Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Father, Son and Holy Rift [Calvary Chapel/Chuck Smith]
KTLA ^ | September 2, 2006 | Christopher Goffard

Posted on 09/02/2006 5:53:18 PM PDT by Alex Murphy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

1 posted on 09/02/2006 5:53:19 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Prayers up for every pastor, may the Word be preached faithfully!

Amen


2 posted on 09/02/2006 6:04:04 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Spirit Of Allegiance

Amen


3 posted on 09/02/2006 6:12:30 PM PDT by doc1019
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Sad that sola scriptura doesn't seem to help these things any, huh?


4 posted on 09/02/2006 6:13:56 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"he couldn't understand why a loving God would consign his children to eternal flames"

Constantly, the holiness of God is forgotten. The critics point to His love, and neglect His holiness. The two are both true of God, and cannot be separated!

5 posted on 09/02/2006 6:32:25 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I am truly curious. How so?


6 posted on 09/02/2006 6:35:37 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
"Even when I speak, some of what I say is opinion and confusion and error," says Smith Jr., 55, who wears shorts and flip-flops as he welcomes a visitor to his church. "I'm more in a place of learning than I am in a place of certainty."

Ah yes, the Church of what's happenin' now!

7 posted on 09/02/2006 6:38:40 PM PDT by ladyinred (Leftists, the enemy within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

I have been to the Capo church and met Chuck Smith Jr. His sermons were bible based and sound. We all had an enjoyable Saturday evening service. That was in 2000, 2001 and 2002. I haven't heard from my friends there in several years. I guess things have changed there.


8 posted on 09/02/2006 7:06:09 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

"he couldn't understand why a loving God would consign his children to eternal flames..."

I have heard many people who profess to be Christians make this exact same statement. But the Lord DOES love us, and has given us His Son as an escape from eternal torment. As one of my favorite pastors often says, if people reject Christ here on earth, why would they even want to be in Heaven with God when they die?


There is nothing ambiguous about this statement from Jesus Himself: John 14:6 "...I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. "


9 posted on 09/02/2006 7:09:04 PM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Chuck Sr. is a really big cheese, in the modern era born again Christian community. Costa Mesa, CA

Costa Mesa also home to Trinity Broadcating Network, TBN on your dial

Also nearby Rick Warren of book fame, and also Greg Lurie of Harvest Crusade.

Heard once Benny Hinn had a mansion in Cote de Caza.

A hotbed of born again Christianity, this old Orange County, CA.


10 posted on 09/02/2006 7:16:02 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joann37

I agree 100% - God does love us, and Jesus Christ has made a way for us back to the Father. But when people, expecially pastors, dismiss sinful behavior - appealing to God's love - and do not account for God's holiness, that is disturbing.


11 posted on 09/02/2006 7:37:18 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

Has either man renounced sola scriptura?

Do the men agree on doctrine?

Is it the Bible that is dividing them?

Or is it their divergent interpretations?

Sola scriptura doesn't work in practical terms. It just doesn't. There always has to be an interpreter. Get two people and you'll eventuallt get two interpretations.


12 posted on 09/02/2006 7:57:03 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
Sad that sola scriptura doesn't seem to help these things any, huh?

At least neither one is preaching a mythical purgatory, or molesting kids...

Sola Scripture must be doing some good...

13 posted on 09/03/2006 12:12:16 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

You wrote:

"At least neither one is preaching a mythical purgatory, or molesting kids..."

No Catholic priest preaches a "mythical purgatory" either. They simply preach the real one. Also, how do you know they aren't molesting children? I hope they aren't. I have no reason to believe they are, but I don't claim to know either way. And are you implying that every priest is a child molestor? That's what you seem to be implying.

"Sola Scripture must be doing some good..."

Not if they can't agree it isn't.


14 posted on 09/03/2006 6:23:56 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
What on earth has Sola Scriptura to do with this? Hardly see how it has anything to do with anything.
If it is meant as a Roman Catholic swipe, you really might not want to go down the road of encouraging dissension about orthodox Biblical stands against, oh say, homosexuality when your church is manifestly troubled by an bevy of perverted clergy.
15 posted on 09/03/2006 7:10:15 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

First, this is absolutely about sola scriptura since both father and son are using it. Read the article again. Both cite the Bible as the inspiration for, or justification of, their beliefs.

Second, whether or not you view it as a "Roman Catholic" swipe is irrelevant to the point.

Third, pointing out the problems of sola scriptura is not encouraging "dissension" againt orthodox Biblical stands precisely because sola scriptura is found no where in scripture. There are hundreds of verse that prove scripture is inspired, instructive, useful, inerrant, etc. There is not a single verse that shows there was ever a belief in sola scriptura in Biblical times.

Fourth, my Church is indeed troubled by the presence of homosexuals in the priesthood. They have wrecked havoc on the Church and damaged souls. I am, however, not afraid to go down that road of discussion because it has nothing to do with what I have noted, in no way proves sola scriptura, and does nothing but make you look bad by grasping on to it as a straw man. There are Protestant groups that claim sola scriptura (at least officially) and yet are well entrenched in the pre-homosexual camp. My Church is not pro-homosexual, no matter how many homosexuals may be in it, is not Protestant, and does not use sola scriptura.

Fifth, if a father and son, using the same Bible, and many of the same beliefs, can't agree on basic issues, while apparently still relying on sola scriptura, then what is the practical use of sola scriptura?

Sixth, I made a simple point that no one else apparently saw. You may cast this as an orthodox versus heterodox view of the Bible and what it teaches (on homosexuality in this case). I think that is perfectly appropriate. I also think, however, that that argument fits under a larger heading of "Practical Problems of Sola Scriptura". Two men, whether father or son or complete strangers, armed with the Bible, believing in sola scriptura, coming to blows in regard to beliefs --- and with no apparent way of resolving their differences. Where to from here?


16 posted on 09/03/2006 8:17:22 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
Sola Scriptura is not found in the Bible?
So is the appearance of a particular phrase in the Bible what makes something an orthodox theological stance?
As I am sure you know the term "the Trinity" is no where to be found in the Holy Bible. That does not change the fact that it is and has been an essential to Christian orthodoxy for quite some time.
"Sola Scriptura" as you like to mischarectize it is not what Biblical Christians believe. Do a bit of research.
The notion that Roman Catholicism is a seamless garment across the millenia is false. You have do use tortured explanations and excuses to change and rewrite and explain away ever so many detours and conflicts. You all may be happy sorting through the ridiculous and contrived explanations for things like the Avignon papacy, the various (absolutely non Biblical) dogma of Mariology, the absurd allowances for " annulments", I could go on for quite a while. I for one believe that as a member of the priesthood of believers, I bear some responsibility for attempting to discern the Truth. No institution is responsible for that.
17 posted on 09/03/2006 9:00:52 AM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

You wrote:

"Sola Scriptura is not found in the Bible?"

No, it is not.

"So is the appearance of a particular phrase in the Bible what makes something an orthodox theological stance?"

No. The CONCEPT of sola scriptura is no where in scripture. NOT ONCE.

"As I am sure you know the term "the Trinity" is no where to be found in the Holy Bible. That does not change the fact that it is and has been an essential to Christian orthodoxy for quite some time."

True, but irrelevant. I never said anything about the phrase "Sola scriptura" not appearing in scripture. I thought I made the point clearly enough when I wrote: "There is not a single verse that shows there was ever a belief in sola scriptura in Biblical times."

""Sola Scriptura" as you like to mischarectize it is not what Biblical Christians believe. Do a bit of research."

Have done. I am not mischaracterizing anything.

"The notion that Roman Catholicism is a seamless garment across the millenia is false."

Ha! Do some research yourself.

"You have do use tortured explanations and excuses to change and rewrite and explain away ever so many detours and conflicts."

Really? So how do you explain, using sola scriptura, the Bible alone, that Matthew is inspired or that the gospel of Matthew was in fact written by Matthew?

"You all may be happy sorting through the ridiculous and contrived explanations for things like the Avignon papacy,"

What explanation is tortured about the Avignon Papacy? The popes moved to Avignon. So what? That's the Avignon Papacy. Do you really know what you're talking about? Apparently not.

"... the various (absolutely non Biblical) dogma of Mariology,"

Unbiblical? Like sola scriptura? Or condemned like sola fide (James 2:24)?

"... the absurd allowances for " annulments","

Absurd? I know of unions that were definitely not properly made marriages. How is that fact absurd?

"I could go on for quite a while."

When you say something intelligent let me know. I should point out that in my posts I actually focused on the article and sola scriptura. You are all over the place throwing darts hoping something will stick. Where's the kitchen sink?

"I for one believe that as a member of the priesthood of believers, I bear some responsibility for attempting to discern the Truth. No institution is responsible for that."

No? So the Church has no responsibility to truth? Did Christ not send the Church out into the world to teach and baptize? Wouldn't that duty to teach people automatically include a responsibility to teach truthfully?


18 posted on 09/03/2006 12:32:14 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
From your initial post you have never intended to entertain any serious discussion. No one who ends sentences with the "word" " huh" should be taken seriously.

The only reason you entered the thread was to provoke. Not convince or convict or learn.

I looked at your in forum. You are very pleased with yourself, fancy yourself a scholar( Graduate school citation) and apparently have missed the point of evangelism.

I am off to a birthday party so I am through with this exercise. I will leave you with the same comment I make to RC's who see themselves as all set cause they're in the club. In response to a query about a finding a "traditionalist" parish you responded with your approved parishes! What good is your silly " Catholic" church if you all church shop, you just do it " in network"!
Do not bother to attach endless text with explanations. It does not work for people who think words actually mean what they say.
19 posted on 09/03/2006 12:59:48 PM PDT by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

You wrote:

"From your initial post you have never intended to entertain any serious discussion. No one who ends sentences with the "word" " huh" should be taken seriously."

Wow, what a salient point. What a deep and penetrating argument. Yep. Amazing.

"The only reason you entered the thread was to provoke. Not convince or convict or learn."

No, I posted a one line comment expressing an obvious thought. Both men are sola scripturists. Their DIFFERING interpretations of the Bible id diving them on doctrine. You are pretending that that ISN'T happening.

"I looked at your in forum. You are very pleased with yourself, fancy yourself a scholar( Graduate school citation) and apparently have missed the point of evangelism."

And you think you are evangelizing? How exactly?

"I am off to a birthday party so I am through with this exercise. I will leave you with the same comment I make to RC's who see themselves as all set cause they're in the club. In response to a query about a finding a "traditionalist" parish you responded with your approved parishes! What good is your silly " Catholic" church if you all church shop, you just do it " in network"!"

Wow. That isn't what happened. Let me set you straight. A poster wanted to find a reverentially said Mass in Colorado for a visit she/he was planning. I posted information about Latin Masses said in the area. They are called "indult" Masses. Indult means they have been approved by the bishop of that diocese to be said at that parish at that time. Since the Mass of 1962 is not the common Mass today and only some priests are trained to say it (it is in Latin after all) the permission of the local bishop is necessary. You errors were the following: There was no "query about a finding a "traditionalist" parish" but only a reverential Mass. No one was Church shopping. The person was traveling with her/his family.

Here's the original request I responded to: "We will be in Denver some weekend in September. Would love to attend a beautiful Catholic mass. We love Bishop Chaput, also the hymns/liturgy/ Gregorian chant?? I would prefer a no-music mass to guitar ditties, however. Orthodox theology, please."

The person was looking for a "beautiful Catholic mass" which might have Gregorian chant and an orthodox sermon. I knew of several such Masses. I can't believe you're actually attacking me and my Church for having such Masses! ROFLOL! Wow, that shows what you're really made of.

"Do not bother to attach endless text with explanations. It does not work for people who think words actually mean what they say."

So because you imply you think words mean what they say you don't want to actually read any words? ROFLOL! Hilarious.


20 posted on 09/03/2006 1:20:22 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson