Charles Spurgeon's Sanity Litmus Test (are you insane?)

[bbyrd009]

"Where were you o man when I created....."

That doesn't sound personal.
That sounds like God almighty.
Job 38:4 and on.

that is surely because the Job that opened the Book is still being addressed, not the Job who closed the Book, iow. Two different perceptions, iow. All that is essentially a reply to "What did i do to deserve this?" coming from an analogue of a rather spoiled teenager or something, a privileged person with a blind spot, or however you want to put it. The blind spot is being addressed, not the repentant confessor there.

Job's change of address to God from the opening v closing is also a big clue; it may be seen that the opening contains all formal address of God, while the closing contains familiar address.

there are a lot of YT studies of Job, and most of them are crap imo. Whenever you see one titled anything like "why the righteous suffer," trust that they do not understand Job yet.

 

[jimd]

well, if we just go to Job's confession, "my ears had heard of you, but now my eyes have seen you" etc, ignoring for the moment all of the CogDis that will generate when other Scripture is considered, imo the "personal" nature of Job's relationship is a little more apparent, even if i grant you that it is still kind of obscure, i guess so some people can believe in a Capricious God Who tortures righteous people for no apparent reason if they want, the ignorers of Job's confessions; plural, iow.

Or to put this another way, what sins did Job confess to?

They are clearly brought out in chapter 32 and following if one has not detected them in the preceding chapters.

 

[Marymog]

Hi Marymogl
I must admit that I have never been part of a church that has a solid view on abortion , I have always seen the abortion issue as being a personal one. I did an ethics course with the London bible college because I wanted to assess how I personally felt about a whole range of issues. So I can join in fellowship with people having different views because Gods knows the individual heart and understanding.
I find it hard to understand how anyone can believe it is not taking a life once the heart starts to beat - to me that defines life because death is defined by the heart stopping. I can see how there is a grey area earlier than that when it is just an egg that devides ect- but I believe in the potential of life. Scripturally, I guess ' you knit me together in my mothers womb ' ( is that in Jeremiah or the psalms ).
I equally find it hard to understand how anyone can only define life when a baby is born, that staggers me- and if a church was making that a concrete fact, then I am pretty sure God would class it as murder. When a baby kicks, it's alive and responding.
I guess what I would be curious about is how the church that's says ' it's okay ' backs it up - so I would love to know what lay behind the reasoning, only then can you truly weigh up their conclusion.
We are called to discern.
I do believe God has the final authority, he alone will judge the church ( his people ) he will judge those who mislead others with false teaching. Equally he will also know why they have believed what they believe- he knows far more about satans deceptive powers than us.
I think there are other areas where there are differences - divorce, birth control, re marriage , war ect.
I know you want a firmer answer from me, but sadly it's not something I can give - I trust in Gods sovereignty, fairness, understanding and knowledge - and other peoples viewpoints, whether that be collectively or as individuals, is between them and him.
Butterfly

Hi,

Abortion a personal issue? I guess that means if I steal from you, assault you, have an affair with your spouse, lie about you that would be a personal issue also?

If the church is, as you say, "His people" then we have billions of different churches on this earth since there are billions of Christians. Scripture does not back up your theory. Scripture tells us that His church is the pillar and foundation of truth and that he started a (singular) church. Your theory suggest there are billions of different truths since there are billions of different Christians (churches). Your theory does not match with scripture.

I feel you gave me a firm answer. I can read between the lines. You seem to think God will judge us all in the end, however, we don't know really what we are being judged for or on. We don't know the rules to play by. Each person can make up their own rules and we will find out if we got it right or wrong when we die. That's what I feel you are saying.

Scripture is clear about false teachings/teachers. At the time scripture was written they figured out who the false teachers are and what the false teachings were. At the Council of Jerusalem they even put their stamp of approval on a teaching that all Christians must follow which made the teaching opposite of it false. Did God strip man of that authoritative ability (to bind and loose) once the Apostle's died?

I could never attend a church that doesn't have a solid view on abortion. If they can't get that one basic doctrine right they obviously can't get the bigger issues right.

IHS...Mary

 

[jimd]

that is surely because the Job that opened the Book is still being addressed, not the Job who closed the Book, iow. Two different perceptions, iow. All that is essentially a reply to "What did i do to deserve this?" coming from an analogue of a rather spoiled teenager or something, a privileged person with a blind spot, or however you want to put it. The blind spot is being addressed, not the repentant confessor there.

Job's change of address to God from the opening v closing is also a big clue; it may be seen that the opening contains all formal address of God, while the closing contains familiar address.

there are a lot of YT studies of Job, and most of them are crap imo. Whenever you see one titled anything like "why the righteous suffer," trust that they do not understand Job yet.

Very good video teaching. I shall save that one.

 

[bbyrd009]

They are clearly brought out in chapter 32 and following if one has not detected them in the preceding chapters.

sure, but most "believers" are not even aware of any confessions in Job; Job is a Book about "why bad things happen to good people" for most believers, i'm pretty sure?

 

[Marymog]

Yes, well...you won't get any argument from me. I agree with all you've said except I'm not sure the CC was in a state of change before the reformation. I'm not versed enough on this subject to know this.
For instance Moore died for his beliefs. It seems to me that there were some individual cases that saw the abuse of power in the church, but I don't see a general change, although, as I've said, I don't know this for sure.

Augustine CHANGED the original church. I know he's seen as one of the great minds of Christendom. But it's thanks to him that Mr. Calvin came along with his ideas, and I truly dislike Calvinism, for which I could thank Augustine. That would be predestination.

Infant baptism. This also was expoused by Augustine. And I'm sure you know why...

Original Sin. Original sin did not exist before him. It was not understood as he explained it. Augustine declares that we are imputed the sin of Adam. The bible clearly states that we are each responsible for our own sin. The CC says, now, that the sin of Adam is propogated to us which is different. I guess even they have decided to abandom, somewhat, Augustine's claims.

Let's see. What else...
Oh. In his earlier days, he stated that he knew where evil comes from, or how it got to be a part of all fibre in the universe. Interesting, since we still don't know. But, alas, before dying and as a wiser old man, he did declare that he was wrong and did not know how evil originated.

As to the early church... I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.
Pre the Nicene creed (not because I disagree with it). Pre Constantine.
Pre the chuch (small c) and state becoming one.

All one has to do is read the ECF. And the didache. What could be more simple? If we could just all agree on that.

(oh. And Augustine came out of gnosticism which affected his ideas)

Instead, no. We have some kind of new Christianity.
Watered down and of no use to anyone.

All we need to do is "believe" in Jesus and we're saved...
some don't even know what believe in the greek means.
Jesus did it all, we need do nothing.
The Law is dead.
The Law has been abolished.
We're under the new covenant which requires nothing from us.
We were chosen before time to be saved.
The rest are going to hell.
Annihialism has reared its head.
Oh. And God is actually insulted if we try to help Him along by obeying Him.

So. Yes. I'm upset with how things are going for Christianity.
But I don't have the power to change it like Augustine did...and for what reason I still don't understand.

And might I add, that I know for sure that the CC is softening up as well. Although not as much as the Protestant churches.

Hi GG,

I agree with you that Augustine's predestination teachings were not scriptural. The Catholic Church agrees with you also.

As far as infant baptism scripture says entire households were baptized. Is it not logical to believe that infants were part of those households? In scripture baptism was equated to circumcision. Circumcision occurred in the first week of a child's life. In the 200's, before Augustine, there was a debate if baptism should be delayed until the 8th day of an infants life. They were suggesting it should be done sooner rather than later. Saint Irenaeus (a student of Polycarp who was a student of the Apostle John), Hippolytus (a student of Ireneaus) , Origen and Cyprian (all before Augustine) supported infant baptism. Archeology has revealed early Christian inscriptions that talk of infants being baptized and baptismal fonts that were not large enough for adults. Augustine did not influence The Church to accept infant baptism. Infant baptism is supported by scripture, the church fathers and what has been revealed thru archeology (history).

Augustine did not "invent" original sin. Read Romans 5:12-19 (sin came into the world through one man) for clarification. Also read Irenaeus, Tertullian and Origen who were all BEFORE Augustine.

So, as you can see, the early Church agrees with Augustine on two out of three issues you brought up and The Church came to the right conclusion on predestination in spite of Augustine. No man is perfect; The Church is perfect.

Peter denied Christ but he ended up being the greatest of the Apostles. The Apostle who Jesus built His Church on. Peter walked/talked with Christ and he got some things wrong. I think we can give Augustine a little bit of leeway also. Augustine's teachings were in line with the "early church".

BTW....Augustine is considered an ECF.

IHS...Mary

 

[jimd]

sure, but most "believers" are not even aware of any confessions in Job; Job is a Book about "why bad things happen to good people" for most believers, i'm pretty sure?

Amazing but no surprise.

 

[Richard_oti]

Why? Pray tell.

Because you have been missed. I have thought of sending a message your way, to let you know as much. Though I wondered how it might be received, just as I wondered how this would be received. However, it is better to let you know that it is good to see you, than to never say such a thing. Regardless of how it is received / perceived. Also, because you offer your distinct POV, just as each of us do. Whatever our differences, they are not personal.

My apologies for the offenses that I contributed unto. I do hope to read more of you. I'll even try not to be such an idiot. Though such is hard for me, for I am an idiot by nature.

 

[Butterfly]

Hi,

Abortion a personal issue? I guess that means if I steal from you, assault you, have an affair with your spouse, lie about you that would be a personal issue also?

If the church is, as you say, "His people" then we have billions of different churches on this earth since there are billions of Christians. Scripture does not back up your theory. Scripture tells us that His church is the pillar and foundation of truth and that he started a (singular) church. Your theory suggest there are billions of different truths since there are billions of different Christians (churches). Your theory does not match with scripture.

I feel you gave me a firm answer. I can read between the lines. You seem to think God will judge us all in the end, however, we don't know really what we are being judged for or on. We don't know the rules to play by. Each person can make up their own rules and we will find out if we got it right or wrong when we die. That's what I feel you are saying.

Scripture is clear about false teachings/teachers. At the time scripture was written they figured out who the false teachers are and what the false teachings were. At the Council of Jerusalem they even put their stamp of approval on a teaching that all Christians must follow which made the teaching opposite of it false. Did God strip man of that authoritative ability (to bind and loose) once the Apostle's died?

I could never attend a church that doesn't have a solid view on abortion. If they can't get that one basic doctrine right they obviously can't get the bigger issues right.

IHS...Mary

I am sorry you do not like what I said. Is this how you approach your friend who is part of a different church I wonder !!
The issue I was raising was the one about when a life becomes a life- also I have never been part of a church that actually discussed abortion that often, please remember that this was some years ago and in the UK you did not have the same clinics as the US - it simply was not talked about opening. ( just how it was ). By the way, my spouse did cheat on me , many times, I divorced. Now that is also an issue with differing opinions and different conclusions. When someone lies to protect, like Abraham - hmmmmmm don't think he was condemned by God , but seen as righteous. It was not held against him. Does that make lying wrong or right!
Also you did not comment on war- many lives are taken , many people die as a result of a bomb attack - many Christians agree with war, some do not. Does the church have a solid view !
The things that should unite us is the cross and what it represented, and who Jesus was and is. Jesus will return for his bride, the church- individuals who have given their lives to him, collectively all together we belong to him.
You have made many assumptions in your post - you are free to judge me , but please remember you do not know me. I am governed by the Holy Spirit in my life. If you do not get how , as individuals, we are Gods people ( the church ) which you judge as being a theory. Well we simply will not agree on many things.
I have to go to work and have run out of time to respond ore at this time X
Butterfly

 

[GodsGrace]

My original post was not to you and neither was the one you are addressing here. Did you not notice I said we when referring to the ignorant?
You really don't see the concept??? Why limit it to the NT??? Its in both From beginning to end!

Your original post was bad enough.
Then you compounded the mistake by using the term "ignorant".

Here's what you said:

"After years of study and with bible in hand, you can write a post like this??? Amazing!!! No wonder Paul said a woman should be quiet in church"

A post like what?
I said that the N.T. has no concept of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Of course, we have personal knowledge of Him...What I stated, is that the IDEA of a personal relationship with God did not exist until recently.

This does NOT mean I don't agree with it. I'm just stating history.
If you don't want to believe history, that's your problem.

If women were silent in church, WHO would teach our faith to children? Men don't really like to do this. I've done this and I had to speak to do it.

You must be an older person since a younger person would never have made such a statement.

I wonder if you know that women were treated much more unfairly in the time of Moses than in the time of Jesus. Also, I'd like to bring your attention to the fact that Jesus treated women with as much respect as He treated men. In the Kingdom of God (here on earth) everyone has the same status. We are all brothers and sisters.

So, I say again, WHERE in the N.T. is the concept of a personal relationship with Jesus, as understood today, present?

Jesus' main theme was the Kingdom of God. He mentions the Kingdom over 100 times. His main theme was NOT to have a personal relationship with Him -- although this is what we end up with by being a disciple of His.

But how we would have known this had not persons such as Billy Graham COINED the term??

 

[GodsGrace]

Are you never understood? Do you always understand the other side of the issue involved? We all stand on what we believe, if we really believe it.

As the name calling, I do agree, but a problem with owners and moderators is that they also are people. They may work hard to do the right thing, but even then their own bias is likely to show through. I served once as a moderator on a busy forum with lots of problems. It is a hard position to be in when you find yourself going against one or more of your own convictions in order to properly apply the rules of the forum. It was the reason I quit that job.

Thanks for taking the time to write.
Here's how I feel:
I came here to discuss God and biblical principles, not to be criticized and called names because some do not agree with me. AND then some give Likes to those who name-call.

This is not right. Let alone the fact that I've come across some pretty unusual concepts while here, and I've never demeaned anyone for it.

It seems to me that persons argue more than discuss.
This could be stopped by the moderators by instituting the following rules:
No one should comment on the condition of the soul of another poster.

No one should discuss a poster in a thread unless it's to mention something they said regarding the subject and the person should be advised of this by using the @ sign.

No one should demean another poster or name-call.

And no one should use capital letters and colors throughout a post as if the other person were dumb or couldn't read.

Persons could be banned for a month at a time, or they could be banned forever if the above are not adhered to. It would cut down on all the nonsense that goes on.

Rules are there for a purpose. They should be kept by all.

 

[GodsGrace]

Because you have been missed. I have thought of sending a message your way, to let you know as much. Though I wondered how it might be received, just as I wondered how this would be received. However, it is better to let you know that it is good to see you, than to never say such a thing. Regardless of how it is received / perceived. Also, because you offer your distinct POV, just as each of us do. Whatever our differences, they are not personal.

My apologies for the offenses that I contributed unto. I do hope to read more of you. I'll even try not to be such an idiot. Though such is hard for me, for I am an idiot by nature.

Don't be so hard on yourself Richard Oti.
This happens because we're human and the rules here are rather lax and it brings us to have discussions that are too personal.

I don't take any disagreement as personal. I like to discuss why I may not agree by using scripture and logical thinking. Some here know more than I do regarding certain subjects...I look upon it as an opportunity to learn.

As far as messages, I have no problem receiving PM's. To me it's just another way to communicate.

I actually like you and bb and Amadeus and MaryMog and others too.
I'm just not sure this is the right forum for me.
Maybe I could try again...

 

[Richard_oti]

Maybe I could try again...

I hope you do.

 

[bbyrd009]

You must be an older person since a younger person would never have made such a statement.

basically like going to the N word when you are losing ground to a black guy in an argument, lol.

 

[bbyrd009]

AND then some give Likes to those who name-call.

This is not right.

i usually refrain from liking a post like that, even if i agree with the premise, myself. But i would say that you are reading the wrong thing into those, and ppl are prolly not liking for the denigration, but because they agree with the premise.

 

[bbyrd009]

This could be stopped by the moderators by instituting the following rules:

ah, here we go, look, it prolly seems like enforcing all of these would eliminate offense, but in practice you surely see how it does not work? Plus, what you are suggesting here will actually have the opposite effect. Now rather than expose themselves with their tongue, so that we may all know that person's heart, you advocate censoring someone to hide this, is what that will amount to. Passive/aggressives will just find more creative ways to call you names, is all that will happen most likely.

you are maybe overlooking that if something offended you, it is prolly going to offend most other people, too, while at the same time if you have offended someone, you will not see it the way everyone else will, right.

 

[bbyrd009]

Rules are there for a purpose. They should be kept by all.

i agree, laws are not evil, and they do serve a purpose, but what should happen is irrelevant to what will happen, right, and the lesson there for us is about forgiving, and overlooking a matter imo. You are revealed by what offends you. (Not you specifically, everyone)
Is offense given, or just taken? If you argue that offense can be given at all, you fall into a trap, see, because if you do not take any offense, no offense can be given, regardless of what might be seen.

 

[Marymog]

I am sorry you do not like what I said. Is this how you approach your friend who is part of a different church I wonder !!
The issue I was raising was the one about when a life becomes a life- also I have never been part of a church that actually discussed abortion that often, please remember that this was some years ago and in the UK you did not have the same clinics as the US - it simply was not talked about opening. ( just how it was ). By the way, my spouse did cheat on me , many times, I divorced. Now that is also an issue with differing opinions and different conclusions. When someone lies to protect, like Abraham - hmmmmmm don't think he was condemned by God , but seen as righteous. It was not held against him. Does that make lying wrong or right!
Also you did not comment on war- many lives are taken , many people die as a result of a bomb attack - many Christians agree with war, some do not. Does the church have a solid view !
The things that should unite us is the cross and what it represented, and who Jesus was and is. Jesus will return for his bride, the church- individuals who have given their lives to him, collectively all together we belong to him.
You have made many assumptions in your post - you are free to judge me , but please remember you do not know me. I am governed by the Holy Spirit in my life. If you do not get how , as individuals, we are Gods people ( the church ) which you judge as being a theory. Well we simply will not agree on many things.
I have to go to work and have run out of time to respond ore at this time X
Butterfly

How can The Church be 'individuals who have given their lives to him"?

If The Church is, as you say, individuals then that means that The Church has millions of different "truths" since we all interpret scripture differently. I thought scripture has only one Truth?

In His service...Mary

 

[bbyrd009]

No one should discuss a poster in a thread unless it's to mention something they said regarding the subject and the person should be advised of this by using the @ sign.

unfortunately in practice the one getting advised there is as likely to take offense at being tagged as not. Not saying that this is a bad idea, just that it often does not have the intended effect.

No one should demean another poster or name-call.

no one should engage with someone that offends them either, but a law won't solve that either, i guess. i'm an idealist myself ok, i don't disagree with you on any of these in principle, but imo the remedy is forgiveness, not judgement.

 

[bbyrd009]

If The Church is, as you say, individuals then that means that The Church has millions of different "truths" since we all interpret scripture differently. I thought scripture has only one Truth?

what is presently true will shortly be false right