Christforums

Given your options

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Christforums said:

  Fundamentalism took root during the Liberal Jimmy Carter era, 

 

The term may have taken root at that time, but the movement came much earlier.  

 

Christforums, which group of the doctrinally correct Christians do you belong to?  Or are you a group of one?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, webmdave said:

He believes in some version of Reformed theology. 

 

For more on Fundamentalism, read here: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christian-fundamentalism

 

That's the reformation I was referring to.  The one that started in the middle to late 19th century.  In my youth the Church of Christ called it the "back to the Bible" movement.  I think we were 2 or 3 splinters down from the main movement.  If I remember correctly, the Christian church broke away, then we broke off from them due to instrumental music.  It was decided that there was no example of instrumental music being used in the New Testament, so we shouldn't use it today.  But I later realized they were not consistent in following the examples.  Some were explained away.   And the divisions go on, and on, and on, and on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Christforums said:

 

And what about Satan and his minions?

 

 

 

I haven't seen them either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Weezer said:

 

The term may have taken root at that time, but the movement came much earlier.  

 

Christforums, which group of the doctrinally correct Christians do you belong to?  Or are you a group of one?

 

Thank you for asking for clarification Weezer!

 

I am Reformed Presbyterian. Our doctrine follows the Apostolic doctrines which were later developed by Augustine, Luther, and Calvin. One could say that as a Calvinist Augustinian doctrine has come into fruition in Calvinism.

 

Reformed is a theological umbrella term which covers and conveys much more than Calvinism. For example to be Reformed doctrinal speaking means: systematic theology, catholic (universal), Protestant (5 Solas), Calvinism, Covenant, Amillennialism, and Cessationism.

 

To put this in historical context:

 

The Reformed faith is biblical Christianity in its truest and most consistent form. Broadly speaking, Reformed theology includes any system of belief that traces its roots back to the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century. Of course, the Reformers themselves traced their doctrine to Scripture, as indicated by their credo of “sola scriptura,” so Reformed theology is not a “new” belief system but one that seeks to continue apostolic doctrine. The Latin word sola means "alone" or "only" in English. The five solae articulated five fundamental beliefs of the Protestant Reformation, pillars which the Reformers believed to be essentials of the Christian life and practice.

 

The “five solas” is a term used to designate five great foundational rallying cries of the Protestant reformers. They are as follows: “Sola Scriptura” (Scripture Alone); “Sola Gratia” (Grace Alone); “Sola Fide” (Faith Alone); “Solus Christus” (Christ Alone); and “Soli Deo Gloria” (To God Alone Be Glory).

 

These “five solas” were developed in response to specific perversions of the truth that were taught by the corrupt Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Church taught that the foundation for faith and practice was a combination of the scriptures, sacred tradition, and the teachings of the magisterium and the pope; but the Reformers said, “No, our foundation is sola scriptura”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved through a combination of God's grace, the merits that we accumulate through penance and good works, and the superfluity of merits that the saints before us accumulated; the reformers responded, “sola gratia”. The Catholic Church taught that we are justified by faith and the works that we produce, which the righteousness that God infuses in us through faith brings about. The reformers responded, “No, we are justified by faith alone, which lays hold of the alien righteousness of Christ that God freely credits to the account of those who believe”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved by the merits of Christ and the saints, and that we approach God through Christ, the saints, and Mary, who all pray and intercede for us. The Reformers responded, “No, we are saved by the merits of Christ Alone, and we come to God through Christ Alone”. The Catholic Church adhered to what Martin Luther called the “theology of glory” (in opposition to the “theology of the cross”), in which the glory for a sinner's salvation could be attributed partly to Christ, partly to Mary and the saints, and partly to the sinner himself. The reformers responded, “No, the only true gospel is that which gives all glory to God alone, as is taught in the scriptures.”

 

Today, the Catholic Church teaches the same essential perversions of truth; and much of Protestantism has seen a regress to many of the same corruptions, in many circles and denominations. It is a pressing need for Christians everywhere to reaffirm and champion anew the “five solas” which underlay and gave impetus to the Protestant Reformation.

 

Source: https://www.christforums.com/forums/topic/21-what-is-reformed-christian-theology/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Right that broadly aligns with my understanding.

 

I see why you are asking - it seems @webmdave has updated the Christian icon from Authentic Christian - maybe Christians are labelled by theology? Probably better just to call them Christians. What flavour doesn't matter until we start getting into details.

 

 

 

Right, "but" it is like saying that all religions are the same. Superficially they may appear as so. As such Christianity is like a particle that is superficially thought to be the smallest, but once split breaks down into all these other protons, neutrons etc. making up the entire worldview of a person. Christian is what I also consider an umbrella term because it can cover not only Christian denominations, but also Christian cults and sects. Scripturally speaking, followers of Christ were first called Christian at Antioch which had a way of mocking people. Christian was actually a derogatory term.

 

Theology is the study of God whereas religion falls into the study of man. Consider the differences according to Dr. R.C. Sproul (Reformed Theologian):

 

"Religion is chiefly the study of a certain kind of human behavior, be it under the rubric of anthropology, sociology, or psychology. The study of Theology, on the other hand, is the study of God. Religion is anthropocentric; theology is theocentric. The difference between religion and theology is ultimately the difference between God and man. - R.C. Sproul"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Christforums said:

 

Right, "but" it is like saying that all religions are the same. Superficially they may appear as so. As such Christianity is like a particle that is superficially thought to be the smallest, but once split breaks down into all these other protons, neutrons etc. making up the entire worldview of a person. Christian is what I also consider an umbrella term because it can cover not only Christian denominations, but also Christian cults and sects. Scripturally speaking, followers of Christ were first called Christian at Antioch which had a way of mocking people. Christian was actually a derogatory term.

 

Theology is the study of God whereas religion falls into the study of man. Consider the differences according to Dr. R.C. Sproul (Reformed Theologian):

 

"Religion is chiefly the study of a certain kind of human behavior, be it under the rubric of anthropology, sociology, or psychology. The study of Theology, on the other hand, is the study of God. Religion is anthropocentric; theology is theocentric. The difference between religion and theology is ultimately the difference between God and man. - R.C. Sproul"

 

A rather detailed thought regarding a simple point. The point was for the purposes of the forum we only need to distinguish between those who are christian and those who are ex Christians to help in a general identification of a persons position during discussion. For example we don't also need to know that I'm a methodological naturalist but not a philosophic one. Sure the 'detail' might come up during conversation but doesn't need to be advertised on my profile. Likewise I don't really need your profile to state you are baptist, Methodist, catholic, reformed etc. Only that you are Christian. I can then, and often will ask a person I'm discussing with their particular views, theology and thoughts on a subject rather than assuming - oh he's baptists therefore he thinks/believes xyz. I hate it when Christians say Oh you are atheist therefore.... (insert mostly wrong assumption). Likewise I assume Christians would hate it if I assumed all Christians hated [insert some group].

 

Put it this way, if you state at a minimum that you are a christian then I can assume some general base assumptions about your theology, and if you are a Muslim I can do the same, and I know there is major differences. So my whole point was not about making sure we correctly identify everyones' particular theology or philosophy, but that we can quickly and accurately identify each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question to William @Christforums :

 

Have you stopped beating your wife?

 

Please answer yes or no.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, webmdave said:

My question to William @Christforums :

 

Have you stopped beating your wife?

 

Please answer yes or no.

 

 

 

Yes, I've learned to hold the door open for her rather than be the first to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Christforums said:

 

Yes, I've learned to hold the door open for her rather than be the first to leave.

 

So witty, but my question wasn't "Have you stopped leaving your house before your wife, or beating her as if in a race."

 

So, when did you stop beating her? Just a date, please. Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, webmdave said:

 

So witty, but my question wasn't "Have you stopped leaving your house before your wife, or beating her as if in a race."

 

So, when did you stop beating her? Just a date, please. Thanks. 

 

Never physically beat my wife, but I must admit that I now refrain from beating her down while in debate over life issues. The refrain or pause and remaining silent and saying no more only began in the last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/13/2019 at 4:25 AM, Christforums said:

 

And what about Satan and his minions?

 

Did ya'll miss me?

I guess for you, you have to take it all on faith.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DevilsCabanaBoy said:

I guess for you, you have to take it all on faith.

 

 

Faith means a myriad of things to various persons. I'm not even going to guess what faith means to you. If you wish to clarify then please do.

 

My point about Satan is that Satan and demons believe God exists for they've seen and yet do not believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Christforums said:

 

Thank you for asking for clarification Weezer!

 

I am Reformed Presbyterian. Our doctrine follows the Apostolic doctrines which were later developed by Augustine, Luther, and Calvin. One could say that as a Calvinist Augustinian doctrine has come into fruition in Calvinism.

 

Reformed is a theological umbrella term which covers and conveys much more than Calvinism. For example to be Reformed doctrinal speaking means: systematic theology, catholic (universal), Protestant (5 Solas), Calvinism, Covenant, Amillennialism, and Cessationism.

 

To put this in historical context:

 

The Reformed faith is biblical Christianity in its truest and most consistent form. Broadly speaking, Reformed theology includes any system of belief that traces its roots back to the Protestant Reformation of the 16th Century. Of course, the Reformers themselves traced their doctrine to Scripture, as indicated by their credo of “sola scriptura,” so Reformed theology is not a “new” belief system but one that seeks to continue apostolic doctrine. The Latin word sola means "alone" or "only" in English. The five solae articulated five fundamental beliefs of the Protestant Reformation, pillars which the Reformers believed to be essentials of the Christian life and practice.

 

The “five solas” is a term used to designate five great foundational rallying cries of the Protestant reformers. They are as follows: “Sola Scriptura” (Scripture Alone); “Sola Gratia” (Grace Alone); “Sola Fide” (Faith Alone); “Solus Christus” (Christ Alone); and “Soli Deo Gloria” (To God Alone Be Glory).

 

These “five solas” were developed in response to specific perversions of the truth that were taught by the corrupt Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Church taught that the foundation for faith and practice was a combination of the scriptures, sacred tradition, and the teachings of the magisterium and the pope; but the Reformers said, “No, our foundation is sola scriptura”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved through a combination of God's grace, the merits that we accumulate through penance and good works, and the superfluity of merits that the saints before us accumulated; the reformers responded, “sola gratia”. The Catholic Church taught that we are justified by faith and the works that we produce, which the righteousness that God infuses in us through faith brings about. The reformers responded, “No, we are justified by faith alone, which lays hold of the alien righteousness of Christ that God freely credits to the account of those who believe”. The Catholic Church taught that we are saved by the merits of Christ and the saints, and that we approach God through Christ, the saints, and Mary, who all pray and intercede for us. The Reformers responded, “No, we are saved by the merits of Christ Alone, and we come to God through Christ Alone”. The Catholic Church adhered to what Martin Luther called the “theology of glory” (in opposition to the “theology of the cross”), in which the glory for a sinner's salvation could be attributed partly to Christ, partly to Mary and the saints, and partly to the sinner himself. The reformers responded, “No, the only true gospel is that which gives all glory to God alone, as is taught in the scriptures.”

 

Today, the Catholic Church teaches the same essential perversions of truth; and much of Protestantism has seen a regress to many of the same corruptions, in many circles and denominations. It is a pressing need for Christians everywhere to reaffirm and champion anew the “five solas” which underlay and gave impetus to the Protestant Reformation.

 

Source: https://www.christforums.com/forums/topic/21-what-is-reformed-christian-theology/

 

How is Reformed Presbyterian different from Presbyterian Church USA? Just curious. Are you more of a Bible literalist? More of a predestination view? Calvin on steroids?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Christforums said:

 

Faith means a myriad of things to various persons. I'm not even going to guess what faith means to you. If you wish to clarify then please do.

 

My point about Satan is that Satan and demons believe God exists for they've seen and yet do not believe.

 

I hate to break it to you but Satan doesn't exist. Satan  (and demons) are  mythological figures. And oddly, you claim to know what Satan thinks. That's a little strange. Are you sure you're thinking straight?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2019 at 2:01 PM, Christforums said:

 

G'day,

 

Have you replaced God for your perspective or man's understanding of a god in my question?

 

 

1 hour ago, Christforums said:

 

Never physically beat my wife, but I must admit that I now refrain from beating her down while in debate over life issues. The refrain or pause and remaining silent and saying no more only began in the last year.

 

Thanks for playing along. Since you apparently understand the fallacious nature of false dilemma questions, I wonder at your use of the approach. Seems disengenuous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Orbit said:

 

How is Reformed Presbyterian different from Presbyterian Church USA? Just curious. Are you more of a Bible literalist? More of a predestination view? Calvin on steroids?

 

PCUSA nothing more than simply a book club. They've rejected the Creeds and Confessions which we Reformers vowed to uphold at one time. My church actually broke away from the PCUSA in the 1940s when the PCUSA went full blown liberal and began disciplining us for holding to Scripture (imagine in America being sent to jail for upholding the Constitution). One is not required to believe in God or the Bible to be a PCUSA pastor today. They are not Reformed in theology but only Presbyterian. Presbyterianism is a form of church government. If you're American then you're familiar with Presbyterianism. America is framed on the Presbyterian church government with all her checks and balances.  Theology aside, I think Presbyterianism is the most Scripturally sound form or framework of government.

 

And yes, Predestination is Scriptural. The Reformed theology in question to do with Predestination is based on Scripture and the Apostolic doctrine is further developed by Augustine, Luther, and Calvin.  Now lemme say that there's a lot of misconceptions surrounding predestination and if anyone wants to tackle the doctrine I'd be happy to engage them.

 

Enjoy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christforums said:

My point about Satan is that Satan and demons believe God exists for they've seen and yet do not believe.

 

They believe... but they do not believe? Not sure if this is a typo? You realise this is a logical contradiction?

 

The bible says the demons believe and tremble. IF the bible and certain interpretations are true the devil knows God exists... he believes it, he just disagrees with the whole plan thing so started a rebellion.

 

Incoming side tangent on free will:

This (the point above) is actually a rather good argument against those who claim God cannot reveal himself to everyone because it will take away free will. Bollocks - Lucifer knows God exists and yet still exercised his free will and rebelled.....

 

Unless that was all part of Gods plan in which case we are all just puppets playing out a script. (And ipso facto no freewill)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, webmdave said:

Thanks for playing along. Since you apparently understand the fallacious nature of false dilemma questions, I wonder at your use of the approach. Seems disengenuous. 

 

Why can't we like admin posts?

 

I saw where this was going. Great point made! +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LogicalFallacy said:

They believe... but they do not believe? Not sure if this is a typo? You realise this is a logical contradiction?

 

Do you believe with your own eyes only or is there more to believe of someone other than their existence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Christforums said:

 

PCUSA nothing more than simply a book club. They've rejected the Creeds and Confessions which we Reformers vowed to uphold at one time. My church actually broke away from the PCUSA in the 1940s when the PCUSA went full blown liberal and began disciplining us for holding to Scripture. One is not required to believe in God or the Bible to be a PCUSA pastor today. They are not Reformed in theology but only Presbyterian. Presbyterianism is a form of church government. If you're American then you're familiar with Presbyterianism. America is framed on the Presbyterian church government with all her checks and balances.  Theology aside, I think Presbyterianism is the most Scripturally sound form or framework of government.

 

And yes, Predestination is Scriptural. The Reformed theology in question to do with Predestination is based on Scripture and the Apostolic doctrine is further developed by Augustine, Luther, and Calvin.  Now lemme say that there's a lot of misconceptions surrounding predestination and if anyone wants to tackle the doctrine I'd be happy to engage them.

 

Enjoy.

 

So you are what I would characterize as "fundamentalist". You might not like it, but it's good enough for me. So let's get down to basics. What evidence do you have that God exists? The Bible does not count as evidence, that is begging the question (a logical fallacy where the conclusion is contained in the assertion). In other words, no circular reasoning allowed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Orbit said:

 

How is Reformed Presbyterian different from Presbyterian Church USA? Just curious. Are you more of a Bible literalist? More of a predestination view? Calvin on steroids?

 

It's a very small branch off the tree:

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Presbyterian_Church_of_North_America

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Christforums said:

 

Faith means a myriad of things to various persons. I'm not even going to guess what faith means to you. If you wish to clarify then please do.

 

My point about Satan is that Satan and demons believe God exists for they've seen and yet do not believe.

Of course because they're all invisible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Orbit said:

 

So you are what I would characterize as "fundamentalist". You might not like it, but it's good enough for me. So let's get down to basics. What evidence do you have that God exists? The Bible does not count as evidence, that is begging the question (a logical fallacy where the conclusion is contained in the assertion). In other words, no circular reasoning allowed.

 

Yes, from a distance every planet is round or spherical.

 

Let's get down to basics and throw every testimony outside a court of law because we consider it inadmissible or unbelievable etc.

 

Begging the question, and other logical fallacies etc., I generally do not dive into such arguments because everything can be found to be a logical contradiction. There's not one person here on this board that's completely logically sound.

 

The fact is there would be no logic without the logicause or Logos. The very concept which incarnated in the flesh you reject, therefore, I reject your logical position. The very audience that John wrote his books said that the Logos could not incarnate. I mean, today, it would be like giving artificial intelligence an autonomous body whereas in the day people then and now reject that the Logos could incarnate.

 

Now, I'm sure most here want to reject a higher standard of authority and place more weight upon their own experiences or whatever which is nothing more than an appeal to a different authority. According to the standard of authority, "You" you will always be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Christforums said:

 

Yes, from a distance every planet is round or spherical.

 

Let's get down to basics and throw every testimony outside a court of law because we consider it inadmissible or unbelievable etc.

 

Begging the question, and other logical fallacies etc., I generally do not dive into such arguments because everything can be found to be a logical contradiction. There's not one person here on this board that's completely logically sound.

 

The fact is there would be no logic without the logicause or Logos. The very concept which incarnated in a person you reject, therefore, I reject your logical position. The very audience that John wrote his books said that the Logos could not incarnate. I mean, today, it would be like giving artificial intelligence an autonomous body whereas in the day people then and now reject that the Logos could incarnate.

 

Now, I'm sure most here want to reject a higher standard of authority and place more weight upon their own experiences or whatever which is nothing more than an appeal to a different authority. According to the standard of authority, "You" you will always be right.

 

Got it. You have no evidence that doesn't derive from circular reasoning.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...