|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jul 12, 2010 8:54:07 GMT -5
|
|
autumn
Junior Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by autumn on Jul 12, 2010 10:31:48 GMT -5
This **** I can't find a strong enough expletive or insult for him...
Whatever your faith, most kindhearted people believe that the lives lost before they could be lived always go to heaven or to a better place for a very very good reason! To say to a woman grieving miscarriage that her child might not...I have no words for that kind of cruelty!
May he be reincarnated as a woman doomed to face the hurt and pain of repeated losses!! That's the only fate I can think of that would fit this worm posing as a man!
|
|
|
Post by rosa on Jul 12, 2010 10:39:54 GMT -5
Here's the part I don't get...do these folks believe that God creates a new soul for every fertilized egg?
I guess the way I always vaguely understood Christian belief on this it was that there was a sort of pool of already-created souls waiting for lives. Which a miscarried pregnancy wouldn't really provide.
|
|
|
Post by hopewell on Jul 12, 2010 10:49:20 GMT -5
Ok--the mother doesn't even get the comfort of her child in Jesus' arms? Some babies will NOT go to heaven? This guy just makes my blood boil--for too many reasons to list here. So all those QF Mom blogs with "and X number angels in heaven praying for us" [i.e. stillborn or miscarried children] are wrong? I hate him.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jul 12, 2010 10:55:21 GMT -5
This **** I can't find a strong enough expletive or insult for him... Whatever your faith, most kindhearted people believe that the lives lost before they could be lived always go to heaven or to a better place for a very very good reason! To say to a woman grieving miscarriage that her child might not...I have no words for that kind of cruelty! May he be reincarnated as a woman doomed to face the hurt and pain of repeated losses!! That's the only fate I can think of that would fit this worm posing as a man! Welcome to the doctrines of total depravity and strict predestination, aka Calvinism. That innocent baby in your arms? Totally depraved from birth. And quite possibly damned from the moment of conception because God has already given him his ticket and that ride to hell is non-refundable. This lines up with what seems to be Doug Phillips personality perfectly, doesn't it? If these doctrines weren't ready made for him I think he'd almost have to make them up so as to align with his cruel vision of what our lives should be. Mormons believe there are soul children waiting to be born and they want to provide bodies for them (it's a lot more complicated than that but put simply). And I think some eastern religions believe something akin to that in terms of reincarnation. Christian theology doesn't hold that the souls are just waiting around for bodies but spark into being at conception. At least that was what I was always taught and I think that's pretty standard for Christian theology.
|
|
|
Post by rosa on Jul 12, 2010 11:33:18 GMT -5
So does that mean the QF families who conceive over and over and over again are sort of pushing the vending-machine lever for God to make new souls?
That seems sort of overbearing, somehow.
|
|
autumn
Junior Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by autumn on Jul 12, 2010 11:47:55 GMT -5
I'm a pagan who believes in reincarnation, so to me, a miscarriage happens for a reason, usually that there is something wrong with the life being created and if you miscarry or abort, the soul will simply go somewhere else, become someone else.
Calvinism is something that I really loath with all my heart. There must be a place in this world because there are always those who must make themselves and everyone around them miserable...Me I'll go somewhere where my faith makes me joyful!
|
|
phatchick
Junior Member
Medicated for Your Protection
Posts: 80
|
Post by phatchick on Jul 12, 2010 11:53:07 GMT -5
This has to be one of the most hateful things I've read on this site yet! I've had friends who had to face miscarriages and the grief they went through was heartbreaking. I would dearly love 5 minutes alone with Doug Phillips in a locked room with a very large stick.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jul 12, 2010 12:24:54 GMT -5
I wrote this post late last night ~ and now today, the more I think about it, the more outraged I've become. I have edited/added to the article because I felt that my original rant against Doug Phillips and his God was not stated nearly strongly enough. For those who read earlier this a.m., here's what you missed: And then he says, "Miscarriage is for a moment; a soul is forever."
Mr. Phillips ~ your God is an evil monster!
May He go the way of Molech, Baal, and all the other sons-of-bitches tribal gods of the ancient Near-East that nobody has taken seriously for centuries And this: And women should readily submit our wombs to the capricious whims of this Big Guy, why?
Yes, our mother-hearts will often compel us to sacrifice ourselves for our families. But unlike the Patriarchs, we women are not so cruel as to willfully sacrifice our own children to populate Hell. With no assurance that the precious lives which we grow in our wombs and hold in our hearts are among the "children called of God" ~ why should we cooperate in their creation for eternal destruction? Thank you, Doug Phillips for reminding me why it is that I no longer love, worship and serve this horrible God of the Patriarchy.
|
|
|
Post by sandra on Jul 12, 2010 12:33:31 GMT -5
How fortunate that I wasn't part of this Butthead's world when I was miscarrying. I had three miscarriages before my two children and the experiences changed everything I ever thought about life in the unborn. I wasn't even a Christian anymore during that time but the feminity/fertility issues I struggled with were enough to put the final nail in any thought of returning to the Christian (Calvinistic) God of my childhood.
Even without Phillips' traumatic "hope", I felt like a failure. What was wrong with ME that I couldn't carry a child when teenage druggies give birth to crack babies daily. No God who deprived me of a much-desired child for my own sins (hardly great, I grew up in the fundy bubble, how much trouble could I get into?) but gave children to irresponsible, unhealthy girls who didn't even want them is ever something to worship. 14 yrs later, I'm still trying to get that horrible shaming god out of my psyche where he hides with evil menace.
Turns out my fertility problems were a simple hormonal imbalance that could have been prevented with diet and OTC supplements and the two pregnancies I carried were made possible with simple progesterone supplementation. All quite likely due to early stage adrenal burnout that resulted from spiritual abuse in that fundy Christian childhood.
Yeah, women don't need any more hideous shame heaped on them from sadistic perverts like Phillips. Pregnancy loss, even physically uncomplicated miscarriage, is traumatic enough without this kind of torture that we decry when it is perpetrated by law in other countries.
|
|
|
Post by lg61820 on Jul 12, 2010 13:49:22 GMT -5
I must disgree with Mr. Phillips statement that a "miscarriage is a moment". My miscarriage has been haunting me for 16 years and I expect it will haunt me forever. The first weekend in October is a dark, dark time for me even 16 years after the fact.
We adopted older children because I believed it was my job to tend to the widow & orphans. They were difficult children. I began to pray for a baby, someone to love who might not be so difficult and who might not have a "first family" then a "forever family" but just a family. After a time a baby was dropped into our lives and never left, but I wasn't sure that that baby was an answer to my prayer though I loved her unconditionally. In fact, I came to believe that she was God's little joke. Later I just stopped believing anything much about God.
One October I experienced the worst night of pain I have ever felt. I called our HMO asking if I could go to the emergency room and the nurse said that pain was not sufficient reason to go and that I would likely have to pay the bill. As "frugal" as my husband was I knew better than to go, so I toughed it out & called for an appointment the next day.
Imagine my surprise, over 40 years old, married over 20 years and the doctor wants to do a pregnancy test. I laughed until the test came back positive then I cried. He dangled hope that nothing was wrong. 2 ultrasounds later he determined that all was lost.
Now, Mr. Phillips would have me believe that this was done to discipline me? Why, because I had strayed from the fold? Or it was done to bring me back to testify about God's grace? My miscarriage didn't last a moment, it first lasted the week or so the doctor took to decide there was no pregnancy left and then it has lasted every day since then.
If I did believe in God and this joker told me that my "baby" might not be waiting for me in Heaven I'd have to pinch him, or more likely speak out against him in every meeting.
However, I no longer believe that God-if one exists- has much of an interest in anything earthly. I believe my pregnancy was a result of timing and its loss was a result of scraping lead-based paint off the exterior of the house. Still, it hurts to think of what might have been.
Sorry for such a long post. I rarely talk about this and apparently I had a lot I was holding in. Thanks LG
|
|
|
Post by cindy on Jul 12, 2010 14:34:45 GMT -5
Someone contacted me via email in the middle of the night on Saturday, and I got up very early on Sunday, writing a response to this.
Here's part of my modified response, adding to things that are not obviously known to many.
Ultimately, this is not a "theology of miscarriage or suffering." It is Doug using others to make himself feel better about himself, a discussion of his ugly, ugly twist on replacement theology, a darker aspect of his more overarching concept of "multigenerational faithfulness." Note also that this was written by a Christian to a Christian.... .......
Also, we are to speak that which is good to the use of edifying that it may minister grace unto the hearer. That's a significant question to ask about academic discussions. Is anything said here good to the use of edifying and is that edification strictly limited to only certain people? Is it evangelistic?
I also know privately that some people in these groups have been counseled that babies that die due to abortion or treatment of tubal pregnancy go to hell. I’ve also received emails from my blog readers about the my own posts about survivor guilt after my own miscarriages that they had people tell them that miscarriages happen because they secretly did not want their babies. A woman wrote to me to tell me that some stranger wrote to her to shame her after in this way after she shared about her own experience after a miscarriage.
!!! Some people have a mindset that can only understand good things as finite. I’ve read other books about this type of thing that are more technical, but Harriet Braiker’s book, “Who’s Pulling Your Strings,” explains this very well in more easy to understand terms. Many people see power, survival and blessing as finite resources. If someone has more, they have less. It is very common in people who struggle with narcissism. Those people feel deeply threatened by others with confidence, power, happiness, money, survival, etc.
I think that, also, many angry young Calvinists blow right by the spiritual poverty aspects of Total Depravity in TULIP because of overwhelming feelings of helplessness that they cannot tolerate. I think that their intense compulsion for survival, avoidance, and their lack of self-worth from an internal locus of control through faith in Christ propels them right to a focus on limited atonement. Rather than serving as a academic point, it becomes their survivalist motivated salvation which levels the playing field, what Pia Mellody (and others) describe as “one –upping” themselves and “one-downing” their perceived competition.
We also know that Doug is a lawyer, inclined to shove people into sterile boxes and he is greatly uncomfortable with messy, unanswered questions.
|
|
|
Post by cindy on Jul 12, 2010 14:50:57 GMT -5
If you guys don't want to read more of my ranting, please just go to the next post. But I am as angry as Vyckie, I think. This is just a portion of all that I wrote in dissecting the post. There is more to be said about how the middle section of that blog item is written, leading people down the primrose path. But I am mad, don't want to waste my blog talking about more of this garbage. (I'll pawn it off here!) only kidding. About the last section: Discussions about miscarriage, a theology of miscarriage, should focus on edification and encouragement. This is a discussion about how to make the way to heaven narrow, just like Jesus said of the Pharisees in Matthew 23, a couple of verses into the chapter. They close up the way into heaven, not making it accessible to more people. They have an interest in making it more exclusive so that they can feel better about being special before God in comparison to everyone else. They have higher status in comparison to those who do not make it, and this is not a cause for grieving loss of those who break God’s heart for rejecting Him, it is a cause to rejoice over God’s hatred for his enemies, ala the cruel and survivalist oriented aspects of Covenant Theology. For the insecure, it is a point of external locus of control. Doug can feel special before God by standing on the crushed skulls of the dead babies of the non-elect so that he and his dead babies can have a higher ranking by comparison, and that gives his life more meaning. As Henke said about image consciousness, he can prove that he is more special to God than the heathens who are not part of the "covenant community." Pay attention to what is not said. This is not about comforting all mothers and all people who have suffered loss. This is about restricting salvation and meaning and comfort to only his group. The hope of discipling our families on the priorities, nobilities, and sacrifices of Motherhood.
What exactly does this mean? What does this look like and did Doug tell us what this entails? What could be a possible priority of discipleship for “our families.” Discpleship is discipline or teaching. What priorities specifically would Doug teach his wife and his children? What does this mean? From what is stated here, I cannot say if he defined the terms more clearly. If this is all that was said, I think that it is undefined, sounds nebulous and erudite but means very little because it is vague. But I don’t know the details. Does this mean that he instructed his wife in how to properly care for their unborn child, and did he go over with his children about how to help care for mommy (or their future spouses or selves when pregnant)? When she suffers a loss of a precious child? Did he go over prenatal care with his clueless wife and their five year old boy? Did he talk about the threats to a developing baby in a mother’s womb? Would this include his wife giving a full account of all her actions to ensure her husband and give an account of her actions before him so he could ensure that she had not harmed the baby. Would she face shame and punishment if she is found to have done something to have risked that baby’s life? Who can say? You cannot watch what they say – you have to watch what they do. Some people believe (like Gothard) that people bring on miscarriages themselves because of bad attitudes. What character trait of Ruth would this fall under? When you loose a baby, what do you teach your family about the nobility of motherhood exactly? What does that look like? There is not enough information here to really find out what Doug really means. What do you teach your family about the sacrifices of motherhood? What does this mean exactly? This sounds pretty and virtuous, but what specifically does this really mean? With only this much to go on, it doesn’t really mean anything. I would stand up and applaud if the details included chewing out dirty rotten attitudes of people who blame the mother for the unborn baby’s death, cursing her for supposing that they killed the very wanted babies they lost. Did Doug address this? The hope that tragedy provides to model confidence in the sovereignty of God to your children and the world.This is also too undefined and vague. If this was a discussion about the theology of suffering in general, John Donne and all that fantastic stuff, Hooray! But what were the specifics. To me, without them, I don’t know what these flowery and vague statements mean. They sound pretty, but how do they define the terms?Tragedy offers hope because it provides a model for confidence that we can have in God’s sovereignty. But how is God sovereign to your children? To all children? To the world? Based on past teachings and horrible things Doug has said about others who do not buy into his cruel interpretations about those not in his special area in the “big tent,” is that hope available to all believers? To me? He's called us lesser Christians "Canaanites" (the peoples that Israel was instructed to kill). Is part of the hope that he derives from God’s Sovereignty drawn from the one-upmanship he gives to himself and the devaluing and demonizing of others outside of his group? That’s another detail needed to discern what he’s saying. Tragedy does give us hope. “Send not to ask for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.” (From Donne’s “Upon Emergent Devotions.”) But Donne presupposed that Europe was the less if anyone died, from a prince but down to the pauper. We are a part of the main and no man is an island unto himself. When one suffers, we all suffer. Was this something we could anticipate hearing from Doug, and to whom does it apply? This is a man who has called me a Cannanite and a Communist and a Secular Humanist. I don't know if he's personally called me a lesbian or not. What if miscarriage was God’s mean of showing mercy and love on a human soul, and if He chose you to be the honored vehicle to usher that child into eternity?The greater question that he does not answer and that his own theology is inadequate to address is that this is not a hope that is available to all mothers. So for those he deems to be legitimate Christians, this is a lovely message. But is this denied to others like me, someone twice fit for hell in his estimation? He does not make these statements in a vacuum, and he leaves many things unstated. Vague inference and unstated assumption is how much doctrine of exclusivity is generally communicated. Spiritual abuse is all about proving that your group is more special than everyone else.Did he talk about how to comfort others or use this for evangelism to draw others to Christ? Did he warn to avoid this discussion with the unbeliever because this hope is limited to the covenant community? I’ve been some people teach that some unborn babies go to hell if they are not from covenant families. XXXXX has taught people in his church that aborted babies go to hell. Doug Wilson said we should rejoice when heathens abort their babies, and we should rejoice and praise God when we see their children naked and starving in the streets because God hates the non-elect. It’s all about the math. And this is a lawyer talking. Do you go to a lawyer when you want encouragement and exhortation?
|
|
|
Post by cindy on Jul 12, 2010 14:56:08 GMT -5
I must disgree with Mr. Phillips statement that a "miscarriage is a moment". My miscarriage has been haunting me for 16 years and I expect it will haunt me forever. The first weekend in October is a dark, dark time for me even 16 years after the fact. We adopted older children because I believed it was my job to tend to the widow & orphans. They were difficult children. I began to pray for a baby, someone to love who might not be so difficult and who might not have a "first family" then a "forever family" but just a family. After a time a baby was dropped into our lives and never left, but I wasn't sure that that baby was an answer to my prayer though I loved her unconditionally. In fact, I came to believe that she was God's little joke. Later I just stopped believing anything much about God. One October I experienced the worst night of pain I have ever felt. I called our HMO asking if I could go to the emergency room and the nurse said that pain was not sufficient reason to go and that I would likely have to pay the bill. As "frugal" as my husband was I knew better than to go, so I toughed it out & called for an appointment the next day. Imagine my surprise, over 40 years old, married over 20 years and the doctor wants to do a pregnancy test. I laughed until the test came back positive then I cried. He dangled hope that nothing was wrong. 2 ultrasounds later he determined that all was lost. Now, Mr. Phillips would have me believe that this was done to discipline me? Why, because I had strayed from the fold? Or it was done to bring me back to testify about God's grace? My miscarriage didn't last a moment, it first lasted the week or so the doctor took to decide there was no pregnancy left and then it has lasted every day since then. If I did believe in God and this joker told me that my "baby" might not be waiting for me in Heaven I'd have to pinch him, or more likely speak out against him in every meeting. However, I no longer believe that God-if one exists- has much of an interest in anything earthly. I believe my pregnancy was a result of timing and its loss was a result of scraping lead-based paint off the exterior of the house. Still, it hurts to think of what might have been. Sorry for such a long post. I rarely talk about this and apparently I had a lot I was holding in. Thanks LG I revisit my own miscarriages every month when I get my period, thinking that here's another sad day of pondering and grieving that I will not be a mother in the physical sense. What did I do wrong and what could I do over again that might have made some difference? I don't sit and ponder it for long, and God's grace is sufficient for my life. I am happy with that. But my miscarriages from more than a decade ago visit me every month, mingled with my grief that I have no other babies, too.
|
|
|
Post by cindy on Jul 12, 2010 15:16:52 GMT -5
Vyckie,
Thank you for posting this. Thank you for the opportunity to express these feelings that are so hard to process.
In terms of ethics, these people are way in over their heads. That is blatantly obvious, but it is still helpful to have a place to express the disgust and frustration.
|
|
phatchick
Junior Member
Medicated for Your Protection
Posts: 80
|
Post by phatchick on Jul 12, 2010 23:38:21 GMT -5
I must disgree with Mr. Phillips statement that a "miscarriage is a moment". My miscarriage has been haunting me for 16 years and I expect it will haunt me forever. Oh, hon, I am so sorry! {{{lg61820}}}
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jul 13, 2010 0:55:27 GMT -5
I understand the pain of miscarriage; I have had two. But I was lucky to also have two healthy children. I grieve with those of you who have also suffered, and especially those who wanted children and didn't have them. I know the feeling that you failed; that you did something wrong. I have felt that too. But we didn't. It's just one of those things. Doug Phillips and his icy cold "comfort" is no help. I hope someday the pain he causes is made absolutely clear to him. I agree that a God who would send a miscarried baby to hell is no god at all, but a monster. What I just don't get is how anyone could worship such an evil caricature.
|
|
|
Post by humbletigger on Jul 13, 2010 11:18:48 GMT -5
I hate Calvinism. Yes, hate is a strong work, I know. I used it on purpose. IF Jesus really died so that the world might be saved through him, and if He really is the God who does all things well, then atonement/adoption/acceptance is really for the whole world. My faith is all up in the air and I am sure many Christians would find that heretical, but I find it heretical to deny the scriptures I am quoting above or explain them away as not meaning what they really say. I admit openly that my theology rests on personal mystical revelation of God, through the lens of my Christian culture, and I can say 100% for sure that GOD IS LOVE, GOD IS, and GOD IS GOOD. The God who revealed himself to me doesn't willingly exile anyone, but truly welcomes everyone. If there is a separation from God, it is freely chosen and not by God. For those of you who don't believe in God at all, my experience and theology is just as ridiculous sounding as anyone else's, but if you find after you die that there is a God, I assure you He loves you and wants you to be part of that love forever. Amazingly enough, I am finding out that other Christians are coming to the same conclusions I am (Trinitarian theology, Open View of the future) and it is very comforting. No babies are in hell! Hell, imho, would be a freely chosen state of turning your back on LOVE, and babies would never do that nor even be capable of doing that. If hell exists, then it seems to me that the self-righteous are in the most danger of choosing it, out of offense that "heaven" is for all of us and they need not have made their lives so difficult!
|
|
|
Post by cherylannhannah on Jul 13, 2010 16:16:57 GMT -5
Sometimes I find that the things that trouble me most as a Christian turn out to be the things of greatest comfort to me. The problem was not God or the Bible, it was with my perspective. Does God annihilate His enemies? Yes, He does. He does this by making them His friends. God tells us plainly in Scripture that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He also says that He is love, that He is good, and that He is all-wise, all-knowing, and all-powerful. WRT infants who die before or after birth, my faith is in the God who does all things well, and in the Judge of the earth who always does what is right. I think it is presumptuous to think that we know what happens to babies who are not conceived in covenant households. I think it is presumptuous for us to guess or declare what God is doing in the lives of anyone who suffers tradgedy. You know what has given me a measure of satisfaction? It is the fact that at the end of the book of Job, Job doesn't have his questions answered. It means that God himself is enough. But it wasn't easy getting there.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jul 13, 2010 19:15:26 GMT -5
Sometimes I find that the things that trouble me most as a Christian turn out to be the things of greatest comfort to me. The problem was not God or the Bible, it was with my perspective. Does God annihilate His enemies? Yes, He does. He does this by making them His friends. God tells us plainly in Scripture that He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He also says that He is love, that He is good, and that He is all-wise, all-knowing, and all-powerful. WRT infants who die before or after birth, my faith is in the God who does all things well, and in the Judge of the earth who always does what is right. I think it is presumptuous to think that we know what happens to babies who are not conceived in covenant households. I think it is presumptuous for us to guess or declare what God is doing in the lives of anyone who suffers tradgedy. You know what has given me a measure of satisfaction? It is the fact that at the end of the book of Job, Job doesn't have his questions answered. It means that God himself is enough. But it wasn't easy getting there. Okay, this post is not intended for nonbelievers out there as it presupposes both Christian faith and belief in God. And this is my opinion and I do not attempt to answer for anyone here but myself on these things. Cheryl, you just expressed the Catholic position on the question quite well. I think there is much wisdom in saying to some questions, I don't know, but whatever the answer turns out to be I believe in the goodness of God and that it will not simply be just, but merciful and loving also. We cannot know the mind of God in all things. Now, I want to state that I’ve been hard on Reformed Theology on the forum for a reason but I also realize that there are forum members who have been and still are in the Reformed tradition but who take issue with its extreme wings which have embraced patriarchalism and quiverfull and very harsh and legalistic stances on things. And it is not my intention to offend anyone by my opinions and statements. I know I would not be thrilled if anyone started attacking my own faith. We all have to come to our own understanding in these things and I respect that. When I converted to Catholicism I needed to know what was the core of belief of the church that was required in order to be Catholic. And it turns out it was pretty simple and straightforward, that core. There are enormous amounts of culture, conjecture, theological disagreements and styles of worship and what is called ‘permissible’ belief within the Catholic community around the world and in history, but the core is simple and the rest of it you can discard entirely if you choose to do so. And I think that this is true of many faiths really. I think there is a core of Reformed Theology that is required in order to be considered a believer, and then there is all the interpretation and opinion that gets overlaid on top of it that is up to the believer to believe or not. Now I don’t agree with the Reformed core (obviously, Catholic here) but what is causing the greatest anger right now is the rest of it – the interpretation and opinion and teachings that come out of it, that when you line up the current who’s who of Reformed Theology today it is mostly a list of men who follow a legalistic interpretation of scripture and at the very least a nod toward the patriarchialism that we find so troubling. It seems to be producing the Doug Phillips and Phil Lancasters of the world today. For me, what really bothers me about the Reformed theology I see around me today is the idea that we can know the mind of God in all things by mining the scriptures and come up with absolute Truth regarding the minutiae of life in all its aspects. Truth that, once decided upon, is beyond questioning and mandatory for all believers everywhere to sign on to. It is balls to the walls arrogance. But by doing that very thing they also seem to minimize to the point of irrelevance both mercy and love, preferring to elevate judgment and justice. They explain away all scripture that doesn't fit with their pre-determined world view. Somehow, to me, in trying to make God all–sovereign they have made Him instead very small. Instead of setting us free in Christ they seek to bind us hand and foot. And because there are currently and historically Reformed pastors and believers who do that does not mean that anyone who believes in the Reformed faith is following that path also. I would assume that anyone who is posting on this forum would be questioning or rejecting the harsh and unmerciful teachings of those leaders and theologians. Even if it means just admitting that one just doesn’t have all the answers but we believe that God is good and merciful and we trust in Him. And a God who is good and merciful and just, does not send people to hell for simply having the misfortune of having been conceived in other than perfect covenant circumstances. Which unfortunately touches on one of the cores of the Reformed faith, hence the problem with Calvinism for me. Again, this is my explanation for my harshness in speaking of Reformed Theology and I do apologize if my statements have made anyone feel attacked or uncomfortable.
|
|
|
Post by cherylannhannah on Jul 13, 2010 20:39:49 GMT -5
Nikita, I completely hear what you are saying and I agree with 99.9% of it. I don't think that Phil Lancaster or Doug Phillips are representative of the Reformed church overall. Not all reformed Christians embrace patriarchy or the QF philosophy, which to me, seems to be one of the primary corrupting influences in any church of any stripe or denomination.
I personally don't have a label for what category Christian I am any more. I agree with the Apostle's creed. I agree with large sections of the Westminster and London confessions of faith, the synods of Dordt, the three forms of unity, Belgic Confession, and even a lot of what Calvin taught. However, I also find lots to agree with in conservative Anglicanism, baptist churches, etc.
I just want the truth. I just want to love God and my fellow woman and man. I don't care what kind of label you want to stick on it. I've been wrong too many times before to want to be dogmatic about what anyone should believe. There is not a single person who has cornered the market on truth and has it all right. This should provoke us to humility, imho.
I had a brief discussion the other day about God's call upon those who never hear the Gospel. It is easy for us to get hung up on the details of salvation and think that people need to have all the minutae of their particular formularies in order to achieve salvation. But look at Hebrews 11. Those people who are in the "cloud of witnesses" are all Old Testament saints who didn't have the fullness of knowledge about the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Christ. And what does God say of Job? "Have you considred MY SERVANT Job?" Did Job know any of this? Did Melchizedek? Abraham? David?
Just recently I came across this verse in Acts 10:38 "But in every nation, he who fears him [God] and works righteousness is accepted by him."
I still believe that there is only one way to God and that it is through Jesus Christ, His Son. But I believe that God is fully capable of applying the blood of Christ to those who only know God through general revelation, to infants, to the mentally handicapped, to those who have no experience of having the fullness of the Gospel preached. I think C. S. Lewis could very well have been right in how he presented in at the end of the Narnia tale, "The Last Battle."
God, I believe, is far wider and far greater than any category we try to stuff him into. And He transcends the foolishness and pride we have in thinking we have him nailed.
Justice and mercy are reconciled at the foot of the cross. I'm content to leave it there.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jul 13, 2010 20:45:45 GMT -5
I'm assuming the .01% you disagree with is the Catholic part. Well said. I think we're pretty much on the same page.
|
|
|
Post by cherylannhannah on Jul 14, 2010 1:17:10 GMT -5
Nikita, I'm really starting to like you as I get to know you more.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jul 14, 2010 1:27:36 GMT -5
Nikita, I'm really starting to like you as I get to know you more. That's good to know, because usually I have the opposite effect.
|
|
|
Post by cherylannhannah on Jul 14, 2010 11:56:02 GMT -5
That's good to know, because usually I have the opposite effect. [/quote] All my best and favorite girlfriends are those who have a bit of spunk.
|
|