Should PPT Screen Heretical Detractors?
“The Reformation is the biggest socialist hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. It is an anti-Christ worship of Platonist metaphysics….If the stats drop because people can no longer learn and cannot see my arguments work in real life, I do give a damn about that.”
Is James Jordan saying that Jesus and Paul are in contradiction? Why would the owner of this website allow the posting of such heresy? This might not be the place for me.
I just went through this conversation with an associate of PPT this week as a result of me cutting off Randy Seiver and others. It was not a short conversation. Curiously, some of the complaints about who I allow to post comments here come from those I have cut off. While claiming to hold to the whole canon and making it void with their Reformed traditions, they don’t like James Jordon because he rejects the Pauline epistles. Their argument is the following: “You show agreement by posting their comments.” No, my position on these issues have been clearly stated in no uncertain terms. And I warn anyone who rejects portions of Scripture to heed the warning of Christ found in Revelation. I would also add that distorting what is there is no different from adding to or taking away from it.
The person who discussed this with me despises the very people he doesn’t want me to screen. He also understands me very well, so any conversation about me fearing ideas that threaten the truth were not addressed. I am not afraid of ideas and my inability to refute bad ones with the facts. We have a morale duty to be informed. Lack of knowledge =’s death. Hence, bring the ideas, if I don’t know the answers, I have a duty to find them.
His argument was that PPT is pioneering uncharted waters; ie., I am the first one (in the blogosphere culture of contemporary history) to call out the very doctrinal foundation of Protestantism and the Reformation. I am not afraid to make hamburgers with every sacred cow of the Reformation. In fact, it’s my delicacy. The Reformation is the biggest socialist hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. It is an anti-Christ worship of Platonist metaphysics. Hence, many not only want to watch the fight, they want to learn how to engage in the debate as well. Knowing my indifference to numbers very well, he asked me in an assuming way why I thought my viewer numbers drop when I screen people. In other words, without seeing my stats, he knew the numbers drop and he also knew what my response would be: “Don’t give a damn.”
He then explained why the numbers drop, and I think his contention has merit: I have cut off the learning process. Also, I don’t have a moderator. If the stats drop because people can no longer learn and cannot see my arguments work in real life, I do give a damn about that. And this blog does need a moderator. The moderator and I are not always going to agree 100%, but I need one. That would be a huge step for this ministry.
For now, the comments come in, I shouldn’t have to fight this fight alone.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Paul,
Abe sends people here to be told WHAT to think, not how to think.
You don’t want those people anyway. You want people who are convinced that they posess the maturity and mental acumen to discern reason from madness for themselves…you don’t need to be another Christian PR propaganda machine for the “other side”, which is clearly what Abe has presumed.
Abe should fall under the category of “don’t care about stats”.
LikeLike
Now Argo, you know I love everybody. Well, almost. Really, if I am not mistaken, Abe is the Abe that has emailed me off site–he’s a good guy.
LikeLike
Paul,
Abe is holding you morally responsible for ideas which are not your own, simply because you allow comments which don’t tow the line of HIS subjective doctrinal standard.
He is threatening to punish ( withhold recommendation of your site) you for not placing a moratorium on ideas that don’t meet with his “orthodox” approval. This is tyranny.
LikeLike
Protestant Bible Scholars have declared that Paul did not write the Pastorals–they’re Deutero-Pauline, written by a “Pauline school” rather than Paul himself. And so the Reformed feel no qualms whatsoever about entirely ignoring 1st and 2nd Timothy and Titus and treating several other of the more orthodox epistles tucked in the back of the Paulina with silence and focusing only on Romans and Galatians. But if you go in reverse, and focus only on the Pastorals and the more orthodox epistles of Paul and ignore Romans and Galatians, that’s not tolerable. Nobody has to accept the full Pauline — but everyone has to accept Romans and Galatians. Its all very convenient. But I think I’ve said all I really want to say anyway. I don’t mind not commenting since my commentary is basically expended.
LikeLike
James, I would again point you to Christ’s warning in Revelation. And even though you bring information here that most Christians are unaware of because Protestants shield themselves from it for fear that they can’t withstand it because of insufficient training (it’s easier to hide than to learn), I would appreciate it if you would tone down the bravado out of respect for the known position of this blog.
LikeLike
I do nonetheless think it dubious that anyone can defeat Calvinism while maintaining the canonicity of Romans and Galatians. Pelagius couldn’t defeat Calvinism in the form of Augustine precisely because he accepted them as canonical. Erasmus couldn’t defeat Calvinism in the form of Luther precisely because he accepted them as canonical. Wesley couldn’t defeat Calvinism in the form of Whitfield precisely because he accepted them as canonical. They say the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again even though it always fails. At some point somebody has to wake up and realize that Calvinism arises over and over again because these texts are corrupt. I figure I’ll be long dead before a movement comes about bold enough to admit that the problem is Romans and Galatians. But blogs have the potential to stay in the public consciousness longer than modly 15th century Latin texts, so there’s a possibility that even if this movement will not come for 200 years, in a way, I may contribute to it.
LikeLike
James, I would again point you to Christ’s warning in Revelation. And even though you bring information here that most Christians are unaware of because Protestants shield themselves from it for fear that they can’t withstand it because of insufficient training (it’s easier to hide than to learn), I would appreciate it if you would tone down the bravado out of respect for the known position of this blog.
LikeLike
And its not like the Reformers didn’t throw any books out of Scripture. Ultimately, questioning the Reformation means questioning why they through out Sirach, but retained Romans. Romans is more worthy of being tossed out, with its determinst spew, while Sirach, have you ever read Sirach 15?
Sirach 15:11-20 NRSV.
11 Do not say, “It was the Lord’s doing that I fell away”;
for he does not do what he hates.
12 Do not say, “It was he who led me astray”;
for he has no need of the sinful.
13 The Lord hates all abominations;
such things are not loved by those who fear him.
14 It was he who created humankind in the beginning,
and he left them in the power of their own free choice.
15 If you choose, you can keep the commandments,
and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice.
16 He has placed before you fire and water;
stretch out your hand for whichever you choose.
17 Before each person are life and death,
and whichever one chooses will be given.
18 For great is the wisdom of the Lord;
he is mighty in power and sees everything;
19 his eyes are on those who fear him,
and he knows every human action.
20 He has not commanded anyone to be wicked,
and he has not given anyone permission to sin.
The deathblow to Calvinism. But they threw this out and retained Romans 9 for a reason. Its should be the opposite. Romans should be gone, and Sirach put back in.
LikeLike
James, I would again point you to Christ’s warning in Revelation. And even though you bring information here that most Christians are unaware of because Protestants shield themselves from it for fear that they can’t withstand it because of insufficient training (it’s easier to hide than to learn), I would appreciate it if you would tone down the bravado out of respect for the known position of this blog.
LikeLike
Argo is hilarious. Take his advice, Paul, and enjoy the “freedom” to fill the comments section with nonsense from every wind of doctrine out there. What a glorious liberty that is! 😉
To make a non-tongue-in-cheek comment, Paul, thank you for the assertion that I’m a good guy, on the desiring truth level, at least. Such an assertion is not allowed in new calvinism, of course.
LikeLike
The warning in Revelation is a warning concerning the book of Revelation. Why anyone would interpret it as referring to the whole New Testament I’ve never understood — that’s just silly.
And the Bravado is because honestly I didn’t expect you’d even post those comments. But give a look at my post on what Luther and Erasmus both have to say about the book of Sirach during their debate on freewill http://descriptivegrace.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/sirach-the-best-book-in-the-apocrypha/ The fact is any defeat of Calvinism that you are able to put together while still accepting Romans but rejecting Sirach, will last all of 2 years if even that long. Calvinism will just rear its ugly head in your church again. The problem is a problem of canon.
LikeLike
James,
Be an educator here and not an ideologue. However, I would remind folks that there are many professors at conservative Bible colleges that teach far more radical things that are not even relevant to history and have no factual value. I suspect I get far more grief here for it than they do.
LikeLike
Sorry. I’ve talken a Lutherly approach because the main reason why Erasmus is forgotten and Luther is remembered is Luther was a bombastic ass. If I act like him, people will pay attention. If I’m mild like Erasmus, they just pass over. This is fact. This is how it works. You’re going to have to learn this lesson if you’re going to have any hope of defeating the neocals.
LikeLike
Thanks James, now i am going to have to post on these issues–as if I don’t have enough to do. But that’s how it works I suppose–my readers will now get a learnin’ on the transmission of the Bible.
LikeLike
James Jordan was playing you the whole time, Paul. You think the Holy Spirit sent him to deny entire swaths of Scripture? You know better than that.
He’s played you the whole time. He showed up on another blog I visit on occasion, and they tossed him immediately. They kept the house clean.
LikeLike
Abe,
Which blog was that?
LikeLike
Probably http://reformedmusings.wordpress.com/ because Abe is a NeoCal pretending not to be so he can convince everyone of a Calvinist-Lite doctrine.
LikeLike
James,
The problem with your thesis is Pauline theology is the Achilles’ heal of Reformed theology. You seem to be dismissing the mass of evidence on this blog that clearly shows that. Calvinism is completely antithetical to Paul’s law/gospel construct.
LikeLike
Paul, the blog was called Galatians Four, and the purpose of it is to expose false teachings in general, and they do recognize calvinism as satanic, though I don’t know if they recognize neocalvinism as equally as satanic. They did recognize James Jordan immediately as being in the judaizer form of satanism, and put him out on his can. He as much as told you that he’s been playing you the whole time. He didn’t think you’d ever even post most of what he says. Neocalvinism is satanic, but you don’t use a different form of satanism to fight it. That’s like posting nonsense from the JWs to fight the mormons.
LikeLike