Quote:
Originally Posted by DAII
We know who Barth is but did he also believe in the forced copulation of a "human reptile" beast with a woman would lead to the necessary chromosomal exchange to create little Dans?
If Peter Caroli, a street preacher/priest and professor ... who left the Roman church a handful of times to join the Reformation only to return to the mother church time after time, said Calvin was a modalist than surely its true .... despite the fact that most early reformers were wary of affirming the ancient creeds ... including Luther who was wary of using the term extra-biblical term "trinitas" but Calvin in no way rejected the mystery of the Trinity and used the term in his own writings to express the Godhead.
Please sir ... branch out and read .... you are the William Chalfant and Marvin Arnold of Branhamism.
If you want to believe Calvin was just like you, GO FOR IT, you're free to be WRONG.
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/152474/Pa...an_Debates.pdf
Most, if not all, learned scholars agree that the bulk of Calvin's writing are trinitarian ... even the casual reader of his Institutes can read for themselves... even the quote you believe somehow reflects a rejection of the eternal Sonship is wrought with ambiguity, does not say what you want it to mean, and when juxtaposed to his other writings only shows that this is an argument of convenience.
"Though not mentioned in the paper, Berkhof defends Calvin’s orthodox view of the eternal generation of the Son:
It is sometimes said that Calvin denied the eternal generation of the Son. This assertion is based on the following passage: “For what is the profit of disputing whether the Father always generates, seeing that it is foolish to imagine a continuous act of generating when it is evident that three persons have subsisted in one God from eternity.” Institutes I. 13, 29. But this statement can hardly be intended as a denial of the eternal generation of the Son, since he teaches this explicitly in other passages. It is more likely that it is simply an expression of disagreement with the Nicene speculation about eternal generation as a perpetual movement, always complete, and yet never completed. (Quoted from Berkhof, History of Christian Doctrines, 95-96.)" |
Calvin
You cannot compare Berkhoff to Barth. Even if I do not agree with some relativism of Barth, I cannot compare them. Berkhof was quite sectarian. There are very clear statements of Calvin who say that for him "persons are
properties" of God. In our oriental theology, we would use the word sifat to express it.
We have no problem with Nicea but with its position as final authority and its further developments, specially in latin churches.
Serpent
Nobody believes that the Nahash was a reptile but God
cursed him to become a reptile:
"And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon
thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life"
Adam Clarke noted about the Nahash:" Such a creature answers to every part of the description in the text: it is evident from the structure of its limbs and their muscles that it might have been originally designed to walk erect, and that nothing less than a sovereign controlling power could induce them to put down hands in every respect formed like those of man, and walk like those creatures whose claw-armed paws prove them to have been designed to walk on all fours."
Before the Fall, the Nahas was as smart as Dan
with similar genetic material. Look for the difference, it will be helping.
Adam Clarke questions our translation of Nahas. It is a matter of study.
Y. families
The Y. family runs the FCNN site who claimed that the Church of Iran is a cult. It was the right of our leaders to answer this accusation even if your patron are upset of it. We are not interested about the Y. family, if they do not disturb us.
Threaded Mode
