Refuting Other People's Heresies

I wrote this sin response to a video refuting Catholicism.

But I submit that there is a general principle here as regards refuting other errors and heresies, not just those of Rome

 In just about every refutation of Catholicism I have seen we protestants who make them always make ourselves out to be saints and heroes

But what if assenting to certain doctrinal statements is NOT the same as saving faith  (being necessary but not sufficient)?

What if commitment to a doctrine is NOT  the same as believing it?

What  if forced action against our own hearts as regards doubt fear and the lusts of the flesh is NOT  obedience nor faith  but is forsaking Christ for the law to be perfected in the flesh

If these are so then we act like Catholics but only have a few craps of sound doctrine  where they do not.

And that makes US worse, for we know better but still, in our own self deception,  we are also backslid if not apostate

Catholicism is an easy target,

But to look at our own carnality and what it demonstrates, to look at our  unbelief being what our impulses and careless words indicate  ( and if you know your bibles you KNOW that as we will be judged on our careless words then that is because they indicate unbelief and hypocrisy  being who we are, for "as a man thinks so he is" and "out of the heart of man comes evil thoughts" and  "the mouth speaks the fullness of the heart.

what about these???

There are TWO types of those who have forsaken Christ

This piece was posted in reply to a video saying that the problem with Lutheran preaching is soft antinomianism.

And my slowly evolving position is summarized in the title I append here, namely that there are TWO types of those who have forsaken Christ, and not just the one, namely the legalist

It is as follows:

 if the Lutherans preach the gospel the problem is NOT their teaching.

the thing is human nature has ONLY two alternatives,

legalism which is to forsake Christ for the Law, being fooled by the idea that their efforts do constitute  true law keeping ( they do not) and that these efforts  are obedience to the Holy Spirit ( they are not)

or lawlessness which is falsely called grace but which, in refusing to come to him personally in one on one relationship is no such thing. 

real grace TRANSFORMS the recipient and that as a process of renewal of the mind in one one one discipleship

to see no transformation even over years in an easy believer is to see that they have forsaken Christ for self indulgence

and to see only deterioration in the legalist over years -  and because law stirs up sin and makes it worse deterioration is the only possible outcome  - is to see that they  have  forsaken Christ for the law

the  problem is UNBELIEF, not the unbelief of failing to assent to proposition but the failure of coming to the Lord the spirit  IN PERSON to be changed,  healed and nurtured by Him:

IN PERSON

I come at this from the pole of an  extreme legalist. it is my besetting sin.

the dynamic of coming to the lord to be transformed in person  ( AND STAYING WITH HIM)  to become what the Law requires is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from that of the legalist vainly trying to keep a law he cannot keep and hoping for a help that never comes. Moreover that dynamic of coming to the Lord in person is likewise totally different to that  of the easy believer who thinks that merely being a Christian, or even only assenting to some doctrinal shibboleths is the same thing as having a relationship with Christ

The lies in modern culture compared to the lies in the church

 An American Christian named Rosaria  Butterfield   has preached against some of lies that are permeating modern culture.

She does part of it here  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJaQYNrKaWI

and I have seen other videos of her on this

She is of course correct.

BUT I reply to her post below. For such denunciations barely scratch the surface

FWD

and I said . . .

This very good and necessary. Now i suggest she looks at the lies that have been the foundation of the church since almost the beginning.

and note i did say ALMOST. i never said these following lies were ever preached by the apostles. ND NEVER WILL

But the carnal mind, when it encounters the commandments of God will always twist them, corrupting them into something else entirely, namely lies and they include

1/ that forced obedience against one's own heart is genuine and that God both requires it and is pleased with it

2/that faith  can be engendered,  ie pumped up by willpower

3/ that love is actions  and has nothing to do with feeling

4/that doctrinal assent equals saving faith

5/ that we actually believe the gospel of Christ and are honest about it  when our lives show WE DO NOT

6/ that His yoke is hard  ( remember that He said it was EASY

we can preach  all we like against the lies she speaks about but until we look at the ones i list here we have NOTHING to counter these other lies with for we do NOT believe the gospel. After all the hypocrisy of us Christians  is proverbial and has been for CENTURIES

More on Cessationism

 In reply to a video on the subject:

God speaks to me directly.

this is the promise of having the Holy Spirit 

how do i know it is the Spirit who speaks? no other spirit convicts me  of sin in patience kindness and love.

any other would either tell me sin is not an issue, that i am ok

or have me writing in in agony  of condemnation on the floor

if the Spirit does not speak to us directly how does he Give life? Life is not a reified essence, life is relationship with Him, without this  is a law w cannot keep and we have forsaken him for the law

all the bible is is a book of law for it has things which  i as carnal find absurd.  so the commandments to believe certain things stand to me in the same relations as law does. so gazing at the book will only have me  more condemned than ever. for the letter kills the SPIRIT GIVES LIFE

and how does the Spirit work in me to do and will his good pleasure if he does not speak to me directly in one on one??

and where is the intimacy or abundant life or sabbath rest  if the Spirit does not speak to me one on one?

if i cannot choose, being sunk in sin and carnality, if he does not persuade me as a loving father  in one on one dialogue then nothing gets done and i am lost

i am sorry but if they refuse this they are in perilous danger.

i cannot regard them a brethren for they have forsaken christ for the law, as I did.

but it was the one on one dialogue with the Holy Spirit  OF CHRIST where by his grace ( for he is my wonderful coudsellor0 is persuading me to make choices I simply cannot do of my own 

and if they continue to reject this a time will com when the Spirit  will give up for they are too hardened to hear him. the warning of Hebrews 6:4 ff applies to us christians, and the warning is  to NOT reject the  Spirit for the law

More on "Woke"

You know how it is: the  '"woke" are a pack of spoiled infants. Their entire "thought" and actions show this. And  they especially show this  when disagreed with in any kind of spirited manner. And in their  fevered and  bigoted minds that is hate.

They have nothing else and certainly not the intellectual equipment to consider anything else. So they are in their own imagination but nowhere else, heroes. Their hatred is righteous, they think, and anyone who disputes them is demonized as the forces of pure evil

And of course as they respond to anything they dislike  with HATE and hate only, enough to show that by this  they are in fact a hate movement. Their accusations against classical liberals moderates and conservatives is of course Projection

The behaviour and ideation ( how can i really call it thought) of  the "woke ' leads me to define their movement as 

"Social justice and equity etc 

AS CONCEIVED and PRACTISED BY CHILDREN."

because that is what "woke" is: the most pampered and spoiled generation in history. coming from the most prosperous culture in history yet in their continuing discontent  (that is life itself)  they have to hate something rather thanface their own  internal moral weaknesses.

so they HATE  the culture that gave them EVERYTHING

Truth or Honesty?

This is in reply to a poll post on youtube. the question we were to vote on was "salvation can NEVER be bought by our obedience. 

This is a christian channel

My reply follows:

 I could say the right words (after all I CAN read, you know), and the right words  are  indeed as the question puts, that  obedience can NEVER buy salvation.

OR 

I could speak honestly.

WHICH DO YOU WANT???

For it can't be both, for I am not spiritual enough to believe true doctrine honestly and show  it by living by it in love liberty and peace

BTW i am not the only legalist in the church who thinks he can and must buy salvation: i see it everywhere.

IOW i am largely convinced that if everyone here were honest they would  almost all disagree with the statement given.

Why?

If we are carnal in fruit we are carnal in mind and if carnal in mind then,  as the carnal mind regards the things of God as foolish, and free grace properly viewed  is the core of all spiritual truth, therefore  we WILL regard it as foolish. So  we are trying to buy our salvation with our "obedience, " and this for all our passion and words to the  contrary which God is not impressed by if he sees our hearts (ie what we REALLY think). And our hearts are  given away by  our spontaneous words and reactions

Thoughts on foot washing

The classic Biblical account of foot washing, the one appealed to to justify it in modern times is in John chapter 13:1-14.

I invite you to look it up now, befoer continuing

Jesus washed the feet of his disciples as a sign of service and commanded each to to this to the other, also as a sign of service.

The point was that each should serve each other and, though not explicitly mentioned in this incident, to not lord it over the other as the pagans do

BUT, and I think this important 

foot washing was a relevant cultural practice back in the days of 1st century Israel and the Middle East.

The  culture of bible times in the Ancient Near East is completely foreign to ours, vastly different

people walked everywhere on dusty roads in sandles. Their feet got very dirty, and in arriving at one's destination having them washed would be a relief.

it is no longer so  at least in the urbanized west, not when we drive in an air conditioned cars, alight from the vehicle onto a clean pavement in our  leather shoes. No feet need washing by someone who has never done so in his life 

for us to take foot washing  on is a slavish legalism that has totally lost the significance  of the thing.

Put it this way,  if some legalist  wanted to wash my feet i would regard him as a foot fetishist and get out of there quick!!  The issue is service in a manner  that the person you would serve would find helpful relevant and  not indecent and intrusive, like suddenly wanting to wash his feet "just because they did it in the bible" 

it would be as indecent as putting your hand under the thigh of a person you were making a promise to would be these days but which was a ritual  of promise making in the days of Abraham  and the patriarchs  Genesis 24:2ff  and GEnesis 47:29.

cultural context and appropriateness for these times is UTTERLY RELEVANT .

the point of foot washing is SERVICE, not the culturally relevant form of a time long past  if it is not culturaly relevant now, and  indeed may be seen as either indecent or absurd.

this is something the slavish legalist, ever obsessed with the appearance and never the substance, miises completely

if i were a church member and needed help putting up a fence or some such, and asked for help to receive it, they that helped me would have  done the proper equivalent of washing my feet, something real and practical where the slavish rite of foot washing nowadays is not