From Kristos Vocabulary Booster

I want to learn Yaqui language I'm Yaqui and that's my middle name.

If I were to do it all over again, I would have started with the
Genesis Record by Henry M. Morris. He goes verse by verse and explains
his own thoughst on it. It is easy to read, he does not use a lot of
not understandable vocabulary, but the down side is that it is a 600
page book.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Stephen M. Adams wrote:

> wrf3@stablecross.com (Bob Felts) writes:
>
>
> >
> >Stephen M. Adams wrote:
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>
> >> You have not read very much then. I suggest the following, relatively
> >> short work:
> >>
> >> "Evil and the God of Love" by John Hick
> >>
> >> It's an excellent disection of Calvinism and gives the antidote - Eastern
> >> theology. While I disagree with Hick's personal conclusion that all men
> >> will be saved, that doesn't diminish his comparrison of Augustinianism
> >> and Calvinism with a true, actual, honest to God 3rd way.
> >
> >Is this the same John Hick who wrote "The Myth of God Incarnate"? The
> >one where the Greek Orthodox archbishop in London issued a letter
> >accusing the authors of "falling prey to an opposition of a demonic
> >character"? [http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1169]
> >
> >See also "http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1200".
>
> Well, given this, I see no point in continuing any discussion with you,
> either. The issue is not whether or not John Hick is Orthodox (he's
> not), nor whether he's non-heretical, but his *analysis* of Calvinism
> that is extremely accurate.
>

I don't have a lot of time to waste, Steve. I'm concerned about the
alleged accuracy of someone's analysis of Calvinism if their analysis of
the Incarnation is incorrect. It has been my overwhelming experience
that denial of the diety of Christ automatically leads to all sorts of
errors. Is there not another author who has orthodox Christology who
has analyzed Calvinism in a manner you find acceptable?

> Since you chose to raise this other issue, even after I disclaimed Hick's
> conclusion in "Evil and the God of Love (universal salvation), it says to
> me that you have no interest in the discussion, and that you were, in fact,
> concerned enough about Hick's analysis to raise an unrelated issue to try
> to discredit his analysis.

It isn't an unrelated issue. As I said, bad Christology leads to all
sorts of problems. That I am interested in this disuccsion should be
evident that I want to have it with you. If you would spend a little
more time answering my questions/objections, instead of trying to
analyze what you think my motives are, we would make more progress.
Especially since your analysis of my motives is very far off the mark.

>
> Whatever.
>
> Having review the threads, I see that no progress can be made for much the
> same reason that no progress could be made with Loren - you have everyone
> and everything in a neat little categaroy, and have denied that any other
> classification is not only impossible, but that there is not possibliity
> of any other categories even existing. That makes dialogue impossible.

Where have I denied that there are no other categories? I haven't.
I've seen a lot of avoidance, of which this thread is a perfect example.
More time is spent trying to analyse me than in explaining your
position. What I haven't seen is a lucid explanation from you (or
Matthew) of what those categories are.

> It's frustrating.

Indeed. I was hoping for a discussion of "what the Scriptures say",
instead of an incorrect analysis of my motives.

> And not worth beating my head into the wall over. As
> I wrote in my comment to Loren, here is my final statement::
>
> Calvinism is a false theology, and the god described by Calvin and
> his followers is a demon, not the One, True God. Calvinism is more
> of a false teaching of men than ANYTHING Calvinists accuse us of,
> and is so recent that one must wonder just where all the Calvinists
> were throughout history. Alas, there is NO support for Calvin's
> position from the church, and Calvinism was never taught before it was
> inveted by Calvin and his followers. It is unsupported by history,
> the Church AND the Scriptures.
>
> As is my custom - you get the last word, if you want it.
>

Bart has ably refuted your "the Calvinist God is a demon" canard. So he
can have the last word.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))