Defeat Conceded?
Well, if you have been keeping up with the debates on the 5 points of Calvinism, I'm sure you have been blessed by the discussion and sincere interaction that has happened in that dialogue. Personally, it has been challenging looking up and examining many Scriptures and even just revisiting Scriptures that I have already studied that had led me into the Calvinistic position in the first place.
I am sorry to say, however, that Mr. Norelli has "conceded defeat" as was evident to me after our cross examination. I was obviously misled, as I found out later by reading his blog ( http://rightly-dividing.blogspot.com/2006/09/my-debate-on-tulip.html ), that he basically handed me the debate. Truly disappointing to say the least, especially because of the circumstances generating the concession.
According to Mr. Norelli, I maliciously referred to him in particular as an "unfit minister of the Gospel" in my last blog concerning the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Such is not the case. Let me clarify the purpose of that blog.
I am a person who likes to be well informed. AS such, I have taken the time to print out and read many of Mr. Norelli's papers and even previous debates so that I can understand the position of my esteemed opponent and do my best to not misrepresent him. Thus, I happened to print out one of his articles on the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It just so happens that a friend of mine had been asking me about that particular sin. Personally, I have not done a systematic study on that particular study, so I welcomed the insights of Mr. Norelli, however, due to other Scriptural evidence and theological inconsistencies, I obviously did not accept Mr. Norelli's interpretation. So I started thinking about what it meant. I even looked up other material from Reformed theologians and thinkers on their view of the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Thus, I took it upon myself to post what I believed about it - certainly not my final position as you can see that I was asking for input from readers at the end. I even posted the same article on a MySpace Calvinist group to stimulate discussion.
Now, what was my purpose in writing the blog? Was it to go AD HOMINEM on Mr. Norelli? Obviously not. I never explicitly called him "an unfit minister of the Gospel". Certainly, I did say, would still hold that any who believe that Christ would condemn that which He had previously justified before God the Father and atoned fully for is certainly lacking in knowledge of the Gospel, and is unfit to preach the Gospel for that is NOT the Gospel. Now, if Mr. Norelli specifically believes that then I would assert that to him. However, whether he does or not has NEVER been stated to my knowledge. The statement was general. The statement was a personal opinion. In context, it was part of an article intended to stimulate discussion about the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It was not intended at all to criticize Mr. Norelli. Such is not my taste.
I have of course, written my response back to Mr. Norelli and my rebuttal to the cross examination has been posted. I sent my response to Mr. Norelli but he has deleted all of my emails. I even sent an email to request some sources for information about the Trinity since I was teaching on the doctrine recently at my Church and I know that Mr. Norelli is working on a book about the doctrine of the Trinity and I would have appreciated any insight he would have offered.
Needless to say, it appears that the debate is over...I don't want to say that anybody won or lost because that is never the intention of my debates. Rather, they are informative debates intended more for audience purposes to hear and try to understand both sides and why each side believes what it does. If there are losers, its those who won't see this debate finished and be able to benefit from the dialogue. Its the body of Christ that needs to hear these issues out and be able to see the different views interact, especially in the manner in which Mr. Norelli and I were engaging each other with a mutual respect.
I hope that Mr. Norelli will reconsider picking up where we left off on the debates. I would certainly not like to leave this unfinished. I hope there are no other circumstances hindering the dialogue that are not being revealed. Mr. Norelli has debated with some of the same people that I have who have purposely resorted to Ad Hominem attacks. I hope that he will be able to see that I have not done that being that the intention of that blog was for ME to get input on my thoughts.
God bless,
Moses
I am sorry to say, however, that Mr. Norelli has "conceded defeat" as was evident to me after our cross examination. I was obviously misled, as I found out later by reading his blog ( http://rightly-dividing.blogspot.com/2006/09/my-debate-on-tulip.html ), that he basically handed me the debate. Truly disappointing to say the least, especially because of the circumstances generating the concession.
According to Mr. Norelli, I maliciously referred to him in particular as an "unfit minister of the Gospel" in my last blog concerning the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Such is not the case. Let me clarify the purpose of that blog.
I am a person who likes to be well informed. AS such, I have taken the time to print out and read many of Mr. Norelli's papers and even previous debates so that I can understand the position of my esteemed opponent and do my best to not misrepresent him. Thus, I happened to print out one of his articles on the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It just so happens that a friend of mine had been asking me about that particular sin. Personally, I have not done a systematic study on that particular study, so I welcomed the insights of Mr. Norelli, however, due to other Scriptural evidence and theological inconsistencies, I obviously did not accept Mr. Norelli's interpretation. So I started thinking about what it meant. I even looked up other material from Reformed theologians and thinkers on their view of the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. Thus, I took it upon myself to post what I believed about it - certainly not my final position as you can see that I was asking for input from readers at the end. I even posted the same article on a MySpace Calvinist group to stimulate discussion.
Now, what was my purpose in writing the blog? Was it to go AD HOMINEM on Mr. Norelli? Obviously not. I never explicitly called him "an unfit minister of the Gospel". Certainly, I did say, would still hold that any who believe that Christ would condemn that which He had previously justified before God the Father and atoned fully for is certainly lacking in knowledge of the Gospel, and is unfit to preach the Gospel for that is NOT the Gospel. Now, if Mr. Norelli specifically believes that then I would assert that to him. However, whether he does or not has NEVER been stated to my knowledge. The statement was general. The statement was a personal opinion. In context, it was part of an article intended to stimulate discussion about the Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. It was not intended at all to criticize Mr. Norelli. Such is not my taste.
I have of course, written my response back to Mr. Norelli and my rebuttal to the cross examination has been posted. I sent my response to Mr. Norelli but he has deleted all of my emails. I even sent an email to request some sources for information about the Trinity since I was teaching on the doctrine recently at my Church and I know that Mr. Norelli is working on a book about the doctrine of the Trinity and I would have appreciated any insight he would have offered.
Needless to say, it appears that the debate is over...I don't want to say that anybody won or lost because that is never the intention of my debates. Rather, they are informative debates intended more for audience purposes to hear and try to understand both sides and why each side believes what it does. If there are losers, its those who won't see this debate finished and be able to benefit from the dialogue. Its the body of Christ that needs to hear these issues out and be able to see the different views interact, especially in the manner in which Mr. Norelli and I were engaging each other with a mutual respect.
I hope that Mr. Norelli will reconsider picking up where we left off on the debates. I would certainly not like to leave this unfinished. I hope there are no other circumstances hindering the dialogue that are not being revealed. Mr. Norelli has debated with some of the same people that I have who have purposely resorted to Ad Hominem attacks. I hope that he will be able to see that I have not done that being that the intention of that blog was for ME to get input on my thoughts.
God bless,
Moses
posted by prchdaword at 3:33 PM
0 comments
