|
WHITEFIELD'S LETTER TO WESLEY Bethesda in Georgia, Dec. 24, 1740
Reverend and very dear Brother,
od
only knows what unspeakable sorrow of heart I have felt on your account
since I left England last. Whether it be my infirmity or not, I frankly
confess, that Jonah could not go with more reluctance against Nineveh,
than I now take pen in hand to write against you. Was nature to speak, I
had rather die than do it; and yet if I am faithful to God, and to my
own and others' souls, I must not stand neutral any longer. I am very
apprehensive that our common adversaries will rejoice to see us
differing among ourselves. But what can I say? The children of God are
in danger of falling into error. Nay, numbers have been misled, whom God
has been pleased to work upon by my ministry, and a greater number are
still calling aloud upon me to show also my opinion. I must then show
that I know no man after the flesh, and that I have no respect to
persons, any further than is consistent with my duty to my Lord and
Master, Jesus Christ. This letter, no doubt, will lose me many
friends: and for this cause perhaps God has laid this difficult task
upon me, even to see whether I am willing to forsake all for him, or
not. From such considerations as these, I think it my duty to bear an
humble testimony, and earnestly to plead for the truths which, I am
convinced, are clearly revealed in the Word of God. In the defence
whereof I must use great plainness of speech, and treat my dearest
friends upon earth with the greatest simplicity, faithfulness, and
freedom, leaving the consequences of all to God. For some time
before, and especially since my last departure from England, both in
public and private, by preaching and printing, you have been propagating
the doctrine of universal redemption. And when I remember how Paul
reproved Peter for his dissimulation, I fear I have been sinfully silent
too long. O then be not angry with me, dear and honoured Sir, if now I
deliver my soul, by telling you that I think in this you greatly err.
|
|
2736
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: CHAPTER 19. - OF CHRISTIAN LIBERTY. J CALVIN
|
on: March 12, 2011, 08:10:38 PM
|
|
8. “I know,” says Paul, “that there is nothing
unclean of itself,” (by unclean meaning unholy); “but to him that
esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean,” (Rom. 14:14).
By
these words he makes all external things subject to our liberty,
provided the nature of that liberty approves itself to our minds as
before God.
But if any superstitious idea suggests
scruples, those things which in their own nature were pure are to us
contaminated. Wherefore the apostle adds, “Happy is he that condemneth
not himself in that which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if
he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith
is sin,” (Rom. 14:22, 23). When men, amid such difficulties, proceed
with greater confidence, securely doing whatever pleases them, do they
not in so far revolt from God? Those who are thoroughly impressed with
some fear of God, if forced to do many things repugnant to their
consciences are discouraged and filled with dread.
All
such persons receive none of the gifts of God with thanksgiving, by
which alone Paul declares that all things are sanctified for our use (1
Tim. 4:5).
By thanksgiving I understand that which
proceeds from a mind recognizing the kindness and goodness of God in his
gifts. For many, indeed, understand that the blessings which they enjoy
are the gifts of God, and praise God in their words; but not being
persuaded shalt these have been given to them, how can they give thanks
to God as the giver?
In one word, we
see whither this liberty tends—viz. that we are to use the gifts of God
without any scruple of conscience, without any perturbation of mind, for
the purpose for which he gave them: in this way our souls may both have
peace with him, and recognize his liberality towards us.
For
here are comprehended all ceremonies of free observance, so that while
our consciences are not to be laid under the necessity of observing
them, we are also to remember that, by the kindness of God, the use of
them is made subservient to edification.
|
Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2738
|
Members Only / Purgatory / Re: Universalism: Definding the unbeliever at the expense of the Sheep
|
on: March 11, 2011, 02:58:00 PM
|
mbG
signature line: "There is a mystery of connection to what He reminds
us in His language of Spirit and word that create who we are from our
past in light of the grace that we have received that gives us an
individual identity." K_k: Or, it could be said that we are to be always what His love defines us to be. Fewer words, but same idea? Personally,
i don't think theology is a bad place to put "big arguments". For
theology isn't Scripture, just human interpretations of it. It's good
to have various viewpoints in various places, not just in purgatory. 
Personally,
i don't think theology is a bad place to put "big arguments". For
theology isn't Scripture, just human interpretations of it. It's good
to have various viewpoints in various places, not just in purgatoryYou
teach a theology as long as you teach another view point than mine. Kk
if your teaching has no basis in scripture ... if you believe that my
comparisons of your teaching has no parallel to historical teaching then
you must see from my perspective that you do not have enough
information to know if you are presently teaching heresy. Kk talking to
you is like talking to someone who does not believe there is a basis for
a belief in God. Because teaching began when God taught Adam and he
passed it onto the next generation. Thus it is not only necessary that
teaching is only orthodox if it is correct by its historical
accuracy.Its the same logic after the bible was complete and we have a
history of interpretation. The main reason we insist on historical
accuracy is because there is only one line of reasoning in the
presentation of the doctrines of grace. Other wise you are just
presenting a contradiction. The law of non contradiction must always be
applied to teaching. This is why it is so hard for me to have an
intellectual discussion with you because you dont take the time to
sharpen yourself on historical teachings. But i give you credit ... you
know how to stick to a point. Kk... you can turn my words
around and try and show that my concepts are hard to understand. Ive
been doing this for 6 yrs and discussed theo. with a lot of people. If
you cant tell me some of the specific reasons that i disagree with you
then your not very knowledgeable in historical discussion. If you do not
like to read my responses then learn what i believe from someone else
and then we can have a clear discussion. I do not even need to read you
to know where you are coming from. Although i have read almost every
repetitive thing you have said. Thats why i write what you believe and
then respond to your position cause you dont know enough of the conflict
in the historical perspective to understand the deeper things that need
to be discussed. I m tired rite now ..talk later.
|
Remove
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2742
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Sovereign Grace And The Third Use Of The Law
|
on: March 10, 2011, 01:42:56 PM
|
Thanks guys... i have no self concern about
this process. Even if someone were to skim through it ... it is of no
consequence to my success or lack . I just want to write so that the
part they read is what they need. But even if your simplistic answers
and your repetitive style is your cause then it just shows your general
attention to the more important things. Cause its hilarious to me that
you can quote someone who you admit that you do not read and yet tell me
who spends the time researching these things and memorizing scripture
that you can have Calvin agreeing with your positions when you havent
understood what he is saying and taking him out of context because you
are too lazy to read him. The truth is ive had to respond to kk by
explaining his side and then defending mine. It would be much easier if i
had someone who was able to go deeper. It just goes to show you what a tool you can be .  So
you guys have quoted a statement by Calvin... what does Calvin believe
in a more detailed way? Yes i know... just like my relationship with
Kk... i ask him after conversing with him for 1 yr why i disagree with
him about the sermon on the mount and he goes into his argumentative
repetitive style. Single one line statement. I can tell you what kk
believes in one line. Typical relationship expert in that mode... blah
blah bla. Its mind numbing to me. Kk i dont want to be mean but if your
going to diss me like this then you really are like a fly on my face... i
give you your own position in a logical detailed way and having worked
my ass off and you throw out these mindless repetitions with no
knowledge of the word usage in the text. Its like having someone who is a
kind of a moron hanging out in my study. hehe. Thats ok i have a tendency to be lazy too but more out of weakness now.
|
2748
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Radical Love
|
on: March 08, 2011, 07:20:08 AM
|
hearttuggs: "Just choose to Love, as God loves .. HE has given us that gift to give to one another.
Great, isn't IT!!"
K_k:
Yes, it/He is great! And it is wonderful that He gave us the
Commandments, written originally in stone, now in our hearts and minds,
so that we will know when we are or aren't really loving with His love.
Mankind
wants to change the meaning of "love" to broaden it to whatever feels
good. So homosexuality, adultery, idolatry, etc, can be spoken of as
expressions of love by many people, even some "Believers".
But
the love of God fulfills His Commandments, and when we are convicted by
the Holy Spirit, that we aren't being very loving, it will often be
through bringing the heart of a Commandment to our attention. And then
He draws / inspires us to let Him love more purely through us, just as
He has promised in those same "Thou shalt not, thou shalt"'s.
Great, isn't He!!
Thanks
to the women here, Kk did a little back down... now he says the law is
only used to lead us to Christ who inspires us to keep His commands not
actually keeping them as Christ would.
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2755
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Radical Love
|
on: March 05, 2011, 08:02:09 AM
|
Me thinketh the student doth outstrip the maestro evader. [Bowing low in acknowledgment of superior potential to spot sneaky manipulations of mind and gab.] I
got the visual on your ((())). Mine was more ethereal than visual.
Kind of like vibes" of yesteryear. Some hippies never grow up.  So
where are we? Do we agree to agree, or to disagree? How about we take
a more honest look at what each of us wrote a few posts ago, and see if
we actually can harmonize what seemed to be conflict originally?
Miracles do still happen, i hear/see. 
Kk
you are so easy to figure out. Religious language can be manipulated
into your own moral perspective. Theres a big difference between having
an overall view of the word usage in the text and using it for ones own
purposes. With you there is always an underlying message.
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2756
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Radical Love
|
on: March 03, 2011, 02:41:38 PM
|
rr
quoting Scripture: "And He said to him, " YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR
GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR
MIND.'
38 "This is the great and foremost commandment.
39 "The second is like it, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
did everyone catch that?? think about that one..
40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." "
K_k:
Yes, these are the two Summary Commandments. The first one, love for
God, summarizes the detail of the fIrst four Commandments written by
Him, in stone, for us. The second one, love for neighbors like we love
ourselves, is the summary of the last six of the written Commandments.
And
on these two Commandments, as expressed through the 10 Commandments,
and through their expansion into greater detail, hang all the rules, and
the prophets and the disciples, and hung the Lord of love on the
Cross. We can never obey them without Him living in and through us, for
He is the only power of righteousness. That was the "mystery" of the
OT, which the prophets foresaw but may not have fully understood, now
revealed in Jesus to be "God with us", "God in us", writing His Law
through our lives.
Isn't redundancy fun?
rr quoting
Scripture: "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing
upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we
have been able to bear?
"But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."
K_k:
The ceremonial and sacrificial laws were a yoke leading them to need
for a Savior. And those laws were fulfilled to completion in the
Perfect Sacrifice of the Lamb of God. The eternal moral Laws of love
were fulfilled but never ended, instead they are made alive through the
grace of the Lord Jesus. And "in the same way as they also" were,
mankind has always, and will always, only be saved when they are
directly connected to God, our Dad, through the Son.
For
mankind was created "in the Image of God", Who is Christ Jesus. But the
Fall was a severing of the connection with Dad, and it had to be
restored, as predicted, by Him becoming Man, dieing to free us, rising
to empower us. Empower us to live out His love Laws, falteringly now,
perfectly on that Day when He comes to get us.
rr quoting
Scripture: "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon
you no greater burden than these essentials: that you abstain from
things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and
from fornication; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will
do well. Farewell."
K_k: Yes, the Holy Spirit, Who would never
even hint that we are no longer to keep the moral Commandments of God,
gave the approval to no longer observe all the sacrificial laws, but
only gave guidelines to help keep them from falling back into the old
system. No one, especially the followers of Jesus, would have thought
the Commandments were ended at the Cross, but would have experienced
first-hand what the fulfillment of those Directions looks like in human
form, and they would know that such obedience for us, in His power and
grace, to our Dad's perfect rules gives His Ressurection Life human form
through us.
And thus is the long controversy between Law and
Grace ended -- in freedom to obey The Father, through The Son, in the
gracefulness of the Spirit. Which is always the only Way the
Commandments of God can be actually done.
Repetition can be good for the soul, they say.
I cant let this go .. i will respond to this later.
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2759
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Confusion in the Sand
|
on: March 03, 2011, 10:42:32 AM
|
A man awoke feeling very strangely, just having the most confusing dream. He cried out to the Lord and said:
"Lord,
Please help me to understand this; I have just had a dream which I
found to be both confusing and disturbing. In the dream I saw a hole,
issuing from that hole were two small furrows which seemed to go on a
ways and then abruptly stopped, leaving a small depression. Just after
that depression I saw footprints going every which way as if in some
kind of mad dance. Then, everything went dark, and there was finally a
peace. Please Lord, tell me what this dream means!"
The Lord spoke unto the man and said:
"My
child, the hole which you saw in your dream was your grave. The two
furrows which you saw proceeding from your grave were your heel marks as
I dragged you out of it. The depression in the ground was the spot
where I dropped you and finally breathed life into you. The part after
where it looked like you were doing the funky chicken was you trying to
perfect what I had just given you by gyrations of the flesh. That is
when I had to cold-cock you and carry you here."
"Any other questions?"
LMAO..
|
Reply
Quote
Notify
|
|
|
2760
|
Forums / Theology Forum / Re: Counseling and memory
|
on: March 03, 2011, 09:12:55 AM
|
I remember in the 70s a shift in the way
things were thought about to create a society of health. We began to
study memory. This shift was through the ideas of Freud. He believed
that all problems was from repressed memory. Freud was a therapist of
neurotic women. He developed a philosophy from his times in which he
would get woman to recall their past and then he would study their
recollections and develop a remedy in his writings. The people
who disagreed with him were accusing him of an over focus on self. They
were saying that this would create a society in which men would focus on
themselves only and create more selfishness in our daily lives. Then
there are some people who have a philosophy of paradox. They see
everything as necessary because of the freedom to examine these things
to find a healthy balance between theology and science. I used to go
from the therapist to the theologian like i was playing ping-pong. My
own personal experience as a young child was that i had a very high
awareness of the spiritual nature of things. So i was not able to
process this as a teenager in order to know which way i was going to go.
It wasnt until i found that i had a high level of frustration
because i needed a lot of intellectual stimulus. My whole countenance
and level of confidence changed when i started to focus on the Bible. I
know some people look at this and accuse me of being a blow hard but
seriously ... i would have ended up in a mental institution if i hadnt
over acheived in this area. This is not for everybody... because i would
no wish this level of desperation on anyone. I mean as an initial
experience. But we must see that memory is inconsistent. The
philosophy of memory is the creation of a world in which we find
acceptance in the causes of our reaction to trouble out of a sense of
our own worth ... this is our present grid of truth and we put the world
in a dependent relationship by finding the causes of our problems in
these former relationships in our memory. I believe memory is was a gift
by God to create an image of ourselves out of a sense of forgetfulness
of the bad things and an acceptance of how God defines who we are as
eternally accepted beyond this earth. Memory is a denial that wrongs
were committed ...out of a sense of our sinful inabilities and an
understanding of Gods retribution skills....out of a power that causes
us to be different than we were formed in the mold of the world in this
time sequence. I do not think our problems are in our memory of the way
things were in our past but our memory is created by two things. First
we find all of our confidence in God. Or each one of us is special in
our Fathers memory. So we must find the voice of our great Shepherd to
be the guard over what we hear see taste and touch. We create memory by
what we say...as a focus as opposed to Freud talk. As opposed to men
treating us in a cavalier way. The second is we must be made
to feel taste see and know the eternal in our present experience by our
renewed past. Because memory is as the present. We really go from the
past to the future. This is why memory is experience as finding the
truth. Memory is a created relational reality. When the psalmist talks
about memory He uses it as what God remembers. This means that just as
salvation is a state in which we have no idols desire to speech to temporary experience...so
memory is an understanding that God is God because He made us
acceptable in His counsel before all of this earthly experience started.
In other words our experience in memory is determined by our giving God
all of our experience on this earth and finding our confidence in Him
alone! There are some other things that are related to this as a healthy
exercise i will get into.

|
|
 |
 |
No comments:
Post a Comment