welcome to the story.

Part Four: Me: Somehow I knew you wouldn't disappear into the air. And I'd love to know how you think history does not back up my beliefs. From the beginning of this class, in every post that you've deemed heretical, I've supported with biblical and historical facts. I've practically given you a church history lesson as well as a lesson on the history of thought. The majority of my individual studies has been on this topic of the development of thought, culture, languages, and church history. I've read close to 50 books on this subject and attended close to a dozen lectures and seminars on the subject by evangelical Christians, many of whom are Southern Baptist. I've studied countless hours on the historical movements (ancient, medieval, modern, and postmodern) of thought. What are those movements you might ask? Well you would know if you knew history like I did. So before you say I don't know history, you might want to pull your nose out of whatever close-minded, generic information book that you're reading, and start learning the history behind this movement that you're a part of called Christianity. And I don't know why I would expect you to want to go back to a pre-Constatinian Christianity. Why would anybody want to go back to the form of Christianity that existed for the first 400 years after Christ's death? (sarcasm) I know you're so engrossed into the Constatinian, Western, individualistic version of Christianity that you never stop long enough to think. But then that might be the problem. How in God's green earth does the pre-Constantinian church fit the description of heretical teachings? Are you kidding me? I guess because they didn't have Charles Ryrie and Pentecost spoon feeding them their doctrine, that they're going to hell. Why would the people who made up the pre-Constantinian church, who either conversed or knew the descendants of the apostles, be more heretical than us in 2003? I mean they were only eyewitnesses or descendants of eyewitness right? Those heretics! (sarcasm) Or in your case its not quite a 2003 version of Christianity. More of a 1940s Vacation Bible School/Little House on the Prairie Christianity. I'd like to answer your question with a question. What happened to the nature of Christianity after the Bible was distributed to the people? Did Christians become more mature? Did the world change? Did Christians love more? Granted the first 125-175 years after the Reformation, there was tons of growth. But after this, the growth was your Constatinian growth. But this time it was all about the conquest of another's soul. Little regard was paid toward the Christian actually living out his faith after he was "conquered". That's why the church stinks today. That's why we have so many jacked up problems in our churches. That's why Christianity is on the decline. Yeah, you like to throw numbers that say Christianity is the most popular religion. Or that 95% of Americans believe in God. Or that 70% go to church regularly. But that doesn't mean jack to me or God. He cares about the fact that we drive $50,000 cars while some people don't even have a place to sleep. He cares about the fact that we rush out to buy the newest Christian piece of merchandise without ever giving to the poor. But we all know that we need the newest specialized Bible, whether it be the Leadership, Women's, Sportsman's, Experiencing God, etc Bible. We have to have the newest Max Lucado book. We have to keep dumping money into junk we already know but don't practice. When we should be taking our money and putting into practice. He cares about the fact that the divorce rate is higher for Christians than for the world. He cares about the fact that the American church is in decline because of arrogant, bigoted jerks who treat a unconnected world like dirt. I'm sorry for not coming out of love. But I'll be honest, I'm sick and tired of listening to your uneducated, arrogant, Pharisaical attitude. And you can copy and paste this to the professor, Dr. Flannagan, or whoever else you want. You've been rude to almost everyone in here. Very rarely offering anything positive to say, unless someone is in agreement with you. And you've made more personal accusations than most lawyers do. You epitomize the whole reason I've come to hate seminary. You epitomize the whole reason I've wrestled with dropping out since day one. Your mindset is the reason why the church is losing influence in society. Your heart is the reason why most people won't ever darken the doors of the church. And your "knowledge" and your presentation of it is the reason why Christians get accused of being arrogant, self-righteous, ignorant, and rude. So I'm sure you and probably others, will think this is me not coming out of love. That its me just being hateful and rude. But I'll just see it as me turning the tables on the Pharisees. Eli Sanders: Jerry, I noticed a few inconsistencies in your post. I couldn�t resist responding one last time�First, the Holy Spirit did not abandon His Church after AD 90. He has been supervising, governing and maintaining the Church for several millenniums. Do you really think Jesus lied when He said the �gates of Hell will not prevail� against the Church? It seems that you are suggesting that Christ was absent for nearly 1600 years of Church history� Perhaps you didn�t read my last post. NOWHERE in the post did I even indirectly suggest that Josh and I adopt the teachings of man... I am astonished that you would make such an outrageous remark! Second, the fact that you are enrolled in Bible College contradicts your premise. If you don't need the teachings of man, then why are you attending Bible College with HUMAN professors? Isn't Dr. Vines a "man?" So I guess what you are saying is that you didn't read the textbook because that would be the "teachings of man" according to your vernacular, correct? Jerry Coleman: I am wondering the same thing about you...Can you not understand what I wrote? Man can guide me, man can teach me, but it is up to me....let me say that again,,,,it is up to me to see what I am being taught with the guidance of the Holy Spirit if I dont see it that way...guess what fellows...you can figure out the rest I hope. And that is not a Baptist position, you are very pioused in that regard....it is a Bible position... I never said the Holy Spirit left the Church for 1600 years. I just said He is now working within the bounderies of His word. Is that not very clear......I hope it is...I can understand it with my limited education. You read a lot of things into my posts that are not there. and duck a lot in your own. Seems to me you are a little shaky on your positions. Ill get off that soap box, it is not my intentions to get an aurgument here....just a little debate. But this has turned in to vain babbelings..stupid accusations of things not even said. One time you say you must understand the chuch fathers...the next you have a direct connection....people get it right......its one or the other ...I dare to say you dont even understand your own postitions....and that is just my observation no malice intended. I would love to debate this face to face with yall one day. That is to say over a cup of coffee or a coke. What I am trying to say, you have your view, I have mine...I have no judgment towards you individually,,,and I hope there are not harsh feelings.....I'll pray for you, you pray for me, that truth will be revealed. Me: A response to air: "I dare to say you don't even understand your own positions." I can only laugh. And hard.