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 
I will be the first one to say that if we believe in free will we have to ask ourselves just how much free will are we willing to entertain. As I have been reading this NC debate around SBC blogs, I am seeing this is the big problem for those who do believe in free will.
Freedom is a scary thing. Lots of responsibility in freedom. Not a lot of control over others in the freedom construct either which is not a good thing for those who make a living in ministry and need followers. And that is where I see a lot of squirming going on with pastors who believe in free will when debating Calvinists. There is almost this fear that they might not be needed in a leadership capacity. They are not as important in a priesthood of believer functional capacity.
We have to be willing to ask ourselves if we believe what we believe because of tradition (even interpretation traditions) or truth. There are times I see some almost laboring over whether the fact we were given brains to think is a sin or not. There are those who consider questioning or doubts a sin. As if it is a sin to wrestle with God. I do know that reading many in the patriarchal wing over the years seem to make being a woman a sin, too.
We have to admit our historical traditions were a bloody evil mess. We cannot separate what they believed from their behavior. I always find it interesting it took some Deists to stand up to the traditions of the ruling “Christians” and say, “enough”.
LikeLike
You guys…can’t you see that Abe has made it clear that he thinks he is under NO obligation to explain his position on “inerrancy”. He knows because he knows, period. He is under no obligation to explain that which has been divinely gifted to his unique and elected understanding. If you don’t agree with him, no amount of debate will help you see because TRUE knowledge is not from man, but from God. You CAN’T REASON truth, it has to be given to you by the primary Consciousness. The fact that you don’t accept his idea is merely proof that you are spiritually blind.
And so goes the Gnosticism. The sad thing is that Abe really thinks he is different from Calvinists, while he concedes the SAME premise: man is utterly subservient to the WILL of the Primary Consciousness, which he calls God. Man on his own can never really possess truth.
From there, as Johm Immel says, it simply becomes a matter of who has the bigger sword to force others to obey THE RIGHT primary consciousness.
And wants to quell what he calls “heresy” because he understands that only divine enlightenment brings knowledge and truth (and there is a proof text for that, but can’t remember which). Truth is never the product of HUMANS discussing ideas
LikeLike
Paul, Did you see the 9Marks rep’s response to JA’s post today? Look thru the comments if you have some time.
LikeLike
I will check it out. Thanks.
LikeLike
Oh, so that’s where the hits are coming from – lol. Waving “hi.” 🙂
Paul – get yourself a moderator. Oh my, it’s nice to have the backup. Mine recently went public.
LikeLike
JA,
Hi.
I have written on that till my guts are falling out. Being in their good graces equals salvation. Period. This is the gig: Calvin’s “power of the keys.” Whatever Reformed elders bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Your best shot at heaven is being in the good graces of your local neighborhood elder. We are presently having this discussion with an elder at Denver Sound Church. 1. Membership is synonymous with salvation. 2. You can be disciplined for ANY “sin” judged to be sin by the elders. 3. If you are excommunicated, guess what? Trust me, Dever runs a tight ship over there. I hear you can cut the fear in that place with a knife.
LikeLike
“Being in their good graces equals salvation.”
Such as Mahaney.
LikeLike
Paul: Ed has the best answer of all for leaving a NC church:
LikeLike
If I do comment anymore I’ll just put my “king of the one-liners” hat back on. Arguments tire me out anyway. That’s one of the main problems with Calvinism and every other ism that considers itself the one true orthodoxy. It changes Christianity from being about following Christ and being changed into the image of the Son from glory to glory, to being about brow-beating the other guy into submission until he admits your dogmatics are the only right way and cries uncle admitting whatever form of Christianity he believed before was, in Abe’s terms, “Satanism.” I don’t want to play that. I don’t want to be on the giving or receiving end of that. Believe whatever form of Christianity you want, as long as you aren’t out raping and killing and such, I’ll be just fine with it.
LikeLike
“Believe whatever form of Christianity you want, as long as you aren’t out raping and killing and such, I’ll be just fine with it.”
Exactly.
What we see (and I am guilty of myself) is the cult tactic of “doctrine over people”. When precise doctrinal stances become more important than the person sitting next to you wherever you are, then something is wrong. We have replaced the law of love with man’s interpretation as most important.
LikeLike