The Highway Theology Forum http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php The Highway Theology Forum The Highway - UBB.threads(tm) Re: James 5:14-16 http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48805/Re_James_5_14_16.html#Post48805 Posted by Lynda:
Thank you very much, Pilgrim! This is helpful to me.]]> Wed, 16 May 2012 03:09:21 PDT Re: Science and Scripture http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48786/Re_Science_and_Scripture.html#Post48786 Posted by Pilgrim:
Originally Posted By: Tom
I am curious however how you would answer his quote.
Quote:
The Bible says the sun rises and sets, that a bat is a bird, and that the seeds must die before they can grow. You don't insist on taking those things literally - because you know better from your elementary school science classes.

Not sure I even want to go there with him, however to be honest I am not sure what to think of that particular part of his response.

The question involves a hermeneutical issue. Who said that EVERYTHING we read in the Bible MUST be taken literally?? Of course, the historic and traditional hermeneutic; Grammatico-Historico which has come under attack in recent years, e.g., Peter Enns, N.T. Wright, et al, recognizes that grammar includes such forms of literature as poetry, symbolism, etc. And, the Bible is not excluded from this fact. The CONTEXT and the Analogy of Faith; comparing Scripture with Scripture will determine how the various parts are to be understood.

Yes, the (...)]]> Thu, 10 May 2012 03:22:44 PDT Re: What is essential http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48756/Re_What_is_essential.html#Post48756 Posted by Pilgrim:
'Tis true, Tom, that there is a great variance of beliefs among Dispensationalists and thus it is near impossible to know what any particular Dispensationalist holds to be true doctrinally. But one thing is most always held in common among them and that is the fundamental importance of eschatology for it involves not just the rapture, Israel, the great tribulation, the millennium, etc., but how one actually interprets the Bible. To illustrate the importance they put on one holding to Dispensationalism, since you mentioned John MacArthur, here is a very salient and disturbing article: John MacArthur on Calvinism, Dispensationalism, Israel and Hermeneutics: A Few Comments. In short, MacArthur whose "Dispy Lite" eschatology, aka: Progressive Dispensationalism is perhaps furthest from Classic Dispensationalism comes close to making Dispensationalism an essential of the faith.]]> Mon, 30 Apr 2012 02:53:44 PDT Re: Love the Sinner Dept. http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48394/Re_Love_the_Sinner_Dept.html#Post48394 Posted by li0scc0:
Depends if one is a 4 or 5 point Calvinist (some would say there is no such thing as a 4 point Calvinist, an argument for another thread!).

4 pointers would say God loved all, died for all (i.e. no limited atonement). And thus those who go to hell would be loved.
5 pointers would say God loved and died for only the elect (limited atonement). Thus those who go to hell are not loved.

A bit black and white/simplistic, but hopefully reasonably clear.]]> Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:49:45 PDT Re: Death http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48393/Re_Death.html#Post48393 Posted by ernstoerien:
Did Adam needed to understand the concept of death? Say if God told him to not eat of the fruit or else I will hit you with a cane. And Adam, just so that you will understand what it means to be hit with a cane, turn around. When we tell a small child not to play with fire, whe tell them that you might get hurt. We don't put his hand in the fire so that he will understand. So why did Adam need to understand death? I think God made it pretty clear to him that not eating is the important part.
And then of what death was He talking. Spiritual or physical. If spiritual then how could God explain that to him? Even physical death would have been impossible to explain, actually impossible (would mean death excisted vefore the fall).
All animals had to be herbivores before the fall, the same as Adam and Eve. Eating meat and death only started after the Fall with God actually the first one to kill something.
About microbes, well things where very different then. A lot of them were not (...)]]> Fri, 27 Apr 2012 09:00:47 PDT Re: Enns and Wright - a different God http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48196/Re_Enns_and_Wright_a_different.html#Post48196 Posted by Pilgrim:
John,

Both Enns and Wright, although Enns is far "ahead" of Wright, redefine what Scripture IS and/or how it is to be recognized. For Enns, of course, it is a fallible book of culturally bound musings. For Wright, it can only be understood through the lens of "Second Temple Judaism", i.e., by imposing the writings of fallible unbelieving Jews upon Scripture, which de facto relegates Scripture as a secondary authority.

Consequently, with such views of the Bible, anything goes and nothing is true propositionally, i.e., there is no such thing as "true truth", as Schaeffer wrote.

A good counter to such heretical nonsense is J.I. Packer's article, Freedom and Authority, and Herman Ridderbos' article, The Inspiration and Authority of Holy Scripture.]]> Tue, 17 Apr 2012 16:07:27 PDT Re: Paraphrase http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48092/Re_Paraphrase.html#Post48092 Posted by Hitch:
Id say ,allowing for sources ,they look petty close BigThumbUp ]]> Sat, 07 Apr 2012 13:27:53 PDT Re: Canon Fodder http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48087/Re_Canon_Fodder.html#Post48087 Posted by Pilgrim:
When I have a little more time, perhaps today, I'll try to read through some of what may be on that website. IE9 doesn't like the site so I'll have to use Firefox; quite a humiliating decision on my part

To be honest, I am not sure I even like what this man is proposing, assuming I am understanding what is going on with it correctly. A red flag shot straight up the pole when reading your post. You see, I have this 'feeling' that the authority of what we call Scripture is being jeopardized by making "Canon" the standard (pun intended) and thus before the canon was officially decided upon, there was no real authoritative, absolute Word of God. But that would be nonsense since all that was being taught by the apostles and eventually written down by them was already believed and authoritative by the very fact that they were commissioned by Christ to deliver what was to become Scripture.

Anyway, I'll know better if the 'red flag' was flying true or if it is a false alarm. There are (...)]]> Fri, 06 Apr 2012 03:49:34 PDT Re: Passover and the last supper http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48080/Re_Passover_and_the_last_suppe.html#Post48080 Posted by Robin:
The occasion for the first Lord's Supper was Passover. The first Lord's Supper was, in fact, a Passover Seder!

The Jewish Passover Seder became, in the New Covenant, the Lord's Supper. As the Jews had looked forward with faith to the Cross (represented by the Passover), so we look backwards with faith to the Cross, represented by the Lord's Supper.

]]> Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:49:23 PDT Re: Scripture http://www.the-highway.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/48076/Re_Scripture.html#Post48076 Posted by Pilgrim:
They are unique terms which describe essential qualities of the Scriptures. They cannot be 'blended together' for to do so would diminish, distort or even destroy their respective meanings.

See here:
- What Do We Mean by Sola Scriptura? by Dr. W. Robert Godfrey
- The Rule of Faith and Practice by A.A. Hodge]]> Wed, 04 Apr 2012 18:51:07 PDT