Tab Content
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 04:01 PM
    But you probably still view me as a heathen for disagreeing with you on the New Covenant ;)
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 03:56 PM
    I agree. But if we use "free" in the ordinary sense that most people use it today, people are going to get confused. "I have a car I want to give you for free" is free in the ordinary sense of the word. That is not, however, salvation.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 03:53 PM
    Sola and HU are the two posters that make me interested enough to keep posting here :p
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 03:36 PM
    They mean free in layperson's terms. For instance if I offer you a car and say you don't have to pay for it you can accept the car or not. That's "free" in the standard, cultural definition of the word. The problem is that this isn't the Biblical analogy. Salvation isn't a transaction, its Christ's accomplished redemption on the cross for sinners. Its dead men being brought back to life. Dead men who can't respond at all, can't even choose. In other words, you're right. But "free" needs to be defined for them first.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 03:18 PM
    I'd do that if I thought he didn't have anything worth saying, but given that that isn't true (Though I don't 100% agree with him) I won't.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 03:17 PM
    Its an equivocation on the word "free." The Arminians mean that you don't have to pay anything for it. You mean that the person can't even take it. Really I don't think the correct accusation against them is that they deny salvation being free (they would accept that it is free) but rather that they deny that the person who's supposed to be receving the free gift is actually dead, and the gift is actually life.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Today, 11:44 AM
    I've used Karm but I've never looked up that particular heresy. That said now that I'm seeing the serpent thing I've probably seen that before and just didn't remember the name. oh well :)
    43 replies | 539 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:50 PM
    Well for one thing because the synergism accusation isn't actually true, anymore than the accusations against you being a hyper-calvinist are true. But second of all, what the heck does Deuteronomy 13 have to do with Rome? Joel McDurmon makes this same idiotic accusation and its not true. Third of all, I'm not totally convinced that soteriological errors deserve capital punishment in the same way Christological ones (worshipping a god with a different identity) do. I'd say outright pelagianism also deserves it in that Pelagianism essentially says "I am the Lord your God, but I didn't bring you out of Egypt, you brought yourselves out", but once people start granting that the cross did save them its a bit more complicated. I'm inclined to say that the civil magistrate can still punish the spreading of gross errors but "the punishment should fit the crime" so to speak. I definitely don't want to sound like the anabaptist/modern evangelical "The Reformed were just a bunch of murderers" because I know that's not true, but I really do think this is wrong, assuming anyone was actually killed just for preaching against paedobaptism (which I'm not sure if was actually the case.) You can make a decent case that credobaptists should be denied citizenship from Genesis 17 (which I believe is the standard covenanter position.... I don't claim certainty on this issue however) but to actually execute them for preaching the false doctrine on a non-primary matter I believe is excessive. I can't agree to that because I believe it goes against the OT law as well. The OT law perfectly fits the punishment to the crime. Preaching a false god (as Servetus did) deserves death. I don't think preaching against paedobaptism (though wrong) does. OK fair enough.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:16 PM
    To be clear I'm not defending Phelps, but what capital crime has he committed according to Biblical law? To be clear, I am not familiar with the details of his teaching, I know he's a baptist (which is an error but I don't think would qualify as a capital crime), a Hyper-Calvinist (ditto) and extremely abrasive in how he conducts himself (ditto.) Servetus was teaching a different (non-trinitarian) God which certainly warrants "roasting" (I prefer stoning or firing squad ;) ) according to Deut 13, but I am not sure what capital crime you see Phelps as being guilty of (not disagreeing necessarily, and I do NOT defend Phelps.)
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:14 PM
    I have never heard of it.
    43 replies | 539 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-03-2016, 10:52 AM
    We aren't forced against our will. I agree with that. The problem is you believe people are actually able to choose God of their own volition. But we won't. The only person who we could maybe say had a totally free choice (though even still, God put the tree there intending but not causing the Fall for his own good purpose) is Adam. That would even be speculative but you could maybe make that Biblical argument. Everyone else is born in slavery to sin. The Bible says we were dead in our tresspasses. God has to remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh so that you will believe. So you're right that its not "forced" but its not free will either.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-03-2016, 01:41 AM
    The bold is what I'd dispute. Arminians teach pervenient grace, that God gives everyone enough grace to believe and then its in "their court" so to speak. Calvinists believe that God chose before the foundation of the world who would be saved and who wouldn't. That choice is manifested through belief but its not actually man's choice (in the ultimate sense) to believe. As Romans 9 explains very well.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-03-2016, 01:17 AM
    Calvinists agree with that passage. The question is, what is the origin of belief?
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-03-2016, 01:16 AM
    I don't think its controversy for controversy sake. The dispute is at a minimum very important, and potentially has salvific implications given that denial of Calvinism can (though does not always) lead to self-trust for salvation. Plus the Bible is clear that seekers don't exist, so why you'd worry about "looking bad in front of them" I don't know :/
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-03-2016, 12:44 AM
    Actually Sola is correct, at least doctrinally speaking. I'd suggest taking the tone a bit less personally (whatever you may think of it) and seriously consider the very important doctrinal point being made.
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
  • tennman's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 03:11 PM
    Hillary Clinton supporters can still live a part of their dream if they so choose. Once they decide to stop protesting, they can hop online and order a commemorative edition of Newsweek that was going to be released if the former secretary of state won the presidential election. http://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/01/newsweek-madam-president-issue-hits-ebay/ Hahaha! It's kind of like a modern day Dewey Defeats Truman! Newsweek is saying that it's normal practice to do it, but they published 150,000 issues of them so I think that there's more to it than that. Either way, I think it's funny.
    1 replies | 108 view(s)
  • tennman's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 03:09 PM
    Pay for each job? Tax cuts give people and businesses THEIR money back. The state doesn't "pay" for it. Just because it's Trump, don't assign something negative that is actually a positive.
    424 replies | 5404 view(s)
  • tennman's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 12:06 PM
    A confidential source on the Trump transition team has told The Liberty Conservative that Rep. Thomas Massie, an award-winning, MIT-educated engineer, elected to Congress in 2012, is under consideration for the job of Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, a role commonly known as Science Advisor to the President. Massie currently serves as Chairman for the Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation in the House of Representatives. http://resistancefeed.com/2016/12/01/thomas-massie-considered-trump-administration-post/
    32 replies | 728 view(s)
  • Spikender's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 11:49 AM
    This is a retarded idea and Canadians should feel bad.
    50 replies | 625 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 01:40 AM
    Shame on me for posting while tired :p
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    12-01-2016, 01:13 AM
    Honestly TER I'll be honest, I find the Eastern Orthodox understanding of Hell petty philosophically fascinating. its not Biblical though. The Biblical view of Hell is that its outer darkness, separated from all of God but his wrath. So I don't see anything about your view as Biblical. That said, I wouldn't say your view of Hell is a concern in terms of your soul, though I do think its an error. What I'm more concerned about is that you actually seem to think non-Christians can earn their way into heaven such that God would actually be malicious if he did not let them in. This is the elephant in the room that I'm honestly surprised and confused as to why Hells_Unicorn is not harder on. It seems like Steelites are the only branch of Presbyterianism that sees Eastern Orthodox as having much merit and the rest see EOs as not really any more Christian than Rome. I do want to hear HUs perspective on this but the more I read of you, the more I agree with those other Presbyterians. Not because you are not a nice or gracious person, to be clear, but what you teach is at odds with the scriptures even at the core level of the gospel.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-30-2016, 09:10 PM
    LOL! I know. I believe Christmas actually offends Christ but unless someone has the necessary theological background to understand why (Which probably requires being at least Reformed Baptist or a trinitarian Christian who's fairly understanding of theological paradigms other than their own) I'd probably just silently shake my head at it.
    34 replies | 486 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-30-2016, 08:28 PM
    I'm in agreement with the anti-Christmas people. Christmas is unbiblical and wrong. That said I probably wouldn't make an issue out of it with somebody unless they said they were Reformed.
    34 replies | 486 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-30-2016, 07:15 PM
    I understand that those things are not the gospel. I am NOT one of those theonomists who tries to make every good thing the gospel itself. Nevertheless Hebrews does talk about refusing to move on from the elementary. There are issues that are NOT essential to being saved (and thus, do not entirely break unity and fellowship among brethren) that are nevertheless very important and do create barriers to fellowship and unity.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-29-2016, 08:41 PM
    He's talking about people who just take the 5 points and don't go any deeper than that, ignoring things like the RPW, covenant theology/covenant baptism, the sabbath, the law of God, Biblical ecclesiology, etc.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-29-2016, 12:06 AM
    That isn't saying that people can be saved without Jesus Christ. The point of that passage is that even without the written law one still has enough by natural revelation alone to know he is a sinner and in need of salvation from outside of himself. The problem is that your presupposition is nonsensical. What person can keep the beatitudes? To be clear, here I do not mean the ethical obligation of the believer, which he is continually sanctified toward, but rather the idea that someone could actually keep the beatitudes to a sufficient degree to atone for himself. I'm guessing this isn't actually what you mean, but at face value that's what you're saying, that people can either be saved through faith in Christ, or by doing what he commanded yet without faith. But really that renders the cross worthless. If you are even asking the question of how a loving God could send X person to Hell, I fear for your soul, because you don't even understand the justice of God, the holy wrath which all people are under save Christ's righteousness imputed to their behalf.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-29-2016, 12:00 AM
    I am not accepting of Eastern Orthodoxy. I did, however, want to be clear about what exactly he was saying. I've also never claimed either of those labels.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-28-2016, 09:32 PM
    I'd say its an error to conflate individual responsibility with human ability. The Bible teaches that none seeks after God, God must choose to change someone's heart before they would ever believe. Yet man is still responsible to believe in spite of his hardened heart.
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-28-2016, 09:31 PM
    As written, I'm concerned about this. Also I'm not sure if Hells_Unicorn is on this particular thread, but if he is I'd be curious to hear from him what he thinks of this statement in terms of basic Christian orthodoxy. First of all, the Bible never says anything suggesting that someone can be saved without knowing Christ. instead it is very clear that "he who does not believe is condemned already" (John 3:18.) Furthermore, there is nothing in scripture that hints at the idea that our own works can justify us before God, just the opposite. Our salvation is by the cross and what Christ did for us, not by anything you can do. It is true (as James says) that true faith will always have works, but those works cannot earn us our right standing before God. Do you really believe any human being can actually keep those two commandments in the fullness of what they require? And if you do, where do you derive this idea?
    181 replies | 2217 view(s)
  • Christian Liberty's Avatar
    11-28-2016, 11:51 AM
    So should it be that complicated? Biblically speaking? (just asking the question, not saying I know the answer.) OK, fair enough. But should we divide from everyone over this, rather than trying to reform from within? (I know there are some disagreements among those who call themselves Covenanters over whether the SL + C binds America, though I think they'd all say it binds the UK.) That would be confusing :p
    309 replies | 3932 view(s)
More Activity
About Spikender

Basic Information

Date of Birth
September 28
About Spikender
Biography:
A Virginian who wants liberty and justice for all.
Interests:
Politics, Music, Video Games, Books, Tripping over hobos
Occupation:
Event Analyst
Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" badge by your name badge by yourr name in all posts.)
Select if you do not support Trump or Hillary.:
No Trump. No Hillary. (This will add a "None of the Above" badge by your name in all posts.)

Signature


Quote Originally Posted by Sister Miriam Godwinson View Post
We Must Dissent.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,596
Posts Per Day
2.50
General Information
Last Activity
12-02-2016 11:31 AM
Join Date
11-27-2011
Referrals
0

5 Friends

  1. Christian Liberty
  2. jjdoyle jjdoyle is offline

    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing

    jjdoyle
  3. piyaliguha90 piyaliguha90 is offline

    New Member

    • Send a message via MSN to piyaliguha90
    • Send a message via Skype™ to piyaliguha90
    piyaliguha90
  4. tennman tennman is offline

    Member

    tennman
  5. Todd Todd is offline

    Member

    Todd
Showing Friends 1 to 5 of 5

10-12-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast

12-01-2016


11-25-2016


11-20-2016


11-19-2016


11-17-2016

  • 12:18 PM - Hidden

11-14-2016


11-13-2016


11-12-2016



Page 1 of 17 12311 ... LastLast