Hi I recently became Reformed in my theology there are those I know who think I join a cult and that I’m joining Catholicism because I got the institutes by Calvin the Westminster Confession of Faith and Dr White’s book on Catholicism but I’m not becoming Catholic how would you respond?
I asked those I know are you Born Again their response was I was confirmed in a Presbyterian Church I think I said that's not what I asked when people say that does it show they aren't saved?
Well, We are indeed Catholic (universal CHURCH), Reformed; just not 'Roman' Catholic. We hold that the Work of Salvation is Performed Completely by GOD and HIM Alone, apart from ANYthing in Us. They love to add their worksand their so-called 'free-will', which ia by no means free, but in bondage. He who sins is a slave of sin; one is either a slave of sin and satahn, or a slave of Righteousness n CHRIST. Roman Catholics are man-centeted and extremely Synergistic. We are Complete Monergists. There are many differences, such as the Sacraments and stuff as well. They believe in Transubstantiation; We Partake in rememberence of HIM, Not to re-present the Sacrifice as they do. As far as a "cult"; what You might say depends on what they believe. But We do not follow any man accept The GOD MAN, JESUS The HOLY CHRIST. In fact, We hold to Sola Scriptura and Tota Scriptura. Salvation by GRACE Alone, through Faith alone, In The HOLY CHRIST Alone, as Revealed in Holy Scripture alone, to the Glory of GOD Alone. The 5 Solas; though i utilized Tota Scriptura as well, as We take all of it into account, providing a Biblically Balanced View. This was long but i wanted to provide you with some Foundational information. Hope it helps. Any questions, please holla. YHWH Bless n Keep You ..., Brother!
@@starwarsfan7093 , no, it shows a misunderstanding of what Born Again means. Many people think it means that they got baptized in water; However, that is only a sign/shadow, an outward expression and Declaration of what actually takes place Spiritually (dying to yourSelf and Sin and Being Raised to New Life In CHRIST). However, it Could mean that. But that alone is Not enough to pronounce such a Judgement. Anyone living in Repentance and Faith, by the Grace of GOD In CHRIST JESUS Is Being Saved (Salvation Is Continual, ongoing), as HE Who Began the Good Work in You Will Bring It to Completion to the Day of CHRIST JESUS Our LORD.
You tell them yes I'm in a cult. The word cult means to cultivate or culture. A cult is a good thing. What they probably meant to say was occult. In that case you just tell him about The Bible.
No Dr. Wilson does not have to explain, or cite, or do anything with respect to the "Manicheian hermeneutic". He isn't concerned with whether or not Augustine used the same, for instance, 'gramatical-historical' methodology. He is instead interested in the RESULT of the exegesis. It is the RESULT that is at issue. It is the RESULT that Augustine, according to Wilson, shares with Fortunatum. It is the RESULT that Augustine brought into Christianity, which had been for centuries rejected by all Chrisitans, who's writings are extant, that referenced the topic.
You missed the entire point. Wilson could not provide any meaningful argumentation. Poisoning the well was the best Wilson could do, and it wasn’t good enough.
This is just consequentialist nonsense. Let's say a person claimed to be a prominent provisionist, not out of any desire for the gospel, but purely to be wealthy, would that be good? Jesus cares about hearts. The Manichee view and Augustinian view are so alien to one another its ridiculous to compare them.
Sayig something is wrong does leave one with the burden of proof. What was provided. And, Good Hermeneutics n Proper Exegesis always leads to Proper THEOlogy, which Informs and Fuels Our DOXOlogy.
No "argumentation" is needed when the result is at issue and the result is the same. If it looks like a duck, swim likes a duck, and quacks like it duck... If A. And Fort have the same result, and no one in the Christian tradition shared that result, and in fact shared a dissimilar result (see John Chrysostom on John 6:44), there is nothing more that need be said. That is the argument. That is the proof.
It would be poisoning the well only if he had no evidence: saying that "you read and interpret these texts like a Manichee" without any evidence to back it. The evidence is the result (which until then only the Gnositic sects advocated).
Hi I recently became Reformed in my theology there are those I know who think I join a cult and that I’m joining Catholicism because I got the institutes by Calvin the Westminster Confession of Faith and Dr White’s book on Catholicism but I’m not becoming Catholic how would you respond?
Bible Guy Respond with Scripture my bro
I asked those I know are you Born Again their response was I was confirmed in a Presbyterian Church I think I said that's not what I asked when people say that does it show they aren't saved?
Well, We are indeed Catholic (universal CHURCH), Reformed; just not 'Roman' Catholic. We hold that the Work of Salvation is Performed Completely by GOD and HIM Alone, apart from ANYthing in Us. They love to add their worksand their so-called 'free-will', which ia by no means free, but in bondage. He who sins is a slave of sin; one is either a slave of sin and satahn, or a slave of Righteousness n CHRIST. Roman Catholics are man-centeted and extremely Synergistic. We are Complete Monergists. There are many differences, such as the Sacraments and stuff as well. They believe in Transubstantiation; We Partake in rememberence of HIM, Not to re-present the Sacrifice as they do. As far as a "cult"; what You might say depends on what they believe. But We do not follow any man accept The GOD MAN, JESUS The HOLY CHRIST. In fact, We hold to Sola Scriptura and Tota Scriptura. Salvation by GRACE Alone, through Faith alone, In The HOLY CHRIST Alone, as Revealed in Holy Scripture alone, to the Glory of GOD Alone. The 5 Solas; though i utilized Tota Scriptura as well, as We take all of it into account, providing a Biblically Balanced View. This was long but i wanted to provide you with some Foundational information. Hope it helps. Any questions, please holla. YHWH Bless n Keep You ..., Brother!
@@starwarsfan7093 , no, it shows a misunderstanding of what Born Again means. Many people think it means that they got baptized in water; However, that is only a sign/shadow, an outward expression and Declaration of what actually takes place Spiritually (dying to yourSelf and Sin and Being Raised to New Life In CHRIST). However, it Could mean that. But that alone is Not enough to pronounce such a Judgement. Anyone living in Repentance and Faith, by the Grace of GOD In CHRIST JESUS Is Being Saved (Salvation Is Continual, ongoing), as HE Who Began the Good Work in You Will Bring It to Completion to the Day of CHRIST JESUS Our LORD.
You tell them yes I'm in a cult. The word cult means to cultivate or culture.
A cult is a good thing.
What they probably meant to say was occult. In that case you just tell him about The Bible.
James white is awesome.
No Dr. Wilson does not have to explain, or cite, or do anything with respect to the "Manicheian hermeneutic". He isn't concerned with whether or not Augustine used the same, for instance, 'gramatical-historical' methodology. He is instead interested in the RESULT of the exegesis. It is the RESULT that is at issue. It is the RESULT that Augustine, according to Wilson, shares with Fortunatum. It is the RESULT that Augustine brought into Christianity, which had been for centuries rejected by all Chrisitans, who's writings are extant, that referenced the topic.
You missed the entire point. Wilson could not provide any meaningful argumentation. Poisoning the well was the best Wilson could do, and it wasn’t good enough.
This is just consequentialist nonsense. Let's say a person claimed to be a prominent provisionist, not out of any desire for the gospel, but purely to be wealthy, would that be good? Jesus cares about hearts. The Manichee view and Augustinian view are so alien to one another its ridiculous to compare them.
Sayig something is wrong does leave one with the burden of proof. What was provided. And, Good Hermeneutics n Proper Exegesis always leads to Proper THEOlogy, which Informs and Fuels Our DOXOlogy.
No "argumentation" is needed when the result is at issue and the result is the same. If it looks like a duck, swim likes a duck, and quacks like it duck...
If A. And Fort have the same result, and no one in the Christian tradition shared that result, and in fact shared a dissimilar result (see John Chrysostom on John 6:44), there is nothing more that need be said. That is the argument. That is the proof.
It would be poisoning the well only if he had no evidence: saying that "you read and interpret these texts like a Manichee" without any evidence to back it. The evidence is the result (which until then only the Gnositic sects advocated).
Ken Wilson is AWESOME
Ken Wilson is WRONG!
@@TheJpep2424 Fraid not sonny!
@@johndisalvo6283 Wilson is wrong indeed!
@@KnightFel Nope, you are.
@@johndisalvo6283 good one!