Will It Go 'Round in Circles?

Remember that song by Billy Preston from the 70's?



[Click on choice #4 on the menu bar and see the 1982 version of the song (it's good!) where Billy Preston (minus the afro!) sings with Eric Clapton.]

Here's the lyrics:

I got a song it aint got no melody
Im gonna sing it to my friends
I got a song it aint got no melody
Im gonna sing it to my friends

Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky
Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky

I got a story it aint got no moral
Let the bad guy win every once in a while
I got a story it aint got no moral
Let the bad guy win every once in a while

Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky
Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky

I got a dance it aint got no steps to it
Im gonna let the music move me around
I got a dance it aint got no steps to it
Im gonna let the music move me around

Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky
Will it go round it circles
Will it fly high like a bird up in the sky

I was reminded of that song today when I read two posts from my favorite? nemesis, GMPilot. Our conversation has been going in circles since 2004! I thought...can it be THAT long?

Sure can!

Fast forward, (after hundreds of posts, I might add!) to a post here in 2008. That particular thread all started with an internet quiz that asked the question, "What is your Theological Worldview?"

GMPilot tested out as an "Emergent/Postmodern." I guess that might be considered a positive step away from secular humanistic skepticism?

Well....maybe not!

But through all these years, during all this time, through all these various posts, arguments, counter-arguments, rebuttal arguments, etc. we see that the conversation is still just going 'round in circles...

There comes a time when one must ask this question.

When does following these verses:

1Pe 3:15
But sanctify the Lord God[fn4] in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;

1Pe 3:16
having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed.

...change to following these verses in the mind of a Christian evangelist?

Mat 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

Mar 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

Luk 9:5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.

*******

Latest post from GM:

Addenda

originally from CJW's Unfinished Post

Well, Jesus will one day separate the sheep from the goats.

CW: Another analogy that he used was the wheat and the tares. Both are currently being allowed to grow together. One day, the tares will be separated from the wheat and thrown into the fire. The wheat will be stored in the barn.

CW: Make your own conclusions about that parable.

GM: What conclusions do I need to make? You get to go to the barn, and I get to keep you warm. You once described the tares as "false believers". Guess I won't be burning then, because I'm not one of those!

CW: Did you even read the links to Koukl's other articles? If you did, you would see how wrong you are in your assessment regarding bloody wars. Those in Christian "sects" do not always mean that they have been born again in Christ.

Calvinism adherents and I agree on what is most important - that is - to teach Jesus Christ and him crucified. The minor differences do not really matter in the long run. However, your unbelief does matter - in a negative way of course.

GM: No, I did not, because I considered Koukl's other articles irrelevant to the discussion. You quoted him; if you saw something you thought was worth including, you should have included it.

My assesment regarding bloody wars is wrong?

So the French Catholics didn't spend 200+ years trying to eliminate the Protestant Huegenots?

So the Spanish Catholics didn't attempt to conquer Anglican England to end their 'heresy'?

If "the minor differences do not really matter in the long run", then there would be no Evangelicals (Reformed or otherwise), no Methodists, no Roman Catholics, no Quakers, no Presbyterians nor Greek Orthodox, no Pentacostals nor Coptics, no Lutherans nor Southern Baptists--you'd all be one big, happy, unified Body of Christ sprawled across much of the planet. Instead, some of those mentioned won't even share the same room with each other, much less the same Christ! You speak of them as 'sects', but I see no real difference between their sects and yours. If you all claim to be 'born again' in this same god, I've no reason to disbelieve you, since I don't know any better. But when you squabble and intrigue and fight and kill over what is exactly the right way to manifest that born-again stuff, and the god hasn't given you specific methods, then I have to conclude that none of you know what you're talking about--so maybe, just maybe, all that stuff is false.

You say "they can't all be right", but they could all be wrong. Even your sect.

CW: It (the Bible--GM) is the inerrant Word of God. You can go and look up the answers to any of your questions regarding inerrancy at Tektonics.

GM: Okay, I did. Not a bad place, Tektonics: it's got a well-read and feisty Webmaster, and one who has opinions and the facts to back them up. I respect that. Maybe I'll have to address him some day; but I doubt he'd ever have made the halfassed statements which brought me here in the first place:

Quote:
Humanism is the world's oldest religion. All secularists are certainly "like God" in that they believe their knowledge is far superior to that of the Lord of the Bible. To understand this man-centered dogma requires knowledge of the five basic tenets of humanism:

atheism (no one plus nothing times blind chance equals everything),

evolution (design emerges without an intelligent designer),
amorality (without a conscience and denying a Bible-based morality),

human autonomy (history proves that unrestrained man has a natural penchant for criminality and inhumanity), and

global socialism (e.g. communism has failed to provide freedom, liberty, and prosperity).

GM: Oh no, I haven't forgotten them. After four years, we've only covered two of those statements. Don't expect me to leave before we've gone over them all.

More to come.
__________________
"Religion is fundamentally opposed to everything I hold in veneration--courage, clear thinking, honesty, fairness, and above all, love of the truth." --H L Mencken

*******

My reply:

Humanism is the world's oldest religion. All secularists are certainly "like God" in that they believe their knowledge is far superior to that of the Lord of the Bible.

GM, you have demonstrated this fact - that you believe that your knowledge is far superior to that of the God of the Bible - hundreds of times. So why would you object to that statement? It agrees with your assessment!

To understand this man-centered dogma requires knowledge of the five basic tenets of humanism:

atheism (no one plus nothing times blind chance equals everything),

You believe that no God is necessary for life to have occurred. Right? You believe that Darwinism is true...even as a "fact." Right? So, why object to this assessment as well?

...evolution (design emerges without an intelligent designer),

You have endlessly attributed various anomolies and design "flaws" so as to reject an intelligent designer. So, why object to this assessment as well?

...amorality (without a conscience and denying a Bible-based morality),

You cannot possibly object to this one. The evidence of the fact that man's heart is "deceitful above all things...who can know it?" However, you reject the reasons why this is so (as described in the Bible). So, why object to this assessment as well?

...human autonomy (history proves that unrestrained man has a natural penchant for criminality and inhumanity),

History is the evidence of the truth of this statement. No matter who the perpetrators are (whether they be atheist, secularists, even involved in religion(s)), the fact remains that due to sin, evil and the pursuit of causing death because of those ailments, man has a natural penchant for criminality and inhumanity. So, why object to this assessment as well?

...and
global socialism (e.g. communism has failed to provide freedom, liberty, and prosperity).

History has shown this to be absolutely true as well. We can even see the stark difference between the worldview of global socialism and the worldview of Christian influenced Democratic Republicanism through the worldviews of the current contenders for the U.S. presidency in 2008! So, why object to this assessment as well?

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ. Colossians 2:8

The eyes of the Lord move to and fro throughout the earth to show Himself strong to those whose hearts are fully committed to Him. 2 Chronicles 16:9

I invite readers to share their thoughts!