Reaction score

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • Hey Nang, just a really minor theological question I'm curious about...

    What's your opinion on magic in fiction? (such as Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Harry Potter, etc.)
    To learn what weird paraphrases can do to Biblical thinking, I'm going to bring up one example that's a particular pet peeve of mine.

    If you look at an actual Bible translation of Romans 13:1-7 (KJV, ESV, NIV, whichever) you'll get a fairly vague reference to God "ordaining" government authorities. The article in my sig by C Jay Engel is, in my opinion, the best explanation of what this means.

    But, the paraphrases of the passage all pretty clearly rule out this possibility and very clearly argue that these governments are morally approved of by God where the Bible never actually says this. In my opinion the message translation of this text sucks:

    I've seen two other paraphrases of this text and they're all similar. They all directly mention "police" where none of the actual translations do so and they all directly imply certain viewpoints on the text that aren't stated in the text....
    Just saw your reported post... I wonder if it is too late for you to indicate that it was 'implied profanity' with the Bovine Secretions.
    I'm sure the one thing you will not initially agree upon is that inherent spiritual death is what inevitably brings forth sin, the wages of which is physical death. Augustine has sin and spiritual death switched, and sin being genetic as part of the phusis (nature). Sin is epigenetic (upon the DNA) because of spiritual death. We don't inherit sin, we inherent spiritual death which inexorably results in sinning that is imputed by the law as sin (the condition) and its wages. All have sinned. It's what Semi-Pelagians have been trying to say, but erring toward sin being "sickness" rather than utter incapacity.
    Yes, and that was my intent. To get past all the middle school drama queen banter of accusation and judgment to have a few become a bit enlightened that their false simplicity ISN'T. They don't realize that if imputed righteousness doesn't include conduct with character, there's no way for them to DO anything. Then they're just hearers of the word only, and not doers. Gotta have imputed righteous conduct to go with imputed righteous character. It's a two-fer, and it's all or nothing. Otherwise, it's just a dymo label of "righteous" on your forehead. That's not BEING. It's not ontology.
    A blessed and Joyous New Year to You Nang - may it be free from old angers and frustrations and happy with wonderful thoughts
    Good grief. Talk about invasion of the Body (of Christ) Snatchers. There's nothing worse than Dispensationalism, and especially MADers. I see you haven't included Knight, so hopefully that wasn't an oversight.
    Do you know who is a MAD? I've never paid close enough attention to know.
    John W
    Nick M

    What about Bright Raven and glorydaz? Others? I just wanna know when one of them posts up somewhere. And which ones are also Open Theists?
    Holy Schmanoly! The ravening wolf pack of MADs are insane. I've not experienced them before, except scattered thread encounters with individuals. They're every bit as heinous in their Zionist delusion as the literal Neo-Judaizers of modern Rabbinical Pharisaic Talmudism. They mistake elpis for pistis, among many other fallacies. They refuse to recognize the depth, breadth, and height of the inspired Greek language of scripture, instead preferring the wrongly-perceived simplicity of erroneous conceptual English shallowness. They mock the truth and true Believers. It's sadly hilarious, but a sign of the apostasy that is rampant in today's tare-laden Church. Catholics and Atheists are more palatable than MADs. And coupling that with whoever among them are Open Theists is utterly unbearable for anyone who is redeemed and knows the truth. I'm not telling you anything you don't know. But sometimes it's just better to leave them to their folly and suffer the loss.
    rainee closed the thread before I could answer you, which is sort of funny, given.
    Oh really?

    What is the purpose of such an inner circle, and if it is part of a Secret Order, why do you disclose and advertise it?
    It's the Secret Order of Smack, though it's a poorly kept one. If you go to a user profile page it will show up under group affiliations on the right. It's supposed to be a collection of truthsmackers of some sort. Who knows. It's not hidden but it isn't advertised. Mostly a conservative group. I know a number of the members, but I'm not one. I was really surprised by the HOF nod, but I suppose given, as you and Stux and chrys and rainee are apt to remind me, my relative popularity and the fact that Knight liked me at the time...less so these days, I think, but that's the breaks. You stand where you feel you need to and some people will like it, some won't.

    Such is life. :e4e:
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…