Concrete Reasoning
If something is existing by itself in order to do a task, and then another thing is doing a separate task alongside the first thing , is the first thing alone or together with the second thing??
Think about it for a minute.
I suppose after you finish shaking your head, you will say that of course whatever thing is first alone is obviously no longer alone when anything else joins it. Right? Confused?
Think about it for a minute.
I suppose after you finish shaking your head, you will say that of course whatever thing is first alone is obviously no longer alone when anything else joins it. Right? Confused?
So for example, let's say one guy shows up to lay a slab of concrete out on the ground. At present, he is alone. He begins to guide the shoot of the concrete truck in order to run out the concrete mud into the right spot. Then let's say another man shows, and he begins to rake the mud around with a mud rake into a more level form within set boundary boards. Now, the first man and second man are together on the job. We would not say they are alone right?
Let's say a third man shows up, and then a fourth man, and then a fifth man. The third man is there to start screeding the concrete or leveling it out with a long bar or "screed". The fourth man is there to use a hand float or "mag" to smooth out the edges. The fifth man is there to run a large bull float over the majority of the slab to get a smooth finish.
It is natural for us to look at this scenario and say, "Hey, those guys are pouring a slab together." In other words we would not look at the group of guys and say they were alone.
Here is where it gets interesting and we move to the heart of my point. In logical, reasonable actuality we can safely say that the first man is "pouring out the slab" alone. He is at the shoot behind the truck alone and sliding out the concrete onto the ground. We can say that the second man is raking the mud alone. It is right to say that the third man is screeding the concrete alone. We can easily say that the fourth man is floating the edges alone, and we know it is obvious that the fifth man is bull floating the main slab....alone. You see, the minute that an additional person actually puts their hand to the exact task that any one of these men are performing, then that specific task is being done not alone, but by more than one person. Even though all the men are operating in unison to perform the act of laying the slab, each has his own task and is doing it all by himself.
This is pure reason and causes us to think in ways that we do not always think.
It is natural for us to look at this scenario and say, "Hey, those guys are pouring a slab together." In other words we would not look at the group of guys and say they were alone.
Here is where it gets interesting and we move to the heart of my point. In logical, reasonable actuality we can safely say that the first man is "pouring out the slab" alone. He is at the shoot behind the truck alone and sliding out the concrete onto the ground. We can say that the second man is raking the mud alone. It is right to say that the third man is screeding the concrete alone. We can easily say that the fourth man is floating the edges alone, and we know it is obvious that the fifth man is bull floating the main slab....alone. You see, the minute that an additional person actually puts their hand to the exact task that any one of these men are performing, then that specific task is being done not alone, but by more than one person. Even though all the men are operating in unison to perform the act of laying the slab, each has his own task and is doing it all by himself.
This is pure reason and causes us to think in ways that we do not always think.
On the contrary, sound reasoning is not being used here. Dan is attempting to establish a premise that runs exactly counter to the facts presented.
There are not 5 jobs being done here, there is one job. Each of the 5 workers are engaging in a part of that activity but each is cooperating with the other and each is dependent on the other.
The fifth man cannot run the bull float to get a smooth finish if the first man has not shot the concrete into the grid. The first man cannot continue shooting the mud into the grid unless the second is there raking it and the third screeding it and so on. In attempting to establish the premise of each person acting alone, he has, instead established the very premise of interdependence.
Here is why this exercise is so very important. When we look at God and the way He works in the lives of the elect, we see various elements operating entirely by themselves, and at the same time in perfect unison.
This is actually how life works, but for some reason when we look at God, we say,
"No that can't be right."
Once again, you have only succeeded in disproving the very precept you aim to prove. When a man is single, he is alone. When he marries, he has a partner. The two are individual but they are not alone. They cooperate and work together. In the example you cited above, it is very unlikely that one person would always do the same part of a job and only that part. The way "life works" clearly refutes the "on an island" mentality that your religion dictates.
In salvation as described by the Bible, God is on display, not man.
Again, you make a false claim, as though God's prescence and Man's are mutually exclusive. If we believe (and I assume you do) that God is Omnipresent, than man must be able exist in God's presence. If man could not exist in God's presence, then he should have nowhere to exist for God exists in all places. In the story of salvation, from the point of the fall, to the point of the ascension, we do, indeed, see God on display. However, we see man on display as well. From Eve, the woman who brought sin into the world, to Mary, the woman who brought salvation into the world and a whole host of others. In fact, it is precisely your vision of salvation- God acting alone, to the exclusion of humanity- that is wholly alien to scripture.
We know from the accuracy and innerancy of God's Holy Word that the Almighty is more than capable of getting His instructions into our hands.
A silly and circular argument. You deny the necessity of the church even though you cannot historically deny that the Catholic church is the only reason you have a Bible. Whether or not God was capable, should He have chosen, to deliver the written word by another means is both uncontested and irrelevant.
It was God who chose to build a church and deliver His word through that Church.
One of the most important truths we can ever come to grips with is that God does not need us. He is actually God.
Straw man. No one has argued that God needs us. Quite the contrary. We need God. Should God chose not to give us a path to salvation, we would be doomed with no recourse whatever.
Further, it defies human logic, in consideration of who God is, to understand why He should be predisposed to show us mercy after we have offended Him.
Nevertheless, this is how He is predisposed to us. Therefore, we must meet God where He is and not where we would have Him be (metaphorically of course).
Down through history, so many have tried to pervert the truth of God by adding to who He is, how He does things, and what it is that He does.
True. You non-Catholics need to stop doing that.
In fact, when Constantine merged Christianity with Roman statism and paganism, we ended up with a very grotesque beast that festooned the precious words of God with every kind of man-made trappings available.
Unsubstantiated, hyperbolic polemics.
False doctrines such as the Eucharist, Baptismal Regenertion, baptizing of and praying for the dead, Purgatory, Indulgences, Tradition and extra-Biblical revelation, and works-based faith became rampant.
Not one of those is a false doctrine and it is a demonstrable, historical fact that the early church believed every one of those doctrines. Further, in a Biblically based argument, on any one of those doctrines, you would lose. The Biblical basis for all of those doctrines are all plainly present in Scripture.
In the 1500's men began to raise up in faith and strength from God to declare these doctrines false and exhort the church and all those who would listen back to authentic, Biblical Christianity.
This was the time of the Reformation.
Actually, what happened in the 1500 was the great apostasy. Godless heretics who bore no resemblance to what a Christian is, either by doctrine or lifestyle, foisted upon us the age of ear-tickling, man made religion. It is no coincidence that the "protestant reformation" began on the high holy day of Satanism- October 31st.
If you call yourself a Christian, you can thank the Reformers that you do not kiss the ring of a priest on Sunday and say your "hail Marys". You do not attend a Catholic Mass, because brave men stood up against the spirit of totalitarian, self-righteous maligning of God's word that the Christ Himself had faced in the religious men of His day. Like the Ark from the flood, a bright hope of true believers emerged from the flood of apostasy that had threatened to destroy all of Christendom.
What you lack in substantive fact and credible history, you make up for in hyperbole and rhetoric. I will give you that. Yet, the facts that remain, unmolested are these;
- None of the teachings of the "reformation" find their root in Scripture. In fact, they contradict the plain words of the Bible.
- None of these teachings can be found to have existed prior to 1571.
- None of the teachers of the protestants can establish any historical or authoritative link to the person of Jesus Christ.
- The very Bible you twist to support your fallacious nonsense was given to you by the Catholic church and no matter how much you ruminate about the many other means God could have chosen to deliver the Scriptures to you, the method He chose was the Roman Catholic Church. That is a fact and it cannot be disputed.
Once again, short on substance, long on grandstanding. The fact is that there isn't one jot or tittle of support for any of the 5 solas. In fact, each one is explicitly refuted by Scripture.
Sola is Latin for alone and is used in this creed to describe the secret workings of God. In Scripture, when we see the word "mystery" it is always describing that which is being revealed.
Sola does indeed mean "alone". The other two assertions you make are absurd and you will not attempt to support either one by any means, Biblical or otherwise. You know it, I know it. The preeminent example is that James 2:24 explicitly, and with no doubt, refutes Sola Fide. It doesn't even give you wiggle room.
We have everything that God wants us to have of Himself and these things are clearly defined in Scripture
Another contention that you cannot provide one line of scriptural support for.
It is quite OK to speak of such things, and to determine by God's Holy Word the right and wrong ways of perceiving them.
According to who? Where in Scripture is such authority given to you? Chapter and verse, please.
Paul conferred his office on to Timothy by the laying on of hands (2 Timothy 1:6). Thus it was the same with every Priest, Judge, Prophet and Apostle and every successor to the Apostles. Nowhere in Scripture is it suggested that Martin Luther, John Calvin or you have been given the authority to speak for God. Matthew 18 tells us that the Church, not you, has this authority. (Matthew 18:15-18).
A great mystery revealed is how God operates in the lives of those He elects unto salvation. This mystery is easily defined in the Five Solas. They are as follows:
If this is a great mystery revealed by God, why was it not revealed by Him when He walked the earth in flesh? Nowhere, in the entire history of Christianity, prior to the so-called reformation do we see the church embracing any of these silly doctrines. Further, you defend them with rhetoric and hyperbole because, you know- just as I do- that they are wholly alien to Scripture.
1 Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, which He lavished upon us. (Ephesians 1:3-8)
You will notice that the word "alone" is absent from your citation. That grace is given for a reason- for the purpose of works.
Ephesians 2:8* For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God -- 9 not because of works, lest any man should boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
So Grace must be cooperated with. Just as man can choose to cooperate with God's Grace, He can, likewise, choose to turn from it.
2 Peter 21 For it would have been better for them not to have
known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn
back from the holy commandment handed down * to them.
22 * What is expressed in the true proverb has happened
to them, "The dog returns to its own vomit," and "A bathed sow
returns to wallowing in the mire."
This destroys Calvinistic heresy regarding total depravity and irresistible Grace and establishes both the free will to cooperate with God's Grace and to reject it.
Sola fide ("by faith alone")
Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "All the nations shall be blessed in you." So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer. For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them." Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "The righteous man shall live by faith." (Galatians 3:6-11)
James 2
14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
18 But some one will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder. 20 Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren? 21* Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23* and the scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
The Bible explicitly says that a man is not justified by faith alone. Why do you reject the plain and unambiguous words of Scripture?3 Solus Christus or Solo Christo ("Christ alone" or "through Christ alone")
There is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony borne at the proper time...For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. (1TI 2:5-6; COL 1:13-18)
There is a world of difference between Christ first and Christ alone. The notion of salvation being of Christ alone negates the meaning of the Covenant. A Covenant is an agreement between persons. The term Covenant appears more than 160 times in the Scriptures in both the Old and New Testaments. The term Christ alone appears zero. It, like pretty much everything else Dan believes regarding Salvation, is wholly alien to the Scriptures.
That Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and Man is not in dispute. After all, He being the only person to be both human and divine, He is the only person qualified. Yet, that doesn't mean we do not have obligations under that mediation and it does not mean that mediation nullifies Covenant. On the contrary, the very fact that Jesus choses to mediate between God and man, proves that Salvation is something that must be worked out and that we must contribute something of our own, in order to fulfill our part of the covenant.
Phillipians 2: 12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13* for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Colossians 1: 24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25* of which I became a minister according to the divine office which was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26* the mystery hidden for ages and generations * but now made manifest to his saints.
Notice that Paul does not speak of Salvation in the sense of a personal relationship with Christ, as non-Catholics allege, but as a communal relationship, mitigated through Divine office. This destroys the sola nonsense of the reformers.
4 Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (Psalm 119:18; Psalm 138:2; II Tim. 3:14-17)
2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.
The usefulness of Scripture for any of the above noted purposes is not in dispute. What is in dispute here is Dan's notion that the books of the Bible are formally sufficient for salvation. This doctrine is utter nonsense and is absent from the text of scripture itself. The very Scriptures he purports to support, not only obliterate this notion but actually establish the Church as the final authority. (1 Tim 3:15, Luke 10:16, Matthew 16:18-20, 18:15-18) Of all the five Solas, this one is by far the easiest to refute. It is historically untenable in the sense that there was no Bible for the first almost 400 years of the Church and it is practically untenable since you must rely on the Church to even have a Biblical table of contents. Sola Scriptura is not merely satanic in it's origin (The Devil seeking to divide), it is silly and unworkable and makes a book into a god instead of a very useful, but very inanimate resource.
John 21:25* But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.
5 Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")
Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God; Whoever speaks, let him speak, as it were, the utterances of God; whoever serves, let him do so as by the strength which God supplies; so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father; to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. To Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might, be to our God forever and ever. For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen. (1CO 10:31; 1PE 4:11; REV 1:6; 2PE 3:1; EPH 3:21; REV 7:12; ROM 11:36)
God's Glory is made manifest in His creation. Since God has always spoken to us, in one way or another, it is precisely His creation that reflects His Glory. In Luke Chapter 1, the most magnificent of His solely created beings- Mary- is inspired by the Holy Spirit, to say of Herself My soul doth magnify the Lord. This flies in the face of the Calvinist nonsense of total depravity.
If man were totally depraved, he would lack the ability to choose good and reject evil. Thus, the entire notion of evangelization that Dan engages in would be utter nonsense. The source of all glory is, indeed God and the fulfillment of all glory returns to God. Nevertheless, Salvation is about reconciling accounts between God's Mercy and God's Justice. Calvinism asserts that God's choice to save this person or damn that person is solely an act of God's choice, for no discernible purpose. Under this notion of predestination, God creates some people for the eternal joys of heaven and others for the horrible punishments of hell, solely for His good humor. This doctrine of limited atonement makes a loving and just God into a monster. Therefore, I can say, most assuredly, that Calvinism is an abhorrent cult and bears no resemblance to legitimate Christianity. The Bible is clear that the doers of the law will be Justified (Romans 2:1-13)
Dan's article stands refuted. We will discuss this Friday on the Deeper Truth show.
Home page
DTB facebook Page
You Tube
Blog Talk Radio Show
No comments:
Post a Comment