Some Reconsiderations (I Recant!)

[JohnV]

Even then, Chris, I don't mind people having their views, whatever they may be. If they're sincerely trying their best to do what is right, even in their thinking, you have to support that effort as much as possible, whether it is by gentle correction, suggestions, or even admonitions: its a matter of love and fellowship.

The difference is not so much whether one person is more righteous than the other in his own perception, or less righteous in another's, but whether each person is open to the Spirit's leading through the Word applied and through sound reasoning ( which is the Spirit at work in the mind. ) We're all still on the road from error to truth.

What I do mind is people making into the Bible their own speculative opinions, obligating them on others. Suddenly some new philosophy or perspective becomes the Biblical precept of the day, when it never was before. That's just overdoing something, and shows a real lack of understanding on those issues.

The Bible is supposed to be a clear exposition on its own of the basics of the Chrisian life of salvation and thankfulness. Perspicuous and Sufficient! The more complicated and hard-to-understand things do not negate the simple things, but amplify and fill them out. Sometimes we're making things impossible for the budding believer because we're setting the bar too high for our believing peers, and sometimes we're making things too easy for the believing peers by setting the bar too low for budding Christians. It really comes down to something simple: do you know God, and do you believe that Jesus died for sins, yours included? The level of understanding, one's educated achievements, makes no difference here. None of us were perfect when saved; and we don't lose our salvation because we didn't attain to others' expectations. The simple truths are still simple truths, and we should be allowed to believe them as such. We should grow where we can, but not to the point where we deny our salvation's beginnings.

 

[mybigGod]

I would say there is a tension there and to feel obligated in that tension could be a good thing. Yet not going about growing in the biblical way can add to the lack of confidence of a believer as well as making the bar too high by those around him. I still cannot ignore that tension though.

 

[JohnV]

Definitely the call should be upward. I'm just saying that the initial things ought not to be negated. You can't kick someone out of the faith because he's not as legalistic or as antinomian. The tension has to be a beneficial one, of expectations of the Spirit for both the other and for oneself. Looking down the nose is usually a sign of being laying flat on the back, not of being higher.

 

[mybigGod]

Thank you John. I may have misunderstood you because i thought we were talking about believers and had no thought about judgment on someones faith in our exchange.
I also think that being rigid can be a bad thing. It depends apoun what your rigid about.
The whole argument about music is just about preference when it comes to the question of singing doctrinal hymns or singing strictly psalms, i guess i would enjoy both churches but i would probably react to the attitude that this particular music must be the only valid music . Like i said it depends apoun what you want to be rigid about.

 

[Myshkin]

Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
From months of thought, Scripture reading, and consulation with my elders and other ordained men, I have reconsidered many things.

Postmillennialism- I just don't buy the dominion mandate. I think it is blatant eisogesis. God has revealed to us in His Word what He does and does not like, and we have no business "taking over for Christ" things that God abhors. I have a very optimistic future as far as eschatology is concerned, but I do not believe in a literal thousand year millennium. Yes, I know many today who claim Postmil do not either, but they're really not Postmil, and more often than not, fall under the Christian Reconstructionalist/Dominionist/Theonomic camp, not traditional Reformed Postmillennialism. I would say I'm an Optimistic Amillennialist, and I don't believe that I have changed my eschatological views one bit... I'm just being honest about what my view actually is (i.e. NOT postmillennialism as normally understood).

For what it's worth, this makes two of us. I have recently joined the amillennial persuasion, and left the postmillenial position.