Verses Freebirds ignore or misunderstand when reading their Bibles.

[FreeToBeMe]

Secondly, a freebird, even in the most pejorative sense possible, may certainly still be saved.  It's not my job to determine who is saved, so I wouldn't call them a heathen.

Lie much?

These are just examples from the FFF.  My OP was not intended to limit the critique of Freebirdism to merely incidents of those that have appeared on this forum, but rather the entirety of the Christian Freebird experience.

Let the heathens rage.

 

[PappaBear]

There are so many to choose from! 

The "freebirds" love to proclaim how Jesus "ate with sinners."  They seem to ignore just where that accusation was coming from and question its validity.  Much like Simon the Pharisee who thought to himself privately that if the LORD just knew about that woman washing his feet, He wouldn't allow her to touch him.  Surprise, Simon!  The Lord had already delivered her and she was no longer "that woman."  But, I digress.

Here is what the Bible says about Christ, our High Priest, in description.

Hebrews 7:26  For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

By the by, you ought to be careful when divorcing "walking in the Spirit" from the practical reality of progressive sanctification, which indeed is a characteristic of true antinomianism.

Can you please describe what you think is the "practical reality of progressive sanctification"? 

 

[ALAYMAN]

By the by, you ought to be careful when divorcing "walking in the Spirit" from the practical reality of progressive sanctification, which indeed is a characteristic of true antinomianism.

Can you please describe what you think is the "practical reality of progressive sanctification"?

In short, the synergistic work of the will of the believer with the Spirit to grow into (conform) the image of Christ.

 

[ALAYMAN]

so....... if a person agrees with you on all but one of those points...... even fighting on your side the majority of the time .......but stands fast in the firm belief that you have erred on one of these issues....... is that person still a freebird and a heathen?.... ???..... ...... do we get any fundy points for being in agreement with you 90% of the time?........  ???

First, what a joy to see you posting again sister.  I've continued to pray for you.

Secondly, a freebird, even in the most pejorative sense possible, may certainly still be saved.  It's not my job to determine who is saved, so I wouldn't call them a heathen.

Third, to your central point, of percentage of agreement with another Christian, I can't even agree with myself  100% of the time.   Seriously though, I disagree with my own pastor on some issues, and we get along just fine.  I'm sure that in the real world, were I to rub elbows with many of the freebirds on here that we'd get along just fine.  But there are certain personalities that will always rub me wrong, Christian or not, and a couple on here fit that bill.  When people mock for fun, and want nothing more than to argue, rather than discuss, then when discussion is offered they act like Pee-Wee Herman, well, they'll get the respect that PeeWee gets.

thank you...... .......... you and i have been allies on many issues here..... at odds with each other on a few..... one pretty significant one recently which you mentioned in one of your points here....... i remember one other person who took up the fight along with you... supporting you on that issue... and who abruptly left without ever answering or addressing the questions i asked concerning his very dogmatic statements........... that left just you and me in the argument and i think we pretty much beat it to death......... we got nowhere even though we both felt we had a solid scriptural base for our views.....but personally i felt you were basing your position on traditionalism.... and you seemed to feel i based mine on modern liberal thought.....................

fact is.... i believe we both read the Bible concerning the issue and neither was actually ignoring any of it........ it was just that we gleaned different messages from it... and it spoke to us in different ways............. how either of us saw it might very well have been based partly on tradition.. what some would call modern liberal thought... or even a little of both..........

but that is how it is with all these arguments.......... we all bring something to the discussion and to the study which has various effects on how we interpret what we read and also how we discuss or defend it...... the thing that gets people riled ..(most of the time)... is when one side or the other declares that his or her opinion on the matter is the official position of God........ or that the opposition is by reason of disagreeing automatically heathen or unsaved........... it looked for a moment like you might have been saying that with your final comment .."let the heathens rage"............ but.... i;ll take it you didn;t mean it that way.....

Without sounding like I'm kissing up too much, man I'm envious how your mind works, and your ability to put those thoughts into writing.

Truth is, I don't remember what issue you're referring to, but I do remember us going round for awhile.  I don't mind re-opening it if I left you hanging.

As far as the "let the heathen rage", I didn't mean that in the literal sense at all, and actually was just using it to poke the fellas in the eye who were so insistent that I answer them in the way they wanted, and when I did answer them it was like they couldn't find the thread anymore, so since they weren't being intellectually honest (which I had appropriately already accused them of anyway) I figured I'd have a little fun at their expense.  But no, I don't think that people who disagree with me are unsaved, mostly.

 

[Recovering IFB]

In short, the synergistic work of the will of the believer with the Spirit to grow into (conform) the image of Christ.

"For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. "

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

In short, the synergistic work of the will of the believer with the Spirit to grow into (conform) the image of Christ.

"For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. "

Beat me to it. 

 

[ALAYMAN]

In short, the synergistic work of the will of the believer with the Spirit to grow into (conform) the image of Christ.

"For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. "

Beat me to it.

Are you saying that the regenerated soul does not cooperate with God in sanctification in any sense?

Php 2:12  Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,

 

[Recovering IFB]

Then vs. 13 says " for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
I'm sorry; who's at work in you? I wasn't paying attention, musta' been the bourbon.....

 

[ALAYMAN]

Then vs. 13 says " for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
I'm sorry; who's at work in you? I wasn't paying attention, musta' been the bourbon.....

Well, since TRT has elected not to respond to my query (there seems to be a trend here amongst you Freebirds ) I suppose you'll have to do.

Three things:

1)  When you phrase your responses to me with contempt, derision, and condescension, what kind of rebuttal do you think you invite?

2) Is your hermeneutical apparatus for deciding how to interpret apparently contradictory theological concepts based on counting which one has more verses?

3) Being a Calvinist as you are, do you realize that within your own (reformed) camp that many fully certified Tulip-sniffers (like Sproul, Berkhoff, Hodge, etc) describe sanctification as synergistic?

Please make an honest attempt at answering each of these simple questions, unlike your last effort at "respectful dialogue".

 

[rsc2a]

Then vs. 13 says " for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
I'm sorry; who's at work in you? I wasn't paying attention, musta' been the bourbon.....

Well, since TRT has elected not to respond to my query (there seems to be a trend here amongst you Freebirds ) I suppose you'll have to do.

Three things:

1)  When you phrase your responses to me with contempt, derision, and condescension, what kind of rebuttal do you think you invite?

*blink*

2) Is your hermeneutical apparatus for deciding how to interpret apparently contradictory theological concepts based on counting which one has more verses?

The verse he quotes starts with "for". See also: "because". It's not counting verses. It's understanding basic English to ask and then recognize which is the causal action and which is the effective action.

3) Being a Calvinist as you are, do you realize that within your own (reformed) camp that many fully certified Tulip-sniffers (like Sproul, Berkhoff, Hodge, etc) describe sanctification as synergistic?

Please make an honest attempt at answering each of these simple questions, unlike your last effort at "respectful dialogue".

I actually agree that it's synergistic. I also believe that God is the causing action. See....I don't have to count verses because I agree with both sides.

 

[ALAYMAN]

The verse he quotes starts with "for". See also: "because". It's not counting verses. It's understanding basic English to ask and then recognize which is the causal action and which is the effective action.

So then effectively we ought to read the verse to say "work out your own salvation, because God is working it out in you", and somehow that helps the monergistic argument, how exactly?  That's either blatant gobbledygook, or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace.

I actually agree that it's synergistic. I also believe that God is the causing action. See....I don't have to count verses because I agree with both sides.

Even when you agree with me your contrarian spirit has to find something to differ.

 

[rsc2a]

The verse he quotes starts with "for". See also: "because". It's not counting verses. It's understanding basic English to ask and then recognize which is the causal action and which is the effective action.

So then effectively we ought to read the verse to say "work out your own salvation, because God is working it out in you", and somehow that helps the monergistic argument, how exactly?  That's either blatant gobbledygook, or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace.

Welcome to Calvinism.

I actually agree that it's synergistic. I also believe that God is the causing action. See....I don't have to count verses because I agree with both sides.

Even when you agree with me your contrarian spirit has to find something to differ.

Are you being contrarian?
[/quote]

 

[ALAYMAN]

Welcome to Calvinism.

I'm not a Calvinist, and not arguing for their cause, but you were.

Are you being contrarian?

Not at all.  I'm making an observation that you have buddies here, and that a friend of your enemy is your friend, and that contrarian spirit you have arises in the context of such conversation.  I've observed it over the years.  You've set yourself against my arguments in a polarizing manner for so long now that even when you agree with me you'll pick out the minutia and pedantic points that you can disagree with.

 

[rsc2a]

Welcome to Calvinism.

I'm not a Calvinist, and not arguing for their cause, but you were.

"...or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace."

^^^ Total Depravity

Are you being contrarian?

Not at all.  I'm making an observation that you have buddies here, and that a friend of your enemy is your friend, and that contrarian spirit you have arises in the context of such conversation.  I've observed it over the years.  You've set yourself against my arguments in a polarizing manner for so long now that even when you agree with me you'll pick out the minutia and pedantic points that you can disagree with.

Sure, I've got a problem with ego. Are you willing to acknowledge yours?

 

[ALAYMAN]

"...or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace."

^^^ Total Depravity

Explain what you mean.

Sure, I've got a problem with ego. Are you willing to acknowledge yours?

Yes, pride is always a problem, some worse than others.  I can appreciate what you bring to the forum, and even discuss opposing viewpoints amicably, but it all depends upon how the other poster chooses to disagree.  There have been plenty of occasions that I've disagreed (oftentimes with former IFBxers that have gone Freebird) extensively without getting into peeing contests where more heat than light is shed.  But when people play the game, as RecoveringIFB is want to do (as you are more than occasionally, as in the "porn" distraction), then off we go.

 

[rsc2a]

"...or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace."

^^^ Total Depravity

Explain what you mean.

What's to explain? You described the doctrine of total depravity perfectly.

Sure, I've got a problem with ego. Are you willing to acknowledge yours?

Yes, pride is always a problem, some worse than others.  I can appreciate what you bring to the forum, and even discuss opposing viewpoints amicably, but it all depends upon how the other poster chooses to disagree.  There have been plenty of occasions that I've disagreed (oftentimes with former IFBxers that have gone Freebird) extensively without getting into peeing contests where more heat than light is shed.  But when people play the game, as RecoveringIFB is want to do (as you are more than occasionally, as in the "porn" distraction), then off we go.

Oh...the porn "distraction". You mean the thread where you made stuff up, claimed I said it, then attacked me for it? Sure...we can call that "amicable" if you want.

 

[ALAYMAN]

"...or it means what it says, that we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace."

^^^ Total Depravity

Explain what you mean.

What's to explain? You described the doctrine of total depravity perfectly.

Sure, I've got a problem with ego. Are you willing to acknowledge yours?

Yes, pride is always a problem, some worse than others.  I can appreciate what you bring to the forum, and even discuss opposing viewpoints amicably, but it all depends upon how the other poster chooses to disagree.  There have been plenty of occasions that I've disagreed (oftentimes with former IFBxers that have gone Freebird) extensively without getting into peeing contests where more heat than light is shed.  But when people play the game, as RecoveringIFB is want to do (as you are more than occasionally, as in the "porn" distraction), then off we go.

Oh...the porn "distraction". You mean the thread where you made stuff up, claimed I said it, then attacked me for it? Sure...we can call that "amicable" if you want.

1)  Explain how the doctrine of Total Depravity bears on the process of synergistic progressive sanctification.

2) You responded with the "porn distraction" in the context of a thread about liberty.  Don't be a rube dude.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=rsc2a]Oh...the porn "distraction". You mean the thread where you made stuff up, claimed I said it, then attacked me for it? Sure...we can call that "amicable" if you want.

1)  Explain how the doctrine of Total Depravity bears on the process of synergistic progressive sanctification.[/quote]

The doctrine of total depravity explicitly teaches that "we are to cooperate as God works (as the first cause) in us that have a spirit which is now alive and able to respond to God's grace.".

2) You responded with the "porn distraction" in the context of a thread about liberty.  Don't be a rube dude.

You first brought up porn (in the form of "torture porn"), Bo followed up, then I said I could not in good conscience watch porn, a comment you turned into an attack...

...but go ahead and live in your delusion.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

By the by, you ought to be careful when divorcing "walking in the Spirit" from the practical reality of progressive sanctification, which indeed is a characteristic of true antinomianism.

Can you please describe what you think is the "practical reality of progressive sanctification"?

In short, the synergistic work of the will of the believer with the Spirit to grow into (conform) the image of Christ.

Okay, let's pick a sin -- adultery. 

Please explain the synergy.  What does the Spirit do, and what does the believer do to be faithful instead of committing adultery? 

Be specific.  "The believer cooperates" is not specific.  The believer does what exactly in order to cooperate?  The Spirit does what?