Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

wof and the two natures of man

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
    This is so funny...Unlike you, I read the OP!

    You actually believe "In man two natures are combined."

    You believe "He is at the same time spirit and matter, heaven and earth, soul and body." deliberately leaving out spirit, because your religion only allows you to see two dimensions...and you miss the third and beyond..

    You believe, "For this reason, on one side he is the son of God, and on the other he is doomed to destruction because of the Fall;" Which has nothing at all to do with the nature of man, but the nature of death that was introduced by Adam when he committed treason, and bowed to the snake.

    You believe " sin in his soul and sickness in his body bear witness to the right which death has over him. " clearly, and yet again, this has nothing to do with his tripartite nature. Sin prevents His Holy Spirit from reviving man's spirit, and allowing man to be born again. The Word, sharp as a two edged sword, is the only thing that is able to make this distinction...as it is written and sadly ignored in your false doctrine.

    You believe "It is the twofold nature which has been redeemed by divine grace..."...through His Spirit, making our spirit come alive, and restoring the tripartite image of God in which we were created.

    Maybe you haven't grasped the implications of what you believe? Hmmm?
    Are they inspired by God as the scripture? Do you care to post another paragraph, as I've asked? Do you seriously entertain the fantasy that I'd read 1000 pages to find where your heroes and gurus refute scripture? Post where the guru successfully proves that the Word of God cannot divide between soul and spirit, because there is no such division possible...

    Or...tell me again I don't know what you believe, since it's here in this post cited word for word...or suggest that you don't even believe the OP...That would be fine too, and not surprising.


    He did...

    And I pray with Paul: May the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    ...because it actually does pertain to the subject.
    Did you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?

    SIG
    ---> Insert your denial here. <---

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Tallen View Post

      Did you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?

      SIG
      Trying to find where you posted the pertinent quotes from your gurus. ...Did you forget to post them again? Or are you still entertaining fantasies? Are the fantasies enjoying the entertainment? Or do you do for your fantasies what you do here, and make them wait while you post endless posts trying to make them look like they're in the wrong?

      Where are the pertinent quotes for the two or three of us that remain, who await your proof with bated breath. BTW, are they inspired by God unto correction, reproof and doctrine as the scriptures you are rejecting are? Are their quotes sharper than a two-edged sword, able to cut between soul and spirit?

      May the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

      YAWiA
      Pete

      ~(8-[)}<><===> (flames of new anointing, béret, non-prescription glasses to help critics and their ilk feel more secure, mustache, beard...and tie.) I serve a God who walked this earth for thirty years before He did a single miracle.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post

        Trying to find where you posted the pertinent quotes from your gurus. ...Did you forget to post them again? Or are you still entertaining fantasies? Are the fantasies enjoying the entertainment? Or do you do for your fantasies what you do here, and make them wait while you post endless posts trying to make them look like they're in the wrong?

        Where are the pertinent quotes for the two or three of us that remain, who await your proof with bated breath. BTW, are they inspired by God unto correction, reproof and doctrine as the scriptures you are rejecting are? Are their quotes sharper than a two-edged sword, able to cut between soul and spirit?

        May the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

        YAWiA
        I've posted from them in at least three past threads and conversations. Why would i do that again? You ignored what they said and went directly to your ad hom, disparaging and dinegrating comments, and misrepresenting them. I'm not stupid and willing to go down that road with you again..., so I provided you a link to them. They both, Berkhof and Strong, address your error and misunderstanding of scripture. The quotes, that you so desperately want, are right in the Systematics I linked you to.

        BTW, you never answered, is your personal opinion more inspired than theirs?

        How many times do you think we should go over this point? 10, 20, 50, 100, 2500 times or you can supply a number that you would like. The answer will be the same in each and every post, as I told you in the first one of my posts in this thread where I addressed this.

        Have you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?

        SIG
        ---> Insert your denial here. <---

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Tallen View Post

          I've posted from them in at least three past threads and conversations. Why would i do that again?
          You keep bringing it up as if it were important.

          Clearly it isn't, and the single paragraph you did post was a total fail. The fact that you posted in the past seems to you support enough for any phantasmagorical claim. There is this much evidence ()...which is enough to allow that the scripture still stands, and your gurus cannot erase, disavow, refute or deny a single jot or tittle...and so the canon remains intact for those who are willing to believe and be taught by the Word of the Living God.

          You ignored what they said and went directly to your ad hom, disparaging and dinegrating comments, and misrepresenting them.
          False witness. I've never said anything of your guru Strong, and merely assume by your fear of citing a single quote of his, that he refutes the scripture at least as well as your guru Berkhof, who failed miserably.

          Ad hom would be directed against Berkhof, whom I do not know, nor do I care to investigate further. Ad hom would be like this post, and your false accusations against me...Refuting his appeal to logic, his begging the question and his attempt to attribute guilt by association is mere apologetics, which is what this forum is about, and presumably the reason you offered that tidbit in the first place. I'm guessing that was the best he could do, and you cannot find a single paragraph in the thousands of pages that actually address Paul or Mark or Hebrews.

          I'm not stupid and willing to go down that road with you again..., so I provided you a link to them. They both, Berkhof and Strong, address your error and misunderstanding of scripture. The quotes, that you so desperately want, are right in the Systematics I linked you to.
          So I've given you two names....Kinchlow and Duplessis. Have you read everything they've written yet? Or do you just want to extend your ad homs and make disparaging and denigrating comments?

          BTW, you never answered, is your personal opinion more inspired than theirs?
          Are you saying, then, that their opinions ARE inspired by God and useful for doctrine reproof and correction? I'm actually saying scripture is inspired by God.

          In your opinion, clearly, not all scripture is inspired by God, and certain commentaries prove that to be true to your satisfaction. Thank you for asking.

          How many times do you think we should go over this point? 10, 20, 50, 100, 2500 times or you can supply a number that you would like. The answer will be the same in each and every post, as I told you in the first one of my posts in this thread where I addressed this.

          Have you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?
          Are they inspired by God? I'm only interested in you putting your own reasoning here on this forum...Is the Word of God able to divide between soul and spirit? Why or why not? Is the Word of God inspired by God for instruction, or does your inspiration come from another source?

          BTW...Have you read Kinchlow and Duplessis yet? Not because they're inspired, but in reading them, you can see that they use the same principles of hermeneutics as those who profess to be WoF believers.

          Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. YAWiA
          Pete

          ~(8-[)}<><===> (flames of new anointing, béret, non-prescription glasses to help critics and their ilk feel more secure, mustache, beard...and tie.) I serve a God who walked this earth for thirty years before He did a single miracle.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
            Are they inspired by God?
            Are you?

            I'm only interested in you putting your own reasoning here on this forum...
            Who cares? It isnt necessary for you to respond to this any more because I've explained my thoughts the way I wanted to. You need not try to dictate to me what I should post or not.

            How many times do you want to go over this? 10, 20, 50, 100, 2500 times? The answer will be the same each time.

            Have you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?

            SIG
            ---> Insert your denial here. <---

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Tallen View Post

              Have you read Berkhof and Strong, yet?

              SIG
              Have to read Yahweh, Jesus, and the apostles yet? You should try it, it's a best seller.
              Allen (Unless noted otherwise, Bible quotations are from the 1984 edition of the NIV)

              Faith--Sees the invisible, believes the incredible, and receives the impossible.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by AlFin View Post
                Have to read Yahweh, Jesus, and the apostles yet?
                Why most certainly. But your effort to dinegrate and disparage is noted and expected. Why would you think I haven't?

                You should try it, it's a best seller.
                Why didn't you direct this at TB? Your bigotry is showing in this post. You should read Berkhof and Strong, they are teachers in the body of Christ, their scholarly and informed opinions are worthwhile.

                SIG
                ---> Insert your denial here. <---

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Tallen View Post

                  Why most certainly. But your effort to dinegrate and disparage is noted and expected. Why would you think I haven't?
                  If you had read them, then we would be having this "I'm right/You're not right" discussion.

                  Why didn't you direct this at TB? Your bigotry is showing in this post. You should read Berkhof and Strong, they are teachers in the body of Christ, their scholarly and informed opinions are worthwhile.
                  I directed it to you since you seem to prefer what commentators claim scripture says instead of just letting scripture speak for itself.

                  And I'll leave it at that. I don't want to be cited for bickering.
                  Allen (Unless noted otherwise, Bible quotations are from the 1984 edition of the NIV)

                  Faith--Sees the invisible, believes the incredible, and receives the impossible.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by AlFin View Post
                    If you had read them, then we would be having this "I'm right/You're not right" discussion.
                    You assume too much. If you had read them you would agree with me.

                    I directed it to you since you seem to prefer what commentators claim scripture says instead of just letting scripture speak for itself.
                    Wrong. I referred to scholars who have systematically explained the scripture, as teachers in Christ's Body. You didn't read what they taught on the subject did you? The bible has much more to say on the subject than the two verses being misused to support an unbiblical doctrine. Your bigotry wouldn't let you see that though, would it?

                    And I'll leave it at that. I don't want to be cited for bickering.
                    You can leave it at that, but..., you left in ignorance. 😉
                    ---> Insert your denial here. <---

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Tallen View Post

                      You assume too much. If you had read them you would agree with me.



                      Wrong. I referred to scholars who have systematically explained the scripture, as teachers in Christ's Body. You didn't read what they taught on the subject did you? The bible has much more to say on the subject than the two verses being misused to support an unbiblical doctrine. Your bigotry wouldn't let you see that though, would it?
                      Totally false claim.

                      You linked to commentaries, and made clearly unsustainable claims concerning the links. You have not in any way made more than claims, and the paragraph you did cite was, as we've shown exhaustively, a total fail.

                      You have referred to your gurus, and made unsubstantiated claims concerning a "systematic" explanation that refutes the clear teaching of scripture...without a single quote from any of these alleged scholars.

                      It's bizarre that you make the claims when the thread argues against each of them.

                      You can leave it at that, but..., you left in ignorance. 😉
                      Have you read the Kinchlow books yet? Or the Duplessis books? Or have you chosen ignorance?

                      Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!
                      Pete

                      ~(8-[)}<><===> (flames of new anointing, béret, non-prescription glasses to help critics and their ilk feel more secure, mustache, beard...and tie.) I serve a God who walked this earth for thirty years before He did a single miracle.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
                        Totally false claim.

                        You linked to commentaries, and made clearly unsustainable claims concerning the links. You have not in any way made more than claims, and the paragraph you did cite was, as we've shown exhaustively, a total fail.
                        You forget..., way too much and too convienently. The fact of the matter is, we've been through the discussion at least three times over the years. To go through the discussion again, and end in the exact same place we did before, is a worthless endeavor. Also, the OP wasn't about whether or not a person is bipartite or tripartite being..., I pointed out that Murray had claimed a bipartite view. I pointed it out for your benefit since you claim Murray is one of your unproven wof gurus.

                        Instead of going through a worthless discussion with you, again... I linked you to Berkhof who refutes your error. Have you read him and Strong, yet?

                        You have referred to your gurus, and made unsubstantiated claims concerning a "systematic" explanation that refutes the clear teaching of scripture...without a single quote from any of these alleged scholars.
                        Have you read them yet?

                        It's bizarre that you make the claims when the thread argues against each of them.
                        How would you know? Have you read them, yet?

                        Have you read the Kinchlow books yet? Or the Duplessis books? Or have you chosen ignorance?
                        Have you substantiated your claim? Has either claimed to be wof? Or have you decided to let your false witness stand and continue your obfuscation?

                        Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!
                        Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
                        Matthew 22:37 KJV
                        ---> Insert your denial here. <---

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Tallen View Post

                          You forget..., way too much and too convienently. The fact of the matter is, we've been through the discussion at least three times over the years. To go through the discussion again, and end in the exact same place we did before, is a worthless endeavor. Also, the OP wasn't about whether or not a person is bipartite or tripartite being..., I pointed out that Murray had claimed a bipartite view. I pointed it out for your benefit since you claim Murray is one of your unproven wof gurus.

                          Instead of going through a worthless discussion with you, again... I linked you to Berkhof who refutes your error. Have you read him and Strong, yet?
                          No...and thank you again for pointing out that your take your cues from man.

                          You've found three gurus who lead you to err in your theology. And that's what happens when you trust in man, bereft of the spirit...When you cannot distinguish between soul and spirit, there is nothing to teach you but men...

                          ...and such is the difference between you and me, that Murray can err, and still be brilliant in my eyes when it comes to explaining how prayer works, why prayer works, and what it means to believe God.

                          Murray is dead, therefore incorrigible when it comes to his understanding of the image of God, in whose image we are...tripartite. You, on the other hand, still breathing as I assume you are, do not need to be incorrigible. That's now a choice you have to repent and learn, and receive the Holy Spirit, dividing thus your soul and His Spirit, and making you a whole man...or be content in your partial understanding.

                          Have you read them yet?
                          Have you read a single sentence from Kinchlow or Duplessis? Or do you want to continue to make ignorant claims that they are not WoF based on your presumption.

                          I make no claims concerning Strong...Never read him. I would accept at face value your claim that his successfully refutes Romans, Thessalonians and Hebrews...except that you keep making the claim without citing a single sentence where he makes that claim.

                          How would you know? Have you read them, yet?
                          Your present obfuscation is all I need to suggest that your claims are most likely spurious. Since your an adept, a devotee of both, draw from their well and enlighten us all...or continue to obfuscate. Until a decent thread gets started there's always perpetuating this.

                          Have you substantiated your claim? Has either claimed to be wof? Or have you decided to let your false witness stand and continue your obfuscation?
                          I published the bibliography. Their theology is pure WoF...I don't need to substantiate the truth for my sake, I heard both and worked directly with one of them...You, on the other hand, have denied my assessment with only presumption as your proof...You need to substantiate your false charges, and instead you attack my integrity. That should reveal something as to the impotence of your charges.

                          Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
                          Matthew 22:37 KJV
                          Yes. He did...As we pray with Paul, "Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!" Amen
                          Pete

                          ~(8-[)}<><===> (flames of new anointing, béret, non-prescription glasses to help critics and their ilk feel more secure, mustache, beard...and tie.) I serve a God who walked this earth for thirty years before He did a single miracle.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by tbeachhead View Post
                            No...and thank you again for pointing out that your take your cues from man.

                            You've found three gurus who lead you to err in your theology. And that's what happens when you trust in man, bereft of the spirit...When you cannot distinguish between soul and spirit, there is nothing to teach you but men...

                            ...and such is the difference between you and me, that Murray can err, and still be brilliant in my eyes when it comes to explaining how prayer works, why prayer works, and what it means to believe God.

                            Murray is dead, therefore incorrigible when it comes to his understanding of the image of God, in whose image we are...tripartite. You, on the other hand, still breathing as I assume you are, do not need to be incorrigible. That's now a choice you have to repent and learn, and receive the Holy Spirit, dividing thus your soul and His Spirit, and making you a whole man...or be content in your partial understanding.

                            Have you read a single sentence from Kinchlow or Duplessis? Or do you want to continue to make ignorant claims that they are not WoF based on your presumption.

                            I make no claims concerning Strong...Never read him. I would accept at face value your claim that his successfully refutes Romans, Thessalonians and Hebrews...except that you keep making the claim without citing a single sentence where he makes that claim.

                            Your present obfuscation is all I need to suggest that your claims are most likely spurious. Since your an adept, a devotee of both, draw from their well and enlighten us all...or continue to obfuscate. Until a decent thread gets started there's always perpetuating this.

                            I published the bibliography. Their theology is pure WoF...I don't need to substantiate the truth for my sake, I heard both and worked directly with one of them...You, on the other hand, have denied my assessment with only presumption as your proof...You need to substantiate your false charges, and instead you attack my integrity. That should reveal something as to the impotence of your charges.

                            Yes. He did...As we pray with Paul, "Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely, and may your entire spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ!" Amen
                            Tyfyo
                            ---> Insert your denial here. <---

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Tallen View Post

                              You assume too much. If you had read them you would agree with me.
                              Of course, if I had read them (and bought into what they said) we would be in agreement. However, because I prefer to let God's word speak for itself, we are usually at odds. Now, I do occasionally refer to a commentary (and I have a bunch of them available to me), but it's rare.
                              Allen (Unless noted otherwise, Bible quotations are from the 1984 edition of the NIV)

                              Faith--Sees the invisible, believes the incredible, and receives the impossible.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by AlFin View Post
                                Of course, if I had read them (and bought into what they said) we would be in agreement. However, because I prefer to let God's word speak for itself, we are usually at odds. Now, I do occasionally refer to a commentary (and I have a bunch of them available to me), but it's rare.
                                It's rare for me to. But..., you started off by attacking something you haven't a clue about, because you haven't read it. The point of the commentary, if you read the beginning of the thread, is to avoid a ridiculous conversation like this thread has become. I have gone through the conversation and address Tb's error at least three times in the past, using no commentary. Now..., instead of repeating the same idiociotic exercise over and over, there are two commentaries that address his error. And, both you and him, instead of informing yourselves (it doesn't matter if you agree or not) have chosen to take the low road and use ignorant disparagement as your preferred tool. Hilarious and wof typical. The next thing you should do is call a seminary a cementary, like has happened a hundred times before.

                                And the height of your ignorance is to assume that your understanding of reading the scriptures through your presupposition is the only reasonable and rational explanation of the scripture. Especially when you haven't even informed yourself and assumed the commentary is devoid of scriptural veracity.

                                But carry on AlFin, keep it up, this all shows wof weakness and the bigotry that lays at the foundation of the religion.

                                Blessings.
                                ---> Insert your denial here. <---

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X