September 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  


« Free Tactics | Main | The Reimagining of St. Patrick »

March 16, 2012


Malebranche in 3...2...1...


There is no technique that is better than the true Scriptural technique which is: "No one can can to Me[Jesus]unless he is DRAWN BY THE SPIRIT OF MY FATHER.." and "..take NO THOUGHT how or what thing ye shall answer,or what ye shall say: FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT SHALL TEACH YOU IN THAT SAME HOUR WHAT YE OUGHT TO SAY". Why should we even think to work up a sweat to find such techniques when we are not the ones who win souls to Christ; It is God who is the Soul-winner--"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not of yourselves: It is the gift of God: NOT OF WORKS,LEST ANY MAN SHOULD BOAST.." If we truly go by the guidance of God's Spirit in us,we wouldn't need to find other ways to communicate to people about the goodness of God. The Holy Spirit in us causes that lost person to see the light,not us--"the goodness of God leadeth [one] to repentance..". Now if the Holy Spirit communicates to us that we should proceed with other techniques,then by all means we should,but ultimately,it's the Holy Spirit who will guide us whereas we wouldn't need to seek OUR own special techniques. In any type of conversation pertaining to a certain situation in where we show a person their guilt in a literal sense,there are always ways to make a person look guilty outside of the actual Holy Spirit's guidance,but where does that guilty person go after that? He just feels guilty for a time and then he reverts back to his ways because he's not truly regenerated nor convicted by the Holy Spirit to see that he needs a transformation. In court,a judge makes a person see the guilt of their ways all the time as it's a part of their profession,but spiritually that person is still unregenerated because the conviction of the Holy Spirit is not apparent in them. Yes,he may be rehabilitated and make a vow not to commit the crime again,but where's the genuine transformation of the heart? The true fact is "that no man can say that Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Spirit". Okay,let's look at it this way: There are countless religions (Buddha,Islam,Hindu etc.)out there that promote their doctrines using the same techniques to make a person feel guilty,but a true brother or sister in Christ possesses the Spirit of the Most High God whereas we are more than confident that the Holy Spirit in us will DRAW that person to Christ than to try and work up a sweat in finding ways or techniques like the world does it. In Matthew 8:5-13,let's observe this type of confidence and faith find in the centurion when he beseeched Jesus to heal his sick servant. The centurion understood the power that Jesus had and he understood who Jesus was,and he knew that Jesus did not have to come to his house to perform some special technique. He understood the authority that Jesus had because he[the centurion] was a man under authority,and he had servants under him who jumped at his every command. It was the same with the power and authority of the Spirit of Jesus. The centurion said,"JUST SPEAK THE WORD ONLY,and my servant will be healed". I know this example may be a way off the topic of salvation,but the context and essence is understanding that we as children of God are confident in the authority of God's Spirit to transform when God puts us in the situation to converse with the unsaved person. There is denying how the disciples communicated the gospel in scripture,but they didn't need to break a sweat to find techniques of their own,but they were always guided by the Spirit. In Acts 10:19,for example,"While Peter thought on the vision,THE SPIRIT SAID UNTO HIM,'Behold,three men seek thee. Arise therefore,and get thee down,and go with them,doubting nothing: for I[The Spirit]have sent them'. Then Peter went down to the men..." Of course,we know that the house of Cornelius was converted to Christ at Peter's preaching of the gospel of Christ. Peter was SENT TO THEM BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. There is no greater technique than that of being under the authority and complete guidance of the Holy Spirit. We speak and the Spirit convicts and converts.

If Jesus took everyone's punishment, then isn't everyone's sins (if they committed any) paid for, whether they believe in him or not? So then why wouldn't everyone go to heaven?

Henrydavid,you raise a vaild point and this is just the thing: Some of us do not fully understand what we really say when we proclaim Jesus Christ to be Saviour of the world. We say He's the Savior of the world and then in that same tongue,we assume that He will only save some and consign all His rejecters to a place called Hell. Most of us take Jesus being "Saviour of the World" like it's a name tag. What I mean is,we take it like it's his "job" or "obligation" to "save the world" whereas it ends up that we have to be the ones by our free will to accept Him. For example,we have to go to McDonald's if we want a Big Mac and the server with the McDonald's name tag has to wait for our order. If we don't order,the server will just sit there and do nothing. That's not how our Lord Jesus Christ is:"I did not come to be served but to serve.." Jesus Christ is not just someone who waits and does nothing if we don't do anything. HE IS the Saviour of the world,He always performs,He always serves,He always saves,and He will save the whole world. He doesn't work for a franchise. HE IS THE FRANCHISE! If He is the Saviour of the whole world,HE WILL SAVE THE WHOLE WORLD no matter how long it takes and no matter what mankind must endure to finally be reconciled to God. Many will say,"Well what about Hell?" Okay,what is Hell to most of us. Is it not the "Lake Of Fire"? Well, if it's the lake of fire,then why is DEATH,the last enemy, and HELL cast into this lake of fire(20:14). Hell and the Lake of fire appear not to be the same thing. But "hell" and "death" are cast into this lake of fire. If "Death" will be abolished(1 Corinthians 15:26,54-57) as well as "Hell" in the Lake of fire,and those who commit the numorous sins mentioned in Rev.20:15,Rev.21:8,that would ultimately mean and confirm that "God shall WIPE AWAY[GOD IS A CONSUMING FIRE!] ALL TEARS FROM THEIR EYES;AND THERE SHALL BE NO MORE DEATH,NEITHER SORROW,NEITHER SHALL THERE BE NO MORE PAIN. THE FORMER THINGS ARE PASSED AWAY.." Many of us do not know the purpose of God's FIRE of purification and complete purging from sin.

I think it's a great way to help people understand, right where they're at. An attorney would understand legal issues and judgments. Just like Paul with the "unknown god".

Sorry,my computer cut off. Continuing from my last post....

Jesus will ultimately reconcile the whole world to God but many will have to endure the most severe punishment and spiritual torture,processing,purging and purification in the Lake Of Fire and that will come from those who fight vigorously to hang on to their sinful nature and behaviour,but after that torturous process,those who were cast into that fire will come out like pure gold,thoroughly cleansed and able to enter into the kingdom of God,and then the scriptures shall be confirmed: "Death is swallowed in VICTORY. O Death where is thy sting? O grave,where is thy victory? BUT THANKS BE TO GOD WHO GIVES US THE VICTORY THROUGH OUR LORD[AND SAVIOUR]JESUS CHRIST".

Many of us preach about Hell or Hellfire,not comprehending the true spritual symbolism and significance of the purpose of FIRE in the scriptures. Where in the old testament do we find a "place where people are screaming and being tortured in a fire". The word "hell" translates into Sheol,the pit,the grave,Gehenna and Tartarus. If we don't know already,Gehenna was a literal place outside of Jerusalem where the burned waste and garbage in fire,and Jesus made symbolic spiritual reference to that a few times in the new testament. In the old testament,there are numorous references to "hell" but it's always translated into Sheol,Hades or the grave and is described as a place where "the dead know not anything,neither have they any more a reward;for the memory of them is forgotten.." Yet,David makes symbolic reference to it and in those instances,the LORD always saves him. Job makes reference to "hell" but applied it to being trapped in the whale's belly. Now as to the reference of FIRE itself,we would in a better position if we objectively observe the use of FIRE in the some of these scriptures:

Malachi 3:2-3,Luke 3:16,17, Luke 12:49-50,
Mark 9:49,1 Corinthians 3:13-15, Hebrews 12:29,and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 and then compare it with Revelation 20:14 and Revelation 21:8.

On the Hinnom Valley:


Remember the third responsibility of an ambassador?


I don't. What is it, RonH?

It's here.


SteveK is a man of great character, RonH.

Good to know, RonH, and I agree with it. Thanks.


I never said otherwise.
I can't assess his character.


I do think you poisoned the well above.
Is that what you meant to do?

That's my only point.


No, of course you didn't RonH.
I never thought you did.

How can I be poisoning the well when I offered no argument and no poisonous statement about Malebranche? History shows that Malebranche often posts comments criticizing the traditional Gospel message, and here Greg is discussing that subject.

Hi SteveK, I took what you posted as meant for humor, you even added the smiley face symbol. Anyway, I'm kinda surprised to not have a Malbranche offering yet.

SteveK, BradB,

It seems like you might be misunderstanding 'poisoning the well'.


For instance, you can poison the well with something that's true and/or funny.

You can even poison the well with something that's not poisonous - unless by 'poisonous' you mean 'anything that poisons the well. In other words, you can poison the well without being malicious, venomous, etc.


"Why should we even think to work up a sweat to find such techniques when we are not the ones who win souls to Christ; It is God who is the Soul-winner"

2 Thimothy 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.

It sounds like we are expected to work, not just let go and let God. I should think that we should be eager to roll up our sleeves in service to the one who so graciously saved us from slavery to our sins. That service may take on many forms, depending on individual spiritual gifts, but it seems to me that seeking to be more effective in communicating the good news that God entrusted us with when we were saved, is but lifting the pinky in terms of effort that we are obliged to put forth in gratitude for what we were given and which was earned for us by the life, works and finished work on the cross. What we do in response to this will result in spiritual growth and that is certainly something each of us who call ourselves Christians should be eager to embrace as a joyful activity and not a sweat producing chore. Such activity produces the rich crop of the fruit of the spirit in our lives and is an indicator of a healthy spiritual life.

For instance, you can poison the well with something that's true and/or funny.

LOL. Never heard that one before, RonH.

Oops I guess I just poisoned the well again by LOL-ing, stating truth and not being malicious or venomous. Dang it!

My comment was intended to be humorous. I know how much Malebranche loves this topic. He's usually the first to post a comment so I took advantage of getting here first. But now he's ruined it by not showing up. I guess the joke is on me.


Please read this.

Check some other sources too - one's I haven't chosen. Let me know what you think.


Louis Kuhelj,that's a premature response. I never implied that there's no work involved. I was speaking in the context of FINDING OTHER TECHNIQUES other than being led by the Holy Spirit. Are you telling me that there's no work involved in being led of the Spirit of God? Be careful in how you interpret my comments.

Obviously,there's work involved in BEING LED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT. How can one follow and be guided by the Holy Spirit without DOING WORK? How can one say that they're being obedient and being guided by God's Spirit if he is sitting down and doing nothing whatsoever to follow His commands? Of course there's work involved! How could you come to the conclusion that I implied that there's no work involved?

You tell me,Louis,how does one present himself approved to God as a workman who need not to be ashamed but rightly handling the word of truth? God does not say anywhere in His Word that we should find OUR OWN TECHNIQUES. If we are led by the Spirit[and let me add]TO WORK,we would not need to seek our own techniques and "work up a sweat" to find ways to communicate the gospel to the world.


"there is therefor now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,who WALK NOT AFTER THE FLESH,BUT AFTER THE SPIRIT"(Romans 8:1).

"WALK in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh"(Ephesians 5:16).

"For we WALK BY FAITH and NOT BY SIGHT"(2 Corinthians 5:7).


WORKING and FINDING TECHNIQUES are not one and the same as you have implied in your comment. There's WORK involved in finding techniques just the same as there's WORK involved when being led of the Spirit to do His commands.

Louis,you say "It sounds like we're expected to work,not just let go and let God".

As Christians,our WORK is LETTING GO AND LETTING GOD WORK THROUGH US AS WE WORK. What are you saying,Louis? "Letting go and letting God" is not sufficient work?

"For as many as are led of the Spirit of God,THEY ARE THE SONS OF GOD"(Romans 8:14). How can anyone imply that there's no work involved in being led of the Holy Spirit? I certainly did not imply that.

Louis,the fact that you say "It sounds like we're expected to work and NOT JUST let go and let God" shows that you tread on dangerous ground in your context of one showing himself "approved of God" as a child of God. How can you add other "work" to the work of "letting go and letting God" which is OUR CALLING,OUR WORK and OUR SERVICE? Would God approve of His child not letting Him work through him/her to do His work?

"Letting God" means completely yielding ourselves to the move,the influence,inspiration and the WORK of the Holy Spirit in our lives so we,as children of God through Him,can GIVE and IMPART LIFE TO THE WORLD. You don't think that I know that there's WORK involved?

Hi RonH, while I see the point you are making, I dont see what SteveK wrote to be in the same category you wish to put it in [poisoning the well]. No attempt to discredit whatever he might've said was uttered, just an anticipation of his expected offering.

If Malbranche did comment now, how would you see SteveK's first remark harming Mal's case?

Hey Guys,

Honestly, we do not know whether Malebranche has posted any response. The reason is simple. STR censures responses to posts from those who do not always speak to their liking. They've given Malebranche unusual freedom in the past, but one can only say so much before the staff (Amy, etc) determines that you have not toed "reasoning" line that STR seeks to advance. The result? Your responses to posts mysteriously vanish. One need not use any profanity or ill-suited language to have this happen. It's happened to me on a number of occasions. Perhaps today it is happening to Malebranche. Perhaps not. We will never know.

'Censure' is true, but 'censor' is perhaps more apt in the above comment. Oh well, no matter. Both occur here.

First I've heard of that.

As for the post, I find it very odd that Greg insists on employing "tactics" and "techniques" on persons. We should strive to earn a sympathetic understanding of the perspective of other persons, not treat them as a jewel to be secured for our heavenly crown. "Techniques" and "Tactics" are the kinds of things salesmen deliver seminars on, and write books about. I find it embarrassing to Christians when they present the Gospel as something to be peddled in this manner.

Regarding the post, I'm glad to find that Greg's interlocutor acknowledges his moral failings. I'm also glad to see that Greg acknowledges his own. But I find in general that no honest person denies that they have moral guilt, so this isn't terribly surprising. However, what I have found is that no one has demonstrated that what follows from having moral guilt is the consequence of meriting eternal abandonment to torment. It certainly was not demonstrated in this post either, just once again merely assumed.

Perhaps the assumption is based on the claim found in previous posts that "infinite punishment is merited for offenses committed against an infinitely good God". But that claim is, at best, just fallacious.

Hi Daron, LHRM alert!!!

As to the statement being called fallacious,

"infinite punishment is merited for offenses committed against an infinitely good God". "But that claim is, at best, just fallacious".
, the problem lays with your rendering of the word infinite. It is meant to describe a quality, not a quantity as you would have it. You cannot square a sin for a lifetime against an eternal punishment because your measuring stick is inadequate for what needs to be weighed.

Brad B,

SteveK didn't comment on what Malbranche had yet to say about this OP.

He was commenting on Malbranche - on his 'history'.

Malbranche always says negative things about the gospel message.


Hi RonH, unless I am not seeing a missed post, you charged him with poinsoning the well prior to his stating this. I guess I see your point as of that statement[about Mal], but he's already been charged prior it seems.

Richard, I'm willing to wager that Greg has led more people to Christ through the conviction of their sin by the Holy Spirit because he takes evangelism seriously and tries to be "all things to all people" - in this case, meeting the intellectual skeptic at his argument and leading them to the Gospel.

And your multi-paragraph response with capital-case statements falls short of the Biblical standard of Col 4:5,6. I suggest you simply setup your own blog and simply post a link to it in the comments.


I think it is important to be led by His Spirit. Yet, it is important to be well studied (study to show yourself approved, ready in season and out of season). The "mechanism" for that readiness is to "be well studied". It's not a "fake" thing; God invented our intellect and it's okay to use it. If we allow that to overshadow the Spirit then I see your point. But I do not think Greg is saying to abandon the Spirit's guidence, merely to be ready in and out of season, especially for the intellectual skeptic. God invented our Spirit, our Brain, our Soul, etc. It's all to be "employed". I do not think "being well studied" with frameworks to work off of scripture is abandoning the Spirit. We are more than Spirit. We are also Soul, and Mind, and Body. God likes that stuff: He invented them.

I do know whether or not Malebranche has been posting, and he has not (I even went back and checked through the spam filter to be sure).

Always Learning, since you are friends with Malebranche, you should know that he has not been censored. And that your posts were removed on one day (three comments, total) because of a comment you wrote that was purely insults (and therefore added nothing to the conversation), after which you were not allowed to post. All of this was explained to Malebranche, whom I'm assuming passed this information on to you.

Further, Malebranche's freedom is not at all "unusual." Take a look around at the people who disagree. RonH has never been asked to leave.

Whether or not you're able to stay depends completely on your attitude, not on your arguments. And this is not a good start for you.

Brad B,

I understood what SteveK meant by the 3,2,1 comment. I made my charge (as you call it). SteveK's history comment simultaneoulsly denied and confirmed my understanding.


So what did you mean, RonH, by referencing the third responsibility?

Kpolo,it seems like I struck a nerve because your anger has caused you to take my comments out of proportion. Where in my comments do I question Greg's spiritual walk with Christ? Where in my comments do I question Greg's love for evangelism? You're willing to wager that Greg has led more people to Christ--Let me stop you right there before you lose your "money". God is the Soul-winner,not us and I appreciate that you mentioned conviction by the Holy Spirit because it is the Spirit that brings us to Christ. Are you going to tell me otherwise? You can take that up with God. Where in my comments do I say or accuse Greg of not having the Holy Spirit? Be careful in what you falsely accuse me of because I do not hold nothing against Greg as you suggested in your impartation of 1 Corinthians 4:5-6 which you irresponsibly use out of context. Your false accusations, whether indirect or direct, are actually the ones which fall short of this scripture passage. You seem greatly offended at grand spiritual truths. I wasn't the one who commanded that we be led of the Spirit and not lean to our own understanding. It was God. So,as I said,if you have a problem with the scriptures I quoted,you can take it up with God. I will give you this passage of scripture to ponder on:
1 Corinthians 2:15-16.

Kpolo,I don't have a problem with meeting and conversating with people of all class and orientations nor coming to certain levels. Greg seems very sincere in Christ and I applaud him for that,but it was a clear problem and clearly contrary to the scriptures when he sought to promote techniques of expressing the gospel which ruled out the Holy Spirit's command not to worry over what to say,do or how to act. How many times to do I have to reiterate that I'm speaking in context of FINDING OTHER TECHNIQUES.

John/T being studied and well-educated does not mean that we employ other techniques to communicate the gospel. If we're well-studied and educated,why do we need to seek other techniques. If we're ready, prepared in and out of season to communicate,why should we then go out of our way to find other techniques when we are already gifted and possess all the tools? "Being well-studied" and "finding techniques" are not the same thing,are they?

Matthew 10:19
But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say,


I meant something along these lines: Do you really want to go off topic and/or ad hom? It doesn't look good.

I thought maybe SteveK would say: You're right.

Then maybe I would leave it at that or maybe I would say: No big deal.

I referred to the 3rd responsibility only because I was reminded of it by the mention of the 1st in the OP. If I had been less roundabout at that point a lot of back and forth might have been saved.


Hi RonH,
That's kind of funny because responsibility 3 doesn't say anything about going off-topic or arguing to the man. Rather it, it admonishes us about character and maturity.
Why did you think you think that referring to character and maturity might make the points you say you wanted to make?

Kind of funny? Responsibility 3 could never mention everything that goes into character and maturity.

Why? Because NOT going off topic and (especially) NOT going ad hom are evidence of character and maturity.

This is a matter of showing consideration for the OP and the other commenters.

And to that end: Suppose we wrap this up.


Nope, not wrapped up.

Kind of funny? Responsibility 3 could never mention everything that goes into character and maturity.

So you plainly admit that when you referenced #3 you were referring to character and maturity.
Why? Because NOT going off topic and (especially) NOT going ad hom are evidence of character and maturity.

And you plainly state that going off topic and using ad hom are evidence of a lack of character and maturity. Yes, I see you tortured the syntax in order to avoid this obvious conclusion, but your twisted version is fallacious (no, NOT going off-topic is not a sign of character ... one could do all kinds of things without going off-topic which would not evidence character - including not read the OP and not even comment) and completely unnatural.

This is a matter of showing consideration for the OP and the other commenters.
Thus, by your claim, going off topic and using ad hom shows a lack of consideration, and, accordingly, of character.

You also said that SteveK had gone off-topic and used ad hom:

I meant something along these lines: Do you really want to go off topic and/or ad hom? It doesn't look good.

But you also had said:

I never said otherwise.
I can't assess his character.

So, yeah, you did say otherwise and you did assess his character.

And you were absolutely wrong. When you did so, and when you falsely claimed otherwise, you were not treating this board and its posters with consideration.
Even atheists can comport to responsibility three.

I saw the above from Daron.

The comments to this entry are closed.