Re the second post:
Romans 1 states what I said -- if you read it ALL. Men are without excuse because they SHOULD have seen God through His creation, but "even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and [various] creatures."
That is followed in chapter 3 by another truth that I've noted in our exchanges:
"there is none who seeks for God." [Rom. 3:11]
Re Genesis 12: fortunately, you and I do not need to debate "takes" -- God revealed exactly what His promise to Abraham that "all the nations shall be blessed in you" meant in Galatians 3:6-12. It was that "those who are of faith ... are sons of Abraham" [vs. 7] and that "those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer." [vs. 9] It was, as Paul explained, that everyone -- Gentile as well as Jew -- would be justified by faith; that is, it was "the gospel" "preached beforehand to Abraham." [vs. 8]
Acts 15:16 is a reference to the millennial kingdom as prophesied in Amos 9:11-12. The "tabernacle of David" refers to Christ's (the Messiah from David's line) millennial rule. The tabernacle is a symbol of God's presence -- God will be present in the person of Christ.
Again, you indicate that I said Cortez had authority over the Aztecs because he had "bigger guns" -- but I never said that! In fact, looking back, I see that I specifically said that "The Aztecs were not under Cortez's authority; they were under Montezuma's." So, again, I'm confused. Eventually, Cortez became an authority over them -- but you recognize the authority of the United States and
it was acquired by guns, so why is my position controversial or unreasonable?
The current governments of Germany and Japan were established as a result of the "bigger guns" -- do you doubt their legitimacy?
Finally, as I've told you before, I'm not enthralled with theological "systems" (whether Calvinism or any other). They're all devised by fallible men. I try to follow and present whatever the Bible teaches -- irrespective of "traditions" or systems.
I'm sure you're right that I haven't completely thought out all implications of what I believe -- but who has? Have you? For my case, it would require someone a lot more intelligent and knowledgeable than I to have plumbed the depths of everything that Scripture teaches -- which is my "tradition."
As far as I have considered the implications of my views, I find them to be exceedingly practical and applicable to real-life situations. That's the way God designed them. I have yet to be "stumped" or to encounter a real-life situation that God's Word was inadequate to deal with. I believe I have given a practical application in response to every one of your challenges.
I think the problem is that we have different understandings of what's "practical." For me, doing what the sovereign God of the universe says to do and then trusting Him for the results is the most practical thing one can do. I don't want to put words in your mouth (as you keep doing to me), but it SEEMS as if you would have advised Gideon not to follow God's seemingly foolish plan -- because it looked impractical from man's perspective. It SEEMS as if you would have advised Daniel, Shadrach & his friends, and the apostles to organize resistance against the tyrannical rulers who were oppressing them. And it SEEMS as if you would have advised Moses to organize the Israelites into a rebel army to overthrow Pharaoh -- how impractical to wait upon God to accomplish what appeared to be impossible in each case.
I could be wrong, but I think these examples reflect your view of what's "practical." If not, I don't see why you would consider any of what I've said to be impractical.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Frazer's Dialog with KOI Continues
Gregg tried to post the following comment but it didn't go through; so he emailed it to me. I then tried to post it on the comment thread, but got an error message. So I am reproducing it here.