07-13T16:14:51.033-07:00I didn't read all the comments (maybe only the...I didn't read all the comments (maybe only the first 80 or 90) so sorry if someone already said this, but it does seem interesting to me, Dan, that you would only use this line of reasoning with universalists, since, at least in my very limited experiance, universalists rarely use the 1 John 2:2 verse to support their position. That verse is more often used by 4 pt. calvinists, or non-universalists Arminians.<br /><br />Wow I'm an awful speller somedays.lawrencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02269079315500219992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-4518016182476595852009-07-13T15:25:10.011-07:002009-07-13T15:25:10.011-07:00While supra's may hold that, are they necessar...While supra's may hold that, are they necessarily the only ones? On what authority?<br /><br />Are you saying that Christ fully satisfied justice for everyone's sins, including the hopeless already in Hades awaiting sentencing to Hell?<br /><br />What did Christ's death accomplish?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-47483984016762925702009-07-13T15:11:18.004-07:002009-07-13T15:11:18.004-07:00The idea that the atonement of Christ has no value...The idea that the atonement of Christ has no value to the reprobate is a logical necessity of Supralapsarianism. When people argue that the sacrifice of Christ had no effect for, and was not intended for the reprobate they show the influence of SL.<br />If not for SL there is no reason Christ could not have paid equally for all, but made effectual by the Spirit for only some.<br />In point of fact I suspect you to be a believer in unlimited atonement Dan, despite your protest- else why are the wicked not condemned on their first sin to hell as justice deserves? If it is not Christ purchasing them a pardon (however temporary) on the cross then what is it that permits them daily grace?Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-90409198298290969212009-07-13T15:07:57.215-07:002009-07-13T15:07:57.215-07:00Sorry Dan. I just noticed my post had an error in ...Sorry Dan. I just noticed my post had an error in it. My amanuensis has since been fired.<br /><br />The one line in there is incomplete. I *meant* to say "I told him I wanted "proof" that Darwin had ever lived. This is because he wanted *scientific* evidence for God."<br /><br />So much for inerrancy in my comment posts.Tim Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06771868540726222826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-77168877757587712412009-07-13T13:16:55.587-07:002009-07-13T13:16:55.587-07:00Really? Who propounded that?Really? Who propounded that?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-60957654749952908612009-07-13T13:14:52.184-07:002009-07-13T13:14:52.184-07:00I think the lesson here is that if you are a first...I think the lesson here is that if you are a first degree black belt (read: high Calvinist) you had better not pick a fight with the second degrees (Classic Calvinists). <br />Supralapsariansim and it's dichotomous world view fails again, Sorry Dan.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11630461838295942309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59389738900867023492009-07-13T11:24:59.221-07:002009-07-13T11:24:59.221-07:00Good point and good illustration, Tim. Usually, my...Good point and good illustration, Tim. Usually, my first impulse is frontal. Takes a bit of (unnatural) coolness and thought to come back the other way.<br /><br />I've done <i>both</i> in just this meta.<br /><br />/c:DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-6643940560756030072009-07-13T10:30:26.315-07:002009-07-13T10:30:26.315-07:00Dan, thanks for this.
All too often I sucker myse...Dan, thanks for this.<br /><br />All too often I sucker myself with the frontal assault when trying to make a point (usually to someone who just wants debate). <br /><br />We study something and we understand the forest down to the tree because we've walked it so often. Sometimes, it's just better to back up and show the general fallacy.<br /><br />It really ticks me off with myself when I do this. I recently had a discussion on facebook with an atheist. I told him I wanted "proof" that Darwin had ever lived. *scientific* evidence for God. I told him "I don't believe Darwin existed. I want scientific *proof* he existed!".<br /><br />His reply was "The only way to prove anything is by Mathematics!"<br /><br />I *should* have seen that and grabbed it but didn't. I *could* have asked him "Ok, prove that particular claim....mathematically!"<br /><br />DUH!<br /><br />Again, your post is well presented. Thank you!Tim Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06771868540726222826noreply@blogger.com