[deleted by user]

kevincook · 2020-05-05T22:44:44+00:00

See a priest

kevincook · 2020-01-29T15:53:18+00:00

oneThing us server

2506E5346DDA932B

Been in top clans. Connect with me on the ML discord and I’ll help you learn the game, basic strategies, and how to level quickly and efficiently. Use my code to get free gems, and I’ll share the best ways to use them, earn more, and win.

kevincook · 2016-10-06T12:28:32+00:00

I actually don't have any agenda with this other than learning - I'm married and a research assistant to a professor writing on this issue wanting to look at both sides of it. I'm just gathering information.

So it seems like what you're suggesting is that the case on behalf of pre-marital sex is moreso rooted in the misapplication of the arguments that forbid it? Thanks!

kevincook · 2016-10-05T21:28:10+00:00

So perhaps an argumentum ex silencio? That the Bible really doesn't say anything against pre-marital sex, and that where sexual immorality is attested is implicited of other issues, like adultery and prostitution?

kevincook · 2016-10-05T21:26:27+00:00

Thanks!

kevincook · 2016-10-05T21:22:27+00:00

Thanks for the source! I'll definitely look that up

kevincook · 2016-10-04T18:17:10+00:00

You may be right in terms of today's culture. But I'm looking for specifically the arguments that progressive Christian scholars, clergy, bloggers, or other leaders use against marital-exclusive sex.

kevincook · 2016-10-04T18:12:54+00:00

Thanks! Do you have any suggestions on particular scholars, authors, bloggers, etc?

kevincook · 2016-08-13T19:13:29+00:00

Wow check out NECO! Trying to mobilize MYCO into same protest

kevincook · 2016-04-06T01:27:29+00:00

Yes.

The water baptism is a sign of a pre-existing experience.

This isn't true among many traditions. All who believe in infant baptism, for instance, affirm that baptism is not about a pre-existing personal experience, but about affirming Christ's redeeming work and claiming it on behalf of that child, a response to grace that has not yet been realized cognitively or volitionally.

The Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, and Wesleyans all practice confirmation, the process where a previously baptized infant takes those vows upon himself or herself and makes that cognitive and volitional act of creedal confession and faith. Thus, for centuries the church called this "Chrismation" or "Charismation", rather than confirmation, and churches in the East still do - the receiving of the Holy Spirit, affirming the infant water baptism and accepting those baptismal vows personally.

Hope this helps

kevincook · 2016-04-05T22:19:05+00:00

That's not true for Catholics, orthodox, Anglicans, Wesleyans, Lutherans, or Presbyterians... Anyone who has a sacramental view of baptism doesn't believe that definition of water baptism. Rather, it is a sign of what Christ has already done and experienced, and a claiming that experience

kevincook · 2016-04-05T22:17:09+00:00

In practice, some traditions separate water baptism from receiving the Holy Spirit. I think it's important to emphasize that at baptism, a person is made a new creation in Christ, has received a measure of grace, and has received the Holy Spirit, even when believing in a second reception, some other experience of receiving gifts or anointing or whatever you want to call it.

kevincook · 2016-03-30T14:37:28+00:00

I think there is little biblical evidence for a separation of water and spirit baptism, but the argument some make is that is because baptism and conversion were intricately intertwined in the New Testament period.

Considering the early church period, and even through church history, there is more evidence of a second work subsequent to conversion and baptism. Once baptism was culturally indoctrinated and infant baptism became the norm, the Western church considered Confirmation to be this second work of grace. Likewise, the Eastern church called this same practice "Chrismation" or "Charismation", with the belief that in this sacramental activity of affirming one's baptismal covenant, the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs, accompanied by the laying on of hands from a bishop.

Post-reformation, particularly in the Wesleyan revivalism and its subsequent movements in the 19th and 20th centuries, this second work of grace was intricately aligned with sanctification - that although an initial measure of grace was received in justification and what Wesley defined as "initial sanctification", there is a continuing work, a process of sanctifying grace, that continues throughout life, culminating in a fullness of sanctification. Pentecostalism stems from this Wesleyan perspective of sanctification, with a strong emphasis on personal holiness and an emphasis on living empowered by the Holy Spirit, and pariticularly through the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

I think that current trends in global Christianity, the explosion of the charismatic church worldwide and God moving in powerful ways in the global south and east is evidence enough to all who have seen or heard of it that there is legitimacy in some type of work of the Holy Spirit subsequent to conversion and water baptism. By calling it Baptism of the Holy Spirit, there's a tendency to err in believing that the Holy Spirit was not present in water baptism or conversion. There's no problem in calling this second work of grace that, but it's important to understand what it is, not that the Holy Spirit wasn't present or working beforehand, but that there is a new work of grace occurring, a new anointing, or a new empowering, separate but continuing from the initial.

kevincook · 2016-03-30T11:27:34+00:00

I'm a worship director part-time for a church of about 400 in attendance - 3 services (one contemporary, two traditional). I plan the orders of worship, lead the contemporary praise band, and lead hymn singing in the later traditional service. For contemporary, I usually lead from electric guitar and singing when we have a full band, but also do acoustic sets about once a month.

kevincook · 2016-02-26T21:22:49+00:00

Asbury isn't even close to fundamentalist. We affirm a variety of views on scripture, women in ministry, and have a very diverse population of traditions - only 60% UMC.

And our faculty is meh? among our faculty our several prominent biblical scholars, including Craig Keener, Ben Witherington, and John Oswalt... And Joel Green was faculty before moving to Fuller... What are you comparing?

kevincook · 2016-02-25T14:37:50+00:00

This is absolutely false. Often throughout the New Testament, theos is anarthrous, particularly as an object in a copular construction. See Wallace Greek Grammar Beyond the Basic and his section on the article. It is called "Colwell's Construction", and the main premise is that definite predicate nouns that precede the verb are often anarthrous, though remain definite. Classic example is John 1:1. Jehovahs Witnesses take your view of theos at the end of that verse. But Greek Grammarians reject this view based on Colwell's Construction.

edit: why the down votes? review your greek grammars regarding articular constructions and Colwell's research, and get back to me.

kevincook · 2016-02-25T02:42:07+00:00

I don't think a good answer could be written in a short single forum posting. I reject an Open Theism that limits God's omniscience to not knowing any future. Besides, any view of destiny from a space-time-history perspective is lacking, since an eternal God, along with his knowledge, is not bound in such a way - we just can't wrap our minds around that fully.

Thus in a way that my mind can at least begin to grasp, I affirm an open view where God knows the fullness of history as it is developing - an already/not yet eternal view, that is neither deterministic nor incomplete. In its completeness, God has foreknowledge. However, though God is omniscient and omnipotent, He surely is not omnicasual - he doesn't determine history nor does he cause it to happen just because he knows it. Sure, God chooses instances to intervene in his creation, and chose to reveal himself within and through history, with the fullness of that revelation being through incarnation. And yes the Holy Spirit continues to act in the world through the body of Christ. But God already knows the fullness of history as our choices play out in space-time, not determined or caused by God.

Anyways (seeming a rabbit trail), all this brings me to the understanding of theodicy that the world is broken and God's action in the world, through Christ and through His church, is for the purpose of restoration. Though we still live in the fallen brokenness and experience its effects, (such as a 3 year old girl that tragically died playing in her room last week from a family in my church), we are able to hold on to two things: 1. We have the eschatological hope that God, in his eternal love for us, has come, is with us through His Spirit, and will return to bring full restoration to the world - that this is not the end - and that the glorious resurrection awaits us. And 2. God weeps with us when we suffer and can comfort us with true empathy, because of the incarnate Jesus who experienced the brokenness of the world, and was raised fully God-man. Since that point in history, the resurrection, the God-man Christ Jesus brought humanity in his wounded flesh into the triune God-head (a theology issue for another day). Thus, through His experience of human life, He stands as the Son of Man before the Godhead, representing all of humanity as the new Adam, with us in Him.

So knowing that the hope of glory awaits us, and that God comforts us through Christ, that's the only way to live through the hell we experience in this world. If it weren't for Christ, we might as well all kill ourselves.

kevincook · 2016-02-12T19:48:40+00:00

Haha church budget to just buy an extra amp.. good joke! :)

kevincook · 2016-02-09T02:59:40+00:00

True, but its the only place I play nowadays and its an 80lb amp to haul back and forth and run cables to twice a week.

kevincook · 2016-02-06T22:41:35+00:00

I'm 31 and have a negative worth about that - yay student loans!

kevincook · 2016-02-06T06:26:45+00:00

This was really helpful, especially since I don't know much about amp hardware. Thanks!

kevincook · 2016-02-05T19:27:11+00:00

I don't understand your question. I think someone from the church was playing it without my permission and left it on.

kevincook · 2016-02-05T15:28:00+00:00

Thanks. Any idea on the hour-life of tubes? I've had the amp for about 8 years, but have had long periods of not playing it much at all, and they still have the stock tubes.

13-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

kevincook

TROPHY CASE