LSM’s Deification Doctrine—Biblical or Blasphemous? Nigel Tomes

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

This may be the wrong thread for this, but I can't bear to slog through Nigel Tomes' tedious articles anymore. I usually feel like he intentionally tries to misunderstand or misrepresent certain things, not realizing that in the eyes of LCers, this kind of misunderstanding or misrepresentation only justifies their stance and invalidates everything else that he might have to say.

My conclusion about "man becoming God in life and nature but not in the Godhead" is that it is an unnecessarily "shocking" (and possibly in-artful) way of expressing the idea that the believer is born of God with God's life to grow up into that life without inviolating or compromising God's "God-ness."

I know from experience that rejecting this idea out of hand--without an actual attempt at understanding what is meant--completely turns off many LCers.

In regard to Nigel most of his writings are from a scholarly view that tend to address teachings. If there's one I'm hopeful to read one day is if/when Nigel addresses deputy authority. Until then I'll be reading his articles as they become available and glean from them what I can.
In regard to "man becoming God in life and nature but not in the Godhead", in experience I saw an congregation in Bellevue made uneasy by such a speaking. Whatever the basis is for the teaching, do not add nor take away from what the Bible says. Following are just several verses on adding or taking away from the Bible

Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32
Proverbs 30:5-6
Revelation 22:18-19

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Terry

In regard to Nigel most of his writings are from a scholarly view that tend to address teachings. If there's one I'm hopeful to read one day is if/when Nigel addresses deputy authority. Until then I'll be reading his articles as they become available and glean from them what I can.

Personally, I do not find Nigel's articles "scholarly." I find them pedantic.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Personally, I do not find Nigel's articles "scholarly." I find them pedantic.

Quite necessary, though, due to LSM's life-long obsession with lawsuits. Surely you can differentiate basic CYA thoroughness from Tomes' excessive meticulousness.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Personally, I do not find Nigel's articles "scholarly." I find them pedantic.

Yes, you could say Nigel is nitpicking and I'd say that's necessary since too often what comes from LSM is received as gospel regardless if it's accurate or errant.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Personally, I do not find Nigel's articles "scholarly." I find them pedantic.

I rarely read his entire articles, but I think Nigel's work is very scholarly and greatly exceeds the "scholarship" put out by the sophists from LSM.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Terry

Whatever the basis is for the teaching, do not add nor take away from what the Bible says. Following are just several verses on adding or taking away from the Bible

Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32
Proverbs 30:5-6
Revelation 22:18-19

Forgive me, but I think this is too simplistic. You have to grapple with the idea, not just the wording. The idea may be wrong, but it is not wrong simply because the exact wording used is not found in the Bible.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Forgive me, but I think this is too simplistic. You have to grapple with the idea, not just the wording. The idea may be wrong, but it is not wrong simply because the exact wording used is not found in the Bible.

Years I met with the local churches as an adult, with the exception of quarantines I tried to receive whatever came out from the ministry even if it did defy logic and normal Christian behavior.
I have grappled with the idea. All brothers and sisters do have a sonship, but not the same sonship Jesus had. When the Word became flesh has referenced in John 1:14, none of us can make that claim. We can say we have "received a spirit of adoption as sons".