I’m in the process of redesigning my personal site and I’ll have you
\nknow that ‘CSS only’ is ridiculously annoying. There are so many
\nfactors to consider, duplicated by the fact that I don’t want it to
\nlook like a blog. Tim Challies does a bang up job of working in css,
\ndoubling my respect for his design skills. But for all those anti-table
\nfanatics out there…sorry guys but I’m thinking that I’m going to design
\nmy personal site with some tables. There is a marginal difference in
\nactual load time and I am working under tight constraints.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Fanatics drive me nuts all across the board—from the wide eyed web guys
\nwho proclaim the gospel of W3C standards while claiming the use of
\ntables heretical to the Christian who has a monopoly on truth. Can you
\nsee it? A legion of online pundits who jump to (ridiculous) conclusions
\nand are quick to mark an opponent with (a) the unstudied or (b) the
\nheretic?<\/p>\n
\nYou know, it’s the reason I always claim the heretic label before \nConversing with some Arminians<\/a> you get the charge thrown at you that \nForgive me, but how dare we? You see a fellow Believer speaking about \n“I’m not saying he’s a follower of Pelagius! But if you take what he’s \nYou know what, if you take Calvinism to it’s logical conclusion it is \nYou get that? I am convinced that the ages are ordered in \nI think that we’re doing a huge mistake if we’re taking the beliefs of \nI guess we wouldn’t have anything to talk about<\/a> if we can’t say that \nIf you’re reading this and think I’m talking about you, drop it. I’m -r-<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I’m in the process of redesigning my personal site and I’ll have you know that ‘CSS only’ is ridiculously annoying. There are so many factors to consider, duplicated by the fact that I don’t want it to look like a blog. Tim Challies does a bang up job of working in css, doubling my respect […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-472","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-personal"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nsomeone else gives it to me and “wins”. For instance, upon visiting an
\nonline discussion<\/a> regarding origins you’ll see labeling within two
\ncomments. Any argument posed is laughed at and the commentator is held
\nup as a spectacle. Thing is I can understand it with the
\nunregenerate…after all they don’t have the Spirit of the Living God
\nworking within them.
\nWhat I (partially) don’t understand is when a professing Believer does the same thing with any and all topics.<\/p>\n
\nyou’re a hyper-Calvinist<\/a>. Conversing with some Calvinists<\/a> you get the
\ncharge that you’re Pelagian. <\/p>\n
\nthe grace and mercy of God and how Christ was given to make us more
\nthan conquerors—not by our power but by His—and some of us have the
\nutter audacity to call that believer a follower of Pelagius<\/a>?<\/p>\n
\nsaying to it’s logical conclusion it’s called ‘being Pelagian’. See I
\nproved my point. That heresy has been dealt with hundreds of years ago!
\nPelagius was a nice guy, but it was still a lie from the devil.”<\/p>\n
\ncalled fatalistic determinism. “Dispensationalism lead us to
\nantinomianism”? You know what, the opposite leads to bondage under the
\nlaw. If you want to the truth of it, I doubt any of us have it at one
\nhundred percent especially when we keep basing our theology on the
\ncounterpoint of the theology of others. Be humble with your theology
\nknowing that it is immensely possible that you’re wrong while
\nsimultaneously removing your strict labels.<\/p>\n
\ndispensations…but just because I am doesn’t mean that I’m required read
\nmy Bible with the Left Behind books as a commentary. I am convinced
\nthat Calvinism and Armininianism are wrong but that doesn’t make me
\npart of either camp as if there was nothing but the two choices. Folk
\nwill say that there is no such thing as a 4 Point Calvinists<\/a>. Doesn’t mean those persons are Arminian either. We’re Christians
\nand there are countless shades of misperception and misinterpretation
\nand misapplication as we are still in the flesh. The Holy Spirit works
\nin each of us but as Paul said: currently we are looking at a cloudy,
\nfuzzy mirror.<\/p>\n
\nmen and making them adjectives. Look, it’s okay to describe a Christian
\nwho is falling into sin as a “backsliding Christian”. It’s an
\nadjective. But we have the nasty habit of taking a "heresy"<\/a> and slapping
\nit on as if it describes the Christian. And then when someone does use
\nan adjective (like Scoffield’s ‘carnal Christians’) we get into a
\nseething huff saying that there are only Christians and [X] is being
\ndivisive.<\/p>\n
\nScoffield was a babbler, that Calvin was a philosopher or that Jacob
\nArminus was a heretic. Poor us. Heaven is going to be a horrendous
\nplace if all these things are cleared up and we have nothing to talk
\nabout because we spent seventy years over our idol of pet-topics. <\/p>\n
\nnot talking about any specific individual—it’s a texture of posts that
\nI’ve read spanning from the web-standards evangelist through the
\nsarcastic scientist and over past the part-time theologian. Lots of
\npeople like to do a little heretic-stake-burning on the web. What
\nstrikes me is that we still haven’t learned the lesson of history.
\nCatholics tortured<\/a> heretics until they recanted or died. The Reformers
\ndid the same<\/a>. When will the next fires be ignited? <\/p>\n