Showing posts with label sinless perfectionism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sinless perfectionism. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Marvin Heiman Won't Answer Simple Questions

Why is it that sinless perfectionists give themselves so easily to intellectual dishonesty and sin when they are questioned? I thought they were perfect. Guess not.

Sadly, @Cry Aloud, Marvin Heiman, an immature and hateful street preacher in the Nashville area, has decided that he loves division from Christians and self-exaltation rather than honest engagement and work to try to labor through hard questions with those who profess Christ.



Are you perfect in every thought word and deed?
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN Mike, we have already had this discussion.
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud yes I do realize that I was looking for a possible public profession of your perfection
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN Almost every time I preach Mike. I am perfect in Christ Jesus. I am perfectly obedient to Christ. I know that is difficult for a lot of people to understand, but it is possible to choose not to sin.
1
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud So your not perfect? Almost perfect isn't perfect, yes?
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud or are you saying you publicly confess your perfection in thought word and deed almost every time you preach?
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN You are putting words in my mouth Mike. I never used the word almost. Now, I am done here.
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN Yes.
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud //almost every time I preach// Thank you for clarifying that you profess to be perfect in thought word and deed almost every time you preach.
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN And you profess to be a sinner don't you Mike?
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud daily in need of Gods grace and mercy, yes. Ask my wife if I'm perfect, she'll testify I am not. Willfully walking in sin? No. Perfect? I discover more and more each day just how far from Gods perfection I am. Now call me to repentance for not maintaining sinless perfectionism.
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN You are free to believe the way you want Mike, and I am free to believe the way I want. I am not interested in an endless debate, so I will walk away. I will tell you to repent, and believe the Gospel.
Rhology
+Cry Aloud Clarity of speech is a virtue, Marvin. So is patience. You are saying, aren't you, that you love God perfectly every second of every day for a significant period of time? And you love your neighbor as yourself every second of every day? Not had a flash of unjustified anger? Not a second of a scrap of lust? Pride is sin. You keep saying that you are perfect. How is that not pride?
Cry Aloud
+Rhology I am perfect in Christ, not in of myself. who am I speaking with?
Rhology
+Cry Aloud You can see my avatar very clearly, I presume. I don't see how you answered my questions. Could you please answer them? Thank you in advance. I'm confident that someone who is perfect will 1) assume the best about professing believers 2) answer honestly 3) answer scripturally 4) answer humbly 5) answer directly, as someone who loves truth and has apparently been perfected. So I'm sure I can count on the perfection of Christ to come through in your answer. Thanks!
Cry Aloud
+Rhology I did answer you, I am perfect in Christ. That would be morally and biblically. I choose not to sin, and so can you.
Rhology
+Cry Aloud Would you please answer each of my questions with a yes or no and any qualification and elaboration you may choose? 1) You love God perfectly every second of every day? 2) You love your neighbor as yourself every second of every day? 3) Not had a flash of unjustified anger? 4) Not a second of a scrap of lust? 5) Pride is sin. You keep saying that you are perfect. How is that not pride? Thank you again for answering in a way that reflects Christ's perfection. Please answer directly rather than beating around the bush as "I am perfect in Christ" does.
Cry Aloud
+Rhology I did answer your questions. I gave you one answer for your five questions. You never answered my question. Who am I speaking with? Not your YT name, but your real name.
Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN
+Cry Aloud I am perfect in Christ as well I think we mean different things by that
Cry Aloud
+Abolitionist Society of Sumner County, TN For once, we agree.
Rhology
+Cry Aloud I would really appreciate it if you would be so kind as to answer directly each of the questions in turn. Honestly, "I am perfect in Christ" is subject to a significant amount of interpretation. Different people mean different things by that sort of phrase. Please simply answer my questions directly. My name is Alan. Howdy. Who I am is completely unimportant, however. What matters here is ideas and adherence to the Bible. Once again, I thank you in advance for answering my questions directly.
Cry Aloud
+Rhology I will expound on my answer by saying this, that each and every day I choose not to sin. Now another question for you Alan, are you a sinner?
Rhology
+Cry Aloud I'm sorry, you didn't answer my questions. Please, I have asked you with as much kindness and openness as I know how. I don't feel like you're answering with honesty and openness yourself. Would not a perfect man answer honestly and openly? Please simply answer my questions directly, and I will be happy to dialogue with you as well. I need to see some fruit of your profession of perfection, however.
Cry Aloud
+Rhology My answer is above. You just don't like the answer. I am awaiting an answer to my question, are you a sinner?
Rhology
+Cry Aloud No sir, with all due respect, it's not that I don't like your answer. It's that you did not actually answer. I have asked you forthrightly, openly, and honestly to answer each question in a straightforward and honest manner. I should think a perfectly sanctified person would have no problem giving a loving and kind and honest answer to an inquirer. Please demonstrate what perfect patience looks like and how 1 Cor 13 says that love hopes all things and believes all things. Since you have no reason to think that I stand opposed to you or to the truth, please demonstrate perfect love and answer the questions in a straightforward way. Thank you again in advance for demonstrating what it looks like for a perfect person to engage in substantive dialogue with an honest questioner.
Cry Aloud
+Rhology I guess we will end the dialog here, I have answered your questions and you refuse to answer mine.

Wednesday, January 06, 2016

Debate with Randy Hartinger

At the 2nd so-called Black Mass in OKC, street preachers who tend toward the Pelagian and the abusive (those who I've been told sometimes call themselves the "Pervert Patrol", though that information might be flawed) were present from Tulsa. Brother Toby and I engaged them and asked them to speak with persuasiveness and grace with people, beseeching and pleading with them rather than berating them and calling names. They did not respond well.

I later encountered them outside the Joel Osteen "Night of Hope" event in Tulsa in April 2015. Abolitionists were agitating and proclaiming the Law and Gospel of God there, and these other preachers were also present, again repeating their abusive and mean-spirited behavior that we had previously observed in OKC. I took the opportunity to rebuke them publicly to their face in an interaction behind which I stand 100% as justified and indeed necessary and helpful, given who these men are and how they act.

A few months later I believe I commented on one of their videos either on that channel or on compatriot Chris Hale's channel (now defunct), and they responded, leading to a conversation of some length, (probably on this video, which has been taken down for some reason) during which the interlocutor (Peter Schultz) challenged me to a face-to-face debate, again including childish abusive language like "kiddo" and "we'll give you 30 minutes on Sunday to phone in and teach the church whatever you want to. Game? Doubt it, big boy" and "Had a real good laugh over the hypocrisy you displayed as you yelled 'sinner, sinner, sinner' in that whiney voice of yours".

I of course was more than happy to engage in such a debate. It turns out they didn't mean I'd debate one of them, though. I was put in touch via email with one Randy Hartinger, and figured he was a resident of Tulsa, so we made our plans, exchanged some emails about each other's positions for preparation sake, and then set the time and date.

I arrived at Schultz's house on 04Oct15, to find that I was to debate Hartinger, yes, but in fact via Skype, since he lives in Virginia and "acts as one church" with Schultz's house church via video conferencing. The video had been going for at least three hours when I arrived, so I guess those two churches "act as one" every Sunday or something via teleconference. Oookkaaaayyyy.

At any rate, we proceeded with the debate, and here it is:


To clarify a few things about Schultz's slanted "introduction":
--During the phone call mentioned at the 2:30 minute mark, I'm not at all confident that "he wanted to drop the call like a hot lava rock" is accurate. I was looking for teammates in street evangelism, and when I realised who he was and what he believes and how he acts, I understood it would be bad to continue wasting his time and mine. He makes it sound like I abruptly hung up. Typical.
--At the 3:10 mark, during our Facebook PM conversation, it's true that he said he couldn't meet on a Sunday and I was fine with that. I never offered again because at that point it was becoming clear that he was more than just some lost soul that could possibly be reached with a private conversation. Rather, he is a false teacher and a wolf to be opposed and exposed publicly.
--3:50 mark - I was at JoelO to preach the Gospel. The debate mentioned was part of the reason I was in Tulsa that weekend, but far from the only reason.

Also, for some reason around the 20:30 mark, I said that I did not attend the debate mentioned. I did actually attend most of it, but there was another presentation the night before that I did not attend, and due to my nervousness I experienced a brain fart and confused the two.

During the debate I certainly could have improved here and there but overall I believe it was a good use of time, for the record. Since I definitely do think that men like these give Gospel preachers a bad name, it is good that I can point to my interactions with men like them to show any honest inquirer that we are not on the same team.

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

Some questions for those who think they've arrived

There are other excellent collections of such things out there. These are some notions I thought of myself.

Romans 7 refers to Paul's life as a redeemed, regenerate man. Here are six arguments to that effect.

Why does Jesus teach His disciples to pray in the following way?
Luke 11:4 "And forgive us our sins, for we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us."
What sins, if those who are walking in the Spirit don't sin? Is this only a prayer that brand new believers are supposed to pray? Where does Jesus indicate anything of the kind?

Why does James 3:2 say "for we all stumble in many ways"?

Why does Solomon say in 1 Kings 8:46 that "there is no man who does not sin"?

Why does Paul refer to "my brothers" in 1 Cor 1:10-12, when he is rebuking their quarrelling?

If only people who stop sinning entirely reach Heaven, what is 1 Corinthians 3:9-15 about?

The Scripture mentions numerous times that God chastens His children. Does He chasten people when they don't sin? If chastening as sons occurs after sin, how is it that they are referred to as children at that time? Why doesn't it refer to apostates or sinners or de-regenerated people, who once belonged to God but have fallen into condemnation because they sinned?

What do Hebrews 12:4-13 mean?

Philippians 2:27 Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. 28 I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. 29 So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, 30 for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me.
--The church lacked in its service to Paul. But he is still treating them like Christians.
--Paul is sending him so that he may be less anxious. Yet we are supposed to cast ALL our anxieties on Christ (Paul even says so later in the book - 4:6). Maybe Paul was unregenerate when he was writing the Epistle to the Philippians.

Why does Paul differentiate between the righteousness of his own that comes from the law and the righteousness that he has by faith (in Philipppians 3) if
1) it's so much better to be free from sin in this life through our own perfect obedience?
2) he had achieved perfect obedience to the law?

Why does he go on to say what he says in v12? Should we consider you more spiritually advanced than the Apostle Paul?

What do verses 13-16 mean? Why does he say that those who are mature should think that way? Wouldn't someone who has achieved perfection already be mature?

Philippians 3:17 - 17 Brothers, join in imitating me, and keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us.
Why should these BROTHERS join in imitating Paul? That's an invitation to keep growing to maturity. Isn't a perfect person already mature? Isn't a lack of maturity sinful? Why does he call them BROTHERS?

What do Philippians 4:2-3 mean?
Why is it that Paul is so certain that these women's names are in the book of life if
-election is false?
-they are in the middle of dissent?

What do Philippians 4:14-16 mean? Are those other churches that neglected to provide for the scanty needs of an apostle of the Lord entirely false churches, entirely populated by unregenerate people?
Is it not a sin to doubt? What does Jude 22 mean, in that case?

What does Acts 15:6-11 mean, especially the parts boldfaced here?
6The apostles and the elders came together to look into this matter. 7After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8“And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10“Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11“But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”
What is it about circumcision that is a yoke that the apostles said they weren't able to bear? Why are the commands of the NT more bearable than OT laws?

Why does 2 Peter 1:8 say the following?
For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
How can the aforementioned qualities increase if one is supposed to be perfect already?

Why does Paul pray for the Colossians in Col 1:9-10 if they are NOT yet walking in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to Him, or bearing fruit in every good work?
As a matter of fact, why does Paul still treat the Corinthian church, Galatian church, and all thsee other churches as actual churches filled with actual Christians if they were sinfully allowing these divisions, sinful doctrines, and negligent behaviors among them? Why didn't he tell them all that they were headed to Hell?

The Bible says that we are to keep careful watch over ourselves and our doctrine. When you fail to realise that you have sinned, such as when you speed while driving, you have failed to do what you were supposed to do. Even if you repent immediately it doesn't matter because you keep telling me you are perfect and wallking in the Spirit.

You are supposed to have perfect joy at all times. How are you in perfect joy right now? And what will you do if you ever fall into depression?

Do you never waste even a nanosecond of time? Do you always use all of every second of every day for God's glory in all ways?

Do you always use all of your money and every single cent of your money in a way that brings the maximum amount of glory to God?

Notice how the author of Psalm 119 expresses many times the fact that he keeps the commandments of God, but then also expresses his failings. How do we explain this other than by saying that he is a righteous man who sometimes sins? Specifically:
Ps 119:136 - My eyes shed streams of water, because they do not keep Your law.
Ps 119:176 - I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek Your servant, for I do not forget Your commandments.


In what way is the New Covenant better than the Old Covenant? How are the new promises better than the old?

What does it mean that Christ has died for all sins once for all?

What does Hebrews 4:16 mean? Why do believers need to find mercy and grace on an ongoing basis?

What does Hebrews 5:1-3 mean?

Why doesn't the author of Hebrews call the recipients of the epistle to be re-regenerated because of the faults in them as listed in Hebrews 5:11-14?

What is a "dead work", as in Hebrews 6:1 and 9:14? Why is it set in opposition to faith?

Do you teach and confess that it is impossible to renew the one who falls away to repentance again, as in Hebrews 6:4-6? Or do you teach, contrary to that passage, that those who fall away into an unregenerate state can come back to God?

Why is the author of Hebrews convinced of better things concerning the recipients, since they love Him, even though they are guilty of these things he just mentioned? Is not failing to realise the full assurance of hope until the end a sin as well?

Why does the author of Hebrews use the example of a unilateral covenant in which Abraham had no part, no role to fulfill, in this discussion in Hebrews 6:13-20?

If the law made nothing perfect, as in Hebrews 7:19 and 10:1, why do you think we can be made perfect thru obedience to the law now?

Wasn't the epistle to the Hebrews written post-Jesus' coming? Why didn't he say anything about that at that point?

What does Hebrews 10:10 mean? Were all of the recipients on their deathbeds, such that he was 100% sure they had all persevered until the end already?

What does Hebrews 10:18 mean?


Did Abraham, who is said to have been justified by his faith in Genesis 15:6, become un-justified when he lied to Abimelech? When he took Hagar into his bed so as to jump-start the promise that he would have a son?

Was Lot un-justified when he offered the men of Sodom his daughters? If so, why is he called righteous in 2 Peter?

If Jeremiah and Job had died right after their complaints against God, would they have gone to Hell?

If Peter had been stabbed by a Roman soldier right after cutting off Malchus' ear, would he have gone to Hell?

Which between Barnabas and Paul reverted to an unregenerate state when they separated over the question of whether John Mark would accompany them on their mission?

Why didn't Jesus call Philip to repent and be re-regenerated when he lacked faith in John 14:8?

Why didn't Jesus call the disciples to repent and be re-regenerated after His resurrection but before His ascension, given that they had doubted His resurrection?

What does Romans 12:3 mean?

What do Galatians 2:16-17 mean?

Why can it be that there are those who preach Christ out of selfish ambition in Philippians 1:15-18?

Can one who is perfect be conspicuous in failing to be mentioned in the love he ought to have?
Paul singled out Timothy in Philippians 2:20 - "20 For I have no one like him, who will be genuinely concerned for your welfare."
And then v25 - I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, 26 for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill.

Is it not falling short of perfection to be surpassed in the excellence of love for a church by someone else?

Monday, May 06, 2013

Romans 7:14-25 and Paul's struggle

Here I present some exegetical reasons why Romans 7:14-25 refers to Paul's struggle up to the point in his life when he wrote it, as a regenerate Christian desiring to live for Jesus, instead of referring to his pre-Jesus life, or to his life as lived as a Jew under the Mosaic Law.

1) He uses the present tense throughout the passage.
"I am of flesh..."
"For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate."

If the competing views are true, we'd expect to see verbiage more like this:
14For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I was of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15For what I was doing, I did not understand; for I was not practicing what I would have liked to do, but I was doing the very thing I hated. 16But if I did the very thing I did not want to do, I agreed with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17So now, no longer was I the one doing it, but sin which dwelt in me. 18For I knew that nothing good dwelt in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing was present in me, but the doing of the good was not. 19For the good that I wanted, I did not do, but I practiced the very evil that I did not want. 20But if I was doing the very thing I did not want, I was no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwelt in me.
But we don't. The present tense maintains throughout.

2) Paul already discussed what it was like when he didn't know Jesus, when he was under the condemnation of the Law, in verses 7-13.

3) Verse 15b says: "I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate..."
18b: "...the willing is present in me..."
19: "For the good that I want..."
19b: "...practice the very evil that I do not want..."
20: "But if I am doing the very thing I do not want..."
21: "...the one who wants to do good..."

The only person about whom it is true to say that he wants to do good, hates evil, is willing to do good, etc, is the regenerate person. How do we know this?
Romans 8:6-8 - For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Does doing good, being willing to do good, desiring not to do evil, and such things please God? Yes, of course.
And the only way that one can escape from being in the flesh are those who are born again by the Spirit of God, those who are alive in Christ. One is either alive in Christ or dead in sin, and those who are dead in sin and in the flesh cannot please God, and these statements Paul makes in Romans 7 are inapplicable to them.


4) Even if Paul is speaking about himself as under the Mosaic Law or as before he knew Jesus, he still affirms total depravity here. "Nothing good dwells in me..."

5) Verse 23 ("I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members") does not make sense unless there exists a battle, a duel between good and evil, in the regenerate person. Lost, unregenerate sinners don't battle against sin, and they follow the lusts of their glands/bodies/hearts/evil thoughts without much compunction.

6) Paul does not cry out for mercy from the Law or to be born again at the end of his discussion. Rather, he cries out for deliverance from the body of this death. The sinful nature remains in his flesh, he feels the weight of the struggle, and he longs to be free from his body (ie, to die and be with the Lord and thus free from the presence and temptation of sin) so as to be released from this struggle.


DISCLAIMER: In no way is any of the above intended to excuse sin, diminish sin's severity, or deny that regenerate people are able to do the right thing and can deny temptation every single time that temptation arises.