tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post7934109492147490683..comments2024-02-27T00:11:57.219+11:00Comments on Extra Nos: Needing philanthropic helpLPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comBlogger74125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-10045418864927543622016-02-24T13:56:40.469+11:002016-02-24T13:56:40.469+11:00Alec,
I am blessed to learn this thread has been ...Alec,<br /><br />I am blessed to learn this thread has been helpful.<br /><br />We obviously do not have the same theological method with the Calvinist, for why would we come out with different conclusions. Why I like the Lutheran approach is that they side with Scripture and let the mind grapple with what the text says. We can not get away from the text.<br /><br />Blessings,<br /><br />LitoLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-43893661963662564482016-02-24T09:21:29.827+11:002016-02-24T09:21:29.827+11:00Dear Lilo,
This thread - and your comment (Monday...Dear Lilo,<br /><br />This thread - and your comment (Monday, August 2, 2010 at 8:41:00 ) - has made very clear something I hadn't quite understood - where is the foundational difference in the Lutheran and Reformed/Calvinistic understandings of Scripture. You wrote:<br /><br />" I would rather use Luther's theological method, which is a commitment to what the Scripture says and the heck with what your reason or mind says about it... <br /><br />" I was surprised that as a scholar Jack missed my point on prima facie evidence, i.e. the need to ground a teaching on Scripture...<br /><br />"..In the Westminster Confession of Faith (1:6) we read:<br />The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, <strong>or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture:</strong> unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men<br /><br />"I do not think I am groundless in saying that UOJers are actually functional Calvinists in as much as they put reason as part of their theological method."<br /><br /><br />And Greg confirmed:<br /><br />"Deduction is the key. UOJers deduce their universalism by a series of logical double-back-somersaults. Calvin placed reason above Scripture while Luther subordinated reason to the Word of God. That is why we have Calvinism turning into Unitarianism in one generation. Krauth or another American noted that all union churches end up Unitarian, the influence of the Lutheran side slowing down the descent. Rationalism is the natural foundation for Enthusiasm. You have it right, LPC. "<br /><br />and <br /><br />"LPC, Sig Becker has a good book on Luther and reason. He pointed out that Luther subordinated reason to the Scriptures, while Calvin subordinated the Scriptures to reason. That explains the difference between the two, as well as the philosophy behind Enthusiasm. "<br /><br />This is all crystal clear to me now. Thank you.<br /><br />AlecAlechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00825239050486476125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-75428041955799011642010-08-12T11:00:40.944+10:002010-08-12T11:00:40.944+10:00Pr. GJ and Others,
Calvinists equate Atonement wi...Pr. GJ and Others,<br /><br />Calvinists equate Atonement with Justification. They see justification subjective hence they conclude Atonement must be subjective too.<br /><br />See the pattern? UOJ does the same! On a the opposite direction!<br /><br />Because Luther and the BoC emphasized faith so much these Lutherans must think Luther and the BoC were Calvinistic too!<br /><br />Well the truth catches up with everyone some day (to quote my ex-Pastor but not to endorse him).<br /><br />Which Lutheran are allergic to faith, I ask? Non but the Waltherians, and as Brett says, they are not even really Lutherans.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-1698024542667341192010-08-12T08:38:33.999+10:002010-08-12T08:38:33.999+10:00LPC, I posted a comment on UOJ on Facebook and the...LPC, I posted a comment on UOJ on Facebook and the "ura Calvinist" claque sounded forth. That was funny.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-78279425870530023322010-08-09T13:00:25.571+10:002010-08-09T13:00:25.571+10:00Pr. Greg,
Yes Becker was good on this, I read him...Pr. Greg,<br /><br />Yes Becker was good on this, I read him on this a long time ago.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-81643072401717943112010-08-08T10:22:52.498+10:002010-08-08T10:22:52.498+10:00LPC, Sig Becker has a good book on Luther and reas...LPC, Sig Becker has a good book on Luther and reason. He pointed out that Luther subordinated reason to the Scriptures, while Calvin subordinated the Scriptures to reason. That explains the difference between the two, as well as the philosophy behind Enthusiasm.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-68376231920341789412010-08-07T06:39:23.878+10:002010-08-07T06:39:23.878+10:00Stephen, since Scripture has dominion then man'...Stephen, since Scripture has dominion then man's reason is subject to Scripture. <br /><br />Above you correctly state, <i>It seems to me the question is how to do this in a way that is faithful to Scripture and does not mean we are essentially importing our own opinions.</i><br /><br />Take Universal Objective Justification (UOJ) for example. When Theologian X proposed the doctrinal opinion that all men have been declared justified by God before faith the application of <b>Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.</b> And, <b>Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. </b> reject that proposed doctrine as they declare only those who believe in Christ are justified and those who don't are damned. The doctrine of UOJ should have been soundly rejected and condemned publicly. Yet, through the dominance of man's reason (take Dr. Jack Kilcrease' confession on Justification) the new man made doctrine Central Doctrine of UOJ is born of concepts and thoughts extrapulated from Scripture through man's reason which rejects Justification by faith alone, the doctrine of Election, the Holy Spirit's faith, Christ as author and finisher of faith, the unchanging and perfect Triune God etc.Brett Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15916121605136512091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-68721665104391652712010-08-06T00:19:31.634+10:002010-08-06T00:19:31.634+10:00Hi LPC, Brett,
I agree of course that Scripture ha...Hi LPC, Brett,<br />I agree of course that Scripture has first place. I wasn't advocating unbridled speculation, just that the theological enterprise of necessity involves our reason. Sorry but have to fly now - I have a wedding to prepare for! Will return...<br />Jack,<br />I will take a look when I can, thanks.<br />Peace to all,<br />StephenStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17420676557428116309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-31077143829214893032010-08-05T23:00:12.236+10:002010-08-05T23:00:12.236+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dr. Jack Kilcreasehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362736419613180038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-46905696104062436842010-08-05T10:04:17.579+10:002010-08-05T10:04:17.579+10:00Stephen,
Reason has its place, but it does not ha...Stephen,<br /><br />Reason has its place, but it does not have 1st place, Scripture has already occupied that.<br /><br />For example, if Jesus says of the bread at Communion, this IS my body. Lutherans take it at that and at face value without debate on what IS means or really means, so IS is IS.<br /><br />That is why Christianity is a bit peculiar. There is mystery in Christian faith but not absurdity.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-19403376362614458132010-08-05T08:22:19.486+10:002010-08-05T08:22:19.486+10:00and does not mean we are essentially importing our...<i>and does not mean we are essentially importing our own opinions.</i><br /><br />Scripture says that we cannot import our own opinions.<br /><br />2nd Peter 1:20-21, "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."<br /> <br />In fact Scripture, God's own Word, is so clear that He says in <b>2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:</b>Brett Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15916121605136512091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-56523663619210019052010-08-05T03:57:48.728+10:002010-08-05T03:57:48.728+10:00LPC,
I am sympathetic to what you are saying about...LPC,<br />I am sympathetic to what you are saying about the dangers in rationalist deduction. I fully realize this has been a problem in parts of my tradition. But when I read the WCF quote, it simply said to me that some of our theology is more or less lifted word for word from the Scriptures, while other parts require a degree of analysis and synthesis. Would you not agree with that? It seems to me the question is how to do this in a way that is faithful to Scripture and does not mean we are essentially importing our own opinions.<br />Thanks again for the discussion,<br />StephenStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17420676557428116309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-15768090219413372822010-08-04T13:18:31.718+10:002010-08-04T13:18:31.718+10:00Brett,
Kilcrease wants us to join him through co...Brett,<br /><br />Kilcrease wants us to join him through conceptual ideas where he says he could prove UOJ, but note well not from Scripture but from deductions.<br /><br />However, concepts are not necessarily real. We have the concept of a unicorn but they are not real. We can talk about its color, its eyes and what not but that does not prove a thing. Who can authoritatively say that the wing span of a unicorn is 10 feet? It is like Middle Earth, a world of its own but it is not our world.<br /><br />Even mathematicians are questioning now the concepts they have invented, for example, the idea or concept of a number. Some of them are wondering if this concept exists!<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-36313483482061000182010-08-03T23:53:18.360+10:002010-08-03T23:53:18.360+10:00Interesting how many have become comfortable think...Interesting how many have become comfortable thinking that critical Christian doctrines, that if one rejects them establish that person as not a Christian, are simply thoughts or concepts of God's Word and not clearly and articulately established doctrines by Christ. Such as UOJ, the central article of a UOJists confession, and the doctrine of the Trinity.Brett Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15916121605136512091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-37177813842110961362010-08-03T16:15:47.855+10:002010-08-03T16:15:47.855+10:00Contrary to Kilcrease's depiction of the Trini...Contrary to Kilcrease's depiction of the Trinity, I contend that the doctrine is established philologically rather than philosophically.<br /><br />It is a direct teaching of Scripture and not a result of rational deduction.<br /><br />If one starts from the assumption that the Trinity is based on logical deductions rather than direct axioms from Scripture, then then there is every reason why we have Unitarians who also claim that their doctrine is the result of deduction.<br /><br />It is the Scripture and not logic that prevent one from being Unitarian.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-51490261710069014542010-08-03T05:24:34.058+10:002010-08-03T05:24:34.058+10:00Stephen - Genesis 1 is explained as Trinitarian by...Stephen - Genesis 1 is explained as Trinitarian by John 1. The doctrine of the Trinity is a mystery fully and clearly revealed by the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-9572293132097410902010-08-03T03:23:18.092+10:002010-08-03T03:23:18.092+10:00Hi LPC,
I realize this is tangential to the origin...Hi LPC,<br />I realize this is tangential to the original post, but wanted to comment on rationalism in theology. I confess the early reformed confessions (not the WCF), but do you not think that certain elements of even Lutheranism are (rightly) deduced by good and necessary consequence from Scripture? Is the full doctrine of the Trinity, say, that you and I both confess expressly set down in Scripture?<br />Pax,<br />StephenStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17420676557428116309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-90539619065939268532010-08-02T09:09:13.083+10:002010-08-02T09:09:13.083+10:00Deduction is the key. UOJers deduce their universa...Deduction is the key. UOJers deduce their universalism by a series of logical double-back-somersaults. Calvin placed reason above Scripture while Luther subordinated reason to the Word of God. That is why we have Calvinism turning into Unitarianism in one generation. Krauth or another American noted that all union churches end up Unitarian, the influence of the Lutheran side slowing down the descent. Rationalism is the natural foundation for Enthusiasm. You have it right, LPC.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-70460202853117221972010-08-02T08:41:53.508+10:002010-08-02T08:41:53.508+10:00Hi All,
I said to Dr. Kilcrease that this blog is...Hi All,<br /><br />I said to Dr. Kilcrease that this blog is not for those who are easily offended. This blog is also particularly dangerous because it is not moderated. Hence, it allows you to say anything. There is the risk for it will also mean it gives you enough rope to hang yourself.<br /><br />Now Jack follows logicism in his theological method, even pointing to Gerhard. No offense to Gerhard, I have not read him, but Luther said a lot of things in the use of reason for doing theology, mostly negative. Between Gerhard and Luther, I would rather use Luther's theological method, which is a commitment to what the Scripture says and the heck with what your reason or mind says about it. In other words, Luther makes faith precedent over reason. Luther may have been airing what Letter to the Hebrews said...by faith we understand...etc.<br /><br />Hence, I was surprised that as a scholar Jack missed my point on prima facie evidence, i.e. the need to ground a teaching on Scripture.<br /><br />Take a look at the Westminster Confession of Faith...In the Westminster Confession of Faith (1:6) we read:<br /><i>The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and <b>necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture</b>: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.</i><br /><br />Now compare that with what Dr. Kilcrease's method. Do you not see he is actually following that confession without him realizing it?<br /><br />See any similarities in method? I do.<br /><br />I do not think I am groundless in saying that UOJers are actually functional Calvinists in as much as they put reason as part of their theological method.<br /><br />Yet they have the nerve to say anti-UOJers are Calvinists because it believes in JBFA or the prominence of faith in Christianity.<br /><br /><br />CruzLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-27854608983653960042010-08-02T02:21:14.353+10:002010-08-02T02:21:14.353+10:00Brett, I saw the same thing in the photo.Brett, I saw the same thing in the photo.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-14872885082739783142010-08-02T00:43:34.354+10:002010-08-02T00:43:34.354+10:00I think some words caused Jack to go through and d...I think some words caused Jack to go through and delete all of his comments from this thread.<br /><br />Now that is the first time I've ever seen anyone react in that manner. I think Jack would have been astonished if I had done that after his flame out on me - for which he apologized in this thread.<br /><br />Maybe his blog photo, looking down at everyone along the length of his nose and across his uplifted chin was indicative of more than just disdain.Brett Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15916121605136512091noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-2156604286941340502010-08-01T19:12:34.959+10:002010-08-01T19:12:34.959+10:00Kilcrease,
Thanks for the summary - that is much ...Kilcrease,<br /><br />Thanks for the summary - that is much better. You have some conceding in that last paragraph. In my view McCain, since he subscribes to UOJ like you, is the false teacher because UOJ is not taught in Scripture nor in the BoC.<br /><br />Seriously, you miss my point on prima facie? Do the fans know about this? You can at least Wiki the term, goodness, it is in the internet.<br /><br />If you want logicism in theology, you can not out do a Calvinist. I was once one.<br /><br />I am so amazed you missed my point here on evidence. ROFL.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-79845233789182661242010-08-01T13:19:59.638+10:002010-08-01T13:19:59.638+10:00Father Jack, you are terminally dumb, but you prov...Father Jack, you are terminally dumb, but you provide great entertainment. Keep posting. I have some popcorn heating up.Ichabod the Glory Has Departedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03119183283328283096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-53139118861167355202010-08-01T12:18:15.626+10:002010-08-01T12:18:15.626+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dr. Jack Kilcreasehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362736419613180038noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-10322945321141039932010-08-01T12:02:58.939+10:002010-08-01T12:02:58.939+10:00Jack,
The problem with so called logical implicat...Jack,<br /><br />The problem with so called logical implication is that it can be supported with any train of reasoning which is not necessarily of sound use.<br /><br />Scripture is prima facie Jack, ever heard of that principle?<br /><br />Calvinists have the same principle as yours too, it is found in WCF so much so as an example, that one can deduce that the electing process of God by decree is Supralapsarian.<br /><br />Prima facie evidence is the direct quote. For example, stealing is wrong. This is not a result of reasoning from Scripture, we have a direct command from God not to do this.<br /><br />You cannot absolve McCain without absolving Jackson. For if you say that Pr. Jackson has no right to exercise ministry at a particular setting what is the warrant for McCain's setting that is not applicable to Jackson? We do not have Jesus standing and commanding us not to go there or go here, we have Mt 28:20. In saying 'settings' etc. you go beyond Scripture to establish rules for doing this or that. Since you do not have actual precedence that applies to Jackson.<br /><br />All you have to do is establish that you have direct knowledge that Jesus does not want Jackson to operate or do what he is doing now.<br /><br />1. I do not think you have that warrant<br /><br />2. If you claim you do, I claim on the other hand you are an enthusiast.<br /><br />Because of your theological method which is similar to Romanism, I can see why Jackson was withing reason to assert you are a crypto-Romanist.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.com