Bart Goddard wrote:
> gkmcnees@comcast.net wrote:
>
>
>
>>Bart, doesn't one need wisdom and insight to understand the Bible?
>
>
> Catch-22. How can you get wisdom and insight other than from
> the Bible, which you can't read properly unless you already
> have wisdom and insight?

I THOUGHT this one was easy?

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to
all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.


>>Where does the original questioner say anything about "judging" the
>>Bible. He is asking about interpreting and understanding it.
>
>
> He's not that innocent. He's putting down "all these outside
> sources" as if they are worthless. But what does he offer
> in their stead? His own, much less developed and much less
> scholarly and much less respected "wisdom and insight."

Well, I agree, it is better to stand on the shoulders of
others, provided they were pointed in the right direction.

> If you put a man in a room alone with the Bible and a
> candle, the only thing that can come out of the room
> is a heretic.

This I deny. Unless you mean a "saved" heretic, perhaps.
For he certainly could believe the Gospel, and be saved.
Many have done so under similar circumstances.

Gary

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

wrote in message
news:173.53.11.05.406554000@srcbs.org...
>
>
> Gary McNees wrote:
> > Two Calvinists, Bob and Loren, and one Lutheran, Bart, on this list
> > have asserted that I do not understand Calvinism. They further assert
that I
> > misrepresent Calvinism, and malign Calvinism unjustly.
> >
> Whaaaaa! Whaaaa! Whaaaaaa!
> >
> > Norman Geisler entitled "Chosen But Free."
> >
> By his own admission he clearly stands on the side of moderate
> Calvinism.

Every definition of TULIP is different for Geisler's moderate "Calvinism."
I have read a number of Calvinist authors who claim that Geisler is no
Calvinist at all. (See White's book, "The Potter's Freedom" which is
supposed to refute Geisler's book "Chosen But Free," but is a miserable
failure. I agree with the "TULIP" doctrines as defined by Geisler, but
not a single one of them is the definition given by a Calivinist.

> Some of the subjects he discusses in the appendixes are
> these: Was Calvin a Calvinist? The Origins of Extreme Calvinism; Is
> Faith a Gift Only to the Elect? Double Predestination; Is Regeneration
> P