Frank

Cheryl, it is good to have you back and up to top form in expounding the Scriptures, and if I may say so, giving a solid, well-reasoned and biblical answer to Chris’s comments (41). And thank you for your kind words regarding my comments (48), by which I also stand. And so, if I may, I wish to briefly respond to Chris’s last comment to me (49).

Chris, the short answer to your questions are my trouble with your syllogism was not its formal validity, but, how shall I say this, the misleading if not false content of your premises; yes, it is the motive, and not merely the possession of, or lack of knowledge, that distinguishes the Deceived heretic from the Deliberate heretic. In fact, in the Catholic Dictionary of Theology, the terms for these types of heretics are, as I recall, an Informal Heretic, one who teaches a heresy in ignorance, not realizing it is contrary to orthodox Christianity; and a Formal Herectic, who not only knows what orthodox Christianity but rejects it and deliberately teaches a heresy for his own reasons. And it is made on the basis of the same Scriptures and reasoning Cheryl uses. At least the Catholics got something right.

Of course, I am most intriqued by your question regarding 1 Timothy 1:13. Why would Paul, or even I, for that matter, ever think that ignorance and unbelief somehow “merit” God’s saving grace in Christ? I know there is no exegetical justification for such an idea in any of Paul’s writings, let alone in 1 Timothy 1:12-17. Or don’t you think I have ever read and studied Galations and Romans, where Paul clearly teaches we are not saved by “works of the law” but “by divine grace appropriated by faith” in the finished work of our Lord Jesus Christ? And if you want the reason why our Lord Jesus took pity on Paul, saved, and transformed him, might I suggest you find it in 1 Timothy 1:16, “I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who believe in him and receive eternal life” (1 Tim. 1:16, TNIV). The Lord Jesus saved and transformed Paul for the benefit of others and for his own glory, not because Paul merited it. Is that explanation sufficient?

Still, I wonder why it was necessary, Chris, for you to suggest I thought Paul taught this and so had to give an explanation? Son, I’m not as stupid, nor as biblically and theologically illiterate, as you apparently think I am. I may not have a Phd., but I have certainly been trained in biblical studies, theology, and apologetics. And I know when someone misuses hermenuetics and logic. And I have been in enough debates to know someone is using a diversionary tactic when his own position’s weaknesses are being heavily assaulted. And I apologize to others if these final remarks seem blunt and to the point, but on the basis of Prov. 26:4-5, I believe they are called for.