tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post5095778593460193747..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: The Actual AgendaPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84681287472078458602013-04-24T14:12:47.259-07:002013-04-24T14:12:47.259-07:00Not sure what is more amazing, Trogdor's abili...Not sure what is more amazing, Trogdor's ability to word truth in a way that no one else seems to be able to, or the fact that <b>he's still a baby!</b>Michael Coughlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01151414777657994736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-25585899668531924652013-04-24T10:24:55.519-07:002013-04-24T10:24:55.519-07:00Trogdor --
No Mere Christianity, then? No standi...Trogdor --<br /><br />No Mere Christianity, then? No standing about in the hallway like some kind of lost drunk in a joke with a punchline about why he's fumbling for his keys?<br /><br />No?<br /><br />All right then: lead on.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-53218606567985867722013-04-24T10:05:33.743-07:002013-04-24T10:05:33.743-07:00How about "pachydermatous," which is &qu...How about "pachydermatous," which is "callous, insensitive." <br /><br />"It was somewhat pachydermatous of Tom Chantry to derail two metas in a row."Kerry James Allenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06083436735702873300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92125854731178983502013-04-24T09:55:41.438-07:002013-04-24T09:55:41.438-07:00...and, once again, with "2nd Council of Pach......and, once again, with "2nd Council of Pachydermia," Trogdor wins the intrawebs.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-92168188370327599692013-04-24T09:54:40.561-07:002013-04-24T09:54:40.561-07:00You can tell this is old, because it assumes non-T...You can tell this is old, because it assumes non-Trinitarianism is unorthodox. Must be from way back before the 2nd Council of Pachydermia.<br /><br />As said, orthodoxy is a really complex matter. There is the usual Bibley disclaimer that even demons know the orthodox facts, and it don't do them no good. But there are other forms of unorthodoxy that are also dangerous. For example, someone could formally affirm the language of scripture and confessions, while re-defining those terms to mean something else. Example: the Openness folks with foreknowledge, or any form of "this is sufficient, but you also need...". Or those who will affirm that Jesus saves, but preach nothing but moralism.<br /><br />Instead of making disciples and teaching them to obey all that Jesus commanded, we try to figure out what is the least someone can possibly do to be counted as 'saved'. And we take the same view of our leaders, who just affirm a few core doctrines (or something close enough to them) and they're beyond reproach on all that other stuff that doesn't matter.<br /><br />Maybe we shouldn't be so hasty in the laying on of hands, or of giving blanket approval to a man and his ministry. Maybe it's dangerous to even tell the world he's fine, there's just some minor issues we're working on behind the scenes. But I don't know if that gets into derailing territory.trogdorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11452996348717802065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87279653362228016302013-04-24T09:42:22.088-07:002013-04-24T09:42:22.088-07:00...all I need is the T-shirt...
Ya'know, they...<i>...all I need is the T-shirt...</i><br /><br />Ya'know, they got a on-line store for that!<br /><br />(We Franked Dan's meta yesterday; may as well Frank Frank's today!)Tom Chantryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485908616177111150noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-91494904242325525842013-04-24T09:35:20.025-07:002013-04-24T09:35:20.025-07:00Frank, I've been reading Pyro for 7 years now,...Frank, I've been reading Pyro for 7 years now, I've got the books, got the twitter feed, all I need is the T-shirt... I'm sure I contracted "crazy" from all that.Webster Hunt (Parts Man)https://www.blogger.com/profile/04631846083790242392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-33285527369058062222013-04-24T09:23:32.866-07:002013-04-24T09:23:32.866-07:00Webster: You are crazy.
.
.
.
.
In a good wa...Webster: You are crazy.<br /><br />.<br /><br />.<br /><br />.<br /><br />.<br /><br />In a good way.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51087133907899048412013-04-24T09:09:27.380-07:002013-04-24T09:09:27.380-07:00Any thoughts on this issue being related to our la...Any thoughts on this issue being related to our lack of discipleship in our day? Perhaps we're so caught up in seeing that men are saved, that we forget that we've been charged with discipling them? <br /><br />I was thinking about how time is involved in sanctification, and how we can't expect a new believer to act as a mature one, but at the same time that new believer needs an ordinary means - a discipler, a mature man/woman in Christ - teaching them all that Jesus has said and why it matters that they believe these things in Scripture. Instead it seems that so long as they believe in "core doctrines" and are saved, then we can leave it up to the pastor and the "elite" guys in our culture to teach them the rest. Even a momma bird, when she pushes her chick out of the nest so that it can learn to fly, hovers nearby to be sure a predator doesn't snatch them up.<br /><br />Our Master is not dependent on the ordinary means to grow His people, but that doesn't discount the fact that He has ordained and commanded those means be the ones by which He works.Webster Hunt (Parts Man)https://www.blogger.com/profile/04631846083790242392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-35221696524956885632013-04-24T08:52:54.680-07:002013-04-24T08:52:54.680-07:00I'm dreaming of a bacon sandwich. With Chicke...I'm dreaming of a bacon sandwich. With Chicken. <br /><br />Did DAC say something?FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21131913221570873012013-04-24T08:38:04.478-07:002013-04-24T08:38:04.478-07:00DAC: "More questions" about your motivat...DAC: "More questions" about your motivation? Where was the first?<br /><br />On second thought: never mind. It would be just the second step of you doing what you virtually always do, which is take focus off of the post-that-is and try to go somewhere else. If Frank wants to put up with that, that's on him.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-89461349968538934592013-04-24T08:34:24.420-07:002013-04-24T08:34:24.420-07:00OSH: Luv Ya!OSH: Luv Ya!FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-39213661470074644322013-04-24T08:29:38.027-07:002013-04-24T08:29:38.027-07:00djp
I said nothing to CMP, because CMP has been a...djp<br /><br />I said nothing to CMP, because CMP has been all of this issue for years, and has multiple posts on the subject. Plus, CMP actually answers Paul's question in a very interesting, substantive way. <br /><br />Any more questions to my motivation that I may answer for you?David A. Carlsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00465387359523299616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-51096155311374490532013-04-24T07:38:11.269-07:002013-04-24T07:38:11.269-07:00Webster,
That's a good question/observation, ...Webster,<br /><br />That's a good question/observation, and I agree, with qualifications. <br /><br />As is clear from a study of church history, not all doctrines are equally clear and discernable from the Scriptures. That is not to say that there isn't a correct understanding and an incorrect one, but rather to note that we do not see all things clearly. As such, it is not as simple as saying that someone isn't being sactified (and therefore not saved) if they don't fall in line doctrinally in all categories. As a Calvinist, I believe that the doctrines of grace represent the correct way to read and understand the Bible. I am not willing, however, to claim that any number of Arminian believers are unsaved because they have spurned those truths. In its essence, the Gospel is simple, and those who place their faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior are saved despite there shortcomings in life and doctrine. Hence it is my belief that the doctrines relating to the very essence of the identity of God and how we are saved can be said to be of primary importance. Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16345630463450652762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-60068982718993074672013-04-24T07:12:55.678-07:002013-04-24T07:12:55.678-07:00I'm also reminded of how much humanism started...I'm also reminded of how much humanism started creeping into the church after the Middle Ages. I just started reading "How Shall We Then Live?" with my boys and last night we were reading about how Thomas Aquinas starting bringing a focus on the particulars into the church. At the end of the day, when we start looking at good works without orthodox beliefs instead of orthodox beliefs leading to good works, we are just following in the tracks laid by the humanism of the Renaissance. <br /><br />If the good works are fine and dandy on their own, why is there any need to preach a gospel of repentance of sins and faith in the work of Jesus Christ? And why do we need all 66 books of the Bible laying out all kinds of truths about God and man and commands for believers? There is a reason for each of those books being included in the canon of Scripture. And Scripture tells us that "<b>All Scripture</b> is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17, emphasis mine) Surely there are some implitcations involved there.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13987985549747283669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-49382897485089540292013-04-24T07:12:20.990-07:002013-04-24T07:12:20.990-07:00I believe the answer to your question, Webster, is...I believe the answer to your question, Webster, is Yes. And this is my test I use to determine if someone is in my mission field or is my brother who needs correction.Michael Coughlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01151414777657994736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-61280598667022024882013-04-24T07:11:00.258-07:002013-04-24T07:11:00.258-07:00Frank, I thought it was a good post. It is always ...Frank, I thought it was a good post. It is always nice to read something you wrote years ago and still agree with it and think it applies. It is nice to grow, but sometimes nice to have simply been right before.<br /><br />Paul - As far as the hierarchy of doctrines go, I have wondered myself how that works.<br /><br />It seems that some doctrines, if denied, seriously change the "gospel" in which someone is believing. That being the case, I can see how those would be considered quite essential.<br /><br />Then is seems there are other doctrines where, although the person can still maintain the same gospel, there is a sense that they are on a path where we believe that the logical conclusion of their belief will deny the gospel. Yet they believe these two seemingly cognitive dissonant things at the same time. These people confuse me, but their professions of faith and general appearance of sanctification is what I go by. Things like creationism and denial of God's sovereign election seem to be in this category.<br /><br />Then the people who baptize babies or not, believe in rapture or not, or to use hymns or rap music in church - it seems there is a category where we hold to certain doctrines based on our hermeneutic and that we can all agree that, even though we've drawn a conclusion, we do see through a glass darkly. So we offer grace to those who do not agree with us on those issues, recognizing we've been wrong in the past and could be wrong again. So we love our brothers (which is also a very important doctrine) enough to be patient with them and humble about these things.<br /><br />Then we start our own church. :)Michael Coughlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01151414777657994736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-46880729426244030042013-04-24T06:56:20.966-07:002013-04-24T06:56:20.966-07:00Eric, although we're not saved by perfection o...Eric, although we're not saved by perfection of doctrine, doesn't it serve as an indicator of sanctification and therefore salvation that when someone is confronted with the truth of Scripture that they submit instead of reject and continue on in their own thinking? Honest question, no snark, not rhetorical. <br /><br />Webster Hunt (Parts Man)https://www.blogger.com/profile/04631846083790242392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-36137129557501728912013-04-24T06:52:09.870-07:002013-04-24T06:52:09.870-07:00Very timely post Frank both as a plan for my lesso...Very timely post Frank both as a plan for my lesson for the high school youth this coming Sunday night, and as I consider some of the past (and probably future) discussions I've had with my sister about what it means to call someone a Christian.<br /><br />Those discussions aren't about whether or not she is a Christian (she is), but about her fascination with the Pope and Ignatius of Loyola, both of whom she can't imagine not being Christians because they say/said "Jesus is Lord" and do/did lots of good stuff.<br /><br />The issue, as you say, is orthodoxy. Kindness to others and serving ones fellow man are both important issues, but not an eternal one.<br /><br />There's a serious difference between saying "Jesus is Lord" and believing what Jesus says we must believe. <br />If he's Lord, believe Him, if you don't, then you're lying when you say he is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-4294653058854023512013-04-24T06:49:28.151-07:002013-04-24T06:49:28.151-07:00Paul,
Inasmuchas we are saved by faith and not by...Paul,<br /><br />Inasmuchas we are saved by faith and not by perfection of doctrine, those areas that go directly to the heart of who God is and how one is made right with Him can be said to be of primary importance. Secondarily we concern ourselves with being as Biblically faithful in every area of doctrine and life as we are able to on this earth.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16345630463450652762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31101451818316773512013-04-24T06:35:45.363-07:002013-04-24T06:35:45.363-07:00In some conversations I've had with folks, the...In some conversations I've had with folks, there's some kind of belief that the only things that are "orthodox" are the things that are directly spelled out. The things you have to read in context, the things that are plainly understood when words mean things, those things are up for debate and could vary by interpretation. Lately the doctrine of the Trinity and the hypostatic union have been the ones I've heard falling in that category - and in concert with Mr. Paul Reed, a literal view of creation following closely after. <br /><br />My question is, how do we convince these people who claim to be orthodox Christians but hold a loose view on what truths actually matter in Scripture that they are terribly wrong and are adding to the problem, in the hopes that they'll "aha" and repent?Webster Hunt (Parts Man)https://www.blogger.com/profile/04631846083790242392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-4630518909170047462013-04-24T06:28:15.397-07:002013-04-24T06:28:15.397-07:00I like Michael Patton. He's not a Pyro.I like Michael Patton. He's not a Pyro.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-82630141334749829432013-04-24T06:26:28.460-07:002013-04-24T06:26:28.460-07:002005....wasn't that about when the "emerg...2005....wasn't that about when the "emergent" (how ironic) church began to espouse a "generous orthodoxy"? It feels so nostalgic all of a sudden. James Scott Bellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07641370124346172648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-11303301134266954572013-04-24T06:20:22.622-07:002013-04-24T06:20:22.622-07:00What did Patton say when you pointed him to Frank&...What did Patton say when you pointed him to Frank's post?DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-2464870666515508472013-04-24T06:02:35.756-07:002013-04-24T06:02:35.756-07:00C Michael Patton has a series of good posts on thi...C Michael Patton has a series of good posts on this topic (with charts)David A. Carlsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00465387359523299616noreply@blogger.com