Posted on 06/13/2011 3:57:07 PM PDT by HarleyD
Aren't those posts hypocritical?
It's just like posts cribbing about supposed extra-biblical stuff and posts believing in Jesse Duplantis's visits to heaven.
hypocritical posts....
And give us the sola scriptura proof for “biblical unitarian universalism”...
It's appalling how your cult, the OPC hates Billy Graham, calls Pentecostals and Methodists as damned heretics, hates Jews, Lutherans, Baptists etc. and still pretends to be Protestant
Your post should be honest and state that your cult is a rabidly anti-Semitic group that has lately been trying to promote it's anti-Israeli message on FR with posts like:
What is disgusting is that this group (the OPC) pretends to be Christian while spouting it's hatred for Jews and Christians alike
After all, and ex-elder of your cult Paul M. Elliott says that
First between true and false conversion. The Bible recognizes that not everyone who says he believes in Christ really doesVoilą! (by the way, that means "see there" in French) -- the followers of Calvin-Machen use their rubber dictionaries to say "Oh, they never were Christian in the first place!"
Salvation of Infants Who DieThe OPC believes that God pre-damns infants to eternal hell. This isn't the Christian God of Love.
The Confession entertains the idea that at least some infants who die in infancy and some others "who are incapable of being outwardly called" are among the elect.
However, the Confession does not say that all such infants, etc., are saved.
| 12 “Therefore, son of man, say to your people, ‘If someone who is righteous disobeys, that person’s former righteousness will count for nothing. And if someone who is wicked repents, that person’s former wickedness will not bring condemnation. The righteous person who sins will not be allowed to live even though they were formerly righteous.’ 13 If I tell a righteous person that they will surely live, but then they trust in their righteousness and do evil, none of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered; they will die for the evil they have done. 14 And if I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ but they then turn away from their sin and do what is just and right— 15 if they give back what they took in pledge for a loan, return what they have stolen, follow the decrees that give life, and do no evil—that person will surely live; they will not die. 16 None of the sins that person has committed will be remembered against them. They have done what is just and right; they will surely live. |
| John 4:42 describes Christ as "the Savior of the world," 1 John 2:2 Christ "is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1 Timothy 4:10 God is "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe." |
| The Orthodox Presbyterian Church was founded in 1936 by about 135 people who were offended by the lack of discipline in and doctrinal errors of the Presbyterian Church in the USA. . But early in its history the OPC fell under the influence of an agnostic view of propositional revelation emanating from Westminster Seminary -- a view that said that there is no identity of content between the \"Christian system\" of theology, meaning Reformed confessions of faith, and the \"divine system\" of theology, known only to God. This agnosticism has now brought the OPC to the point of falling. Like its predecessor, the PCUSA, the OPC has failed to discipline teachers who teach contrary to Scriptures and the Confession of Faith, and it has endorsed un-Biblical teaching about Scripture and the Gospel. |
| Despite the painstaking efforts of many fine Christians within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), the leaders of the OPC maintain a suicidal course. Despite the departure of congregations and individuals from the OPC, due to the leaders' collective inability to resolve the current justification controversy Biblically, the OPC leaders continue to advance doctrines that contradict Scripture. The OPC is, in the words of its late historian Charles Dennison, "obviously inept, bumbling, [and] confused."1 That confusion now appears to be fatal. At this point in its history, the confessional affirmations of the OPC have no more credibility than the confessional affirmations of the PCUSA from 1936 to 1967. One of the commissioners to the 2004 OPC General Assembly made this very point: "There was a time when, if the OPC said it, it was accepted. The 2003 deliverance that accompanied the decision to acquit [John Kinnaird] destroyed forever that our words will not be questioned. The PCUSA always said that the [Westminster] Confession was their confession (even as they were denying it)." |
Just like your posts said that Jesse Duplantis' posts are the truth? Or Benny Hinns'?
I don't think Daniel's posts have yet said anything like Jesse Duplantis's
"With fierce prayers and determination to see my mother healed, I started talking to God. "What is going on here?! I'm praying! Dad's praying! Why isn't she healed? You cannot allow death to defeat me, God. You made a covenant with me through Jesus' blood! And that covenant says by His stripes we were healed! Where is that healing? If you break this covenant with me, you'll have to cease to be God! You must keep covenant with me. You must obey your Word!"yet.
Contradictions, contradictions. First it is sola scriptura, now, ok, it's there before, there's more than the written word.
Next, Muhammed-al-rasurillah?
Actually these aren't things in the far past -- you can ask Quix if he believes that Jesse Duplantis' visits to heaven are correct or if he believes that Jesse teaches the Pentecostal faith. Feel free -- I'll give him this, he sticks to the beliefs in Jesse, Colton et. al.
I have the honor of working (in a VERY minor way) with a genius poet on a collection of poems about disabled veterans. She has the gift of looking at what could seem repellent and dreadful and helping us see the beauty of heroism. She is a pagan, avowedly, though sometimes I think she's just tweaking me.
How embarrassing to turn from a pagan with a piercing eye for true beauty to Christians who, if they cannot find filth, will invent some, or look with filthy vision until everything looks dirty!
Good post, MD!
CS Lewis described this very well in Mere Christianity:
Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one’s first feeling, “Thank God, even they aren’t quite so bad as that,” or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils. You see, one is beginning to wish that black was a little blacker. If we give that wish its head, later on we shall wish to see gray as black, and then to see white itself as black. Finally, we shall insist on seeing everything—God and our friends and ourselves included—as bad, and not be able to stop doing it: we shall be fixed for ever in a universe of pure hatred.
Excellent post there, annie...
ping
No wonder our pentecostal friends call Dr. Eck's group the "replacementarians"
Lewis REALLY gets it. He knows the pit and he knows the hand which drew him out.
No it doesn't...It means 'brother'...I've posted the translation many times...
Adelphos does not differentiate between a blood brother or other...But it does mean brother...Even when the brothers are not related...Just as some folks on these boards are my Christian brothers...
It would be good for you to read the Bible, history, linguistics etc before posting wrong statements over and over again
For example
The NT was written in Greek, ok -- not all, but let's take your argument for the sake of argument. Remember also that the words of Jesus were mostly Aramaic or Hebrew or maybe even GReek -- we've already shown that in SEmitic languages like Aramaic/hebrew there is no differntiating term between a blood brother and a cousin, let's examine the GReek ouch outos estin o tekton o uios Marias adelphos de Iakobou Iose kai Iouda kai Simonos
If the term is that the adelphoi have the same mother then it would be ho adelphos But that is not used. Without the article adelphos is non-specific and non-exclusive and can mean kinsmen, relatives
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.