Presuppostional Apologetics have given many a headache.

[PloughBoy]

Hi PloughBoy,

If we take the historical perspective we find that it was common in NT times for Greeks to associate themselves with a school of thought. Often that school of thought was labeled after the teacher. So, people would say, I am of so and so, meaning they followed that philosophy. This is what the Corithians were doing. I am of Paull, I am if Apollos, etc. That is what Paul condemned. We have the same thing today. Clavinsists hold to the teaching of Calvin. Lutheran hold to the teaching of Luther. Arminians hold to the teaching of Arminius. Paul's point was that the messenger was irrelevant but rather the message was important. That would be the same today except that they don't all bring the same message as those did in the early days. Today we have all kinds of teachers claiming all kinds of things. Unlike the early Christian's we have to compare every teaching to the Scriptures to see what is true and what isn't. However, that requires that we understand the Sceuptures correctly. Clearly some don't as we have Chrsitians teaching opposing doctrines from the same book. Someone has to be wrong. Thus, someone is misunderstanding Scripture. I agree with you that many have gone out and are in error. That makes it all the more important that we check everything against Scripture.

History also helps us determine what is true as does an understanding of the early church and what it taught.

I am just wondering and if I may ask, since you have taken to yourself to teach me and instruct others here concerning Historical Creeks, what university or Seminary and what form of greek have you studied, And concerning school of thought: Is only a terminology and has no regards to greek what so ever. And how many hours in the class room have you studied 1 and 2nd century "Corinth" and under who. And what is the teachings of Calvinism and have you studies the teachings of John Calvin and under who? Have You study "Luther" and under who? And Have you Study "Jacob Arminius" and under who! And , to come to Pauls point of view of what he meant. How did you arrived there? Whp taught you what Paul meant! And How do you know about early christians? Where did that knowledge come from? And are You a "Professor", a Instructor in Religious or Theological Studies, or a Assistant professor? And Who gave you the right to instruct others in such matter into these fields of learning? I am asking because before I take any teaching from anyone, I going to know where are they getting their instructions from! And what kind of credentials and what university or seminary they have taught at. And what are their Biblical field of study? Because, i would be a fool if i didn't ask them. And what kind of Biblical Historical classes have they taken and and under who? And what their Higher school of Biblical learning have they obtain. And where. Because There are many fakes out here on both sides of the fence.

 

[Bill]

I don't doubt that there are sincere believers in all of them. I just think they're bad for the body. Many are based on doctrinal positions. I wonder why, since we all claim to follow the Bible, we don't come together to reconcile our differences in belief. I suspect I have several reasons but that's a different discussion. Paul chastised the believers in Corinth for denominations. They claimed to be of different teachers. I am of Cephas, I am of Paul, etc. Today it's Arminius, Luther, Calvin, etc.

I always see the " issues " as politics

Is it ok to dance or not , sat versus sun , how we look at Mary or not . Should we belong to a denomination or not ( its a little humorous , if you look up the definition of denomination. ' when two people agree on the same philosophy ' . So the nondenominational church is actually a denomination ) lol . And all the rest of the silly arguements .

I can only roll my eyes

I have seen Long arguements over if we should worship on Sat or Sun . If people only knew how silly this arguement is . In Heaven , the Worship is unceasing . And people here should worship Jesus with thier hearts, daily. But who am i , right . Lol

 

[Bill]

I am just wondering and if I may ask, since you have taken to yourself to teach me and instruct others here concerning Historical Creeks, what university or Seminary and what form of greek have you studied, And concerning school of thought: Is only a terminology and has no regards to greek what so ever. And how many hours in the class room have you studied 1 and 2nd century "Corinth" and under who. And what is the teachings of Calvinism and have you studies the teachings of John Calvin and under who? Have You study "Luther" and under who? And Have you Study "Jacob Arminius" and under who! And , to come to Pauls point of view of what he meant. How did you arrived there? Whp taught you what Paul meant! And How do you know about early christians? Where did that knowledge come from? And are You a "Professor", a Instructor in Religious or Theological Studies, or a Assistant professor? And Who gave you the right to instruct others in such matter into these fields of learning? I am asking because before I take any teaching from anyone, I going to know where are they getting their instructions from! And what kind of credentials and what university or seminary they have taught at. And what are their Biblical field of study? Because, i would be a fool if i didn't ask them. And what kind of Biblical Historical classes have they taken and and under who? And what their Higher school of Biblical learning have they obtain. And where. Because There are many fakes out here on both sides of the fence.

I dont know all these people by name to thier teachings . But what i do know is all had questions . Some questions were followed with good thought and those people continued in a Godly light.

But there are others who took thier questions to a far extreem.
When Martin Luther became a priest in the Catholic Church. He took oaths to God , not to the Church. And to me this is where he began a number of errors.

Now the validity of his arguements to the church , many had merit . And some seemed more out of personal frustration.

However , making vows to God are important to me. Much like my marriage vows.

Martin should not have broken vows to God. He could have kept his vows and left the church.

As time went on he became a glutton and associated with prostitutes.

This is just an example of 1 . There are others who also caused a ton of mischief, and really caused more harm than good to Christians. Even though thier names are venerated

 

[Butch5]

I am just wondering and if I may ask, since you have taken to yourself to teach me and instruct others here concerning Historical Creeks, what university or Seminary and what form of greek have you studied, And concerning school of thought: Is only a terminology and has no regards to greek what so ever. And how many hours in the class room have you studied 1 and 2nd century "Corinth" and under who. And what is the teachings of Calvinism and have you studies the teachings of John Calvin and under who? Have You study "Luther" and under who? And Have you Study "Jacob Arminius" and under who! And , to come to Pauls point of view of what he meant. How did you arrived there? Whp taught you what Paul meant! And How do you know about early christians? Where did that knowledge come from? And are You a "Professor", a Instructor in Religious or Theological Studies, or a Assistant professor? And Who gave you the right to instruct others in such matter into these fields of learning? I am asking because before I take any teaching from anyone, I going to know where are they getting their instructions from! And what kind of credentials and what university or seminary they have taught at. And what are their Biblical field of study? Because, i would be a fool if i didn't ask them. And what kind of Biblical Historical classes have they taken and and under who? And what their Higher school of Biblical learning have they obtain. And where. Because There are many fakes out here on both sides of the fence.

Hi PloughBoy,

My study hasn't been in any seminary. Seminaries teach the doctrines of whatever denomination they belong to. My study has been with other men and women who have looked at many sources. At one time I was a Calvinist. I studied the teaching of RC Sproul. I also studied Boyce. I have Calvin's institute's and copies of his letters.

I've studied the early church via several sources. David Bercot is a noted teacher of the early church. I also have the copies of the Ante-Nicene writings.

I've studied church history with different people. Sources have been numerous, among which is, the writings of Eusebius, Josephus, the Ante-Nicene Fathers, Alfred Edersheim's "The Life and Time of Jesus the Messiah", the Jewish Encyclopia, and others.

But, I don't think who I've studied with or under matters. I find that often the only sources that are considered credible are those we agree with. I've had one Christian quote a source and claim it was irrefutable. However, when I made a counter claim and sited the same source the source was rejected. Thus, this individual only accepted what agreed with what he/she already believed.

We have a set of parameters by which we interpret Scripture. It's known as the Historical-Grammatical method. We hold that the original Scriptures were without error. We take historical precedent into account. We use sound logic. And we don't violate the grammar. I find that we know we have a correct understanding of the Scriptures when we have harmony. If we find that all of the Scriptures agree with a doctrine then it harmonizes with Scriputre. If, however, we have this passage and that passage that doesn't seem to fit with our doctrine, we don't have harmony, and therefore there is something wrong with that doctrine. I believe it's incumbent upon us to be willing to challenge that doctrine to see where the problem is. I did this many years ago. After being taught opposing doctrines by different churches I decided to take everything I believed and lay it on the table. Anything that couldn't withstand the scrutiny and be soundly supported by Scripture was tossed aside. Since that time many more doctrines have been cast aside as I find more and more that cannot be supported by Scripture. I no longer take anyone's word at face value, but like the Bereans, I search the Scriptures to see if those things are true. Because I hold no doctrine sacred I am free to look closely at the Scriptures and examine them with an open mind. I have no position to defend. This has actually been one of the most freeing things in my life. Many years ago before I became a Christian I prayed to God and asked Him to help me understand the Bible. Well, He has answered that prayer many times over.

 

[Butch5]

I always see the " issues " as politics

Is it ok to dance or not , sat versus sun , how we look at Mary or not . Should we belong to a denomination or not ( its a little humorous , if you look up the definition of denomination. ' when two people agree on the same philosophy ' . So the nondenominational church is actually a denomination ) lol . And all the rest of the silly arguements .

I can only roll my eyes

I have seen Long arguements over if we should worship on Sat or Sun . If people only knew how silly this arguement is . In Heaven , the Worship is unceasing . And people here should worship Jesus with thier hearts, daily. But who am i , right . Lol

That's part of what I was getting at with Denominations. There is so much infighting among Christian's over these Denominational disagreements.

 

[Bill]

Are you backwards? Jesus said those words not me! God also said: " he who have eyes let him see" LOL Because if you cannot see with human eyes you cannot see the written word. And if you cannot see the written word you cannot think with a human mind.

" Love the Lord God with all of your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind"

"And let this Mind be in you as it was also in christ Jesus"

"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, THEN you will be able to test and approve what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of GOD."

A man can read the Word and hear the Word and still be blind to it

And a man who never heard the Word with his ears and never read the Word with his eyes can have Jesus living in him.

Why is this ?

 

[PloughBoy]

A man can read the Word and hear the Word and still be blind to it

And a man who never heard the Word with his ears and never read the Word with his eyes can have Jesus living in him.

Why is this ?

"And a man who never heard the Word with his ears and never read the Word with his eyes can have Jesus living in him."<

<"Now where did that strange foreign doctrine come from? For it seems that yet, you still have a limitation who the "WORD of GOD" is. Your "doctrine" is lacking, "sound biblical doctrine" Your own words are in error relating to "Biblical Truth". That is not the "simplicity' of Christ. Review your words. And definition of Biblical words from a reliable source that is not bias, in any form.

 

[Bill]

"And a man who never heard the Word with his ears and never read the Word with his eyes can have Jesus living in him."<

<"Now where did that strange foreign doctrine come from? For it seems that yet, you still have a limitation who the "WORD of GOD" is. Your "doctrine" is lacking, "sound biblical doctrine" Your own words are in error relating to "Biblical Truth". That is not the "simplicity' of Christ. Review your words. And definition of Biblical words from a reliable source that is not bias, in any form.

My brother that's strange foreign Doctrine is the Scripture. The words of Jesus just explained a little bit differently

When we read the Bible the scripture are we not reading the words of Jesus . In the beginning was the word the word was with God and the Word was God . And the word became flesh and dwelt Among Us.

So when we read the words that are written by Paul, these very words are the words that come from the mind of Jesus.

So it is Christ who speaks to us when we read where Paul is talking about the pagans.

 

[complete]

' But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty,
so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.'
(2 Corinthians 11:3)

Hello @PloughBoy,

' Presuppositional Apologetics!!'

I get a headache just saying the words!! As to what they mean? and if it matters anyway? is another matter.

Oh for simplicity!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[PloughBoy]

My brother that's strange foreign Doctrine is the Scripture. The words of Jesus just explained a little bit differently

When we read the Bible the scripture are we not reading the words of Jesus . In the beginning was the word the word was with God and the Word was God . And the word became flesh and dwelt Among Us.

So when we read the words that are written by Paul, these very words are the words that come from the mind of Jesus.

So it is Christ who speaks to us when we read where Paul is talking about the pagans.

Do you even know what "Holy Scripture" is? Look what you just said.

"My brother that's strange foreign Doctrine is the Scripture. "The words of Jesus just explained a little bit differently"

Jesus is "The Word of GOD".

 

[PloughBoy]

' But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty,
so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.'
(2 Corinthians 11:3)

Hello @PloughBoy,

' Presuppositional Apologetics!!'

I get a headache just saying the words!! As to what they mean? and if it matters anyway? is another matter.

Oh for simplicity!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Yes it is simple.

What is "Presuppositional Apologetics"

Presuppositionalism as a school of Christian apologetics maintains that the Christian faith provides the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews.

Presuppositionalism claims that apart from presuppositions, one could not make sense of any human experience, and there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[1] Presuppositionalists claim that Christians cannot consistently declare their belief in the necessary existence of the God of the Bible and simultaneously argue on the basis of a different set of assumptions that God may not exist and that Biblical revelation may not be true.[2][failed verification] Two schools of presuppositionalism exist, based on the different teachings of Cornelius Van Til and of Gordon Haddon Clark. Presuppositionalism contrasts with classical apologetics and with evidential apologetics.


Presuppositionalists compare their presupposition against other ultimate standards such as reason, empirical experience, and subjective feeling, claiming presupposition in this context is:

"a belief that takes precedence over another and therefore serves as a criterion for another. An ultimate presupposition is a belief over which no other takes precedence. For a Christian, the content of Scripture must serve as his ultimate presupposition… This doctrine is merely the outworking of the lordship of God in the area of human thought. It merely applies the doctrine of scriptural infallibility to the realm of knowing."

 

[complete]

Yes it is simple.

What is "Presuppositional Apologetics"

Presuppositionalism as a school of Christian apologetics maintains that the Christian faith provides the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews.

Presuppositionalism claims that apart from presuppositions, one could not make sense of any human experience, and there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[1] Presuppositionalists claim that Christians cannot consistently declare their belief in the necessary existence of the God of the Bible and simultaneously argue on the basis of a different set of assumptions that God may not exist and that Biblical revelation may not be true.[2][failed verification] Two schools of presuppositionalism exist, based on the different teachings of Cornelius Van Til and of Gordon Haddon Clark. Presuppositionalism contrasts with classical apologetics and with evidential apologetics.


Presuppositionalists compare their presupposition against other ultimate standards such as reason, empirical experience, and subjective feeling, claiming presupposition in this context is:

Hello there, @PloughBoy,

Thank you for the explanation. It makes me think of one little verse:-

'But without faith it is impossible to please Him:
for he that cometh to God must believe that He is,
and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.'
(Heb 11:6)

HE IS !!
How wonderful that knowledge is, and how could we possibly doubt it? Just breathing in through my nose makes me rejoice in His creative work, for the workmanship that could ensure that the incoming breath is warmed before reaching the lung is a creation of absolute brilliance, with it's little hairs which prevent particles from entering. Each time I cough I hear and feel the mechanism whereby unwanted matter is extracted from my lungs, Every facet of the human body is a working miracle. We are fearfully and wonderfully made!!

Praise His Holy Name!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Bill]

Do you even know what "Holy Scripture" is? Look what you just said.

"My brother that's strange foreign Doctrine is the Scripture. "The words of Jesus just explained a little bit differently"

Jesus is "The Word of GOD".

Sometimes i dont understand you to well . Is it that i dont tell you where to find the words at, is this the issue ?

You literally are arguing with yourself.

Did you already miss the quotes from the Scriptures.

Maybe if i tell you where to find everything , you will understand.

But what is the point, if you are not listening anyways , why bother telling you where to look.

" In the beginning was the Word . The Word was with God and the Word was God " do you know what this quote means ? Do you know the rest of the paragraph , or the rest of the complete reading?
Do you know where this is from , without looking it up on a computer?

The Word of God should live in you like a river. It isnt about memorizing the bible , its about living the Word.

You can scream to the mountain tops , and quote all of Scripture. All this will not save you.

You can scream to the mountain tops , Jesus is my Lord and i am saved in Jesus name. But this will not save you either.

If you have Gods love in your heart, and have never read or understood about Jesus. You have never stated Jesus is my Lord. You will be saved

Why?

Knowing the Word will not save you , but having the Word in your heart will.

Go read what Paul writes about the Circumcision and the Heart

 

[PloughBoy]

Hello there, @PloughBoy,

Thank you for the explanation. It makes me think of one little verse:-

'But without faith it is impossible to please Him:
for he that cometh to God must believe that He is,
and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.'
(Heb 11:6)

HE IS !!
How wonderful that knowledge is, and how could we possibly doubt it? Just breathing in through my nose makes me rejoice in His creative work, for the workmanship that could ensure that the incoming breath is warmed before reaching the lung is a creation of absolute brilliance, with it's little hairs which prevent particles from entering. Each time I cough I hear and feel the mechanism whereby unwanted matter is extracted from my lungs, Every facet of the human body is a working miracle. We are fearfully and wonderfully made!!

Praise His Holy Name!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

You got it!

 

[PloughBoy]

Sometimes i dont understand you to well . Is it that i dont tell you where to find the words at, is this the issue ?

You literally are arguing with yourself.

Did you already miss the quotes from the Scriptures.

Maybe if i tell you where to find everything , you will understand.

But what is the point, if you are not listening anyways , why bother telling you where to look.

" In the beginning was the Word . The Word was with God and the Word was God " do you know what this quote means ? Do you know the rest of the paragraph , or the rest of the complete reading?
Do you know where this is from , without looking it up on a computer?

The Word of God should live in you like a river. It isnt about memorizing the bible , its about living the Word.

You can scream to the mountain tops , and quote all of Scripture. All this will not save you.

You can scream to the mountain tops , Jesus is my Lord and i am saved in Jesus name. But this will not save you either.

If you have Gods love in your heart, and have never read or understood about Jesus. You have never stated Jesus is my Lord. You will be saved

Why?

Knowing the Word will not save you , but having the Word in your heart will.

Go read what Paul writes about the Circumcision and the Heart

sad

 

[Butch5]

Yes it is simple.

What is "Presuppositional Apologetics"

Presuppositionalism as a school of Christian apologetics maintains that the Christian faith provides the only basis for rational thought. It presupposes that the Bible is divine revelation and attempts to expose flaws in other worldviews.

Presuppositionalism claims that apart from presuppositions, one could not make sense of any human experience, and there can be no set of neutral assumptions from which to reason with a non-Christian.[1] Presuppositionalists claim that Christians cannot consistently declare their belief in the necessary existence of the God of the Bible and simultaneously argue on the basis of a different set of assumptions that God may not exist and that Biblical revelation may not be true.[2][failed verification] Two schools of presuppositionalism exist, based on the different teachings of Cornelius Van Til and of Gordon Haddon Clark. Presuppositionalism contrasts with classical apologetics and with evidential apologetics.


Presuppositionalists compare their presupposition against other ultimate standards such as reason, empirical experience, and subjective feeling, claiming presupposition in this context is:

I too hold to Presuppositional Apologrtics. However, I ascribe to the style taught by Doctor Jason Lyle of Answers in Genesis.