Wednesday, April 25, 2007


I'm digging work right now. The bank sent me down to Naples, Florida for the week to help out a bank going through a conversion. Since the branch I am at is so slow, I've spent a lot of time on the internet. Mainly looking up random info on Wikipedia, as well as putting thoughts on Arnold's blog. It's a pretty interesting conversation about perseverance of the saints. So, I've really wrestled with thinking biblically there, because the guy I am conversing with is a pretty smart guy, and is Catholic. Through it all, I've also come to remember, though we differ in many doctrinal issues, we are still brothers in Christ. And that's comforting knowing that we don't have to have it ALL right. Of course, that begs the question, "What DO you have to have right?" Any thoughts?

I'll leave you with a picture from a couple of hours ago.


  1. Color me jealous...nice sunset.

    As far as having doctrinal things "right," we have heard the wise advice to "major on the majors and minor on the minors." I truly believe, though, that as far as our personal walks are concerned, I want to study the minors hard once I have the majors well-explored. I want to know what I beleive and why and I want that to influence my convictions on seemingly minor issues.

    I know you'd's a part of deepening your relationship with Christ.

  2. I do agree. These last few years where, for the first time, I've dug into the Word and racked my brain trying to figure stuff out, I come away with a deeper understanding of who God is. However, lately, I've gotten so hung up on the "minor" things, that I can start labeling all kinds of people heretics, who really aren't.

    For instance, the whole debate between Arminians and Calvinists is a difficult thing. To me, the idea of particular redemption (among other things), is a beautiful part of the gospel. The idea that God effectively purchased my salvation through the cross is amazing. And it seems like an essential part of the gospel. But alas, we have brothers and sisters who find this utterly repugnant. This is the dilemna.

  3. Sorry for the late post . . .

    "What do we have to have right" about what? When I first read your question, I thought you meant in order to be saved, but now I'm not so sure.

    If you do mean salvation, I'd say we need to know there's a God (Romans 1) and that we're sinners (Romans 2) and that we can never be good enough to meet God's standard. So we have to fling ourselves on God's mercy and ask Him to save us because we can't save ourselves. I'd say that's the bare minimum, expressed in laymen's terms, not theologians'.

    Whaddya think? Or did I misunderstand your question?

  4. That is what I am getting at. It just seems that lately I'm running into people, who would say they are Christians, who don't believe certain things that I would consider quite important.

    John Stott, for example, doesn't believe in hell. To me, that's pretty big. And Catholic doctrine of faith plus works or losing your salvation seem pretty big as well.

    Your answer seems to cover both of these two examples, and probably every other example I could think of. I guess I'm wondering what, if anything, is necessary in the grayer areas where people disagree.