Rembrandt - take a breath and study

Status
Not open for further replies.

fredtgreco

Vanilla Westminsterian
Staff member
Paul,

You are going about this in completely the wrong fashion, and it is dishonoring to the Word and the Church.

If you actually want to find out answers to this question, STOP:

1. Quickly reading (sometime spending only a few hours before you post another question) blasphemous and false teachings and literature (as so pronounced by the entirety of the Protestant church)

2. Asking many non-ordained men and women, and a very few ordained men who are already overwhelmed with commitments to "irrefutably rebut" your "positions" in the swift manner of a web board.

3. Pronouncing "Rome's view as correct" after a day or so of reading quick responses.

This is folly. You are not even coming close to dealing with Scripture as it should be - pouring over it, meditating on it, praying over it for an extended time, thinking about it for an extended time, looking at the original languages, looking at commentaries, looking at secondary sources, etc.

Before you post another "question" I strongly suggest you read the following:

1. Galatians 5 times
2. Galatians in Greek
3. Calvin's and Luther's commentaries on Galatians
4. Calvin's Institutes
5. William Cunningham's Historical Theology
6. Bannerman's Church of Christ
7. William Webster's books
8. Boetner's Roman Catholicism
9. James White's material
10. Richard Bennett's material on the web
11. Warfield's volumes on Scripture
12. George Gillespie's Aaron's Rod and Dispute Against English Popish Ceremonies
13. The sections pertaining to the issue in Systematic Theologies of Turretin, Hodge, Dabney, Berkhof, and Reymond
14. Owen's volumes 14-16 (on the church) and his Biblical Theology (recently translated)

If you are going to study these doctrines, do not do so with part-time diletant theologians like myself. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to reproduce Cunningham, Gillespie or Bannerman for you. I should also not need to. READ THEM!

[Edited on 6-12-2004 by webmaster]
 
[quote:fb10fcfd03][i:fb10fcfd03]Originally posted by webmaster[/i:fb10fcfd03]
Throw in there the Westminster Standards while you have the time.

Listen to Fred. He is right. [/quote:fb10fcfd03]

That was assumed! :bs2:

Good catch Matthew!
 
[quote:41777ab654][i:41777ab654]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:41777ab654]
Paul,

You are going about this in completely the wrong fashion, and it is dishonoring to the Word and the Church.

If you actually want to find out answers to this question, STOP:

1. Quickly reading (sometime spending only a few hours before you post another question) blasphemous and false teachings and literature (as so pronounced by the entirety of the Protestant church)

2. Asking many non-ordained men and women, and a very few ordained men who are already overwhelmed with commitments to "irrefutably rebut" your "positions" in the swift manner of a web board.

3. Pronouncing "Rome's view as correct" after a day or so of reading quick responses.

This is folly. You are not even coming close to dealing with Scripture as it should be - pouring over it, meditating on it, praying over it for an extended time, thinking about it for an extended time, looking at the original languages, looking at commentaries, looking at secondary sources, etc.

Before you post another "question" I strongly suggest you read the following:

1. Galatians 5 times
2. Galatians in Greek
3. Calvin's and Luther's commentaries on Galatians
4. Calvin's Institutes
5. William Cunningham's Historical Theology
6. Bannerman's Church of Christ
7. William Webster's books
8. Boetner's Roman Catholicism
9. James White's material
10. Richard Bennett's material on the web
11. Warfield's volumes on Scripture
12. George Gillespie's Aaron's Rod and Dispute Against English Popish Ceremonies
13. The sections pertaining to the issue in Systematic Theologies of Turretin, Hodge, Dabney, Berkhof, and Reymond
14. Owen's volumes 14-16 (on the church) and his Biblical Theology (recently translated)

If you are going to study these doctrines, do not do so with part-time diletant theologians like myself. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to reproduce Cunningham, Gillespie or Bannerman for you. I should also not need to. READ THEM!

[Edited on 6-12-2004 by webmaster] [/quote:41777ab654]

Fred, I will read, thanks for looking out.

About the Matt. 16 passage (if that is what you are referring to), I find the Protestant position as a failing attempt to refute Rome's interpretation. I have already read enough commentaries and studied the greek. D.A. Carson also holds this position along with a plethera of other Protestant scholars. I still admit that I cannot rebute his (Hahn's) argument about Peter being a pope. But I have concluded that his interpretation of Matt. 16, falls short of [i:41777ab654]proof[/i:41777ab654] for the papacy. Therefore I will never follow the pope.

[quote:41777ab654]3. Pronouncing "Rome's view as correct" after a day or so of reading quick responses.[/quote:41777ab654]

I pronounced Rome's view as correct a couple months ago on the thread about Peter as the pope. In my first post on the more recent thread, I said "it cannot be refutted." I was just seeing what people could come up with. (Saying Rome is correct on something is only being honest. If they believe the Trinity, are they correct?)

The main reason why I posted was because I find that the Protestant apologetic is greatly hindered because we are not honest with this passage, and the Romans see that. If we could show our fair treatment of Scripture and refute Rome on other grounds, that would be great.

[quote:41777ab654]blasphemous and false teachings[/quote:41777ab654]

Thats a pretty big charge. Would you please show me where I have blasphemous beliefs? I expect you to be able to do this, if you are going to charge me with this.

I will slow down a bit as you say...

Paul
 
Paul,

Fred said:

If you actually want to find out answers to this question, STOP:

1. [b:2dbde8f33f]Quickly reading...blasphemous and false teachings[/b:2dbde8f33f] and literature (as so pronounced by the entirety of the Protestant church)

your reply:

"Thats a pretty big charge. Would you please show me where I have blasphemous beliefs?"

This statement is either misinterpreting or reaching for offense. Paul, chill out.
 
[quote:32a7f7d0a6][i:32a7f7d0a6]Originally posted by Ianterrell[/i:32a7f7d0a6]
Paul,

Fred said:

If you actually want to find out answers to this question, STOP:

1. [b:32a7f7d0a6]Quickly reading...blasphemous and false teachings[/b:32a7f7d0a6] and literature (as so pronounced by the entirety of the Protestant church)

your reply:

"Thats a pretty big charge. Would you please show me where I have blasphemous beliefs?"

This statement is either misinterpreting or reaching for offense. Paul, chill out. [/quote:32a7f7d0a6]

Oh, thanks for pointing that out Ianterrell. Sorry Fred! I got confused on your parenthesis. I was seriously confused though; like how could you say I am blasphemous? Its cool though.

Paul
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top