There Was a Time, Long, Long Ago.....

[Arial]

The idea of Total Depravity is that because of original sin, man would not choose to love God unless God directly acts upon the person.
This means that God directly acts upon some but not others.

There are several threads already existing that deal with total depravity. This is not one of them. This thread is about what the church once had and what was lost, when it was lost, and the result of that loss.

I think all of that was an excellent answer to the question posed in the OP. Do you think all of those individuals mentioned in the OP were really any different fundamentally than those responding to the OP. They were simply people who, for whatever reason, had developed biases concerning the questions being addressed.

Those you mentioned as the reason for why the church lost something had opposing views. Some were adopted as being consistent with the whole of Scripture and others were deemed heresy because they were found to not be consistent with the whole of Scripture. This was arrived at by systematic theology (look it up). It is the foundational doctrines of Christianity that became a part of the traditional, historic Protestant Christian church established during the Reformation, and its teaching, and that pervaded the churches of the people of God that was lost in the time period I mentioned in the OP.

So no, just mentioning all those names does not address the OP question at all. It actually addressed nothing. The question is not were those people any different than people are today who are responding to the OP. The question is what caused the losing of that foundation and what did the loss cause?

It would be very difficult for one who has abandoned the foundation themselves to do anything but rail against it.

 

[Arial]

I would offer. The kingdom of God does not come by observing the temporal dying historical thing seen .They must be compared to the unseen eternal things .called faith Christ giving us His understanding below


2 Corinthians 4:18King James Version While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

God looks to the heart. And remember he makes men different so that men do not puff themselves up above sola scriptura) In order that some might reach out to him through His living word .

In that way there must be denominations or sects as families . as heresies. . opinions personal commentaries of mankind .

1 Corinthians 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

In that was there can be differences in oral traditons as long as they do not do despite to the fullness of Christ, the cost of salvation

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

I think in that way Christ uses as a ceremonial sign the gathering as a sign to the world not a sign unto there own selves .Aarons sons added to the ceremony "strange unauthorized fire. the fiery judgment of Christ.

One new testament ceremonial sign to the world not to the church. . .The hair covering doctrine (Nazarene)

1 Corinthians 11. One that seems to be dying .. . .woman taking the head. . Gender confusion by the king of identity theft. and king lying signs to wonder after

I have difficulty understanding that. So I will just make an observation. Part of the foundation of Christ's church, a part most who call themselves Christian have not abandoned, is the deity of Christ.

 

[Arial]

That is not true. The doctrine of Total Depravity denies your last sentence. Those who disobey, according to TD, do not do so willingly. They have no choice. They have been given ears that can't hear and eyes that can't see.

Are they doing anything they don't want to do? Are they being disobedient against their will? A discussion on total depravity belongs in a thread devoted to the subject of total depravity. There are some, and there are many others that were not on that subject in which you have given thoroughly and repeatedly your view of successfully hijacking a thread.

Why is it so hard for people to locate the purpose and subject of an OP and stick to it?

 

[LeviR]

There are several threads already existing that deal with total depravity. This is not one of them. This thread is about what the church once had and what was lost, when it was lost, and the result of that loss.

Those you mentioned as the reason for why the church lost something had opposing views. Some were adopted as being consistent with the whole of Scripture and others were deemed heresy because they were found to not be consistent with the whole of Scripture. This was arrived at by systematic theology (look it up). It is the foundational doctrines of Christianity that became a part of the traditional, historic Protestant Christian church established during the Reformation, and its teaching, and that pervaded the churches of the people of God that was lost in the time period I mentioned in the OP.

So no, just mentioning all those names does not address the OP question at all. It actually addressed nothing. The question is not were those people any different than people are today who are responding to the OP. The question is what caused the losing of that foundation and what did the loss cause?

It would be very difficult for one who has abandoned the foundation themselves to do anything but rail against it.

Division starts with this:

If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen, and if Christ is not risen your faith is worthless.

The dead are in the grave and nowhere else.

 

[JIM]

Are they doing anything they don't want to do? Are they being disobedient against their will? A discussion on total depravity belongs in a thread devoted to the subject of total depravity. There are some, and there are many others that were not on that subject in which you have given thoroughly and repeatedly your view of successfully hijacking a thread.

Why is it so hard for people to locate the purpose and subject of an OP and stick to it?

Everything that you believe and post here on the subject of soteriology is dependent upon total depravity. You asked what was lost and how did we get here. We got here because there is not, nor ever was, a universal understanding of what God's word says and means. That is displayed here over and over again.

 

[Arial]

Those such as myself and others deny what you claim to be the very foundational doctrines of the apostolic and historical Christianity. We believe it is you, and those who believe as you do, who create some of those divisions.

Fewer more obvious statements have been made. However----I not believing something does not make it untrue. And, nevertheless, it is those foundational doctrines that were lost, because they were never taught and because they came to be considered unnecessary. They were replaced by feelings and emotions and a religion that does not even bother to center itself around God (theology). As we see on full display in this thread.

A division is caused when the "I don't believe it." enters the equation and one walks away from something. The division is not caused by the thing that was walked away from. Now, if you, or anyone, can systematically, hermeneutically, exegetically, espositionally, disprove any of those foundational Reformation teachings----which is the way in which they were arrived at----you are more than welcome to do so.

This cannot be done by basing it on feelings, or what makes the most sense according to those feelings, or appeals to emotion, or simple degradation of them, or misstating them. It has to be done in the same way as the way in which they arrived. As stated above. Some of the debates as they were being established, and the heresies refuted may have become very emotional and heated, but the doctrines themselves were never established by feelings and emotions, but solid and sound theology and all the other oligies involved.

 

[JIM]

A division is caused when the "I don't believe it." enters the equation and one walks away from something. The division is not caused by the thing that was walked away from. Now, if you, or anyone, can systematically, hermeneutically, exegetically, espositionally, disprove any of those foundational Reformation teachings----which is the way in which they were arrived at----you are more than welcome to do so.

We do that all the time. And your response is "I don't believe it" and you walk away from it.

 

[Arial]

We do that all the time. And your response is "I don't believe it" and you walk away from it.

No, You. Don't. If you were to actually observe the actual work that was done in the Reformation and for the couple of centuries after, you would see int their writings a profound difference in how they present their case and the way in which you---and others---present theirs.

One of the side effects of the way in which preachers preached and what they preached (as given in the OP) and theologians wrote, is that Christians have become incredibly spiritually lazy and don't even know it. And that a natural consequence of another way in which the church has been adversely affected: whatever the current culture is comes flooding unrecognized into her. Unrecognized because her people have not been taught by the shepherds (who likely don't know either) historical biblical doctrine but only feel good stuff. Doctrines as pulpit teachings becoming whatever the Pastors decides to teach. And the sheep just follow along having no interest in anything but feeling good.

 

[Arial]

We got here because there is not, nor ever was, a universal understanding of what God's word says and means. That is displayed here over and over again.

What is displayed here is a result of what I posited in the OP. And something does not have to be universal in order to be true. That is irrelevant. God's word means what he means

 

[Alive]

Deleted the last couple of posts huh?

Jim…you know you are not to criticize mods in public, right?

 

[Tambora]

The OP is dealing with a specific topic. How did the church get into the condition of being full of divisions.

I think it comes from a variety of attitudes.
Enjoy being snarky towards others, thrive on controversy, feel a sense of having a superior spiritual enlightenment.
The list goes on.

But whatever the cause of such attitudes being exhibited, I can say that I have at times (depending on which side of the bed I wake up on that day) been guilty of most of them.

I will also say that through all the conversations, arguments, and debates, I have found that an exception can be found in almost any doctrine one comes up with.
Those exceptions have caused me to readjust viewpoints I previously held.
So I have become cautious over the years not to throw the brakes on and sit in park for any doctrine, but let them continue to unfold.

 

[Tambora]

I think all of that was an excellent answer to the question posed in the OP. Do you think all of those individuals mentioned in the OP were really any different fundamentally than those responding to the OP. They were simply people who, for whatever reason, had developed biases concerning the questions being addressed.

Well yeah, and they all used scripture for their bias.

 

[Alive]

Well yeah, and they all used scripture for their bias.

Factions must exist as Paul said.
IMO…regarding the main doctrines other than clear heresy, it comes down to folks adopting via one means or another suppositions. If a supposition is not solidly scriptural, then doctrines built upon it is wrong.
Most often, this is innocent. Most folks were never discipled properly, but just adopt positions based on familiarity.
Mental ascent is not enough. The Lord is not offended when we are wrong, if sincere.
What is needed is maturity.

 

[Mr GLee]

I have difficulty understanding that. So I will just make an observation. Part of the foundation of Christ's church, a part most who call themselves Christian have not abandoned, is the deity of Christ.

In short the kingdom of God does not come after the observing the temporal historical they must be mixed with faith the unseen eternal things of Christ

The prescription not to focus on what they eyes see the eternal many seem to avoid

2 Corinthians 4:18King James Version8 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

 

[JIM]

Factions must exist as Paul said.
IMO…regarding the main doctrines other than clear heresy, it comes down to folks adopting via one means or another suppositions. If a supposition is not solidly scriptural, then doctrines built upon it is wrong.

I would agree with that whole heartedly. And from my viewpoint, TD is a prime example.

Most often, this is innocent. Most folks were never discipled properly, but just adopt positions based on familiarity.
Mental ascent is not enough. The Lord is not offended when we are wrong, if sincere.
What is needed is maturity.

Do you think those mentioned in the OP needed maturity?

 

[Alive]

I would agree with that whole heartedly. And from my viewpoint, TD is a prime example.

Do you think those mentioned in the OP needed maturity?

Who are the mentioned specifically?

 

[Arial]

Well, we got one agreement from @makesends that what was posted in the OP as to what caused divisions to multiply within the church was indeed what opened the doors. Not only to divisions but in large part a very immature church. It was a skeletal view as was noted because of the need for brevity. Whole large books have been written on the subject. And in case anyone thinks what was presented is nothing more than a Reformation bias presentation and speculation, it was not.

If the history of the church is followed through the "age of Enlightenment" to the present day it is easy enough to see. I did not expect any who sit on the free will side of the great divide to ever agree. I did hope that a couple of embers might have begun to flame. The truth of the matter is, that not all that many see that there is any problem with the church as long as it is the church. In spite of the fact that the epistles are full of constant cautions, exhortations, and warnings of the very thing that has happened.

And just in case, too, any should think that the Reformation and the doctrines that came out of it, is where those teachings in it began, as though they were invented out of thin air and bias, it is not. They were there in every word Jesus spoke, every word we have recorded in Acts and the epistles. They were in the early church and they were lost once before. When the RCC corrupted many of them. What the Reformation did was bring them back to the teaching of the NT church.

What Finny let loose and the mantle that was taken up and the many ways it morphed and the many branches it grew, is what took them out of the church again.

There are many in the body of Christ who care deeply about this because the glory of Christ is all. They write books and give sermons on it in a mighty attempt to rebuild the foundation the apostles so carefully laid, and reset the gates they set, against the enemy. I care deeply about this, but I seem to be standing alone in that forum wise. And it concerns me. Why is it not even Important?

 

[makesends]

Well, we got one agreement from @makesends that what was posted in the OP as to what caused divisions to multiply within the church was indeed what opened the doors. Not only to divisions but in large part a very immature church. It was a skeletal view as was noted because of the need for brevity. Whole large books have been written on the subject. And in case anyone thinks what was presented is nothing more than a Reformation bias presentation and speculation, it was not.

If the history of the church is followed through the "age of Enlightenment" to the present day it is easy enough to see. I did not expect any who sit on the free will side of the great divide to ever agree. I did hope that a couple of embers might have begun to flame. The truth of the matter is, that not all that many see that there is any problem with the church as long as it is the church. In spite of the fact that the epistles are full of constant cautions, exhortations, and warnings of the very thing that has happened.

And just in case, too, any should think that the Reformation and the doctrines that came out of it, is where those teachings in it began, as though they were invented out of thin air and bias, it is not. They were there in every word Jesus spoke, every word we have recorded in Acts and the epistles. They were in the early church and they were lost once before. When the RCC corrupted many of them. What the Reformation did was bring them back to the teaching of the NT church.

What Finny let loose and the mantle that was taken up and the many ways it morphed and the many branches it grew, is what took them out of the church again.

There are many in the body of Christ who care deeply about this because the glory of Christ is all. They write books and give sermons on it in a mighty attempt to rebuild the foundation the apostles so carefully laid, and reset the gates they set, against the enemy. I care deeply about this, but I seem to be standing alone in that forum wise. And it concerns me. Why is it not even Important?

You are a long way from alone. I've seen this decried many times in different ways, on different sites, to include this one.

I hope this isn't taken to be a departure from the OP, but I think it becomes habit with many of the Reformed, like it does with me, to be on the defensive in these matters, to the point where we need to be reminded that the default view is God's view, and the nearest general representation of it (i.e. doctrine), is the Reformed POV. If God be for us, who can be against us?

So when someone does what you have done here, we look at details and not at the big picture you painted, of corruption of truth. It's not that it isn't important, but speaking for myself, I've been lulled into a certain degree of apathy at the many voices against which I have argued for so long.

What I have seen is not as much where the departure happened, but the effects of it, which have been devastating to my life, yet, for which I am grateful to the Lord because of what has come to replace what I once thought. Those effects are of the same DNA as the source —the mind which does all it can to preserve self-determinism.

 

[LeviR]

Well, we got one agreement from @makesends that what was posted in the OP as to what caused divisions to multiply within the church was indeed what opened the doors. Not only to divisions but in large part a very immature church. It was a skeletal view as was noted because of the need for brevity. Whole large books have been written on the subject. And in case anyone thinks what was presented is nothing more than a Reformation bias presentation and speculation, it was not.

If the history of the church is followed through the "age of Enlightenment" to the present day it is easy enough to see. I did not expect any who sit on the free will side of the great divide to ever agree. I did hope that a couple of embers might have begun to flame. The truth of the matter is, that not all that many see that there is any problem with the church as long as it is the church. In spite of the fact that the epistles are full of constant cautions, exhortations, and warnings of the very thing that has happened.

And just in case, too, any should think that the Reformation and the doctrines that came out of it, is where those teachings in it began, as though they were invented out of thin air and bias, it is not. They were there in every word Jesus spoke, every word we have recorded in Acts and the epistles. They were in the early church and they were lost once before. When the RCC corrupted many of them. What the Reformation did was bring them back to the teaching of the NT church.

What Finny let loose and the mantle that was taken up and the many ways it morphed and the many branches it grew, is what took them out of the church again.

There are many in the body of Christ who care deeply about this because the glory of Christ is all. They write books and give sermons on it in a mighty attempt to rebuild the foundation the apostles so carefully laid, and reset the gates they set, against the enemy. I care deeply about this, but I seem to be standing alone in that forum wise. And it concerns me. Why is it not even Important?

I would say whoever thinks Adam’s sin is a condemnation on the flesh and blood nature of man is correct.

 

[Mr GLee]

You are a long way from alone. I've seen this decried many times in different ways, on different sites, to include this one.

I hope this isn't taken to be a departure from the OP, but I think it becomes habit with many of the Reformed, like it does with me, to be on the defensive in these matters, to the point where we need to be reminded that the default view is God's view, and the nearest general representation of it (i.e. doctrine), is the Reformed POV. If God be for us, who can be against us?

So when someone does what you have done here, we look at details and not at the big picture you painted, of corruption of truth. It's not that it isn't important, but speaking for myself, I've been lulled into a certain degree of apathy at the many voices against which I have argued for so long.

What I have seen is not as much where the departure happened, but the effects of it, which have been devastating to my life, yet, for which I am grateful to the Lord because of what has come to replace what I once thought. Those effects are of the same DNA as the source —the mind which does all it can to preserve self-determinism.

I would offer.

We have the time of restoration. The first century reformation .Hebrew 9

The time of departure was when the faithless Jews had become jealous of all the surrounding pagan nation whose foundation is out of sight our of mind. No invisible head .

Most people from my experience do not even acknowledge the first century reformation and its effect .But why?

They rejected Christ who works in born agin believers that Christ should not reign over them.

Kings in Israel the abomination of desolation .God never did live in temples made with the hands of dying mankind as a will of sinners .When he walked out for the last time in Mathew 23 he declared it is desolate not will be as some sort of a sign to wonder or marvel after.

1 Samuel 8:4-10 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them. And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.

Hebrew9: 9-11 Which was a figure(shadow) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.