I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
I'm not sure if I qualify as a fundamnetalist,but I can tell you that I fall short everyday. I do like to share my faith with people who are interested,but do not want to arrogantly impose my beliefs on anybody.
I just consider myself to be a follower of christ who belongs to a local church
I like\love learning from those more versed in the bible and in an odd coincidence was texting a fellow fire member about the same thing. He is very well versed and I have not once felt belittled by him. Nor by as BIL who lives it . Others- yeah I get the holier than thou every now and then and it annoys metoo. I try not to trigger or argue but as coolly as I can 'offer' a counter, rather than "insist: a counter. Me...big work in progress. Would love to be the person I .....would love to be. Most of my family is devout Catholic but none can quote the Bible yet were ever eager to ...instruct me. Not so much these days.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
I see you subscribe to the "Always use enough brush" train of thought.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized I’m apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
I see you subscribe to the "Always use enough brush" train of thought.
Not at all. It’s more like a cut in brush.
The Gospel is simple. Fundamentalists take you back to the law as a way of measuring yourself righteousness and justifying yourself. No Gospel to be seen in that message.
What if one is a 5-Point Calvinist but can't decide whether to subscribe to Infralapsarianism vs. Supralapsarianism??
Quien Sabe,
GWB
Good question. At least there is an inner conflict in that case. When a fundamentalist discovers inner conflict he is on the verge of no longer being a fundamentalist.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
Here is an interesting video regarding the O.P's. post on Fundamentalism. A Bible scholar and professor, Bart Erhman, and Sam Harris. It's a long discussion but very informative as to how Erhman, the scholar, a fundamental Christian, changed his views. It is 1 hour, 48 minutes long, just so you know.
What if one is a 5-Point Calvinist but can't decide whether to subscribe to Infralapsarianism vs. Supralapsarianism??
Quien Sabe,
GWB
Good question. At least there is an inner conflict in that case. When a fundamentalist discovers inner conflict he is on the verge of no longer being a fundamentalist.
BTW,
If I was born in 1951, would it be that I was fore-ordained to be a Pre-Millennial?
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Yup. Not finding anything to "fundamentally" disagree with.
And yes, I am a Christian...bought and paid for by the blood of Yeshua the Christ.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
Of course she sinned again...unless she happened to drop dead at that instant!
In Luke 10:27 Jesus also agreed that the Law and the Prophets are summed up thusly;
"YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.”
I was raised in the fundy tradition in which my mother was brought to salvation and my father was raised. My household, however, was not fundy. I don’t know how that worked intellectually or theoretically exactly but I know the separation was due to my mother’s conversion and her chronic disease which kept us all in a state of suspense for my entire time in my parents home.
I left fundamentalism for an older strain of Protestantism which is more confessional and liturgical. In my opinion it is also much more focused upon grace and upon maintaining a sense of continuity with the last 2,000+ years of Christianity vs the discontinuity (over)emphasized by fundamentalism.
As described, my read is that the fundamentalist posture is one of certainty rather than humble submission to a God who is beyond our ability to understand and to grace beyond our comprehension in quality & quantity BECAUSE WE NEED IT.
Ps 90 is my favorite Psalm and pops into my head when I get too proud or complacent; that is, often:
90 Lord, You have been our [a]dwelling place in all generations. 2 Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever You [b]had formed the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. 3 You turn man to destruction, And say, “Return, O children of men.” 4 For a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it is past, And like a watch in the night. 5 You carry them away like a flood; They are like a sleep. In the morning they are like grass which grows up: 6 In the morning it flourishes and grows up; In the evening it is cut down and withers. 7 For we have been consumed by Your anger, And by Your wrath we are terrified. 8 You have set our iniquities before You, Our secret sins in the light of Your countenance. 9 For all our days have passed away in Your wrath; We finish our years like a sigh. 10 The days of our lives are seventy years; And if by reason of strength they are eighty years, Yet their boast is only labor and sorrow; For it is soon cut off, and we fly away. 11 Who knows the power of Your anger? For as the fear of You, so is Your wrath. 12 So teach us to number our days, That we may gain a heart of wisdom. 13 Return, O Lord! How long? And have compassion on Your servants. 14 Oh, satisfy us early with Your mercy, That we may rejoice and be glad all our days! 15 Make us glad according to the days in which You have afflicted us, The years in which we have seen evil. 16 Let Your work appear to Your servants, And Your glory to their children. 17 And let the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us, And establish the work of our hands for us; Yes, establish the work of our hands.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
I have no idea if she did or didn't. I don't think anyone else knows that answer either. I simply asked a question as to what that meant. Which I have not read here yet.
I believe most of nominal Christianity went through that wide gate and down that broad road that Jesus described. There are some that ignored the 13th self named apostle and kept to the narrow path.
Brother Jim, I believe Jesus was telling her to repent. I don't know the answer to very much, & I won't pretend I do. I do know that my righteousness comes from God, by way of grace through Jesus.
The Bible's message of salvation is very easy to comprehend. Believe in Jesus, don't rely on working your way in. There's nothing in there about having to be perfect or having to follow anyone's rules or laws. It's all by faith, nothing else.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
What if one is a 5-Point Calvinist but can't decide whether to subscribe to Infralapsarianism vs. Supralapsarianism??
Quien Sabe,
GWB
Good question. At least there is an inner conflict in that case. When a fundamentalist discovers inner conflict he is on the verge of no longer being a fundamentalist.
BTW,
If I was born in 1951, would it be that I was fore-ordained to be a Pre-Millennial?
Antinomies Abound!
ya!
GWB
Yes and maybe.
If a five point Calvinist it may be necessary to determine if one has leanings toward Antinomianistic legalism or legalistic Antinomianism. I’m not a three, four or five point Calvinist but I seem to equally fall off both sides of the horse.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
I have no idea if she did or didn't. I don't think anyone else knows that answer either. I simply asked a question as to what that meant. Which I have not read here yet.
I haven’t looked back at the passage but to the best of my memory I think he was pretty much telling her to stop being the village bicycle.
The Bible's message of salvation is very easy to comprehend. Believe in Jesus, don't rely on working your way in. There's nothing in there about having to be perfect or having to follow anyone's rules or laws. It's all by faith, nothing else. Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
I agree Rock Chuck. Wholeheartedly. Salvation is God's free gift to us, but we must accept it. To heck with bein’ told what you’re ‘supposed’ to believe just because it’s part of some set of principles laid down as being incontrovertibly true by other men in authoritative positions (like Pope’s and Archbishop’s and other ecumenical patriarch‘s and such). Same goes for formal catechisms, creeds, and confessions. I’ll draw my own conclusions in these matters, rather than have em’ dictated to me by someone else (another man).
The Holy Spirit is a teacher, a helper, and an advocate. Some followers of Jesus truly believe that the same Spirit of God that raised Jesus from the dead actually resides within them, and teaches them the things that God wants them to know, and helps them live the way that God wants them to live.
I don’t think He wants a bunch of automatons and slaves; I think He wants us to have a relationship with Him...to see us change by knowing Him...and to feel what it’s like to be truly loved by Him.
After the final judgment God will gather us all up… Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Reformed/Presbyterian, maybe even a few Baptists will make it (that’s a joke!) and Pentecostals Weslyans et al
He’ll give us kudos on certain things we did well, and tell us where we missed the boat.
The Bible's message of salvation is very easy to comprehend. Believe in Jesus, don't rely on working your way in. There's nothing in there about having to be perfect or having to follow anyone's rules or laws. It's all by faith, nothing else.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Very true. There is a tendency to add to it. That is where the Fundamentalist makes the gospel small g.
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.
20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.
21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.
22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
I have no idea if she did or didn't. I don't think anyone else knows that answer either. I simply asked a question as to what that meant. Which I have not read here yet.
I'm not being critical and just using this as a perfect example of why trying to discuss 'biblical' passage with 99 of 100 or probably even 990 of 1000 Christians just doesn't work. This example is normal, common of most Christians, even those who think they 'know' the bible, few actually read the bible, they are fed snippets, cherry picked by the clergy.
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Over 40 years ago I threw away the sword and shield of chapter and verse... because so few are armed enough to actually engage.
Read the bible straight through, the new testament two or three times before thinking you have a slight idea what the bible say's.
The theme you will get is Jesus kept it really simple, KISS... Go, and sin no more... was for that woman in that context... very simple, no or else, after saying he would not condemn her, a parting blessing. Same as you would a child who did something wrong knowing that's not the last thing they will do wrong, but...
The more you read about Christ himself the more you see his inclusionary love and how simple he kept it.
Contrast that to man and religion's words, the complexities and exclusions.
Go, and sin no more... is one of my favorite Christ life examples. Woman at the well is a good one also, thief on the cross and many more.
Man has a hard time getting simple stuff right, even remembering a bible story.
Trust in Christ's life example and the Holy Spirit, all man's words are fallible no matter how well intentioned.
Yes. I had to be taken outside fundamentalists Christianity. Fundamentalist don’t preach the Gospel.
Quite a generality there….. so much that it verges on being just flat out laughable.
Humor is always anchored in truth.
No anchor nor humor here at all. To make the statement that “Fundamentalist don’t preach the gospel” is inaccurate to the point of being easily dismissed.
But, go ahead and define “fundamentalist” for me.
Edit to add: While you’re at it….. pls define “the gospel” for us…..
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
I have no idea if she did or didn't. I don't think anyone else knows that answer either. I simply asked a question as to what that meant. Which I have not read here yet.
I'm not being critical and just using this as a perfect example of why trying to discuss 'biblical' passage with 99 of 100 or probably even 990 of 1000 Christians just doesn't work. This example is normal, common of most Christians, even those who think they 'know' the bible, few actually read the bible, they are fed snippets, cherry picked by the clergy.
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Over 40 years ago I threw away the sword and shield of chapter and verse... because so few are armed enough to actually engage.
Read the bible straight through, the new testament two or three times before thinking you have a slight idea what the bible say's.
The theme you will get is Jesus kept it really simple, KISS... Go, and sin no more... was for that woman in that context... very simple, no or else, after saying he would not condemn her, a parting blessing. Same as you would a child who did something wrong knowing that's not the last thing they will do wrong, but...
The more you read about Christ himself the more you see his inclusionary love and how simple he kept it.
Contrast that to man and religion's words, the complexities and exclusions.
Go, and sin no more... is one of my favorite Christ life examples. Woman at the well is a good one also, thief on the cross and many more.
Man has a hard time getting simple stuff right, even remembering a bible story.
Trust in Christ's life example and the Holy Spirit, all man's words are fallible no matter how well intentioned.
Kent
So you threw the Bible out? It's the very foundation of everything my life consist of. Everything.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Good that there are more choices. I do have a question. When Jesus told the lady at the well to go and sin no more what did that mean?
Do you think that she never sinned again? I don’t. That would not be consistent with any of the rest of scripture.
I have no idea if she did or didn't. I don't think anyone else knows that answer either. I simply asked a question as to what that meant. Which I have not read here yet.
I'm not being critical and just using this as a perfect example of why trying to discuss 'biblical' passage with 99 of 100 or probably even 990 of 1000 Christians just doesn't work. This example is normal, common of most Christians, even those who think they 'know' the bible, few actually read the bible, they are fed snippets, cherry picked by the clergy.
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Over 40 years ago I threw away the sword and shield of chapter and verse... because so few are armed enough to actually engage.
Read the bible straight through, the new testament two or three times before thinking you have a slight idea what the bible say's.
The theme you will get is Jesus kept it really simple, KISS... Go, and sin no more... was for that woman in that context... very simple, no or else, after saying he would not condemn her, a parting blessing. Same as you would a child who did something wrong knowing that's not the last thing they will do wrong, but...
The more you read about Christ himself the more you see his inclusionary love and how simple he kept it.
Contrast that to man and religion's words, the complexities and exclusions.
Go, and sin no more... is one of my favorite Christ life examples. Woman at the well is a good one also, thief on the cross and many more.
Man has a hard time getting simple stuff right, even remembering a bible story.
Trust in Christ's life example and the Holy Spirit, all man's words are fallible no matter how well intentioned.
Kent
So you threw the Bible out? It's the very foundation of everything my life consist of. Everything.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Yup. Not finding anything to "fundamentally" disagree with. And yes, I am a Christian...bought and paid for by the blood of Yeshua the Christ. It is a shame what some folks do to Grace.
Our nuns told us not to. It wasn't meant to be read front to back like a normal book...and we were too dumb to grasp it anyway.
I don't know why they would have told you that except to maybe control the narrative.
The best thing about reading it through is seeing the contrast between Christ and everyone else in the bible, including Paul. Christ didn't write any words or bible, he left us his life example written by men in the first books of the New Testament... and the Holy Spirit to guide us if we will listen. Even if every word written by man in the new testament aren't exactly remembered true, it gives us the true example of Christ.
The Holy Spirit is our strongest mentor here, not a church.
What if one is a 5-Point Calvinist but can't decide whether to subscribe to Infralapsarianism vs. Supralapsarianism??
Quien Sabe,
GWB
Good question. At least there is an inner conflict in that case. When a fundamentalist discovers inner conflict he is on the verge of no longer being a fundamentalist.
BTW,
If I was born in 1951, would it be that I was fore-ordained to be a Pre-Millennial?
Antinomies Abound!
ya!
GWB
Yes and maybe.
If a five point Calvinist it may be necessary to determine if one has leanings toward Antinomianistic legalism or legalistic Antinomianism. I’m not a three, four or five point Calvinist but I seem to equally fall off both sides of the horse.
Thus gospel-grace and law-commands, Both bind and loose each other’s hands: They can’t agree on any terms, Yet hug each other in their arms.
Those that divide them cannot be The friends of truth and verity; Yet those that dare confound the two, Destroy them both, and gender woe.
This paradox none can decipher, That plow not with the gospel-heifer. . . .
To run to work, the law commands; The gospel gives me feet and hands: The one requires that I obey; The other does the pow’r convey.
At the risk of being a heretic to some. I will ask if all the peoples of the world, present and past, have not been "saved" according to a doctrine are they doomed to perdition?
At the risk of being a heretic to some. I will ask if all the peoples of the world, present and past, have not been "saved" according to a doctrine are they doomed to perdition?
mike r
If they've already passed, then yes. If the living continue with that choice then "yes" would be my answer.
The Bible's message of salvation is very easy to comprehend. Believe in Jesus, don't rely on working your way in. There's nothing in there about having to be perfect or having to follow anyone's rules or laws. It's all by faith, nothing else.
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
"There's nothing in there about having to be perfect or having to follow anyone's rules or laws."
Sounds like Jesus spoke clearly when he said,
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
Just FYI the Holy Spirit doesn’t say you can lay out of church for 40 years and wax your Bayliner and drink Elijah Craig ever Sunday either.
The whole crap about “I’d rather be in the woods thinking about God than in church thinking about deer or fishing” is bunk
The vine keeper cuts dead limbs off and tosses em into the fire for not producing fruit
The Holy Spirit isn't about this world, or saving you from it and all the chit here... or going to church, singing in the choir, softball team, being a deacon.
Christ's life example was of service, he was the greatest server ever... if you can't serve your fellow man's spirit regardless of your hardships. Vs self serving based in this world and even religion that is world and 'now' based...
Going to church don't get you anything extra you didn't bring in with you.
Hebrews 10:25 New King James Version 25 not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.
Yes. I had to be taken outside fundamentalists Christianity. Fundamentalist don’t preach the Gospel.
Quite a generality there….. so much that it verges on being just flat out laughable.
Humor is always anchored in truth.
No anchor nor humor here at all. To make the statement that “Fundamentalist don’t preach the gospel” is inaccurate to the point of being easily dismissed.
But, go ahead and define “fundamentalist” for me.
Edit to add: While you’re at it….. pls define “the gospel” for us…..
I'm pretty sure that I went a fairly long way toward defining fundamentalism and fundamentalists in the OP.
Fundamentalists are modern day Pharisees. They have not concept of the purpose of the law, what it does and what it means for the Christian. In one breath they will tell you that you are saved by grace and in the next breath demand that you follow the law as a means of being saved, staying saved, being sanctified etc.
That school of thought and teaching has nothing to do with the Gospel. Paul wrote a couple of books destroying those ideas.
Peace was made between my Maker and I nearly 35 years ago.
We both appear to be very happy with the outcome........................., family, employers, and general society does too.
I've learned not to change horses in midstream, so to speak. I'll likely ride this one 'till the end, no matter how many folks offer me horses of a different color.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Yup. Not finding anything to "fundamentally" disagree with. And yes, I am a Christian...bought and paid for by the blood of Yeshua the Christ. It is a shame what some folks do to Grace.
Tim
Like going to a whore house ?🤦🏻♂️
You have to contextualize what I said. Think about the prophet Amos.
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Kent
I suspect a number of us knew that, but figured correcting the OP would be like telling a fellow his button-down collars are un-buttoned. Not really helpful.
Speaking of the woman in question....ever wonder what it was Jesus was writing in the dirt with his finger, that got all those guys to turn tail?
I always figured he was ratting them out as the whore's customers!
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Kent
I suspect a number of us knew that, but figured correcting the OP would be like telling a fellow his button-down collars are un-buttoned. Not really helpful.
Speaking of the woman in question....ever wonder what it was Jesus was writing in the dirt with his finger, that got all those guys to turn tail?
I always figured he was ratting them out as the whore's customers!
There was no provision in the Law for the stoning of ONE adulterer!
She was 'caught in it'........... where was the other party? Maybe, each one of them!?!?!?
No one yet in this thread even knows that Christ didn't tell the woman at the well... go, and sin no more... it was the woman that the Pharisees brought to the temple to be judged and stoned for adultery, trying to trick Jesus with old law.
Kent
I suspect a number of us knew that, but figured correcting the OP would be like telling a fellow his button-down collars are un-buttoned. Not really helpful.
Speaking of the woman in question....ever wonder what it was Jesus was writing in the dirt with his finger, that got all those guys to turn tail?
I always figured he was ratting them out as the whore's customers!
Another interesting... cherry picked my post and a bunch of suspecting.
So we are not to be biblically correct as it's not really helpful and we should just make up suppositions on what Jesus 'wrote', as if him doodling in the dirt to give the Pharisees time to see the light was the main part of the story.
No, I bet everyone thought it was the woman at the well when it was brought up.
Again why it's worthless to have a true biblical discussion with someone, when you point out that what they say isn't correct and even nicely, to actually discuss and restart the issue on biblical standing. They say well it doesn't matter if I got it wrong.
Why so many versions of God? It seems that every believer has their own ideas about God.
There appears to be as many versions of God as there are believers who believe in the existence of a God.
Broadly grouped according to religion, Islam/Allah, Hinduism/Brahman, Judaism/Yahweh, etc, with individuals having their own ideas.....if there is a God, why all this confusion?
No, I bet everyone thought it was the woman at the well when it was brought up.
Kent
You would lose that bet.
Again a cherry pick... my first reply was 'No one yet in this thread' a thread that had been running for some time, answered by someone else and then replied to in that context.
You weren't on this thread before now, but want to change the parameters.
Obviously I expect to be attacked by christians for following Christ and the Holy Spirit over fallible men.
Every true Christian is a fundamentalist. Every true Christian is an evangelical.
If a Christian read the Bible thy would know this.
I say Amen to this. The problem is the definition of fundamentalist is all misconstrued. In the context of the OP, a fundamentalist is defined as a dogmatic legalist. You and I would probably agree that a fundamentalist is one who practices the fundamentals. THE fundamental of Christianity is salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and his redemptive work. So, IMO the "grace people" are the real fundamentalists. I have found that the more I have comprehended the grace of God the better my conduct has gotten over time. I am much more merciful towards other people because I understand in part how merciful God has been to me and I hate to damage a person's chance at salvation with my big mouth telling them what I think....since I am a known Christian. Legalists are afraid that teaching grace gives people a "license to sin" when the reality is that people sin without a license all the time.
So where does that leave "the law" or a law, or a rule, or a doctrine? Romans 10:4 tells us that "Christ is the end of the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS for everyone that believes". So complying with a set of rules is not going to make us righteous in God's eyes. He has already "imputed" righteousness (right standing) to believers as a result of their faith.
I'll give you a for example that the Southern Baptists and the Holy Rollers can agree on. Both are very hard on drinking alcohol up to the point of telling you that Jesus was drinking grape juice in the Bible....the wine wasn't the same, didn't have alcohol in it whatever.....and if you are gonna be saved you are gonna have to give it up. The idea of not drinking is a real good one. Alcohol, particularly in excess is not good for your body, and if you become a drunk you are gonna ruin your life potentially. If you never start, you take alcoholism off the table. They see all this and make a good idea a law for righteousness. But based on scripture, this is FUNDAMENTALLY flawed.
Perhaps Jesus telling the woman taken in adultery to go and sin no more was more practical in the sense that he meant that committing adultery again would be a really bad idea seeing as how I just saved you from some guys who were fixing to kill you over it and I might be out of town next time.....as opposed to if you break this command I'm giving you, you are going to hell.
Every true Christian is a fundamentalist. Every true Christian is an evangelical.
If a Christian read the Bible thy would know this.
The argument can easily be made that every Christian evangelizes. I think that it's easier to talk about the calling of vocation that each believer has.
A true Christian a Fundamentalist and an evangelical. Depending on how that is applied based on definition and intent a bold step has already been taken toward legalism.
Fundamentalism & Evangelicalism both have definitions that are understood to refer to specific parts of Protestantism. By those definitions every Christian is NOT both; I would say it’s safe to say that the vast majority of the saints on high were not either of them.
Now do all Christians believe in salvation by grace?
What about by grace ALONE? I heard about a world-shaking event that centered around that debate that likely had a great many Christians on both sides.
What if one is a 5-Point Calvinist but can't decide whether to subscribe to Infralapsarianism vs. Supralapsarianism??
Quien Sabe,
GWB
Good question. At least there is an inner conflict in that case. When a fundamentalist discovers inner conflict he is on the verge of no longer being a fundamentalist.
BTW,
If I was born in 1951, would it be that I was fore-ordained to be a Pre-Millennial?
Antinomies Abound!
ya!
GWB
Yes and maybe.
If a five point Calvinist it may be necessary to determine if one has leanings toward Antinomianistic legalism or legalistic Antinomianism. I’m not a three, four or five point Calvinist but I seem to equally fall off both sides of the horse.
Thus gospel-grace and law-commands, Both bind and loose each other’s hands: They can’t agree on any terms, Yet hug each other in their arms.
Those that divide them cannot be The friends of truth and verity; Yet those that dare confound the two, Destroy them both, and gender woe.
This paradox none can decipher, That plow not with the gospel-heifer. . . .
To run to work, the law commands; The gospel gives me feet and hands: The one requires that I obey; The other does the pow’r convey.
Interesting Article GW. I've read a bit of Ferguson over the years. I've been down the road a way with the Puritan writers and some of the Old Scottish Presbyterians. I think that they missed the boat by overemphasizing the last paragraph that you posted.
A couple summers ago a Presbyterian fella was telling me about how he had improved over the years (synergistic sanctification). I asked him specifically how he had improved. He gave me quotes from the Westminster. I kept asking how he had specifically improved. When pushed he told me that he was more patient than he used to be. Not a good example of power conveyed for a guy in the faith as long as he had been a Christian.
I think it was Luther that said that God doesn't need your works but your neighbor does. Rather than the law being a demand, in Christ it becomes an example of how we serve the neighbor. I still seem to go back and forth between the two. It's hard to keep the middle ground.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
None of us are good really, but Christ said he had a plan for everyone, I believe him.
Why so many versions of God? It seems that every believer has their own ideas about God.
There appears to be as many versions of God as there are believers who believe in the existence of a God.
Broadly grouped according to religion, Islam/Allah, Hinduism/Brahman, Judaism/Yahweh, etc, with individuals having their own ideas.....if there is a God, why all this confusion?
Every one of those tries to work their way into heaven. There is no ultimate redeeming sacrifice. Christianity stands alone.
Ehesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
I'm not really sure how to respond to the idea of a belief system. I've kinda come to the conclusion that all religions in the world are about belief systems. Christianity stands out as being different. Christ kept it pretty simple when he said that all who believe have eternal life. Maybe all men are fundamentalists at heart because it's hard to find anybody who will let Christ's words stand as they are. Men want to add a bunch of do's and don't's to the proposition and make it a system of belief rather than something that is given to them
Interesting Article GW. I've read a bit of Ferguson over the years. I've been down the road a way with the Puritan writers and some of the Old Scottish Presbyterians. I think that they missed the boat by overemphasizing the last paragraph that you posted.
A couple summers ago a Presbyterian fella was telling me about how he had improved over the years (synergistic sanctification). I asked him specifically how he had improved. He gave me quotes from the Westminster. I kept asking how he had specifically improved. When pushed he told me that he was more patient than he used to be. Not a good example of power conveyed for a guy in the faith as long as he had been a Christian.
I think it was Luther that said that God doesn't need your works but your neighbor does. Rather than the law being a demand, in Christ it becomes an example of how we serve the neighbor. I still seem to go back and forth between the two. It's hard to keep the middle ground.
Beware of dialectical synergism!
“The Scriptures are shallow enough for a babe to come and drink without fear of drowning and deep enough for a theologians to swim in without ever touching the bottom"......... St. Jerome
9 because if you acknowledge and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord [recognizing His power, authority, and majesty as God], and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart a person believes [in Christ as Savior] resulting in his justification [that is, being made righteous—being freed of the guilt of sin and made acceptable to God]; and with the mouth he acknowledges and confesses [his faith openly], resulting in and confirming [his] salvation. Romans 10:9-10, Amplified Bible
9 And this I pray, that your love may abound more and more [displaying itself in greater depth] in real knowledge and in practical insight, 10 so that you may learn to recognize and treasure what is excellent [identifying the best, and distinguishing moral differences], and that you may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ [actually living lives that lead others away from sin]; 11 filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God [so that His glory may be both revealed and recognized]. Phillipians 1:9-11, Amplified Bible.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
Comparing western legalistic Christians to those Musloid head choppers is quite foolish and now I have a hard time taking you seriously even though I agree with much of what you said.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Yup. Not finding anything to "fundamentally" disagree with. And yes, I am a Christian...bought and paid for by the blood of Yeshua the Christ. It is a shame what some folks do to Grace.
Tim
Like going to a whore house ?🤦🏻♂️
You have to contextualize what I said. Think about the prophet Amos.
I know the story But going to a whore house, and having your wife become a prostitute, seems to be two different things I’m truly not trying to be augmentative Be well
I'm going to ask that Jesus' teachings and Paul's writings be closely and critically examined to see if they can be reconciled. I just do not believe Jesus will fault you for examining Paul. I understand if you have been SBC, Assembly of God, Pentecostal or whatever it can be painful to give up a cherished belief you have held for forty years. I was baptized a Southern Baptist over 40 years ago and still attend a SBC. There is no way this side of hell that Jesus' teachings and Paul's doctrine agree. Jesus message was not new and not a new road to salvation. He clearly said that. True repentance followed by works evident of repentance are the way clearly taught by Jesus and John the Baptist. Jesus by the way vouched for John. Now look into it and see if you can verify your thoughts on salvation if you leave Paul completely out of it. I notice that he is quoted most often and Jesus' clear statement that the law and the prophets would not pass away as long as heaven and earth endures are ignored. Go ahead and try to ratify your beliefs on salvation without quoting Paul.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
I'm not really sure how to respond to the idea of a belief system. I've kinda come to the conclusion that all religions in the world are about belief systems. Christianity stands out as being different. Christ kept it pretty simple when he said that all who believe have eternal life. Maybe all men are fundamentalists at heart because it's hard to find anybody who will let Christ's words stand as they are. Men want to add a bunch of do's and don't's to the proposition and make it a system of belief rather than something that is given to them
In a quick perusal of your posts, it seemed to me from the get-go you were trying, as the MSM does, to use the term "fundamentalism" to lump conservative Christians in with fundamentalist sects of Muslims and other groups that generally are terroristic. Fundamentalist Christians vary wildly from group to group but are, in general, simply conservative believers in Christ and the Bible. Christianity is greatly different from any other religion. As Rockchuck is trying to point out, at its core is the belief that there is nothing an individual can do to save himself. Salvation only comes through belief/faith in Jesus Christ and that faith is a gift from God. It comes from without, not from within. That is the huge difference between Christianity of any stripe and all other religions. Buzz words/terms like "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" usually come from sources that wish to put Christians in categories with other religions and liken them to them. They cannot be as Christianity is truly different.
A kind God is what we have. One Who holds everything together by strict adherence to the law and Who found a way to salvage His imperfect creation even while adhering to the last letter of that law. Praise God (Jesus) for ever and ever. Amen.
I'm going to ask that Jesus' teachings and Paul's writings be closely and critically examined to see if they can be reconciled. I just do not believe Jesus will fault you for examining Paul. I understand if you have been SBC, Assembly of God, Pentecostal or whatever it can be painful to give up a cherished belief you have held for forty years. I was baptized a Southern Baptist over 40 years ago and still attend a SBC. There is no way this side of hell that Jesus' teachings and Paul's doctrine agree. Jesus message was not new and not a new road to salvation. He clearly said that. True repentance followed by works evident of repentance are the way clearly taught by Jesus and John the Baptist. Jesus by the way vouched for John. Now look into it and see if you can verify your thoughts on salvation if you leave Paul completely out of it. I notice that he is quoted most often and Jesus' clear statement that the law and the prophets would not pass away as long as heaven and earth endures are ignored. Go ahead and try to ratify your beliefs on salvation without quoting Paul.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
I meant to also say ''there we go again quoting Paul to prove a point''.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
Do we throw Peter's writings out as well who called Paul "beloved" and his letters "scripture". 1 Peter 3: 15-16...."Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction".
So which one are you......ignorant or unstable? Those are not my words but Peter's.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
In reading post you make on other subjects I have learned what to expect from you and not very much is of value to me. The Bible is a complete book. It was made flesh and dwelt among us even. To say some of it is wrong would absolutely be wrong to me so I'll leave you with this.
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
Do we throw Peter's writings out as well who called Paul "beloved" and his letters "scripture". 1 Peter 3: 15-16...."Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction".
So which one are you......ignorant or unstable? Those are not my words but Peter's.
See if you can come up with Paul's doctrine of salvation by reading Jesus' teachings. I can't. I am asking you to throw aside Baptist etc. doctrine for a short while and critically compare the teachings of the entire bible and see if you can buttress Paul's claims about the new deal. It isn't there. I understand that casting aside something dearly held is painful. Very painful. Jesus warned about him.
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
I don't dispute the book (Revelation) that your quote references
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
God's Word tells us there are none good but one. That is God.
It might be well to remember that the bible, the New Testament in particular, was in enemy hands for centuries. The Old Testament would have been much harder to pollute. It had been around too long.
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
I don't dispute the book (Revelation) that your quote references
Can't pick and choose which to believe. Throughout history people have tried to change the standards to better fit their life situations and ideas. Maybe that standard stood in the way of some goal or something they believed would bring them happiness, not sure. Instead of adhering to false pretenses and rebelling against the Word, perhaps we should be asking for forgiveness. Seems like you just want to change the rules, therefore you really have no other option but to declare parts of God's word as mistakes, obsolete, or using other excuses instead of our own ignorance.
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
I don't dispute the book (Revelation) that your quote references
Can't pick and choose which to believe. Throughout history people have tried to change the standards to better fit their life situations and ideas. Maybe that standard stood in the way of some goal or something they believed would bring them happiness, not sure. Instead of adhering to false pretenses and rebelling against the Word, perhaps we should be asking for forgiveness. Seems like you just want to change the rules, therefore you really have no other option but to declare parts of God's word as mistakes, obsolete, or using other excuses instead of our own ignorance.
Read what you wrote ''people have tried to change the standards''. Paul maybe? You are right that we should be asking for forgiveness. Repentance and obedience is the constant theme. There is only one letter writer that deviates and calls the rest of "God's Word" obsolete. It wasn't me. I'm asking you to compare Jesus' teaching to Paul's doctrine and find out if they are congruent as to the law and salvation. If you have decent reading comprehension you will find out Paul doesn't agree with anyone on those things. Respectfully submitted for your consideration.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
Do we throw Peter's writings out as well who called Paul "beloved" and his letters "scripture". 1 Peter 3: 15-16...."Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction".
So which one are you......ignorant or unstable? Those are not my words but Peter's.
See if you can come up with Paul's doctrine of salvation by reading Jesus' teachings. I can't. I am asking you to throw aside Baptist etc. doctrine for a short while and critically compare the teachings of the entire bible and see if you can buttress Paul's claims about the new deal. It isn't there. I understand that casting aside something dearly held is painful. Very painful. Jesus warned about him.
So you have a greater understanding of the teachings of Jesus than the Apostle Peter? Mmmmkay. You have a greater understanding of Paul than Peter? Mmmmkay. You know Peter better than Jesus, who if deity, left a man in charge of his fledgling church that would rubber stamp a fraud? Mmmkay? You don't think Almighty God can watch over his word any better than to let generations of his people believe a lie because half his new testament was written by a fraud?
Far as I can tell the Gospels are riddled with images of Salvation by faith and grace. The prodigal son. Everyone's favorite funeral verse....John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life he who BELIEVES in me though he were dead yet shall he live and he who lives and BELIEVES in me shall never die". Said not one word about keeping any laws pertaining to salvation.
How about John 1:12: "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that BELIEVE on his name." Said not one word about keeping the law pertaining to salvation.
How about the Mark version of the 'great commission" “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who BELIEVES and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not BELIEVE will be condemned. Said not one word about keeping any laws as pertaining to salvation.
Finally the most well known verse of all John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever BELIEVES in him shall no perish but have everlasting life? Guess what? Said not one word about keeping laws as pertaining to salvation.
You could actually just log into blue letter bible and search the word "believe" in the new testament and maybe it would clear things up. Have you heard enough non Paul salvation by grace and faith scriptures yet? Brother it just hits you in the face OVER AND OVER.
Jesus did say the law would never pass away until heaven and earth did. It is going to stand for all time as our judge. You either keep it or you don't and no one ever did except Jesus whose obedience and righteousness was "imputed" to us who believe in and accept him. Otherwise its you against the law and it won't be pretty.
I do believe that genuine conversion will over time produce "fruit" of better conduct. Those works are not what saves but rather are a by product of what does. We all probably see people who say they are Christians who we wonder about. I've got a 93 year old uncle who has sat in church for over 50 years every time the doors opened and was ordained as a deacon but is one of the meanest, pettiest, most selfish people I know. There is no evidence of grace in him, no love, no kindness. I gravely doubt his salvation but have no doubt that his church did him no good at all. He may as well have went fishing and hunting on Sundays. I think he is the type that thinks he is gonna punch his ticket by going to church and giving them a few bucks and doing a little work for them. Good luck with that.
I cannot see this alleged "contradiction" in the scriptures that you see. With respect, I do not believe you ever spent much time reading Paul or much else in the actual Bible itself but perhaps read a book that someone, likely a Rabbinic Jew, wrote about Paul and think you really have something over on the rest of us. Or maybe you have just come by your confusion honestly. Either way, perhaps it is you who should cast aside something "dearly held".
What I can't figure is why, believing as you do, would you attend a Baptist church and get constantly hammered with the "Roman Road" to salvation? Gotta be aggravating. Some woman must be dragging you there.
So you have a greater understanding of the teachings of Jesus than the Apostle Peter? Mmmmkay. You have a greater understanding of Paul than Peter? Mmmmkay. You know Peter better than Jesus, who if deity, left a man in charge of his fledgling church that would rubber stamp a fraud? Mmmkay? You don't think Almighty God can watch over his word any better than to let generations of his people believe a lie because half his new testament was written by a fraud? Far as I can tell the Gospels are riddled with images of Salvation by faith and grace. The prodigal son. Everyone's favorite funeral verse....John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life he who BELIEVES in me though he were dead yet shall he live and he who lives and BELIEVES in me shall never die". Said not one word about keeping any laws pertaining to salvation. How about John 1:12: "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that BELIEVE on his name." Said not one word about keeping the law pertaining to salvation. How about the Mark version of the 'great commission" “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who BELIEVES and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not BELIEVE will be condemned. Said not one word about keeping any laws as pertaining to salvation. Finally the most well known verse of all John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever BELIEVES in him shall no perish but have everlasting life? Guess what? Said not one word about keeping laws as pertaining to salvation. You could actually just log into blue letter bible and search the word "believe" in the new testament and maybe it would clear things up. Have you heard enough non Paul salvation by grace and faith scriptures yet? Brother it just hits you in the face OVER AND OVER. Jesus did say the law would never pass away until heaven and earth did. It is going to stand for all time as our judge. You either keep it or you don't and no one ever did except Jesus whose obedience and righteousness was "imputed" to us who believe in and accept him. Otherwise its you against the law and it won't be pretty. I do believe that genuine conversion will over time produce "fruit" of better conduct. Those works are not what saves but rather are a by product of what does. We all probably see people who say they are Christians who we wonder about. I've got a 93 year old uncle who has sat in church for over 50 years every time the doors opened and was ordained as a deacon but is one of the meanest, pettiest, most selfish people I know. There is no evidence of grace in him, no love, no kindness. I gravely doubt his salvation but have no doubt that his church did him no good at all. He may as well have went fishing and hunting on Sundays. I think he is the type that thinks he is gonna punch his ticket by going to church and giving them a few bucks and doing a little work for them. Good luck with that. I cannot see this alleged "contradiction" in the scriptures that you see. With respect, I do not believe you ever spent much time reading Paul or much else in the actual Bible itself but perhaps read a book that someone, likely a Rabbinic Jew, wrote about Paul and think you really have something over on the rest of us. Or maybe you have just come by your confusion honestly. Either way, perhaps it is you who should cast aside something "dearly held". What I can't figure is why, believing as you do, would you attend a Baptist church and get constantly hammered with the "Roman Road" to salvation? Gotta be aggravating. Some woman must be dragging you there.
Well I guess we will have to be in disagreement. But as to your reference to the story about the prodigal son. It was an illustration of salvation through the act of confessing wrong and repentance. One of my favorite of the teachings of Jesus. I'll be thinking about your thoughts and hoping you examine the subject. A hard critical examination of a theory won't harm that theory if it is correct. I will continue to examine the subject. Thanks for your time. P.S. I do believe the last part of 2nd Peter was not authored by Peter. It doesn't follow the rest of the letter.
Yes. I had to be taken outside fundamentalists Christianity. Fundamentalist don’t preach the Gospel.
Quite a generality there….. so much that it verges on being just flat out laughable.
Humor is always anchored in truth.
No anchor nor humor here at all. To make the statement that “Fundamentalist don’t preach the gospel” is inaccurate to the point of being easily dismissed.
But, go ahead and define “fundamentalist” for me.
Edit to add: While you’re at it….. pls define “the gospel” for us…..
I'm pretty sure that I went a fairly long way toward defining fundamentalism and fundamentalists in the OP.
Fundamentalists are modern day Pharisees. They have not concept of the purpose of the law, what it does and what it means for the Christian. In one breath they will tell you that you are saved by grace and in the next breath demand that you follow the law as a means of being saved, staying saved, being sanctified etc.
That school of thought and teaching has nothing to do with the Gospel. Paul wrote a couple of books destroying those ideas.
No, you did not define fundamentalists… you just expressed your exaggerated and biased opinion of what bothers you and the hung the term “fundamentalist” on it. There are many modern day fundamentalists that are not only NOT Pharisees but also preach the gospel.
I suspect you do not have a good understanding of the fundamentals of Christianity nor of what the gospel is.
But, this is the ‘Fire and many good posts have been made….. carry on!
Peace was made between my Maker and I nearly 35 years ago.
We both appear to be very happy with the outcome.........................,
How do you know he is happy with it?
First, how do you know he is a "he"? As efw points out (correctly by my estimation)
Quote
As described, my read is that the fundamentalist posture is one of certainty rather than humble submission to a God who is beyond our ability to understand and to grace beyond our comprehension
. Because God is beyond my understanding and the grace I've received beyond my comprehension I personally refuse to label the Almighty with a human described gender.
Second, as I pointed out, society, my family, friends, and employers are all happy with the outcome. Are those not the results that teacher of 2000 years ago was attempting to get society and individuals in that society to?
Third, "we" talk every day and I've not had serious repercussions when following the directions I get, unlike what was happening in the past. Good enough for me, and if it's not good enough for you, take it up with God. Not me, please. Because I have a line to that Deity which is working well for me.
Why so many versions of God? It seems that every believer has their own ideas about God.
There appears to be as many versions of God as there are believers who believe in the existence of a God.
Broadly grouped according to religion, Islam/Allah, Hinduism/Brahman, Judaism/Yahweh, etc, with individuals having their own ideas.....if there is a God, why all this confusion?
Every one of those tries to work their way into heaven. There is no ultimate redeeming sacrifice. Christianity stands alone.
Ehesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
That doesn't really address the question of why there are countless versions of God with their contradictory theologies.
The God of Hinduism, Brahman, is nothing like the God of Islam, which differs from Christianity, Hindu enlightenment being nothing like Christian salvation, etc.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
Comparing western legalistic Christians to those Musloid head choppers is quite foolish and now I have a hard time taking you seriously even though I agree with much of what you said.
Originally Posted by keith_dunlap
Originally Posted by IZH27
Originally Posted by keith_dunlap
Originally Posted by Tarbe
Originally Posted by IZH27
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
Yup. Not finding anything to "fundamentally" disagree with. And yes, I am a Christian...bought and paid for by the blood of Yeshua the Christ. It is a shame what some folks do to Grace.
Tim
Like going to a whore house ?🤦🏻♂️
You have to contextualize what I said. Think about the prophet Amos.
I know the story But going to a whore house, and having your wife become a prostitute, seems to be two different things I’m truly not trying to be augmentative Be well
My intention was not to equate their actions but to point out the extremity of fundamentalism no matter the religion. The extreme is to always control a person or people based on a bunch of rules. That’s really as far as the comparison goes.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
I'm not really sure how to respond to the idea of a belief system. I've kinda come to the conclusion that all religions in the world are about belief systems. Christianity stands out as being different. Christ kept it pretty simple when he said that all who believe have eternal life. Maybe all men are fundamentalists at heart because it's hard to find anybody who will let Christ's words stand as they are. Men want to add a bunch of do's and don't's to the proposition and make it a system of belief rather than something that is given to them
In a quick perusal of your posts, it seemed to me from the get-go you were trying, as the MSM does, to use the term "fundamentalism" to lump conservative Christians in with fundamentalist sects of Muslims and other groups that generally are terroristic. Fundamentalist Christians vary wildly from group to group but are, in general, simply conservative believers in Christ and the Bible. Christianity is greatly different from any other religion. As Rockchuck is trying to point out, at its core is the belief that there is nothing an individual can do to save himself. Salvation only comes through belief/faith in Jesus Christ and that faith is a gift from God. It comes from without, not from within. That is the huge difference between Christianity of any stripe and all other religions. Buzz words/terms like "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" usually come from sources that wish to put Christians in categories with other religions and liken them to them. They cannot be as Christianity is truly different.
A kind God is what we have. One Who holds everything together by strict adherence to the law and Who found a way to salvage His imperfect creation even while adhering to the last letter of that law. Praise God (Jesus) for ever and ever. Amen.
That was never the intent of a the post. You have read into my posts something that isn’t there.
Unfortunately both the word fundamentalist and evangelical were not words assigned to Christians but schools of thought developed by Christians. These schools of thought “further defined” the faith. No matter the endeavor be it religious or secular the original begins to change when isms and ists are added.
Interesting Article GW. I've read a bit of Ferguson over the years. I've been down the road a way with the Puritan writers and some of the Old Scottish Presbyterians. I think that they missed the boat by overemphasizing the last paragraph that you posted.
A couple summers ago a Presbyterian fella was telling me about how he had improved over the years (synergistic sanctification). I asked him specifically how he had improved. He gave me quotes from the Westminster. I kept asking how he had specifically improved. When pushed he told me that he was more patient than he used to be. Not a good example of power conveyed for a guy in the faith as long as he had been a Christian.
I think it was Luther that said that God doesn't need your works but your neighbor does. Rather than the law being a demand, in Christ it becomes an example of how we serve the neighbor. I still seem to go back and forth between the two. It's hard to keep the middle ground.
Beware of dialectical synergism!
“The Scriptures are shallow enough for a babe to come and drink without fear of drowning and deep enough for a theologians to swim in without ever touching the bottom"......... St. Jerome
9 because if you acknowledge and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord [recognizing His power, authority, and majesty as God], and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart a person believes [in Christ as Savior] resulting in his justification [that is, being made righteous—being freed of the guilt of sin and made acceptable to God]; and with the mouth he acknowledges and confesses [his faith openly], resulting in and confirming [his] salvation. Romans 10:9-10, Amplified Bible
9 And this I pray, that your love may abound more and more [displaying itself in greater depth] in real knowledge and in practical insight, 10 so that you may learn to recognize and treasure what is excellent [identifying the best, and distinguishing moral differences], and that you may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ [actually living lives that lead others away from sin]; 11 filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God [so that His glory may be both revealed and recognized]. Phillipians 1:9-11, Amplified Bible.
ya!
GWB
I certainly see what you are saying as a a norm that is held high in many circles. I’ve yet to meet the man or woman who has accomplished even a bit of that my applying the law as a measure and marker. I’ve met a lot of people that think that they have and think that they are doing so.
They bear in common a self measurement of achievement based on their personal goodness as measured by the law rather than an assurance that is based on the work of Christ alone. There is no question that the life of faith will result in fruitfulness or works. The problem that I see arises when men try to define and codify those works.
Yes. I had to be taken outside fundamentalists Christianity. Fundamentalist don’t preach the Gospel.
Quite a generality there….. so much that it verges on being just flat out laughable.
Humor is always anchored in truth.
No anchor nor humor here at all. To make the statement that “Fundamentalist don’t preach the gospel” is inaccurate to the point of being easily dismissed.
But, go ahead and define “fundamentalist” for me.
Edit to add: While you’re at it….. pls define “the gospel” for us…..
I'm pretty sure that I went a fairly long way toward defining fundamentalism and fundamentalists in the OP.
Fundamentalists are modern day Pharisees. They have not concept of the purpose of the law, what it does and what it means for the Christian. In one breath they will tell you that you are saved by grace and in the next breath demand that you follow the law as a means of being saved, staying saved, being sanctified etc.
That school of thought and teaching has nothing to do with the Gospel. Paul wrote a couple of books destroying those ideas.
No, you did not define fundamentalists… you just expressed your exaggerated and biased opinion of what bothers you and the hung the term “fundamentalist” on it. There are many modern day fundamentalists that are not only NOT Pharisees but also preach the gospel.
I suspect you do not have a good understanding of the fundamentals of Christianity nor of what the gospel is.
But, this is the ‘Fire and many good posts have been made….. carry on!
Fundamentalism was a response to the liberalism in Christian doctrine that began to be prominent in the late 19th and early 20th century. Fundamentalism began as a counter movement to the liberal gospel of preachers such as Fosdick. The thoughts behind my original post begin at that point.
As with any good movement fundamentalism took roots and morphed into many different things but no longer represents its original purpose. That is a very good argument that the movement should not have been started in the first place.
The movement lived and flourished. Different Christian sects adopted the methodology and began to apply the teachings to different windmills rather than keeping with the foundational truths of the Gospel.
The landscape of American culture was ripe for such a movement to take hold. That landscape was well tilled and readied for seed by the onset and aftermath of the Revivalist movement and the widespread teaching of Wesleyan Christian Perfectionism doctrine. Both Wesley and Finney preached a Gospel of works righteousness rather than Grace.
Adding to the mix that the Protestant churches that established themselves in America were based in non conformity and self definition and the history of fundamentalism has a great foundation from which to launch.
I’ll stand by my statement that Christian Fundamentalism does not preach the Gospel but rather a gospel. That has to do with a misuse of the law and confusing the law as a means of Grace after salvation. Considering the American churches roots in the influence of Revivalism and Wesleyanism it isn’t hard to understand how we arrived at a broad embrace of fundamentalism.
Fundamentalist Christianity in America is much much more than a nod at “just following the Bible”. When it is taken to it’s full logical end it results in a liberal or conservative legalism. It produces practitioners who are judgmental, condemning and filled with self righteousness. We witness that regularly in posts made on the fire.
So you have a greater understanding of the teachings of Jesus than the Apostle Peter? Mmmmkay. You have a greater understanding of Paul than Peter? Mmmmkay. You know Peter better than Jesus, who if deity, left a man in charge of his fledgling church that would rubber stamp a fraud? Mmmkay? You don't think Almighty God can watch over his word any better than to let generations of his people believe a lie because half his new testament was written by a fraud? Far as I can tell the Gospels are riddled with images of Salvation by faith and grace. The prodigal son. Everyone's favorite funeral verse....John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life he who BELIEVES in me though he were dead yet shall he live and he who lives and BELIEVES in me shall never die". Said not one word about keeping any laws pertaining to salvation. How about John 1:12: "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that BELIEVE on his name." Said not one word about keeping the law pertaining to salvation. How about the Mark version of the 'great commission" “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who BELIEVES and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not BELIEVE will be condemned. Said not one word about keeping any laws as pertaining to salvation. Finally the most well known verse of all John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever BELIEVES in him shall no perish but have everlasting life? Guess what? Said not one word about keeping laws as pertaining to salvation. You could actually just log into blue letter bible and search the word "believe" in the new testament and maybe it would clear things up. Have you heard enough non Paul salvation by grace and faith scriptures yet? Brother it just hits you in the face OVER AND OVER. Jesus did say the law would never pass away until heaven and earth did. It is going to stand for all time as our judge. You either keep it or you don't and no one ever did except Jesus whose obedience and righteousness was "imputed" to us who believe in and accept him. Otherwise its you against the law and it won't be pretty. I do believe that genuine conversion will over time produce "fruit" of better conduct. Those works are not what saves but rather are a by product of what does. We all probably see people who say they are Christians who we wonder about. I've got a 93 year old uncle who has sat in church for over 50 years every time the doors opened and was ordained as a deacon but is one of the meanest, pettiest, most selfish people I know. There is no evidence of grace in him, no love, no kindness. I gravely doubt his salvation but have no doubt that his church did him no good at all. He may as well have went fishing and hunting on Sundays. I think he is the type that thinks he is gonna punch his ticket by going to church and giving them a few bucks and doing a little work for them. Good luck with that. I cannot see this alleged "contradiction" in the scriptures that you see. With respect, I do not believe you ever spent much time reading Paul or much else in the actual Bible itself but perhaps read a book that someone, likely a Rabbinic Jew, wrote about Paul and think you really have something over on the rest of us. Or maybe you have just come by your confusion honestly. Either way, perhaps it is you who should cast aside something "dearly held". What I can't figure is why, believing as you do, would you attend a Baptist church and get constantly hammered with the "Roman Road" to salvation? Gotta be aggravating. Some woman must be dragging you there.
Well I guess we will have to be in disagreement. But as to your reference to the story about the prodigal son. It was an illustration of salvation through the act of confessing wrong and repentance. One of my favorite of the teachings of Jesus. I'll be thinking about your thoughts and hoping you examine the subject. A hard critical examination of a theory won't harm that theory if it is correct. I will continue to examine the subject. Thanks for your time. P.S. I do believe the last part of 2nd Peter was not authored by Peter. It doesn't follow the rest of the letter.
Thank you for that and letting me "fuss" at you. You are one fine gentlemen and a brother despite "being in disagreement". My Dad and his earthly brothers used to sometimes argue over this stuff like cats and dogs at family gatherings. But they loved one another and always parted friends.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
Do we throw Peter's writings out as well who called Paul "beloved" and his letters "scripture". 1 Peter 3: 15-16...."Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction".
So which one are you......ignorant or unstable? Those are not my words but Peter's.
See if you can come up with Paul's doctrine of salvation by reading Jesus' teachings. I can't. I am asking you to throw aside Baptist etc. doctrine for a short while and critically compare the teachings of the entire bible and see if you can buttress Paul's claims about the new deal. It isn't there. I understand that casting aside something dearly held is painful. Very painful. Jesus warned about him.
I'm not a Baptist and want no part of the calvanism doctrine that so many of them cling to. My church roots go back to John Wesley. You're the first person I've ever heard condemn Paul. Paul wrote what the Holy Spirit directed him to write as did every person that is contributed to the Holy Bible. I take it from cover to cover as being what God said he would forever preserve. His word. For me to believe I have to believe as a child, Jesus himself said that. A child does not need a degree in theology to believe, they only need to believe what God expects of them. In my thoughts of your disdain for part of the Bible they lean towards you being a heretic in your thinking and what you promote here. I'll have no further discussion with you about any of this.
I'm going to ask that Jesus' teachings and Paul's writings be closely and critically examined to see if they can be reconciled. I just do not believe Jesus will fault you for examining Paul. I understand if you have been SBC, Assembly of God, Pentecostal or whatever it can be painful to give up a cherished belief you have held for forty years. I was baptized a Southern Baptist over 40 years ago and still attend a SBC. There is no way this side of hell that Jesus' teachings and Paul's doctrine agree. Jesus message was not new and not a new road to salvation. He clearly said that. True repentance followed by works evident of repentance are the way clearly taught by Jesus and John the Baptist. Jesus by the way vouched for John. Now look into it and see if you can verify your thoughts on salvation if you leave Paul completely out of it. I notice that he is quoted most often and Jesus' clear statement that the law and the prophets would not pass away as long as heaven and earth endures are ignored. Go ahead and try to ratify your beliefs on salvation without quoting Paul.
In a nutshell, you can't!
ALL truth, was NOT revealed/given/spoken/taught by JESUS, HE said so HIMself................. JOHN 16:12-15
A question: Has ANY part of the Law and the Prophets been done away with???
I'm going to ask that Jesus' teachings and Paul's writings be closely and critically examined to see if they can be reconciled. I just do not believe Jesus will fault you for examining Paul. I understand if you have been SBC, Assembly of God, Pentecostal or whatever it can be painful to give up a cherished belief you have held for forty years. I was baptized a Southern Baptist over 40 years ago and still attend a SBC. There is no way this side of hell that Jesus' teachings and Paul's doctrine agree. Jesus message was not new and not a new road to salvation. He clearly said that. True repentance followed by works evident of repentance are the way clearly taught by Jesus and John the Baptist. Jesus by the way vouched for John. Now look into it and see if you can verify your thoughts on salvation if you leave Paul completely out of it. I notice that he is quoted most often and Jesus' clear statement that the law and the prophets would not pass away as long as heaven and earth endures are ignored. Go ahead and try to ratify your beliefs on salvation without quoting Paul.
In a nutshell, you can't!
ALL truth, was NOT revealed/given/spoken/taught by JESUS, HE said so HIMself................. JOHN 16:12-15
A question: Has ANY part of the Law and the Prophets been done away with???
Who wrote this one...."Whoever keeps the whole law but stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker"??
Was it Paul? No it was James.
What I think we need to do is define what we mean by "the law". Is it the entire Torah? The Top 10? The golden rule? Good conduct worthy of the name Christian? They are all related. None of the Apostles condoned a Christian living like an unsaved member of the world. James said "faith without works is dead". Paul said, "shall we sin that grace may abound...GOD FORBID". Peter said, "a dog returns to its vomit". John said "no one born of God will continue in sin".
I think the easy error that gentile Christians make when they read the Old Testament is that they read it and put themselves in the place of an ancient Israelite living under the Mosaic law. We identify with David not Goliath. After all they were God's people even though they screwed up mightily and that is how we perceive ourselves and what we aspire to.
The trouble is we are Gentiles. The only way to be a fully fledged part of the Levitical Jewish system was to be born into it. The law made allowances for "strangers" living among the Israelites. There were certain requirements they were held to and certain ordinances they could participate in but other things they were not required to do and other things they could not participate in. Why? THEY WERE NOT JEWS! They were something else. You will hear Christians say that "they are not under the law" but guess what? Gentiles in the BC era were not under it either. Why? THEY WERE NOT JEWS! They were something else.
Another sticking point I think is that when we read the four Gospels, we put ourselves in the place of one of the disciples. Guess what? Jesus may have shown us mercy and given us "crumbs from the master's table" but folks like us would not have been considered for discipleship. Why? THEY WERE NOT JEWS! At the time Jesus was fulfilling his role as the Messiah of Israel. He was not yet the Savior of the world. He had not gone to the cross. The law of Moses was still in full effect. Jesus had some but very little interaction with Gentiles. 9 out of 10 times the folks he interacted with, preached to, argued with, corrected, and taught WERE JEWS under the Jewish law. Consider the narrative of Jesus healing the Roman centurion's servant in Luke 7. It says that the centurion was vouched for to Jesus by "Jewish Elders" because he "loved Israel and built them a synagogue". Jesus responded positively to his what.....FAITH and healed the servant. He did not ask him to become a Jew or a disciple.
As you likely know, gentile Christians came on board in the book of Acts....after the resurrection and ascension, after the day of Pentecost. The whole narrative with Cornelius, the Philippian jailer etc. It was a move of God totally out of left field......the leaders of the Church who were Jews didn't know what to do with these people. Eventually they had a council of the Apostles and decided that Gentile Christians did not have to become Jews but rather were told to stay away from Idols and sexual immorality.....that's it.
The idea that Paul made up something by himself that was in conflict with Jesus and the rest of the Apostles just don't hold water. All of them were in on it.
I’ve been on a few forums over the years. It seems that there is a cycle of some fundamentalist showing up with a fanatical fervor to school everyone up and convert them. Heck. They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians.
It’s a curiouser curiouser thing that Christian Fundamentalists are really not a lot different from the fundamentalist of other religions. They have it all figured out. No legitimate question be it difficult or simple goes without an answer. They “litrally” have it all figured out and an answer for everything.
When their beliefs are challenged they don’t answer directly but go to great lengths and blather on and on repeating some memorized apologetical argument to support their views. When that fails they resort to personal insult and or dehumanizing the person who is a threat to them by having ask simple questions.
They are not self critical or introspective which is a reflection of a deep seated belief that that they are somehow autonomously righteous.
They are big on law and commandments. Never mind that the whole of the Bible teaches that the law never did, never could and never will bring righteousness. It can’t. It wasn’t designed for that. But…..the fundamentalist drags everyone back to the law. If they were self critical and introspective they would realize that they are sinners.
Sinners he said! Ask a fundamentalist if he sins. That’s a fun experiment. Talk about making a guy squirm as his self righteousness is challenged. They will lie through their teeth and come up with all kinds of excuses or twisted definitions of what sin is and how they only sometimes sin.
They never realize that the expressed disbelief in their righteousness by those who claim no faith at all is a condemnation of exponential proportions.
I’m a Christian. Faith is important in my life. That being the case, were I faced with two choices, go to a fundamentalist church or go to a whore house I’d chose the whore house every time. It would be a much more honest transaction every single time and metaphorically appropriate.
I see you subscribe to the "Always use enough brush" train of thought.
Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
God's Word tells us there are none good but one. That is God.
^^ This ^^
Romans 3 10-18
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Romans 3:10 is Paul quoting an old testament scripture, I believe one of the Psalms. It was his habit, making the case for the Gospel using "the law and the prophets".
Folks, it all goes together, flows together and fits. You have to overlook a whole lot of agreement in your search for contradictions.
Everyone is right part of the time, Christ was right all the time. The contrast or contradictions highlight this and isn't a bad thing, probably the intent. You don't have to search for it it's in plain sight.
Again not reading the bible and at least the new testament straight through, leaves you without the full understanding of Christ, his intent, manner, reasoning... and the contrast of the other human players and their contradictions.
So throw everything Paul wrote out of the Bible? What do we do with this? 2 timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: I've never gotten the idea that Paul was against good works. Works are the fruit of salvation.
That would be a good start. See if you can come up with Paul's plan by reading Jesus' teachings or for that matter anywhere else in the old or new testament. There is no coming to consciousness without pain as someone once wisely noted. Should we throw away Jesus and John or Paul if there is a dichotomy in their teachings?
Do we throw Peter's writings out as well who called Paul "beloved" and his letters "scripture". 1 Peter 3: 15-16...."Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction".
So which one are you......ignorant or unstable? Those are not my words but Peter's.
See if you can come up with Paul's doctrine of salvation by reading Jesus' teachings. I can't. I am asking you to throw aside Baptist etc. doctrine for a short while and critically compare the teachings of the entire bible and see if you can buttress Paul's claims about the new deal. It isn't there. I understand that casting aside something dearly held is painful. Very painful. Jesus warned about him.
Jesus brought the word to the Jews. He then handpicked Paul to carry it to the Gentiles. In every city, Paul went first to the local synagogue to start preaching. He quickly made Jewish converts who then assisted him in converting Gentiles and setting up churches. The message of salvation was the same as Jesus taught but needed adapting to reach those who had never been under the law. Of necessity, his approach to the word had to be different with the Gentiles as they had no law to build on like the Jews did. Jesus picked Paul because he had the ability to hit home, to tell it like it is. Those today who reject Paul are dodging the truth.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
I believe in God. "Just dont beleive in alot of what man has decided to be beleived.
And it is nice to see you guys talking about it all in a back and forth rational manner."
Something YOU are incapable of because you despise God's Word. Everyone can read here and knows how you turn everyone away from the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ when I post that good news or so much as a sermon. When a ravenous wolf in sheep's clothing comes along you talk like you have some sense for you have much in common...because you do.
"Something that wouldnt happen if HC and his lying deceitful ways were participating on this thread.
I think God has a special place for the HC my way or the highway types who think they are God's representatives on the planet..."
It is your Pope, (which means "Father"), who claims to be God's Vicar on Earth.
I am doing my Lord's will when I carry out His Great Commission. He made His message VERY clear. You and your buddies do everything you can to stop that message of His Free Gift of heaven when someone dies because you serve your father. I speak truthfully, plainly and boldly because I spend time with Jesus Christ, Whom you boldly refer to with an "F" in the middle of his holy Name. What does that letter stand for Rene?
You say "my way or the highway types." Do you think I'm narrow minded in the message I share? It's NOT MY way that I have ever given. I don't have my own way. "Strait" in the bible means NARROW.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." Matthew 7:13, 14
According to Jesus, He is The narrow/strait gate. Few go to heaven because they try to climb in some other way. That's the broad way that leads to destruction....hell. Jesus said that HE is that way, not any other way...that goes for the church that you have nothing to do with, but expect everyone else to embrace.
John 14:6 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
Legit question….
OT “law” can be categorized in three ways….
Civil Law
Ceremonial Law
Spiritual Law
In my current view, Jesus’ sacrificial death… being made sin for us…. Paying our sin penalty…. Has made both Civil Law and Ceremonial Law to be set aside in favor of the New Covenant.
God’s Spiritual Law of the Old Testament…. In my view…. Remains intact and unchanged.
Many do not distinguish between these three “laws.” In fact, one could argue that both “Ceremonial and Civil ‘Law’ “ were peculiar to the tribes of Israel and were “extinguished” at the death on the cross and destruction of the temple…. 70 AD or so…..
If one does not distinguish the “laws” as shown …or does not understand the New Covenant, misunderstanding will be the result.
Edit to add: Got a busy afternoon ahead, and will not be back until late or even tomorrow…… perhaps some else could post examples of the three types of laws…..?
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
Legit question….
OT “law” can be categorized in three ways….
Civil Law
Ceremonial Law
Spiritual Law
In my current view, Jesus’ sacrificial death… being made sin for us…. Paying our sin penalty…. Has made both Civil Law and Ceremonial Law to be set aside in favor of the New Covenant.
God’s Spiritual Law of the Old Testament…. In my view…. Remains intact and unchanged.
Many do not distinguish between these three “laws.” In fact, one could argue that both “Ceremonial and Civil ‘Law’ “ were peculiar to the tribes of Israel and were “extinguished” at the death on the cross and destruction of the temple…. 70 AD or so…..
If one does not distinguish the “laws” as shown …or does not understand the New Covenant, misunderstanding will be the result.
If that be true, and I believe that it is then................ 'Heaven and Earth have passed away' '...if even one jot or tittle................'
...They have the inexplicable compulsion to convert Christians....
That has always been a real puzzle to me as well - "You maybe are a Christian in the eyes of some other denomination/sect, but you need to become a Christian under our auspices for it to count".
Along similar lines, I grew up in a denomination that seemed to think that a person's Christianity was something that somehow was lost or faded away as time passed, so it was deemed necessary to constantly redeclare one's standing as a Christian.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
Jesus was talking to the Jews who were and are under the law. He chose Paul to go to the Gentiles are not under it.
Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
The Jews were and are under the law. The Gentiles are not.
14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!
Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!
There are no more jews and gentiles............ EPH 2:13-15
Further, the Law was only to last until the seed came...... GAL 3:19
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards Originally Posted by IZH27 Originally Posted by lvmiker Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
I'm not really sure how to respond to the idea of a belief system. I've kinda come to the conclusion that all religions in the world are about belief systems. Christianity stands out as being different. Christ kept it pretty simple when he said that all who believe have eternal life. Maybe all men are fundamentalists at heart because it's hard to find anybody who will let Christ's words stand as they are. Men want to add a bunch of do's and don't's to the proposition and make it a system of belief rather than something that is given to them In a quick perusal of your posts, it seemed to me from the get-go you were trying, as the MSM does, to use the term "fundamentalism" to lump conservative Christians in with fundamentalist sects of Muslims and other groups that generally are terroristic. Fundamentalist Christians vary wildly from group to group but are, in general, simply conservative believers in Christ and the Bible. Christianity is greatly different from any other religion. As Rockchuck is trying to point out, at its core is the belief that there is nothing an individual can do to save himself. Salvation only comes through belief/faith in Jesus Christ and that faith is a gift from God. It comes from without, not from within. That is the huge difference between Christianity of any stripe and all other religions. Buzz words/terms like "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" usually come from sources that wish to put Christians in categories with other religions and liken them to them. They cannot be as Christianity is truly different.
A kind God is what we have. One Who holds everything together by strict adherence to the law and Who found a way to salvage His imperfect creation even while adhering to the last letter of that law. Praise God (Jesus) for ever and ever. Amen.
That was never the intent of a the post. You have read into my posts something that isn’t there.
Unfortunately both the word fundamentalist and evangelical were not words assigned to Christians but schools of thought developed by Christians. These schools of thought “further defined” the faith. No matter the endeavor be it religious or secular the original begins to change when isms and ists are added.
Originally Posted by IZH27
I’ll stand by my statement that Christian Fundamentalism does not preach the Gospel but rather a gospel. That has to do with a misuse of the law and confusing the law as a means of Grace after salvation. Considering the American churches roots in the influence of Revivalism and Wesleyanism it isn’t hard to understand how we arrived at a broad embrace of fundamentalism.
Fundamentalist Christianity in America is much much more than a nod at “just following the Bible”. When it is taken to it’s full logical end it results in a liberal or conservative legalism. It produces practitioners who are judgmental, condemning and filled with self righteousness. We witness that regularly in posts made on the fire.
You just proved my point. I know of no sect that calls itself "Fundamentalist". There may be one, but I don't know of it. Lots of churches identify with fundamental Christian beliefs. It's a far cry from a Fundamentalist as far as Islam is concerned. AFAIK the term could be applied to either a faith-based Church or a works based one.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
Legit question….
OT “law” can be categorized in three ways….
Civil Law
Ceremonial Law
Spiritual Law
In my current view, Jesus’ sacrificial death… being made sin for us…. Paying our sin penalty…. Has made both Civil Law and Ceremonial Law to be set aside in favor of the New Covenant.
God’s Spiritual Law of the Old Testament…. In my view…. Remains intact and unchanged.
Many do not distinguish between these three “laws.” In fact, one could argue that both “Ceremonial and Civil ‘Law’ “ were peculiar to the tribes of Israel and were “extinguished” at the death on the cross and destruction of the temple…. 70 AD or so…..
If one does not distinguish the “laws” as shown …or does not understand the New Covenant, misunderstanding will be the result.
If that be true, and I believe that it is then................ 'Heaven and Earth have passed away' '...if even one jot or tittle................'
Still trying to get out of the house..but…correct me if I am wrong, but the jot and tittle comment was made by Jesus and was BEFORE the death on the cross….. so, no issue here at all.
It is like this if I were on a ship. The captain gives orders and instructions that are to be acknowledged and obeyed. Now a stowaway comes around saying the captain's orders are not valid. Says he has talked to the captain and things are changed.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
Legit question….
OT “law” can be categorized in three ways….
Civil Law
Ceremonial Law
Spiritual Law
In my current view, Jesus’ sacrificial death… being made sin for us…. Paying our sin penalty…. Has made both Civil Law and Ceremonial Law to be set aside in favor of the New Covenant.
God’s Spiritual Law of the Old Testament…. In my view…. Remains intact and unchanged.
Many do not distinguish between these three “laws.” In fact, one could argue that both “Ceremonial and Civil ‘Law’ “ were peculiar to the tribes of Israel and were “extinguished” at the death on the cross and destruction of the temple…. 70 AD or so…..
If one does not distinguish the “laws” as shown …or does not understand the New Covenant, misunderstanding will be the result.
If that be true, and I believe that it is then................ 'Heaven and Earth have passed away' '...if even one jot or tittle................'
Still trying to get out of the house..but…correct me if I am wrong, but the jot and tittle comment was made by Jesus and was BEFORE the death on the cross….. so, no issue here at all.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
Nope, not passed away at that moment…. Jesus still alive…..
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
Nope, not passed away at that moment…. Jesus still alive…..
My point is that if ANY of the OT, Old Law, HAS indeed passed away, is gone, non longer in force, THEN 'heaven and earth have passed away'........... THAT's what HE said!
Heaven and earth haven't passed away yet. I can understand Paul's problem with his doctrine. He never talked to Jesus and he didn't have the gospels to know that Jesus' teachings contradicted him. It is notable that the Roman government thought he was important enough to spirit him away on a ship when things got hot on him for lying.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
Nope, not passed away at that moment…. Jesus still alive…..
My point is that if ANY of the OT, Old Law, HAS indeed passed away, is gone, non longer in force, THEN 'heaven and earth have passed away'........... THAT's what HE said!
What do you think Jesus is referring to when he speaks of “all being fulfilled?”
Did that happen?
Edit: if “all has been fulfilled”, then there is no issue.
Second edit: “Heaven and earth” will/would not pass away…. And only if they did…. Which they won’t…. Only would the law go away…… UNLESS…. “All was fulfilled” …. Which it was when Jesus “fulfilled” the law by dying on the cross.
All ok here…. You may want to read up on “Jesus fulfilled the law”
It's a thorny problem. The words "heaven and earth pass away" are there and are unambiguous. Cannot get past that. Obviously Paul didn't realize Jesus said that. Before it was over the Roman government had to put Paul in their version of a witness protection program.
It's a thorny problem. The words "heaven and earth pass away" are there and are unambiguous. Cannot get past that. Obviously Paul didn't realize Jesus said that. Before it was over the Roman government had to put Paul in their version of a witness protection program.
Read some commentaries…
My read on it is that not one jot or tittle will pass will pass away….until “Heaven and earth pass away”……OR…. All is fulfilled.
Jesus is saying that the law stands…. Nothing will change God’s Law…. until one of two things happen…. Heavens pass away…. Which implies God were cease…. OR… all is fulfilled….,the law fulfilled by Jesus death on the cross.
This endorses the “permanence” of God and His law…. It also points,out that there is only ONE act/occuren e that can change the condemnation of sin in God’s law…. The sacrificial death of,the Son.
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
To me, yes; THAT law has passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc.. The verse you referred to, where He said “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” The highlighted part of that verse is pretty significant. And He clearly said that He came to fulfill all that was written in the Law and the Prophets. All of it pointed to Him, and He accomplished what the Law required. He did fulfill it, just like He said He came to do. The sacrifices stopped because Jesus fulfilled all that they pointed to...He was the ‘final’ sacrifice for sins. The priesthood stopped...the one that stood between God and those who worshipped Him. The physical temple stopped...it was no longer the geographical center of worship because God now lived within His followers...‘they’ themselves were the temple. “Jesus is the end of the Law.”
The Law had a built-in expiration date. When Jesus said that He came to fulfill it, He meant that He came to bring it to a designated end. He didn’t come to abolish...as in ‘destroy’...the validity of it, or undermine the credibility of it. He came to bring it to a designated end. If the Law were a plane, He was landing it; if the Law were a speech, He was concluding it; if the Law were a homework assignment, He was completing it.
Jesus said nothing in the law would “disappear” until everything in it was “fulfilled.” Once it was “fulfilled” however, the law would begin to disappear. Which is exactly what happened.
To me, when He said “It is finished” from the cross, He was announcing that the Old Covenant that He came to fulfill was at last fulfilled. And through His sacrifice, a New Covenant, a better and broader covenant was bring established between God and ALL who would choose to participate.
Don’t. You have some excellent posts on this thread which are very insightful, and I have gleaned a lotta good stuff from them. The same can be said for you Rock Chuck. Thanks, to both of ya’.
Something that has served me well is to realize I could be wrong. So I will again give my distrust of Paul a critical look by analyzing what I see to be his contradictions of Jesus. The bible is pretty short version of a huge amount of subject matter and I do believe keeping an eye out for things the self serving Roman church added in or removed is a good idea. As I earlier stated the old testament would have been much harder to tamper with due to being in circulation for so many centuries. There were gospels that for some reason or another were not canonized by Constantine's council while for instance the book of Hebrews whose author is unknown was included. And I'm not buying it that God stepped in a saw to it that the bible was complete and accurate. God's self proclaimed agency here on earth has done so much dirt that their word doesn't amount to a hill of beans. In addition to knowing I could be wrong being a bit suspicious has also served me well.
Has any part of The Law and Prophets been done away with, dispensed with, no longer in force, etc.???
When you say “The Law and Prophets” above, are you referring to the books that we call the Old Testament, or are you referring to the Mosaic Law that we call the Old Covenant...?
Whatever JESUS was referring to in Matt 5:18............. has any of THAT law passed away/stopped/dispensed with/no longer in force, etc. I think it's the Old Law, old Covenant, the mosaic Law............
It all passed away for those who chose to Believe Jesus was the Son of God who died for our sins and rose from the grave.
What was left or started anew, was the Golden Rule, the Holy Spirit, and the Resurrection of the Lord. We we will also Rise as He did, because He did.
DEUT 32:1 Moses said 'Give ear oh ye heavens, and hear oh ye earth' - he was speaking to the nation if Israel.
ISA 1:2 Isaiah said 'hear oh heavens, and give ear oh earth' he was writing to the nation of Israel.
ISA 51:16 GOD says ' I have put my word in your mouth (speaking to the nation of Israel) to plant the heavens and found the earth, and to say thou art ZION'
These passages are not talking about Planets and Stars, Israel was addressed as, and called heaven and earth, GOD had not put HIS words in anyone when he made the Sun, Moon and Stars.............
And it's possible that when JESUS said 'Heaven and Earth', HE was also talking about the nation of Israel, which passed away, ceased to be, ended in the first century. Coincident with the passing of the Old Law...
After Jesus was crucified, religious Israel wrestled for the next 40 years with the internal tension created by Jesus’ New Covenant. They tried hard to stamp it out, but it kept growing. Due to the tireless efforts of Apostle Paul and others, Jews throughout the Roman Empire began abandoning their strict adherence to the Law and started following the resurrected Jesus.
Then the transition came to a quick end, on August 6th in AD 70. The four-year war between Rome and the Jewish rebels came to a violent conclusion. The Jewish temple was looted and burned and razed to the ground. Its destruction signaled the end of ancient Judaism. The words of the Old Covenant were preserved, but Israel’s ability to live in accordance with those words disappeared in a day.
Ancient Judaism...as prescribed by Moses at Mount Sinai...ceased to exist. To use Jesus’ term, it “disappeared.”
After Jesus was crucified, religious Israel wrestled for the next 40 years with the internal tension created by Jesus’ New Covenant. They tried hard to stamp it out, but it kept growing. Due to the tireless efforts of Apostle Paul and others, Jews throughout the Roman Empire began abandoning their strict adherence to the Law and started following the resurrected Jesus.
Then the transition came to a quick end, on August 6th in AD 70. The four-year war between Rome and the Jewish rebels came to a violent conclusion. The Jewish temple was looted and burned and razed to the ground. Its destruction signaled the end of ancient Judaism. The words of the Old Covenant were preserved, but Israel’s ability to live in accordance with those words disappeared in a day.
Ancient Judaism...as prescribed by Moses at Mount Sinai...ceased to exist. To use Jesus’ term, it “disappeared.”
Yes! the words of the writer of Hebrews, '...whatever is growing old, is ready to disappear...' he was speaking of the 'Old Way'.
Anybody studied much of what the Eastern Orthodox have to say? I just found a YouTube channel that has proven rather interesting. This video (nothing to do with what we’re discussing here) I found pretty awesome:
Some of you are probably thinking what that video clip I posted in the middle of this discussion had any bearing on the thread itself.
Nothing, just my way of saying, let us not miss the pure joy of the gospel in all the superfluous stuff.
The Bible is meditation literature. It is meant for a lifetime of reading and ruminating over. (There are people with doctorates that spend a lifetime on one section of the Bible) You can never be done with it. It is an onion with never ending layers. And we are all understanding at different layers on the onion. So of course there will be differences of opinions. We must humble ourselves . Something you are steadfast positive of today, you may realize you didn’t understand at all years from now
ALL truth, was NOT revealed/given/spoken/taught by JESUS, HE said so HIMself................. JOHN 16:12-15
That is such a ‘great’ point. Thanks so much for pointing it out.
“I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me what he will make known to you.” - Jesus
Without the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ applied personally to me (the gospel as laid out in 1Corinthians 15:1-4) I A M S U N K. With the blood of Christ applied by faith, (Romans 3:25) I am given, as a free gift the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.
I'm under the blood. I am complete in him - - - - F O R E V E R.
All other discussion of fundamentalism is twaddle. Have you been born again by believing in the shed blood of Jesus Christ by faith? NO WORKS INVOLVED? You have E T E R N A L life. If you are not, a fiery Hell awaits you F O R E V E R!!!!!
Jesus told the disciples who he sent out to teach that if a town wouldn't listen, shake the dust from their feet as they left. This passage was almost written for Christians posting on the Fire.
Mat 10:14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. 16 Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
Without the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ applied personally to me (the gospel as laid out in 1Corinthians 15:1-4) I A M S U N K. With the blood of Christ applied by faith, (Romans 3:25) I am given, as a free gift the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.
I'm under the blood. I am complete in him - - - - F O R E V E R.
All other discussion of fundamentalism is twaddle. Have you been born again by believing in the shed blood of Jesus Christ by faith? NO WORKS INVOLVED? You have E T E R N A L life. If you are not, a fiery Hell awaits you F O R E V E R!!!!!
After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I think RJY66 made a good comment regarding that when he said “The problem is the definition of fundamentalist is all misconstrued. In the context of the OP, a fundamentalist is defined as a dogmatic legalist. You and I would probably agree that a fundamentalist is one who practices the fundamentals. THE fundamental of Christianity is salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and his redemptive work. So, IMO the "grace people" are the real fundamentalists.” It appears to mean different things to different people. AND I do agree with the highlighted part of his comment BIG TIME.
Jesus told the disciples who he sent out to teach that if a town wouldn't listen, shake the dust from their feet as they left. This passage was almost written for Christians posting on the Fire.
Mat 10:14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. 16 Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
What do you do when the false prophets follow you from thread to thread or town to town attempting to prevent others from turning to faith in Christ? THAT is the reality of what's going on. And then there are those like Elymas...
After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I think RJY66 made a good comment regarding that when he said “The problem is the definition of fundamentalist is all misconstrued. In the context of the OP, a fundamentalist is defined as a dogmatic legalist. You and I would probably agree that a fundamentalist is one who practices the fundamentals. THE fundamental of Christianity is salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ and his redemptive work. So, IMO the "grace people" are the real fundamentalists.” It appears to mean different things to different people. AND I do agree with the highlighted part of his comment BIG TIME.
Wow antlers! You win the truth award that reveals the Elymas OP's deception against Biblical Christianity!
Up until the 1980s the term "Fundamentals" meant something definitive. At that point it refered to those who held to the basic doctrines of traditional christianity. These were established to differentiate between the popularized changes that were departing from the faith and the orthodox/ long accepted beliefs held primarily by the southern Baptists and evangelical christianity. At one point they started teaching evolution in their Bible college. There were some that had serious problems with that. It wasn't the liberals who objected to evolutionism however.
By the Iraq war, they started popularizing the term fundamentalist.with the Muslim religion. The liberal media and liberal pastors started conflating the two religions by using the term out of context and misapplying it as the OP has obviously done.
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging.
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
Without the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ applied personally to me (the gospel as laid out in 1Corinthians 15:1-4) I A M S U N K. With the blood of Christ applied by faith, (Romans 3:25) I am given, as a free gift the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.
I'm under the blood. I am complete in him - - - - F O R E V E R.
All other discussion of fundamentalism is twaddle. Have you been born again by believing in the shed blood of Jesus Christ by faith? NO WORKS INVOLVED? You have E T E R N A L life. If you are not, a fiery Hell awaits you F O R E V E R!!!!!
Jesus told the disciples who he sent out to teach that if a town wouldn't listen, shake the dust from their feet as they left. This passage was almost written for Christians posting on the Fire.
Mat 10:14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. 16 Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
What do you do when the false prophets follow you from thread to thread or town to town attempting to prevent others from turning to faith in Christ? THAT is the reality of what's going on. And then there are those like Elymas...
Paul dealt with them all the time. The false teachers he wrote about so often were either Jews or agnostics who were lead by Satan to fight against Paul and others who were spreading the word.
Jesus told the disciples who he sent out to teach that if a town wouldn't listen, shake the dust from their feet as they left. This passage was almost written for Christians posting on the Fire.
Mat 10:14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. 16 Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
What do you do when the false prophets follow you from thread to thread or town to town attempting to prevent others from turning to faith in Christ? THAT is the reality of what's going on. And then there are those like Elymas...
Paul dealt with them all the time. The false teachers he wrote about so often were either Jews or agnostics who were lead by Satan to fight against Paul and others who were spreading the word.
He sure did. They even followed him from town to town. He kept on Preaching the gospel as you and a few of our brothers here have already expressed so clearly. Since the Elymas started this thread, I noticed that it doesn't get the typical attacks as it normally does. Maybe the devil's are waiting to see how they can misdirect and demonize the Bible believers first?
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
Psalm 8
What is man(who am I?) that HE would think of me???
Is it easy? NO, learned this week that an Afghan student of Freed-Hardeman, IIRC, was shot, along with his family this past week in Afghanistan, for abandoning Islam and preaching the Gospel.
Paul dealt with them all the time. The false teachers he wrote about so often were either Jews or agnostics who were lead by Satan to fight against Paul and others who were spreading the word.
Poor old Paul. In Acts 21 the Christians figured him out. It took the Roman military to spirit him away to safety. He had a pretty nice gig in Rome until the leadership violently changed hands as it was wont to do. After that according to some accounts Nero had him killed. I notice in 2nd Timothy he states that "all in Asia'' had turned against him. In the Revelation of Jesus Christ chapter 2 Jesus specifically commends Ephesus in Asia for outing the false apostles.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
We are so very fortunate to live in America, where followers of Jesus are NOT persecuted...at least not in comparison to early believers...or even to what believers in other places like North Korea and many Islamic-governed countries face, where believers can be imprisoned and even put to death for their faith.
Do you think it’s difficult for people in America to follow Jesus...? Do you think it’s better for people to have to struggle to follow Jesus...?
Paul dealt with them all the time. The false teachers he wrote about so often were either Jews or agnostics who were lead by Satan to fight against Paul and others who were spreading the word.
Poor old Paul. In Acts 21 the Christians figured him out. It took the Roman military to spirit him away to safety. He had a pretty nice gig in Rome until the leadership violently changed hands as it was wont to do. After that according to some accounts Nero had him killed. I notice in 2nd Timothy he states that "all in Asia'' had turned against him. In the Revelation of Jesus Christ chapter 2 Jesus specifically commends Ephesus in Asia for outing the false apostles.
Huh? It was the Jews who beat him and tried to kill him, not the Christians. He was rescued from the Jews by the Romans who had a duty to keep the peace. In Rome he was under house arrest. As a citizen, he had many rights that a non-citizen didn't have. If he hadn't been a citizen, he'd likely have been in a dungeon. Many scholars believe that Paul was released after testifying before Caesar and made another missionary journey before coming back to be killed by Nero. The Bible doesn't say that but apparently there are indications of it in other writings.
Well now, the early Christians were mostly observant Jews as was Jesus. Paul was obviously in disrepute among the Christians that knew Jesus. Paul himself lamented to Timothy that all in Asia (maybe Gentiles?) had turned against him. His rescue by the Romans seems suspect, as if he was their man. I'm going to think on this. I could be wrong. In any case I hope Paul came to repentance if he was who I think he was.
Paul was suspect among the Christian Jews until the apostles accepted him. Then he was wholly accepted and supported in his work. You brought up Acts 21. Go back and read it. Paul was strongly supported by the Jewish converts. It was the Jewish leaders who were after him.
Yes, they have. You are thinking like a westerner. To the OT Jew, Heaven and earth represented the Priesthood and the People. They "passed away" in 70AD.
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
Growing up my roll model was my Grandpa. He lived as close a perfect life as anyone I ever saw. He was the real thing when it came to a Christian too and he made it look more appealing than anyone I ever knew. With that being said he had things to overcome. Our family was the biggest as so many have not taken up the way. I understand what you men by not all of it being easy but in the end it's well worth it.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
We are so very fortunate to live in America, where followers of Jesus are NOT persecuted...at least not in comparison to early believers...or even to what believers in other places like North Korea and many Islamic-governed countries face, where believers can be imprisoned and even put to death for their faith.
Do you think it’s difficult for people in America to follow Jesus...? Do you think it’s better for people to have to struggle to follow Jesus...?
A couple in our church have a daughter who spent several years as a missionary in an Islamic country. It was and still is a tightly held secret. Being a Christian there was a capital offense. They don't say what country she was in because there are missionaries still there and it could be a death sentence for them if caught. They say that Muslims are hungry for the word, especially the women. Women missionaries have great success in those countries making converts to the Lord.
The question of Paul constantly comes up. He's loved and hated by Christians so what was he?
Consider who Paul was. He was a Pharisee, trained by one of the leading Jewish scholars of the time, Gamaliel. That put him as one of the upcoming men in Judaism. One of the requirements to become a Pharisee was to be married. It's believed that Paul had been married but was likely widowed. He never says so, though. He was a fire and brimstone Jew who hated Christians with a passion, thinking he was doing God's work. Then he met Jesus. Most of us meet him through the Bible or by being convinced of the truth by friends or maybe a missionary. Paul met him head on, getting knocked down in the dirt and slapped along side the head. Jesus knew what Paul was capable of and hand picked him to be the leading missionary of all time. Jesus also said that he would teach Paul what he would suffer for doing his work. And Paul did suffer. He was beaten and imprisoned. He was chased out of cities and came close to being murdered any number of times. In the end he was murdered by Nero. Satan was desperate to stop the spread of the word and needed to stop Paul to do it. God protected Paul and Satan failed but Paul went through some rough times. Even today it still goes on. Many Christians denigrate him and say he preached a religion not from Jesus. That's not true at all. Jesus came to the Jews and he taught a message specifically to them. All of the disciples were Jews because that's who Jesus came for initially. The OT says that the Jews would reject him and that's what they did. It was time to go beyond the Jews and Jesus picked Paul specifically to do the job. After his conversion, Paul disappeared into the desert for 3 years. There are hints in the Bible that he spent that time being taught by Jesus personally. An apostle was, by definition, one who had been taught by Jesus to be a teacher and Paul claimed that title. When Paul came back, he was on fire and it never went out. The Jews were under the law and Jesus represented that law. The Gentiles were NOT under it and never had been. Paul didn't teach the law to them because it didn't apply to them. The Jews and Gentiles were entirely different and had to be approached differently. That's where the conflicts came. The other apostles were all under the law and had to be taught that it didn't apply in the case of the Gentiles. It took some compromising before they accepted that fact. Peter ran into it head on when he met Cornelius. The idea that a Gentile could be a spirit filled believer shocked their systems and entirely changed the church. But, it prepared them for sending Paul out into the Gentile world. God used Cornelius to prepare them for what He was going to do.
I've heard it said that Paul invented the things he'd done and how he'd been converted. However, Luke investigated carefully what he wrote in Luke and Acts. Luke didn't get his information from Paul. He got much of it from the people he talked to, witness to the events. He would have talked to Ananias about how Jesus sent him to restore Paul's eyesight and how Jesus said that he would teach Paul what he must suffer for the word. Luke has been called the greatest historian in history because of his thorough methods of investigation. His words can be trusted. Some say they rely on the 4 gospels alone because that's what Jesus taught. That's fine if you're a Jew. The rest of us are not Jews. We're Gentiles and God sent us OUR message through Paul and the other NT authors. Everyone needs the 4 gospels but us Gentiles also need the rest of what God's telling us.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
We are so very fortunate to live in America, where followers of Jesus are NOT persecuted...at least not in comparison to early believers...or even to what believers in other places like North Korea and many Islamic-governed countries face, where believers can be imprisoned and even put to death for their faith. Do you think it’s difficult for people in America to follow Jesus...? Do you think it’s better for people to have to struggle to follow Jesus...?
It seems obvious to me that people - in this country and elsewhere - experience difficulties in the Christian path. Given what can be seen, the degrees of difficulty seem widely varied - but how can anyone truly understand the degrees of such personal challenges experienced by others? I can not fully know if "it’s better for people to have to struggle to follow Jesus", but I know enough of God's Word to expect such struggles, and the value of being tested.
Most of us aren't who we think we are. Are we able to withstand persecution? We won't know until it happens. We might think we can, but what will we do when we face death for our beliefs and the headsman is standing there with his ax? Some will praise God and let it come. Others will fail.
To the OT Jew, Heaven and earth represented the Priesthood and the People.
They "passed away" in 70AD.
THIS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
FYI…. The only path…a tenuous one…. to get to the “heavens and earth” already passed away is to see the “heavens and earth” as a concept or allusion to…or as an allegorical reference to the OT Law….. which passed away with Jesus sacrificial death which fulfilled the law.
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
Psalm 8
What is man(who am I?) that HE would think of me???
Is it easy? NO, learned this week that an Afghan student of Freed-Hardeman, IIRC, was shot, along with his family this past week in Afghanistan, for abandoning Islam and preaching the Gospel.
Wow. Young Martyrs as soon as american troops pull out. We Americans just don't take advantage of the freedoms we have. Most christians shut their mouths when a troll stirs things up. Others rely on their evangelical fervor of lifestyle evangelism. The hatred for those abandoning Islam is not "Fundamentalist Islam," it's normal, REAL Islam. I would rather that tens of thousands of evangelists went to the middle east to lead them to Christ than tens of thousands of troops. Read some of the trolling that follows my posts of the Sunday sermons and you'll see the same islamic radical attitude from trolling Roman Catholics.
This world isn't easy, it's a bunch of constant troubles.
If you walk with Christ and drag your chain of worldly troubles along, even try to hook the chain to Christ to help pull... no it won't be easy.
No one can shuck all their troubles all the time, but there are times you can lay aside your troubles and walk with Christ for a bit.
Few can do even that, they want to bury that hook into God and beg him to pull, can't let go of this chitty world for even a second.
Kent
Amen, but spiritual warfare is real.
Matthew 11:28-30 New International Version 28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”
John 16:33 New International Version 33 “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
The walk with Christ is easy, His path is clear. This world isn't easy, it's a bunch of constant troubles.
I strongly agree. Jesus said His yoke is easy and His burden is light. I believe Him, and I’ve found what He said to be true. It’s this earthly life that we all live that’s hard. And He assured us that we would all have trouble in this earthly life. But He’s willing to walk with us through it. And I’ve found ‘that’ walk to not only make this earthly life better for me, but to make me better at this earthly life that we all struggle with.
Most of us aren't who we think we are. Are we able to withstand persecution? We won't know until it happens. We might think we can, but what will we do when we face death for our beliefs and the headsman is standing there with his ax? Some will praise God and let it come. Others will fail.
This isn't a direct application from the text, but rather a principle that I think applies.
"He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much."
Most Christians never face martyrdom. But, "all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.". II Tim. 3
There may be those who never stood up for Christ in school, work, or daily life, who would stand boldly in faith even to death. However, it is appointed to not only believe on Him (ie. salvation) , but also to suffer for His sake." Ie. (Rewards. ) Just my opinion is that most Christians are given opportunities to do that in little ways, long before they ever face real persecution. If they pass the minor little quizzes of life faithfully, they are more likely to face stiff persecution if/ when the time comes. If they fail, it won't be a loss of salvation, since salvation is an everlasting gift that never ends. It would only affect the degree of glory to God and rewards at the believer's evaluation judgement.
Keep in mind that even the apostles didn't always stand there and take it. Sometimes they ran. Both Peter and Paul made escapes from captivity where they likely would have died. The question is when to stand and when to run. I don't know the answer.
Keep in mind that even the apostles didn't always stand there and take it. Sometimes they ran. Both Peter and Paul made escapes from captivity where they likely would have died. The question is when to stand and when to run. I don't know the answer.
Doesn't exactly answer the question, but it does offer some perspective on several issues...
The jews accused Paul of 'offending THEM, the Temple and Caesar...... spiritual and civil blasphemy, if you will...
Acts 25...
8Then Paul made his defense: “I have committed no offense against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar.”
9But Festus, wishing to do the Jews a favor, said to Paul, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem to stand trial before me on these charges?”
10Paul replied, “I am standing before the judgment seat of Caesar, where I ought to be tried. I have done nothing wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. 11If, however, I am guilty of anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die. But if there is no truth to their accusations against me, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!”
Paul recognized Rome's right to govern, the right to dispense capital punishment, and his submission to same........ he also recognized that the jews did NOT have that right!
Keep in mind that even the apostles didn't always stand there and take it. Sometimes they ran. Both Peter and Paul made escapes from captivity where they likely would have died. The question is when to stand and when to run. I don't know the answer.
Sometimes that's hard to know. Most Westerners probably don't have much to concern themselves over that, but I hear of Chinese believers, Sudanese, north african countries that suffer persecution to imprisonment and death. Some of us Westerners got death threats, nevertheless, God has protected those I knew personally, last I heard. I posted a sermon of a church that was repeatedly threatened with tape and murder and their Church burned here in America. Even a handful of sodomites on this message board took strong offense to me posting that sermon given right after, that had to be held outside for lack of a structure.
As to those apostles, we have a record of persecutions after the crucifixion of Jesus, starting with Steven. The one thing we can see in hindsight that wasn't clear to the apostles is that they were supposed to leave Jerusalem and Judea as soon as they evangelized it. The persecution got the rest of the believers scattered out of there to carry out the great commission. I thought that was interesting. Then, Paul obeyed the Lord until he went back and took that vow.
It was ordained by God that Paul would stand before Caesar. Nothing could prevent it. We have no record of the trial but we can assume that Caesar heard the Word and had his chance to accept Jesus. We're not sure of which Caesar this was but many scholars believe it was Claudius and that Paul was released. Possibly he made a 4th missionary journey to Spain after that then returned to Rome to face Nero who executed him. The records aren't clear on all of this but scholars have pieced it together.
The question of Paul constantly comes up. He's loved and hated by Christians so what was he?
Consider who Paul was. He was a Pharisee, trained by one of the leading Jewish scholars of the time, Gamaliel. That put him as one of the upcoming men in Judaism. One of the requirements to become a Pharisee was to be married. It's believed that Paul had been married but was likely widowed. He never says so, though. He was a fire and brimstone Jew who hated Christians with a passion, thinking he was doing God's work. Then he met Jesus. Most of us meet him through the Bible or by being convinced of the truth by friends or maybe a missionary. Paul met him head on, getting knocked down in the dirt and slapped along side the head. Jesus knew what Paul was capable of and hand picked him to be the leading missionary of all time. Jesus also said that he would teach Paul what he would suffer for doing his work. And Paul did suffer. He was beaten and imprisoned. He was chased out of cities and came close to being murdered any number of times. In the end he was murdered by Nero. Satan was desperate to stop the spread of the word and needed to stop Paul to do it. God protected Paul and Satan failed but Paul went through some rough times. Even today it still goes on. Many Christians denigrate him and say he preached a religion not from Jesus. That's not true at all. Jesus came to the Jews and he taught a message specifically to them. All of the disciples were Jews because that's who Jesus came for initially. The OT says that the Jews would reject him and that's what they did. It was time to go beyond the Jews and Jesus picked Paul specifically to do the job. After his conversion, Paul disappeared into the desert for 3 years. There are hints in the Bible that he spent that time being taught by Jesus personally. An apostle was, by definition, one who had been taught by Jesus to be a teacher and Paul claimed that title. When Paul came back, he was on fire and it never went out. The Jews were under the law and Jesus represented that law. The Gentiles were NOT under it and never had been. Paul didn't teach the law to them because it didn't apply to them. The Jews and Gentiles were entirely different and had to be approached differently. That's where the conflicts came. The other apostles were all under the law and had to be taught that it didn't apply in the case of the Gentiles. It took some compromising before they accepted that fact. Peter ran into it head on when he met Cornelius. The idea that a Gentile could be a spirit filled believer shocked their systems and entirely changed the church. But, it prepared them for sending Paul out into the Gentile world. God used Cornelius to prepare them for what He was going to do.
I've heard it said that Paul invented the things he'd done and how he'd been converted. However, Luke investigated carefully what he wrote in Luke and Acts. Luke didn't get his information from Paul. He got much of it from the people he talked to, witness to the events. He would have talked to Ananias about how Jesus sent him to restore Paul's eyesight and how Jesus said that he would teach Paul what he must suffer for the word. Luke has been called the greatest historian in history because of his thorough methods of investigation. His words can be trusted. Some say they rely on the 4 gospels alone because that's what Jesus taught. That's fine if you're a Jew. The rest of us are not Jews. We're Gentiles and God sent us OUR message through Paul and the other NT authors. Everyone needs the 4 gospels but us Gentiles also need the rest of what God's telling us.
Certainly Paul was told that he would stand before kings as well as suffer persecution from the time he trusted Christ and was saved. I just think of the times Jesus told the disciples to preach first to Jerusalem, then Judea, Sumeria and to the uttermost parts of the earth. Philip warned Paul and apparently was correct when he told him not to go back to Jerusalem where he would be arrested. Even when Paul began to go back to Jewish traditions for that brief time I think he was not doing so according to God's will; the Lord still used him to work all things according to His plan. It's an interesting study that I have to admit, I would have debated myself ten years ago. Lol
Understanding the concept and striving to live a Christ-centered existence can be plenty challenging. After reading through this thread, it is almost impossible to conjure the meaning of that term "Fundamentalist Christianity". What is it?
I find it to be an easy walk. The idea that the Power that created the universe is interested in having a relationship with me...one of His creations...resonates with me. Everything else really pales in comparison to that idea. To know that when the Creator of all the universe is on your side...it changes your perspective and gives life real meaning. It makes my life better, and makes me better at life. I’m convinced that Jesus loves us, is with us, is not surprised by anything that’s happening to us, and will walk with us through it. When He says “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”...I take ‘that’ to heart. It’s the easiest life that I’ve ever known.
It seems wonderful that you find it to be an easy walk. If only that were true for all who so endeavor - or- would such universal ease be a good thing?
Why should it be, or better yet, how could it possibly be difficult to practice that which one holds in his heart?
Anyone can be tempted. Jesus himself was tempted. There's no sin in that. It's giving in to the temptation that's the problem. Jesus said that no one can be tempted beyond his power to resist. God will always give him a way out. Jesus' way out was his thorough knowledge of God and the scriptures. He was able to shut Satan down. There's no sin we can't resist but we're all too weak to do it 100% of the time no matter how righteous we are.
Ro 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Well, I've learned something from this discussion. The bible can't always be taken literally. I always believed the creation story didn't take place in 7 days as we measure days. The sun and the moon by which we measure days weren't created until day 4. If the creator is at the center of the universe how long is a day there? But I always labored under the assumption that Jesus meant heaven and earth to mean real heaven and earth. The whole shebang. He wasn't prone to refer to Jerusalem or the Jewish people or Israel as being heaven and earth. And he did lament over Jerusalem calling it by name. So we get back to the issue of heaven and earth not yet passed away. It takes a contortionist to combine Paul and Jesus. There were good reasons that the Jewish Christians turned against him and by Paul's own 2nd letter to Timothy he told how all of Asia had turned against him. His writings were resurrected by the Roman church to suit their purposes.
Apostle Paul uses the phrase “the Law of Christ” in two of his letters. It was his shorthand for Jesus’ New Covenant command. When Jesus gathered with His disciples (ALL Jews) for the final Passover, He said He was giving them a new command. And this new command was gonna replace all of the other 600+ commands in the Old Covenant. He gave them this new command because He was establishing a New Covenant.
This new command was simple...“You are to love one another as I have loved you.” And He said that by this unique kind of New Covenant love, everyone would know that they were His disciples. Apostle Paul takes ‘that’ (Jesus’ own words) and promotes it through all of his letters as the uniting ethic for ALL of Jesus’ followers.
The Law of Moses was only supposed to last until Jesus came...and through His sacrifice...Jews and Gentiles were made into one body of Jesus’ followers. The barrier of the Law which had divided them had been broken down. (Muffin referred to this earlier in Ephesians 2 and Galatians 3).
Apostle Paul said that Jesus’ followers are now under the Law of Christ and were no longer under the Law of Moses. The New Covenant Law of Christ is the marching orders for Jesus’ followers. It should likely inform our conscience, our knowledge, our wisdom, and pretty much everything we do.
Poor Ole HC .... Try as you might to get me to react on this thread. I won't blow it up.
Why???
Cause the posters on here are discussing matters of their faith. And I have respected that for a long time. I'm sure you have dug in my post history looking for examples of me attacking any person of faith on here aside from you. Cant find nothing like that can ya???? Frustrates you....
All you can find is my questioning over the years of how man has made bibles worded for their own purpose and created branches of christianity for their own purpose. And slams on preachers who are bogus and in it for self serving reasons.
I go after you cause you are bogus..... Your track record of lies and bogus stories on here since day 1 have been exposed by many of us. People read it all and no one runs to your defense at all.
None of them on this think they are self designated online preachers, who have been caught in numerous lies and bullcrap stories on here like you consistently have been.
It goes against their character and upbringing to be false like you. They are honest people. You on the other hand are not.....
I am so in your head. It is obvious from your post.
You have a nice day and obsess on this post.
Nothing you say, try to spin, quote, cut and paste, or manipulate will undo your track record on here. And just for a reminder. You are by self admission a RC apostate. Myself on the other hand am not. And I do not attend the RC church, but have enough faith in god and god alone to not renounce the faith I was baptized into and burn in hades like you will. Remember.. If you turn You burn.....
If nothing else maybe I've got some folks checking their hole card.
Looking at your sig line, does this mean you also don't think much of the writings of Luke and Peter???
I mostly stick with the old testament, Matthew, and the Revelation of Jesus Christ. I read John, James, and Peter but I'm pretty positive the P.S. in 2nd Peter concerning Paul was added in. As I have noted the New Testament was in enemy hands for many years and heavily edited but they let Jesus core teachings survive. Luke to me is a shadowy figure and Paul's secretary, so I would say he was pretty adept at using enough undeniable truth to cover for his false witnessing just as a skillful defense attorney will do in trying to cover the false story of his client.
And just for a reminder. You are by self admission a RC apostate. Myself on the other hand am not.
You reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which you call a lie. The priests who you identify with, although they wouldn't want any more to do with you than the evangelicals here, continue to offer sacrifices continually which can NEVER take away your sins.
On the other hand, I rejected you and your religion. This weekend I will be leading RCs to Christ Who is Not re-offered again and again In your "Masse$."
"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." Hebrews 10 (That's a New Testament book)
It might not feel too bad being an enemy of Christ right now Rene, but someday He will have the last laugh.
And just for a reminder. You are by self admission a RC apostate. Myself on the other hand am not.
You reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which you call a lie. The priests who you identify with, although they wouldn't want any more to do with you than the evangelicals here, continue to offer sacrifices continually which can NEVER take away your sins.
On the other hand, I rejected you and your religion. This weekend I will be leading RCs to Christ Who is Not re-offered again and again In your "Masse$."
"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." Hebrews 10 (That's a New Testament book)
It might not feel too bad being an enemy of Christ right now Rene, but someday He will have the last laugh.
This HC sockpuppet troll persona for attention you have currently is getting old. You have 0 credibility. As many on here have grown to realize it.
Tell us some more hand of god saved your life ridiculous stories please. And that is just touching the surface, minus all the other stories you have made up on here over the past year.
Ditch HC and make up another sockpuppet troll persona for attention. HC just aint cutting it for you anymore....
There’s likely a better way for Jesus’ ekklesia to not only maybe hang on to those who haven’t yet walked away from the faith of Christianity, but to also logically associate with those who maybe have...and especially with those who describe themselves as having no religious affiliation at all. It’s likely that the way the Bible is looked at, discussed, revered, and even worshipped by some, creates a needless obstacle for many who can’t see the differences in the meaning of the Old Covenant of the Old Testament (even though Christians don’t live under that law) and Jesus’ New Covenant of the New Testament. Many of the people mentioned above (maybe even most of em’) have issues with the laws and the customs and the practices disclosed in the Old Testament.
The differences in the meaning between the OT and the NT is likely lost on em’, and how the OT and NT are discussed likely only adds to the confusion. They likely see the Bible (with its 66 different books) as being all equally revered by Christians...even the laws in Leviticus that Christians have never followed. It’s likely that the people mentioned above don’t have a problem with Jesus, but they likely do have a problem with the Bible itself pertaining to the things I’ve mentioned above.
Imagine being married to your current spouse but still having a relationship with your ex-significant other. It’d likely cause some problems. Or imagine putting the Constitution together with the Articles of Confederation and saying they both are equally revered even though the Constitution is the only one that we live under. It’d likely cause some confusion. The current approach likely creates a needless obstacle to the Gospel for those mentioned above.
Nowadays, with things the way they are, for those who truly are interested in those who walked away from Christianity...and those who’ve never had much to do with it at all (and honestly, it’s likely that some Christians aren’t truly interested in reaching outside the walls of the church)...there’s likely a better way to do it than what pretty much all of us have seen and experienced from the Church and many of those in it.
For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no ‘the Bible’ as it’s currently referred to. The texts all existed, but they weren’t put together in one book and called ‘the Bible’ until 300 years after Jesus’ death. But in those first 300 years, Jesus’ movement...without ‘the Bible’...grew tremendously and transformed human history.
Nowadays, our society does not respect ‘the Bible’ or see it as authoritative as widely as many people once did. But it’s likely still possible to recapture whatever it was that the first Christians did to grow Jesus’ movement and attract people to this new way of life the way that they did.
If nothing else maybe I've got some folks checking their hole card.
Looking at your sig line, does this mean you also don't think much of the writings of Luke and Peter???
I mostly stick with the old testament, Matthew, and the Revelation of Jesus Christ. I read John, James, and Peter but I'm pretty positive the P.S. in 2nd Peter concerning Paul was added in. As I have noted the New Testament was in enemy hands for many years and heavily edited but they let Jesus core teachings survive. Luke to me is a shadowy figure and Paul's secretary, so I would say he was pretty adept at using enough undeniable truth to cover for his false witnessing just as a skillful defense attorney will do in trying to cover the false story of his client.
I suppose it does make it easier when you can throw out the parts you don't like!
If nothing else maybe I've got some folks checking their hole card.
Looking at your sig line, does this mean you also don't think much of the writings of Luke and Peter???
I mostly stick with the old testament, Matthew, and the Revelation of Jesus Christ. I read John, James, and Peter but I'm pretty positive the P.S. in 2nd Peter concerning Paul was added in. As I have noted the New Testament was in enemy hands for many years and heavily edited but they let Jesus core teachings survive. Luke to me is a shadowy figure and Paul's secretary, so I would say he was pretty adept at using enough undeniable truth to cover for his false witnessing just as a skillful defense attorney will do in trying to cover the false story of his client.
I suppose it does make it easier when you can throw out the parts you don't like!
Maybe you can help me understand Mr. Hastings comment about Luke being a" shadowy figure?" He wasn't an anonymous figure on a message board Luke was the most detailed and thorough historian of any ancient manuscripts. He was personally known by other inner circle disciples. He was under the scrutiny of 6 other believers during Paul's mission work of evangelizing countries. He was a trusted disciple that Jesus acknowledged so, as opposed to Judas . His eye witness accounts of being with Jesus and accepted by Jesus are undeniable. His records of Jesus teachings, miracles, death, burial and resurrection are backed up by the other gospels. The gospel of salvation by grace of God through faith alone in His son are the same in Acts as in Paul's Epistles as in all of the gospels. Those are just a few off the top of my head while I take a short break.
Please help me understand what I might be missing.
Antlers: I'm pretty busy but I stopped in and read read your rather lengthy writing. I always enjoy conversing with you. I noticed you made an analogy of a married person continuing to have a relationship with an ex. I think a more apt comparison would be a married person establishing a relationship with a new person that was in opposition to your marriage. I'll be back in a few hours and go over your writing a little more carefully. Thanks, and God bless.
If nothing else maybe I've got some folks checking their hole card.
Looking at your sig line, does this mean you also don't think much of the writings of Luke and Peter???
I mostly stick with the old testament, Matthew, and the Revelation of Jesus Christ. I read John, James, and Peter but I'm pretty positive the P.S. in 2nd Peter concerning Paul was added in. As I have noted the New Testament was in enemy hands for many years and heavily edited but they let Jesus core teachings survive. Luke to me is a shadowy figure and Paul's secretary, so I would say he was pretty adept at using enough undeniable truth to cover for his false witnessing just as a skillful defense attorney will do in trying to cover the false story of his client.
Sir,
Help me understand your issues with the Bible. You claimed that the Bible was in enemy hands for many years. However, I must clarify something, the Bible is a collection of God's inspired Holy books and letters sent by trusted couriers directly to established churches. Those churches were protecting and copying perfect copies and distributing them to other churches, most of which were established by the apostle Paul. They treated them as they were, as the very messages that God provided them.
On top of that, I must ask myself, is God not powerful enough to keep His Word safe and preserved for even one generation?
Antlers: I'm pretty busy but I stopped in and read your rather lengthy writing. I always enjoy conversing with you. I noticed you made an analogy of a married person continuing to have a relationship with an ex. I think a more apt comparison would be a married person establishing a relationship with a new person that was in opposition to your marriage. I'll be back in a few hours and go over your writing a little more carefully. Thanks, and God bless.
Hey Hastings: I enjoy conversing with you as well. And I enjoy reading your insightful posts, not only on ‘these’ matters but also on subject matter completely unrelated to religious faith issues. I understand your analogy above, as it completely goes along with your stated position on this particular subject. We differ on some theological points, and I’m OK with that.
I think a primary difference in our theology is that, to me, Jesus didn’t come to expand the Old Covenant or Judaism. He came to fulfill the Old Covenant and establish His New Covenant. His death and resurrection fulfilled the requirements of the Law, and freed us from the demands of the Law. The Old Covenant was just a precursor. To me, Jesus’ establishment of His New Covenant is a fulfillment, not a continuation.
It sure is handy not having to accept all the books of the Bible. I can pick and choose anything I like. Jesus said that to lust after another woman is committing adultery in your heart. I don't like that verse so I'll skip it. I LIKE lusting after hot babes. Jesus said to go and sin no more. I don't like that one, either. Sinning is fun so I'll ignore it. Jesus said to love one another. Nope, there are some people in our church that I can't stand and I sure won't forgive them. I'll love who I want to.
Once you step over the line to throw out part of the Bible, how do you choose what's true or not, what to keep or reject? If the Bible isn't true, it's nothing, useless. God didn't give us a partial book. He gave us all we need to lead fulfilled Christians lives.
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years.
Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is?
Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
John 5
41 “I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I know you—that you have no love for God within you. 43 I have come in My Father’s name, yet you don’t accept Me. If someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44 How can you believe? While accepting glory from one another, you don’t seek the glory that comes from the only God. 45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom you have set your hope. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me. 47 But if you don’t believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
I wanna give you 2 a frigging man hug if I ever meet you guys.
Both of you nailed it in many ways in these 2 post. JMO....
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions. "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes." Paul to Timothy
IdaHo continually proves that he tries to engender strife and destroy the faith of the unlearned by his questions and comments.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
You guys are welcome to believe whatever you want to believe. Keep in mind that Jesus Himself and His apostles believed and taught a six day literal creation. He then went onto demonstrate that He is God Almighty Creator by many miracles, including but not limited to creating food before 16,000 families.
The Jesus that I believe in is the same One Who referenced what He knew to be a literal event of His prophet Jonah being three days and nights in the belly of a whale. Perhaps you think, that Jesus' resurrection was just a figurative allegory? It sounds like you subscribe to the Jeffersonian philosophy. Is his Bible the one that you use?
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
What are your thoughts pertaining to Arius and the necessity of his banishment to Illyria?
Arius’ position was in opposition to the status quo of what was being taught and how the scripture was interpreted by those in power of the church at the time. After the first 300 years of Christianity, it became inseparable from power over the people; ‘that’ was most important to the church leaders, who sprinkled a little bit of Christianity into the mix. No independent thought was allowed, and theological division was now ‘heresy’ that was punishable by death. Believing the wrong thing was a crime. What you believed trumped how you behaved. Christianity became creedal; and in these creeds, there’s no mention of love, there’s no mention of behavior at all.
And the Arian Controversy resulted in another creed. You could subscribe to the creeds and still do anything you wanted. And there was a reason creeds were like that...the creeds were generally signed off on by the emperor’s, and they had some pretty bad behaviors...so the church leaders who were being funded by the emperor’s had to be real careful with what they put into these creeds. Throughout all of this, no one was ever arrested or persecuted or executed for loving too much. It was all about what they did and didn’t believe. You had Christians arresting Christians for believing the wrong thing.
Happy_Camper: I’m attracted to the original version of Christianity, the first-generation passion of what it means to strive to be a fully devoted follower of Jesus. The approach to advancing the Gospel modeled by Jesus and the apostles is very different from what many/most people see today. The Resurrection was at the center of the first-century apologetic. It’s at the center of mine as well.
Muffin: My faith rests on a person (Jesus) and a historical event (the Resurrection), not on a book.
Which we only know about because of the book!
Christianity doesn’t exist because of a book...it’s the other way around...the book exists because of Christianity. Jesus and His resurrection would still be true even if there were no book...!
In the fevered state of our country, no good can ever result from any attempt to set one of these fiery zealots to rights, either in fact or principle. They are determined as to the facts they will believe, and the opinions on which they will act. Get by them, therefore, as you would by an angry bull; it is not for a man of sense to dispute the road with such an animal.
Muffin: My faith rests on a person (Jesus) and a historical event (the Resurrection), not on a book.
Which we only know about because of the book!
Christianity doesn’t exist because of a book...it’s the other way around...the book exists because of Christianity. Jesus and His resurrection would still be true even if there were no book...!
I concur, however, the OT is/was a 'schoolmaster', and from roughly 30-50AD NT truth was contained wholly within men, from 50-70 it began and was written down, and what we know today of the Gospel is from the Book?
Muffin: To me, to deify the Bible because Jesus is only known through scripture is analogous to the Catholic Church deifying Mary because she gave birth to God. Jesus wouldn’t have been born without Mary, therefore Mary is deified. But Mary’s not part of the Trinity, and belief in Mary is not necessary for salvation. Deification of the Bible is analogous to the veneration of Mary. If Jesus is known only because Mary gave him birth, that doesn’t warrant her deification; and if Jesus is only known through scripture, that doesn’t warrant its deification either. Not to me anyways.
I don’t worship scripture. Scripture is not what saves me. Jesus saves me. Jesus drew a very clear distinction between the Scriptures that testify about Him and He Himself. He clearly said that to think that salvation comes through anyone or anything else other than Him is flat-out wrong, even if that something else is Scripture.
Muffin: To me, to deify the Bible because Jesus is only known through scripture is analogous to the Catholic Church deifying Mary because she gave birth to God. Jesus wouldn’t have been born without Mary, therefore Mary is deified. But Mary’s not part of the Trinity, and belief in Mary is not necessary for salvation. Deification of the Bible is analogous to the veneration of Mary. If Jesus is known only because Mary gave him birth, that doesn’t warrant her deification; and if Jesus is only known through scripture, that doesn’t warrant its deification either. Not to me anyways.
I don’t worship scripture. Scripture is not what saves me. Jesus saves me. Jesus drew a very clear distinction between the Scriptures that testify about Him and He Himself. He clearly said that to think that salvation comes through anyone or anything else other than Him is flat-out wrong, even if that something else is Scripture.
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions. "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes." Paul to Timothy
IdaHo continually proves that he tries to engender strife and destroy the faith of the unlearned by his questions and comments.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
You guys are welcome to believe whatever you want to believe. Keep in mind that Jesus Himself and His apostles believed and taught a six day literal creation. He then went onto demonstrate that He is God Almighty Creator by many miracles, including but not limited to creating food before 16,000 families.
The Jesus that I believe in is the same One Who referenced what He knew to be a literal event of His prophet Jonah being three days and nights in the belly of a whale. Perhaps you think, that Jesus' resurrection was just a figurative allegory? It sounds like you subscribe to the Jeffersonian philosophy. Is his Bible the one that you use?
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Originally Posted by antlers
Happy_Camper: I’m attracted to the original version of Christianity, the first-generation passion of what it means to strive to be a fully devoted follower of Jesus. The approach to advancing the Gospel modeled by Jesus and the apostles is very different from what many/most people see today. The Resurrection was at the center of the first-century apologetic. It’s at the center of mine as well.
1. The Resurrection was built upon the veracity of the O.T. prophecies. If creation and the other miracles that Jesus performed in the beginning and while ministering in His humanity were in doubt, then how can the miracles of substitutionary atonement and resurrection be trusted? See what I am saying? Jesus performed miracles to establish Who He was and His disciples to confirm those spoken proclamations (prophecies, knowledge, eye witness accounts). Once Scripture was written and established, the temporary gifts were done away.
2. The written Epistles and books are also an important for faith, which is required to be saved.
"For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed... For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.". https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans-10-17/
3. This is why it is attacked by Satan in the Garden of Eden to Revelation. This is also why God points this important fact out from Genesis to Revelation's conclusion, placing upon adding and subtracting from it the harshest judgements.
You might have heard about the Jefferson Bible. He didn't believe in the miracles. He wrote his own condensed version.
I believe every word Jesus wrote, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
The rest is just worldly noise that folks get all wound up over.
Would we know about math without a math book...? Would we know about history without a history book...? We learn about math from a math book, and we learn about history from a history book. The books are clearly important. But that does not elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual history themselves...!
I can affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I stop way short of putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy a litmus test for my salvation.
I don’t practice bibliolatry, and I don’t see scripture as being co-equal with belief in Jesus and His resurrection, especially when it comes to requirements for salvation. Sola fide ~ through faith alone...but who or what must our faith be in for salvation...? To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
I believe every word Jesus wrote, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
Would we know about math without a math book...? Would we know about history without a history book...? We learn about math from a math book, and we learn about history from a history book. The books are clearly important. But that does not elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual history themselves...!
I can affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I stop way short of putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy a litmus test for my salvation.
I don’t practice bibliolatry, and I don’t see scripture as being co-equal with belief in Jesus and His resurrection, especially when it comes to requirements for salvation. Sola fide ~ through faith alone...but who or what must our faith be in for salvation...? To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
So! Through it, with it, by it, we are thoroughly quipped for every good work............. true or not???
Happy_Camper: To me, the only claim of Christianity that’s required for salvation is believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross.
The Bible claims and affirms its own authority. It says scripture is useful for teaching and rebuking and correcting and for training in righteousness. But it doesn’t say that belief in the inerrancy and in the infallibility of the entirety of the Old and New Testaments is a requirement for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...most definitely...become a saved follower of Jesus.
I believe every word Jesus wrote, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
I believe every word Jesus said, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
I believe every word Jesus said, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
Happy_Camper: To me, the only claim of Christianity that’s required for salvation is believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross.
The Bible claims and affirms its own authority. It says scripture is useful for teaching and rebuking and correcting and for training in righteousness. But it doesn’t say that belief in the inerrancy and in the infallibility of the entirety of the Old and New Testaments is a requirement for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...most definitely...become a saved follower of Jesus.
But how on earth do we know that to be true? When a Baptist knocked on my door to make his case for the gospel, I took the Bible references that he wrote down and still didn't believe his message. I had to dig out a Bible given to me by the nice Wesleyan Sunday school teachers as a gift. Then I didn't want another Roman Catholic or protestant or minister's opinion. I wanted God's opinion. Creation or Jonah wasn't what was on my mind at the time, but God's opinion about salvation was. That's when I asked and searched read the whole chapter of each verse that was provided earlier. God revealed the understanding and faith was in His written Word as the source, not that Baptist. This is only an example, but faith came by hearing the word of God. Romans 10. The messenger was important to explain the Gospel to me. I didn't take his word for it, but trusted what the Bible said as God's true Word. Faith was the result of my decision. Ephesians 2:8 " For by grace are ye saved through faith..." All of these were very important as was the ministry of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8-11
I never looked at the Bible as an object of worship. It was the source of accurate revelation from God. I believed the Bible even as a former Catholic. The problem was with mixing faith in Christ with dead works. It was a clear explanation + Scripture that got through to me and anyone I've ever led to Christ. I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
I believe in God. Just dont beleive in alot of what man has decided to be beleived.
And it is nice to see you guys talking about it all in a back and forth rational manner.
Something that wouldnt happen if HC and his lying deceitful ways were participating on this thread.
I think God has a special place for the HC my way or the highway types who think they are God's representatives on the planet....
JMO....
Carry on gentlemen.
OMG, we might kind of sorta agree on something. Someone needs to check the temperature in hell.
I was born and raised catholic and it was pretty much beaten into me for the first 18 years of my life. I have a question. Has the Bible always been the word of God? If it has always been the word of God, why were books removed from it? We know there were at least 14 books tossed out of the bible. Some estimate allot more than that. Several of them having to do with Mary Magdalene. She was thought of as a prostitute for hundreds of years. Do you think Jesus is real happy about that? in some cases, if you had a copy of some of these books, it was considered heresy. How is owning a copy of the word of God heresy? What gave these people the right to throw God's word in the garbage?
I don't believe in organized religion. It's more corrupt than politics.
My favorite passage pointing out the hypocrisy is Mathew 19:21. My all time favorite passage is 2 Kings 2:23-24.
So! Through it, with it, by it, we are thoroughly equipped for every good work............. true or not???
Jesus can reveal Himself in any manner He chooses. God doesn’t ‘only’ reveal Himself through the Bible. Jesus isn’t bound by the covers of a book.
Long before there were any Christian scriptures, there were Jesus’ followers - men and women whose faith began with an empty tomb - and no ‘the Bible.’ The fact that none of em’ had ‘the Bible’ clearly didn’t interfere with their salvation, or their ability to have communion with God, or their ability to lay the groundwork for the evangelization of the entire world.
Jesus sent us the Holy Spirit to teach us, and to help us, and to advocate for us. The same Spirit of God that raised Jesus from the dead actually resides within His followers, and teaches them the things that God wants them to know, and helps them live the way that God wants them to live.
Happy_Camper: To me, the foundation of Christianity is not the Bible. To me, the foundation of Christianity is the event of Jesus’ Resurrection. That event launched His movement...His ekklesia...which eventually brought us the Bible.
Unbelievers in the mid-first century were never asked to become Jesus’ followers through blind faith in an authoritative New Testament that didn’t even exist yet. They were encouraged to become Jesus’ followers based on the reality of God and the reality of Jesus’ Resurrection.
I believe every word Jesus wrote, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
I believe every word Jesus wrote, I trust that the words attributed to Jesus through the Gospels are fairly accurate for our introduction to Christ and his life example, and I accept the Holy Spirit as my mentor and communication with God.
word
Jesus didn’t write anything.
Rather profound isn't it, he could have written 14 trillion words for us to study, he could still be alive for these 2000 years writing everything there is to know about God... and still writing... when would he have started and when could he have stopped.
Or he could use the Holy Spirit for our teacher, infinite knowledge.
We only need the introduction, that's what words are for. It's not like man was getting it right so he didn't have to come. And it's judt like man to start screwing it up with excess words and arguments after he left.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...most definitely...become a saved follower of Jesus.
Jesus used the whole Jonah and the whale story as the sign that was given to prove the resurrection from the dead. He said, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign but there shall be no sign given but the sign of the prophet Jonas who was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale." Jesus then told them that He, the Son of man would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. a sure fulfilment of the prophecy of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ -- the exact gospel that Paul gave under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in 1Corinthians 15:1-4. I think that is called the gospel of our salvation, and I would submit , is a requirement of salvation. earlier in chapter 15, it is mentioned that if Christ was not raised from the dead, (like Jonas getting puked out of the whale's belly) we are yet in our sins. Think I'd leave that sign about Jonas alone.
Jesus used the whole Jonah and the whale story as the sign that was given to prove the resurrection from the dead. He said, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign but there shall be no sign given but the sign of the prophet Jonas who was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale." Jesus then told them that He, the Son of man would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. a sure fulfilment of the prophecy of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ -- the exact gospel that Paul gave under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost in 1Corinthians 15:1-4. I think that is called the gospel of our salvation, and I would submit , is a requirement of salvation. earlier in chapter 15, it is mentioned that if Christ was not raised from the dead, (like Jonas getting puked out of the whale's belly) we are yet in our sins. Think I'd leave that sign about Jonas alone.
Do you think it’s possible that Jesus referenced Jonah when talking to those Jews because it’s what they knew...? Because it’s the information they’d been given...? And they could relate to it...? They clearly didn’t have the ability to understand the complexities of His coming death and resurrection. Do you think it’s possible that the story of Jonah and the giant fish was allegorical...? Jesus certainly used parables in His teachings, and they are clear examples of allegory.
Muffin: To me, to deify the Bible because Jesus is only known through scripture is analogous to the Catholic Church deifying Mary because she gave birth to God. Jesus wouldn’t have been born without Mary, therefore Mary is deified. But Mary’s not part of the Trinity, and belief in Mary is not necessary for salvation. Deification of the Bible is analogous to the veneration of Mary. If Jesus is known only because Mary gave him birth, that doesn’t warrant her deification; and if Jesus is only known through scripture, that doesn’t warrant its deification either. Not to me anyways.
I don’t worship scripture. Scripture is not what saves me. Jesus saves me. Jesus drew a very clear distinction between the Scriptures that testify about Him and He Himself. He clearly said that to think that salvation comes through anyone or anything else other than Him is flat-out wrong, even if that something else is Scripture.
I don't know anyone who worships scripture.
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
How do you separate The Word of God from the word of Constantine. Or numerous other emperors and Popes over the millennia who have ordered changes in scriptural content? Not to mention Luther, and Calvin, and every other separitist minded Minister through the years. Of course, each religion must teach that they are preaching the unaltered word of God. To do otherwise would be tantamount to self immolation. Just because the Minister states it as Truth, does that mean it actually is? Were that so, we could not have 45,000 denominations of Christianity today, each teaching a different message.
Good questions. I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel. To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
Praise the Lord. At least 2 men thinking for themselves
Happy_Camper: To me, the only claim of Christianity that’s required for salvation is believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross.
The Bible claims and affirms its own authority. It says scripture is useful for teaching and rebuking and correcting and for training in righteousness. But it doesn’t say that belief in the inerrancy and in the infallibility of the entirety of the Old and New Testaments is a requirement for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...most definitely...become a saved follower of Jesus.
But how on earth do we know that to be true? When a Baptist knocked on my door to make his case for the gospel, I took the Bible references that he wrote down and still didn't believe his message. I had to dig out a Bible given to me by the nice Wesleyan Sunday school teachers as a gift. Then I didn't want another Roman Catholic or protestant or minister's opinion. I wanted God's opinion. Creation or Jonah wasn't what was on my mind at the time, but God's opinion about salvation was. That's when I asked and searched read the whole chapter of each verse that was provided earlier. God revealed the understanding and faith was in His written Word as the source, not that Baptist. This is only an example, but faith came by hearing the word of God. Romans 10. The messenger was important to explain the Gospel to me. I didn't take his word for it, but trusted what the Bible said as God's true Word. Faith was the result of my decision. Ephesians 2:8 " For by grace are ye saved through faith..." All of these were very important as was the ministry of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8-11
I never looked at the Bible as an object of worship. It was the source of accurate revelation from God. I believed the Bible even as a former Catholic. The problem was with mixing faith in Christ with dead works. It was a clear explanation + Scripture that got through to me and anyone I've ever led to Christ. I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Is the Bible not the word? John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Welcome back after your heart cath. I hope everything is as good with you as it can be...!
Turned out good as far as not having blockages but I am getting winded way easier than usual. I spoke (wrote) to Slumlord over on the Candace Owens thread about my careless life with smoke and fumes. Never ever used tobacco though. Thanks
I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Is the Bible not the word? John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
It’s likely that with the advent of Sola Scriptura (when the reformers were simply trying to rescue the Church from a tradition driven doctrine and agenda) that ‘Scripture alone’ (and the Bible was in existence at that time) eventually became something that it was never intended to be...it was never the foundation of the faith of Christianity...but over time Christians came to believe that the Bible ‘was’ the foundation of the Christian faith. They came to believe that we have no need for any truths outside of the Bible. And I disagree wholeheartedly with that position. Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written. The faith of Christianity got started with truths outside of ‘the Bible’ which didn’t even exist yet.
Originally Posted by OldHat
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
My grandfather initially told me about it when I was a boy.
Happy_Camper: To me, the only claim of Christianity that’s required for salvation is believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross.
The Bible claims and affirms its own authority. It says scripture is useful for teaching and rebuking and correcting and for training in righteousness. But it doesn’t say that belief in the inerrancy and in the infallibility of the entirety of the Old and New Testaments is a requirement for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...most definitely...become a saved follower of Jesus.
But how on earth do we know that to be true? When a Baptist knocked on my door to make his case for the gospel, I took the Bible references that he wrote down and still didn't believe his message. I had to dig out a Bible given to me by the nice Wesleyan Sunday school teachers as a gift. Then I didn't want another Roman Catholic or protestant or minister's opinion. I wanted God's opinion. Creation or Jonah wasn't what was on my mind at the time, but God's opinion about salvation was. That's when I asked and searched read the whole chapter of each verse that was provided earlier. God revealed the understanding and faith was in His written Word as the source, not that Baptist. This is only an example, but faith came by hearing the word of God. Romans 10. The messenger was important to explain the Gospel to me. I didn't take his word for it, but trusted what the Bible said as God's true Word. Faith was the result of my decision. Ephesians 2:8 " For by grace are ye saved through faith..." All of these were very important as was the ministry of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8-11
I never looked at the Bible as an object of worship. It was the source of accurate revelation from God. I believed the Bible even as a former Catholic. The problem was with mixing faith in Christ with dead works. It was a clear explanation + Scripture that got through to me and anyone I've ever led to Christ. I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Is the Bible not the word? John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
That is a beautiful verse that is included in the Received Text, because God gave us a complete Bible. This is from the same letter, Jim1611.
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us; That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."
One Name for Jesus is the Word. He is certainly described in details that is personified in the same. 5:7 Is, of course, referring to Jesus as you made the clear connection with John 1:14. The written Word that is settled in heaven, is many things including inspired BY God and is profitable for instruction in righteousness. God exhalts His Word and it is truth. I don't believe that mankind for the past two thousand years would have accurately proclaimed the gospel without having it to refer to. Even with it, most add to the simple message of salvation. However, I look to the written Word for understanding, but I don't pray to it. I look to the Word to learn about Jesus, but the written parchments were not nailed to the cross to bleed, suffer and to die for my sins. There are many descriptions that distinguish the written Word from Jesus in the O.T. and N.T.
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
My grandfather initially told me about it when I was a boy.
You are being elusive, which tells me you are not interested in engaging in honest discussion. You know full well he read it in the Bible or someone taught him who read it from the Bible. It came from the Bible.
Everything we know about God, Jesus Christ and salvation was and is gotten from the Bible. The Bible IS the canonical source of special revelation from God. We rely on it. Every single time people stray from the Bible spiritual ruin results.
I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Is the Bible not the word? John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
It’s likely that with the advent of Sola Scriptura (when the reformers were simply trying to rescue the Church from a tradition driven doctrine and agenda) that ‘Scripture alone’ (and the Bible was in existence at that time) eventually became something that it was never intended to be...it was never the foundation of the faith of Christianity...but over time Christians came to believe that the Bible ‘was’ the foundation of the Christian faith. They came to believe that we have no need for any truths outside of the Bible. And I disagree wholeheartedly with that position. Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written. The faith of Christianity got started with truths outside of ‘the Bible’ which didn’t even exist yet.
Originally Posted by OldHat
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
My grandfather initially told me about it when I was a boy.
You learned about salvation from the Bible and you know full well you did. You would not know about salvation by grace if it were not for the Bible.
I know of no one who believes the Bible is the foundation of the Christian faith. I know a lot of Christians who believe that the Bible is the written special revelation from God and that Christ IS THE FOUNDATION of the Christian faith.
Yep. So is John 1:14, which was also referenced. “Word” as it’s used by Apostle John in his Gospel in the very first verse is a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), and is widely interpreted by translators and Bible scholars as referring to Jesus, as indicated by other verses later in the same chapter (verses 14-17).
It’s: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.
It’s not: In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
Originally Posted by antlers
My grandfather initially told me about it when I was a boy.
Originally Posted by OldHat
You are being elusive, which tells me you are not interested in engaging in honest discussion. You know full well he read it in the Bible or someone taught him who read it from the Bible. It came from the Bible.
Originally Posted by antlers
Do you think that God ‘only’ reveals Himself through the Bible...? Do you think that Jesus is bound by the covers of a book...? Do you not think there are any truths about God outside of the Bible...? Do you not think that the Holy Spirit does for us what Jesus Himself said that He sent Him for...?
Originally Posted by OldHat
Everything we know about God, Jesus Christ and salvation was and is gotten from the Bible. The Bible IS the canonical source of special revelation from God. We rely on it. Every single time people stray from the Bible spiritual ruin results.
Originally Posted by antlers
I disagree with you. Wholeheartedly. And respectfully.
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
It means that the men and women who actually knew Jesus personally and chose to follow Him...people like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, Andrew, Mary, Martha, and Paul...the men and women whose faith laid the groundwork for the evangelization of the entire world, did so without having the Bible itself. And they also received salvation without having the Bible itself, as did many, many followers of Jesus who came after them.
Yep. So is John 1:14, which was also referenced. “Word” as it’s used by Apostle John in his Gospel in the very first verse is a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), and is widely interpreted by translators and Bible scholars as referring to Jesus, as indicated by other verses later in the same chapter (verses 14-17).
It’s: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.
It’s not: In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.
If you are agreeing with Jim and I on those verses, then I think we have a consensus. The translation is "word" for a reason. Why Jesus is called the "word" is up for debate, but I want to go on the record as believing that the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are the Trinity, just in case there's any confusion.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antlers
Happy_Camper: To me, the only claim of Christianity that’s required for salvation is believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work on the cross.
The Bible claims and affirms its own authority. It says scripture is useful for teaching and rebuking and correcting and for training in righteousness. But it doesn’t say that belief in the inerrancy and in the infallibility of the entirety of the Old and New Testaments is a requirement for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus for salvation, but they're not sure that Jonah was really swallowed by a great fish (for example), to me, that person can still...[]most definitely[/color]...become a saved follower of Jesus.
But how on earth do we know that to be true? When a Baptist knocked on my door to make his case for the gospel, I took the Bible references that he wrote down and still didn't believe his message. I had to dig out a Bible given to me by the nice Wesleyan Sunday school teachers as a gift. Then I didn't want another Roman Catholic or protestant or minister's opinion. I wanted God's opinion. Creation or Jonah wasn't what was on my mind at the time, but God's opinion about salvation was. That's when I asked and searched read the whole chapter of each verse that was provided earlier. God revealed the understanding and faith was in His written Word as the source, not that Baptist. This is only an example, but faith came by hearing the word of God. Romans 10. The messenger was important to explain the Gospel to me. I didn't take his word for it, but trusted what the Bible said as God's true Word. Faith was the result of my decision. Ephesians 2:8 " For by grace are ye saved through faith..." All of these were very important as was the ministry of the Holy Spirit. John 16:8-11
I never looked at the Bible as an object of worship. It was the source of accurate revelation from God. I believed the Bible even as a former Catholic. The problem was with mixing faith in Christ with dead works. It was a clear explanation + Scripture that got through to me and anyone I've ever led to Christ. I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him.
1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Is the Bible not the word? John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
That is a beautiful verse that is included in the Received Text, because God gave us a complete Bible. This is from the same letter, Jim1611.
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us; That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."
One Name for Jesus is the Word. He is certainly described in details that is personified in the same. 5:7 Is, of course, referring to Jesus as you made the clear connection with John 1:14. The written Word that is settled in heaven, is many things including inspired BY God and is profitable for instruction in righteousness. God exhalts His Word and it is truth. I don't believe that mankind for the past two thousand years would have accurately proclaimed the gospel without having it to refer to. Even with it, most add to the simple message of salvation. However, I look to the written Word for understanding, but I don't pray to it. I look to the Word to learn about Jesus, but the written parchments were not nailed to the cross to bleed, suffer and to die for my sins. There are many descriptions that distinguish the written Word from Jesus in the O.T. and N.T.
You learned about salvation from the Bible and you know full well you did. You would not know about salvation by grace if it were not for the Bible.
I learned about math from a math book. And I learned about science from a science book. The books are very important. But that doesn’t elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual science themselves...!
I affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I’m not even close to putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy necessary for my salvation.
Some practice bibliolatry...I don’t. To me, the Bible isn’t co-equal to believing in Jesus and His redemptive work on the cross, in particular when it comes to salvation. To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
[You learned about salvation from the Bible and you know full well you did. You would not know about salvation by grace if it were not for the Bible.
I learned about math from a math book. And I learned about science from a science book. The books are very important. But that doesn’t elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual science themselves...!
I affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I’m not even close to putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy necessary for my salvation.
Some practice bibliolatry...I don’t. To me, the Bible isn’t co-equal to believing in Jesus and His redemptive work on the cross, in particular when it comes to salvation. To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
[Good questions. "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes." Paul to Timothy
IdaHo continually proves that he tries to engender strife and destroy the faith of the unlearned by his questions and comments.
I believe in Jesus and His resurrection but I’m more than skeptical about the Biblical account of creation, Noah and the Ark, and Jonah and the Great Fish (for example). I can follow Jesus without buyin’ into the entire Old Testament and/or New Testament lock, stock, and barrel.
You guys are welcome to believe whatever you want to believe. Keep in mind that Jesus Himself and His apostles believed and taught a six day literal creation. He then went onto demonstrate that He is God Almighty Creator by many miracles, including but not limited to creating food before 16,000 families.
The Jesus that I believe in is the same One Who referenced what He knew to be a literal event of His prophet Jonah being three days and nights in the belly of a whale. Perhaps you think, that Jesus' resurrection was just a figurative allegory? It sounds like you subscribe to the Jeffersonian philosophy. Is his Bible the one that you use?
To me, believing and accepting God’s grace through faith in Jesus and his redemptive work alone is enough for salvation. To me, a belief in the full inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture is not necessary.
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Didn't mean to get your panties in a twist. Certainly was not thinking of you when I posted the question.
To you, I will say, "It ain't much of a faith that can not withstand a little questioning".
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
This Bible is God's written word, Old Hat. Never let these heretics convince you any different. We are willing to submit ourselves to it's divine authority. They are not. That speaks volumes. They are ever leaning but never able to come to the truth, from such turn away.
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
This Bible is God's written word, Old Hat. Never let these heretics convince you any different. We are willing to submit ourselves to it's divine authority. They are not. That speaks volumes. They are ever leaning but never able to come to the truth, from such turn away.
Just in case you didn't get the context of this statement,
"I suppose that there's someone who considers the Bible as the forth member of the trinity if I were to guess, but I never met him."
I was answering antlers statement that people look at the bible as God Himself. I've been as transparent as anybody on the forums about my beliefs. So, I just wanted to make sure there's not been any misunderstanding.
There's at least half a dozen members who do everything they can to undermine the faith of babes in Christ and potential faith of unbelievers. For unbelievers who trust in their good works, it's the difference between heaven and hell. I will answer sincere questions all evening. However, I have little patience for those who just want to sew discord among brethren and send unbelievers to hell. I'm not saying that it's you. You could probably list those I'm referring to.
I Tim..6:12 "Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life..."
How did you learn about Jesus and salvation through grace?
Originally Posted by antlers
My grandfather initially told me about it when I was a boy.
Originally Posted by OldHat
You are being elusive, which tells me you are not interested in engaging in honest discussion. You know full well he read it in the Bible or someone taught him who read it from the Bible. It came from the Bible.
Originally Posted by antlers
Do you think that God ‘only’ reveals Himself through the Bible...? Do you think that Jesus is bound by the covers of a book...? Do you not think there are any truths about God outside of the Bible...? Do you not think that the Holy Spirit does for us what Jesus Himself said that He sent Him for...?
Originally Posted by OldHat
Everything we know about God, Jesus Christ and salvation was and is gotten from the Bible. The Bible IS the canonical source of special revelation from God. We rely on it. Every single time people stray from the Bible spiritual ruin results.
Originally Posted by antlers
I disagree with you. Wholeheartedly. And respectfully.
You are saying the whole salvation story you have in your head came from dreams and family revelations. I don't believe you for a minute.
Such circumstances are where false messiahs come from. The VERY ideas germinating your questions to me about the Holy Spirit and special revelation come from the Bible and you know it because you have read it and are now conforming your anti Scripture ideas to Scripture.
I believe God reveals Himself through natural revelation and special revelation. Natural revelation is the evidence of God in the world around us (Rom 1:20). Special revelation is the communication of the Holy Spirit with our spirit (Acts 2:17). I believe ANY so called special revelation which contradicts the Holy Scripture (which is the word of God) is false 2 Tim 3:16.
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
It means that the men and women who actually knew Jesus personally and chose to follow Him...people like Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, Andrew, Mary, Martha, and Paul...the men and women whose faith laid the groundwork for the evangelization of the entire world, did so without having the Bible itself. And they also received salvation without having the Bible itself, as did many, many followers of Jesus who came after them.
This is a red herring which you drag about to obscure the central question of whether the Bible is a source of Truth - real Truth. It is. The Bible is Holy and the inspired word of God. Being inspired and Holy it is infallible.
First, everyone saved in the earliest centuries post the resurrection did have Scripture. They had the Old Testament. Christ HIMSELF used Scripture to demonstrate He was who He said He was. He used it as proof of His identity and purpose. Second, the ONLY reason you know what you are saying here is because the Bible tells us these truths. So you are using Scripture to say Scripture is unimportant. That is logical non-sense.
Again, it does not matter at all that the full canon was not yet gathered together during the first evangelical missions. There was no Old Testament when Abraham was saved through faith. Yet, Christ preached from the Old Testament. God chose through His wisdom to use Paul and others as powerful witnesses to His completed plan of salvation.
Yep. So is John 1:14, which was also referenced. “Word” as it’s used by Apostle John in his Gospel in the very first verse is a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), and is widely interpreted by translators and Bible scholars as referring to Jesus, as indicated by other verses later in the same chapter (verses 14-17).
It’s: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.
It’s not: In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.
If you are agreeing with Jim and I on those verses, then I think we have a consensus. The translation is "word" for a reason. Why Jesus is called the "word" is up for debate, but I want to go on the record as believing that the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are the Trinity, just in case there's any confusion.
I agree with you HC regarding the Trinity. It is a bed rock Scriptural concept which if denied is a sure indicator of heresy. I fellowship with many questions who have differing interpretations about some verses in the Bile. I have no problem with this. I personally will never fellowship with someone who denies the Trinity.
You learned about salvation from the Bible and you know full well you did. You would not know about salvation by grace if it were not for the Bible.
I learned about math from a math book. And I learned about science from a science book. The books are very important. But that doesn’t elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual science themselves...!
I affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I’m not even close to putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy necessary for my salvation.
Some practice bibliolatry...I don’t. To me, the Bible isn’t co-equal to believing in Jesus and His redemptive work on the cross, in particular when it comes to salvation. To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
Again with your elusive red herrings and obfuscation. This speaks volumes. Nothing in your response addressed what you quoted from me. You use the Bible as a source of truth for your beliefs. It is obvious and you know it. You even use the Bible as your bases for being anti Bible.
I know of no one who worships the Bible. I know a lot of people who believe the Bible is the inspired inerrant special revelation given to us by God using fallible men to write the words on paper.
Since it is obvious you read and believe many many things in the Bible. The only remaining question is what do you chose to reject. Do you accept the writings of Paul as inspired Scripture?
[You learned about salvation from the Bible and you know full well you did. You would not know about salvation by grace if it were not for the Bible.
I learned about math from a math book. And I learned about science from a science book. The books are very important. But that doesn’t elevate those books to the level of importance as the actual math and the actual science themselves...!
I affirm the inspiration of scripture and it’s tremendous importance, but I’m not even close to putting it at the center of my faith, or of making belief in its infallibility and inerrancy necessary for my salvation.
Some practice bibliolatry...I don’t. To me, the Bible isn’t co-equal to believing in Jesus and His redemptive work on the cross, in particular when it comes to salvation. To me, faith in Jesus is enough, I don’t also have to believe in the sanctity of the entire Old and/or New Testaments.
. . . . . 🎤
So beaver, do you believe in the redemptive works of Christ on the cross? Or are you simply engaging in "lets you and him fight."?
This is a red herring which you drag about to obscure the central question of whether the Bible is a source of Truth - real Truth. It is. The Bible is Holy and the inspired word of God. Being inspired and Holy it is infallible.
First, everyone saved in the earliest centuries post the resurrection did have Scripture. They had the Old Testament. Christ HIMSELF used Scripture to demonstrate He was who He said He was. He used it as proof of His identity and purpose. Second, the ONLY reason you know what you are saying here is because the Bible tells us these truths. So you are using Scripture to say Scripture is unimportant. That is logical non-sense.
Again, it does not matter at all that the full canon was not yet gathered together during the first evangelical missions. There was no Old Testament when Abraham was saved through faith. Yet, Christ preached from the Old Testament. God chose through His wisdom to use Paul and others as powerful witnesses to His completed plan of salvation.
Well, if the bible cannot be examined and must be taken literally and the authors of the New Testament cannot be examined or their veracity challenged then it is settled. There is no discussion to be had with you. The creation is only 5 or 6 thousands years old and was created in six 24 hour days despite all evidence to the contrary. The earth including Mount Everest and Denali were under water in the great flood. Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
To you, I will say, "It ain't much of a faith that can not withstand a little questioning".
"Do not participate in the useless deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them;" Eph 5:11
Speaking for myself, I could care less what people on the internet think about my ability to handle questioning. I was saved at 16 in a tiny country Baptist church. I had a lot of questions during the first decade or so. I asked and sought out the most difficult questions regarding the truth of what was really going on in the world spiritually. God lead me though some tough times and still does. He is faithful and true!
Many decades later and I have heard it all multiple times. I've heard all the atheists, agnostics, pagans, satanists, apostates and heretics have to say. It's all bullshit and empty. I still have empathy for the new seeker, but I have learned there are many jaded and hardened self promoters in the world.
Thousands of Jews and Gentiles understood the truth of the Gospel before the New Testament was ever even written.
That does not in anyway mean the Bible is not the inspired word of God. The Bible was written by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When does not matter in the least.
This Bible is God's written word, Old Hat. Never let these heretics convince you any different. We are willing to submit ourselves to it's divine authority. They are not. That speaks volumes. They are ever leaning but never able to come to the truth, from such turn away.
Just to be clear, debate and interpretation of Scripture is normal and to be expected. There is room in The Church for such and I will gladly fellowship with many denominations with whom I disagree on interpretation. That is very different from the complete undermining of the Bible. By claiming the Bible is just a bunch of written words akin to a history book clearly allows false teachers free reign to distort the message from God.
Yep. So is John 1:14, which was also referenced. “Word” as it’s used by Apostle John in his Gospel in the very first verse is a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), and is widely interpreted by translators and Bible scholars as referring to Jesus, as indicated by other verses later in the same chapter (verses 14-17).
It’s: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.
It’s not: In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.
If you are agreeing with Jim and I on those verses, then I think we have a consensus. The translation is "word" for a reason. Why Jesus is called the "word" is up for debate, but I want to go on the record as believing that the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are the Trinity, just in case there's any confusion.
I agree with you HC regarding the Trinity. It is a bed rock Scriptural concept which if denied is a sure indicator of heresy. I fellowship with many questions who have differing interpretations about some verses in the Bile. I have no problem with this. I personally will never fellowship with someone who denies the Trinity.
If I remember correctly, that was one of the Fundamentals written about by Southern Baptist J. Frank Norris. That term was used a hundred years ago to describe the doctrines that were well established throughout Scripture. You just mentioned a couple more like , inspiration of the written Word, the person of Christ, redemption through faith in Him alone. These are taken for granted by most of us who read and believe the Bible. At the time of Norris' pastorate, he disputed with the liberal pastors of the SBC over issues like evolution and creation. Even in a large Southern Baptist Bible college of his day, they were teaching darwinian evolution as fact, among other heresies. He and others wanted the denomination to go back and re-establish the fundamental basic distinctives that evangelical conservative, Bible believing christianity was based upon. From what I can tell, in the 1980s there was a demonization of the term as the islamic religions were being labeled "Fundamentalists". It took 5 seconds for the liberal pastors, media and govmt to use this to intentionally demonize christianity with this term. Look at who their enemies are today? Peaceful, conservative christians who stand in their devil's way to world tyranny. If they had their way, the gospel would be silenced and Jesus'name would be but a curse word. Bible literalist who believed as we, who make up the majority of christianity in north amerIca for the past many decades, were in fact be refered to as fundamentalists by liberals like Izh who started this thread. Rather than acknowledge the fact of what the term really meant for the past century, they redefined it to turn the ignorant public against true christians. Notice how he, IZH, demonizes us with the term and equates those who believe in the fundamentals of the faith with the Islamic radicals who are known to murder christians like us throughout the middle east. He established a false definition (lied) which suits his agenda to undermine the clear teachings of Scripture on this message board. He, along with beaver, NVhunter biden, lvmike reprobate, rene' 50, Jim the Conman etc. have been trying their hardest to attack doctrines essential to Christ's free gift of salvation since I first proclaimed it. They probably did this with others who cared enough to share this long before I joined too. I'm explaining this to you since you have spiritual eye's to see and display the spiritual courage to not worry what those demonic trolls think about you. If they want to attack me in order to silence the message embedded in my signature, so be it. I'll just redouble my efforts. There's doors to knock on and people everywhere that need to be saved.
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be. There is no valid comparison in your example. Jesus was never caught lying. If in fact someone named Paul did write the writings attributed to him he could be impeached and his testimony could be destroyed by even an inexperienced interrogator.
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
Do you believe in Joseph Smith's similar claims of Paul, is the book of Mormon scripture? Can a Mormon who disregards Paul and embraces Joseph Smith be saved?
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
Do you believe in Joseph Smith's similar claims of Paul, NO! is the book of Mormon scripture? NO! Can a Mormon who disregards Paul and embraces Joseph Smith be saved? That's NOT my call!
Kent
I would note that Zech 12/13 speaks of 'a Day' and in/on that day prophets would be removed from the land. There had been prophets 'in the land' from before Noah through the 'Day' mentioned in Zech........... J Smith came well after that...........
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be. There is no valid comparison in your example. Jesus was never caught lying. If in fact someone named Paul did write the writings attributed to him he could be impeached and his testimony could be destroyed by even an inexperienced interrogator.
If you deny He physically died and his dead body rose from the dead then you don't believe in Jesus The Christ. What Jesus do you believe in?
Do you believe in any miracles? Do you believe Jesus raised physically dead people from the dead?
Jesus's claims come from the Bible. So what books in the Bible do you believe? Do you believe any of the Gospel accounts? Do you believe Jesus when He said the Old Testament testified of Him? Do you believe the Old testament as Christ did?
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
Do you believe in Joseph Smith's similar claims of Paul, is the book of Mormon scripture? Can a Mormon who disregards Paul and embraces Joseph Smith be saved?
Kent
No, of course not, a cursory study of Joseph Smith tells us he was an occultist and obtained the book of mormon through scrying (which is demonic). No, one cannot be saved through Mormonism.
"When they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should a people not consult their God? Should they consult the dead in behalf of the living?" Isaiah 8:19
I don't know what the purpose of your questions are. I'm a Christian. It should go with out saying there are many faiths I reject and don't believe in. No point is made by pointing this out.
And to me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of His ekklesia is NOT an assemblage of ancient writings that we call the Bible. To me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of Jesus’ ekklesia is the actuality and truth of Jesus’ Resurrection.
Without Jesus’ Resurrection, the entire faith of Christianity is reduced to nothingness. The apostle Paul said, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” The New Testament wouldn’t even exist unless the Resurrection occurred.
The Mormons (LDS) and Jehovah Witness missionaries both lost me when I allowed them in and lo and behold they both opened the book of Ezekiel and presented themselves as Israel and God's chosen. They used chapter 37 and claimed to be the dry bones. The J.W.s had a young man that got angry with me in my own house when I pointed out my take on the story happened already in 1948 and pertained to the actual chosen people (Jews) and I told him God had not forsaken the Jews. The Mormons claimed it was them and the valley was the Great Basin in Utah.
I don't know what the purpose of your questions are. I'm a Christian. It should go with out saying there are many faiths I reject and don't believe in. No point is made by pointing this out.
Obviously I'm asking you the same questions you are asking others about Paul.
You wish to ignore Mormons as others wish to ignore Paul.
You asked Hastings twice and even quoted his answer in the second question, he answered... I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be.
What was the purpose of your continued questioning? though I know why.
So do you believe Mormons who accept Christ as their savior through the book of Mormon are saved?
Paul didn't lie when he claimed he was transported into the 3rd level of heaven.
Do you believe Christ was resurrected from the dead? Which is the greater miracle Paul's claim or the resurrection of a 3 day old dead body?
I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be. There is no valid comparison in your example. Jesus was never caught lying. If in fact someone named Paul did write the writings attributed to him he could be impeached and his testimony could be destroyed by even an inexperienced interrogator.
If you deny He physically died and his dead body rose from the dead then you don't believe in Jesus The Christ. What Jesus do you believe in? Do you believe in any miracles? Do you believe Jesus raised physically dead people from the dead? Jesus's claims come from the Bible. So what books in the Bible do you believe? Do you believe any of the Gospel accounts? Do you believe Jesus when He said the Old Testament testified of Him? Do you believe the Old testament as Christ did?
No need for you to be upset. You don't have to answer to the Creator for me. I'm reading and digesting the scriptures in the Bible and also some of the writings that weren't included. I'm going to circle the bait and the decoys a while. It pays to be careful when extraordinary claims are made without extraordinary evidence.
I don't know what the purpose of your questions are. I'm a Christian. It should go with out saying there are many faiths I reject and don't believe in. No point is made by pointing this out.
Obviously I'm asking you the same questions you are asking others about Paul.
You wish to ignore Mormons as others wish to ignore Paul.
You asked Hastings twice and even quoted his answer in the second question, he answered... I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be.
What was the purpose of your continued questioning? though I know why.
So do you believe Mormons who accept Christ as their savior through the book of Mormon are saved?
Kent
This seems to be a poorly worded trick question. It lays out or at least infers a false premise. That premise is that it is the “same” Jesus being referred to.
A comparison of “who Jesus is and who He represents in the Godhead….. and also, what His function is in man’s salvation” is key. Simple put, the Jesus described in the Bible is not the same as the Jesus presented in Mormonism.
Another comment…. Our local church once suffered sudden and very serious damage to our church building. Many local churches and a number of local businesses provided aid and support as our church worked through the difficulty.
Two local organizations provided very significant, much and timely support to us. One was the local Seventh Day Adventist church and the other was the local Mormon church….much needed, much appreciated and much assistance well beyond “we’re praying for you.” When we had a specific need, our pastor would often call them for assistance and they always provided it. They did good.
We had a special Sunday where the Mormon church leadership came to our our church was honored and thanked by our entire church congregation. They helped us a lot.
A bit unusual…. But while we have significant theological differences, if push came to shove, our congregation would stand with them and I believe they would stand with us.
Shared tasks and shared action during emergencies build strong bonds and strong affiliations.
Confused about religion during a time of revival in the state of New York where he lived in 1820, 14-year-old Joseph read a passage in the New Testament and went to the woods to pray. Joseph records that God and Jesus Christ appeared to him. "I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head," he wrote, "above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me." Within that light, he saw two personages — one of whom spoke Joseph's name, pointed to the other, and said, "This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" Church members refer to this experience as the "First Vision." It forever changed Joseph Smith and has become a central tenet of Latter-day Saint belief. It began the work of restoring the Church of Jesus Christ to the earth.
No trick, obviously both Paul and Smith came 'after' Jesus, with similar claims. Both wrote powerful words that inspired many people. I really liked Billy Graham growing up, was able to see him live a couple times in my teens, he definitely was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
I don't have to believe any of their words are scripture to live in Christ.
I accept that Christ has a plan and path for every man as he said.
I accept that my path isn't the only road and neither is someone else's.
I don't have to conform to worldly words to live spiritually.
I will NEVER question another's personal salvation as Christ instructed.
But I will question those that, even thinly veiled, do. Where do you get the authority?
Someone here asked how many God's there were. Well God's infinite. Narrow minded people think they can understand infinite, it just goes forever... It does more than that, if you could somehow put a pin in a starting point, not only would it go forward, but forward in an infinite direction, it also would go backwards in an infinite direction, it would expand infinitely and collapse infinitely. There is an infinite amount of points all doing the same thing. Time goes forward and backward infinitely... It's unexplainable in finite words.
God isn't just 1, a finite number... he's infinite.
Go ahead and contain God in a small book of finite words, it's all good. But don't judge other's who see an infinite God.
And to me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of His ekklesia is NOT an assemblage of ancient writings that we call the Bible. To me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of Jesus’ ekklesia is the actuality and truth of Jesus’ Resurrection.
Without Jesus’ Resurrection, the entire faith of Christianity is reduced to nothingness. The apostle Paul said, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” The New Testament wouldn’t even exist unless the Resurrection occurred.
You have already said thaht multiple times. The testimony of His resurrection is obtained through the Bible. Then you believe Paul's words in the Bible.
I don't know what the purpose of your questions are. I'm a Christian. It should go with out saying there are many faiths I reject and don't believe in. No point is made by pointing this out.
Obviously I'm asking you the same questions you are asking others about Paul.
You wish to ignore Mormons as others wish to ignore Paul.
You asked Hastings twice and even quoted his answer in the second question, he answered... I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be.
What was the purpose of your continued questioning? though I know why.
So do you believe Mormons who accept Christ as their savior through the book of Mormon are saved?
Kent
You are obtuse. As I said no I do not believe Mormons are saved through the book of Mormon or any other path taught through Mormonism. That goes with out saying because I'm a Christian. Do you understand what Christianity is. It is EXCLUSIVE. It excludes all other religions. Asking me such a question is a non sense question.
hastings and antler both deny parts of the Bible. The questions I'm asking them is how they can claim so much knowledge about Christ and deny large parts of the Bible. How is that possible. Both seem to suffer from a cognitive dissonance. They say they believe something which conflicts with what they say they don't believe. They claim Biblical truths and then say they deny the Bible. Which is it. How do they get these truths they claim to believe.
And to me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of His ekklesia is NOT an assemblage of ancient writings that we call the Bible. To me, the all-inclusive foundation...the very foundation...of Jesus’ ekklesia is the actuality and truth of Jesus’ Resurrection.
Without Jesus’ Resurrection, the entire faith of Christianity is reduced to nothingness. The apostle Paul said, “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.” The New Testament wouldn’t even exist unless the Resurrection occurred.
You have already said thaht multiple times. The testimony of His resurrection is obtained through the Bible. Then you believe Paul's words in the Bible.
So Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't testify of the resurrection in the Gospels?
No need for you to be upset. You don't have to answer to the Creator for me. I'm reading and digesting the scriptures in the Bible and also some of the writings that weren't included. I'm going to circle the bait and the decoys a while. It pays to be careful when extraordinary claims are made without extraordinary evidence.
I see. What non Biblical sources are you reading? Let me guess ... the Gnostic Gospels maybe?
Extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary evidence. The goofy internet atheist crowd believes that non sense. Claims require evidence. Full stop.
I don't know what the purpose of your questions are. I'm a Christian. It should go with out saying there are many faiths I reject and don't believe in. No point is made by pointing this out.
Obviously I'm asking you the same questions you are asking others about Paul.
You wish to ignore Mormons as others wish to ignore Paul.
You asked Hastings twice and even quoted his answer in the second question, he answered... I believe Jesus was EXACTLY who he claimed to be.
What was the purpose of your continued questioning? though I know why.
So do you believe Mormons who accept Christ as their savior through the book of Mormon are saved?
Kent
You are obtuse. As I said no I do not believe Mormons are saved through the book of Mormon or any other path taught through Mormonism. That goes with out saying because I'm a Christian. Do you understand what Christianity is. It is EXCLUSIVE. It excludes all other religions. Asking me such a question is a non sense question.
hastings and antler both deny parts of the Bible. The questions I'm asking them is how they can claim so much knowledge about Christ and deny large parts of the Bible. How is that possible. Both seem to suffer from a cognitive dissonance. They say they believe something which conflicts with what they say they don't believe. They claim Biblical truths and then say they deny the Bible. Which is it. How do they get these truths they claim to believe.
You have been obvious this whole time, an obvious follower of Paul. Paul is exclusive and Christ is inclusive. Neither Paul or you define Christ or anyone else's salvation.
The testimony of His resurrection is obtained through the Bible.
God doesn’t ‘only’ reveal Himself to us through the Bible. There is also...under the guidance of the Holy Spirit...natural revelation and special revelation ~ reason, empirical experience, and subjective experience (for examples). And I’ve already said that multiple times too.
Jesus gave us a directive to examine the evidence. I embrace the role of natural revelation and special revelation...including reason...in Christian theology. Without natural revelation, one couldn’t even understand the Bible...or pretty much anything else about reality...! Luther realized this, he didn’t dismiss reason, he said he’d only recant if he could be proven wrong by Scripture ‘or’ reason.
Confused about religion during a time of revival in the state of New York where he lived in 1820, 14-year-old Joseph read a passage in the New Testament and went to the woods to pray. Joseph records that God and Jesus Christ appeared to him. "I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head," he wrote, "above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me." Within that light, he saw two personages — one of whom spoke Joseph's name, pointed to the other, and said, "This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" Church members refer to this experience as the "First Vision." It forever changed Joseph Smith and has become a central tenet of Latter-day Saint belief. It began the work of restoring the Church of Jesus Christ to the earth.
No trick, obviously both Paul and Smith came 'after' Jesus, with similar claims. Both wrote powerful words that inspired many people. I really liked Billy Graham growing up, was able to see him live a couple times in my teens, he definitely was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
I don't have to believe any of their words are scripture to live in Christ.
I accept that Christ has a plan and path for every man as he said.
I accept that my path isn't the only road and neither is someone else's.
I don't have to conform to worldly words to live spiritually.
I will NEVER question another's personal salvation as Christ instructed.
But I will question those that, even thinly veiled, do. Where do you get the authority?
Someone here asked how many God's there were. Well God's infinite. Narrow minded people think they can understand infinite, it just goes forever... It does more than that, if you could somehow put a pin in a starting point, not only would it go forward, but forward in an infinite direction, it also would go backwards in an infinite direction, it would expand infinitely and collapse infinitely. There is an infinite amount of points all doing the same thing. Time goes forward and backward infinitely... It's unexplainable in finite words.
God isn't just 1, a finite number... he's infinite.
Go ahead and contain God in a small book of finite words, it's all good. But don't judge other's who see an infinite God.
Kent
Good response…. But…. But pls do not think that I personally believe God is “contained in a small book of finite words.”
God indeed must be worshiped in spirit and in truth. Only a few words, but they are the words of God. They stand.
I also believe that God is NOT the God described by the “all things to all people” folks. What one believes does indeed matter… it is of great importance.
Now, to a sticky point….. does one have to understand God with all the theological implications that may accompany a saving faith? I did not when I became a follower of Jesus.
Seems to me that God can have a …. or cause…. a life changing experience with a small child…. The child … or even an adult with limited theological knowledge can….through the call of the Father, the witness of the Holy Spirit and the power of the saving sacrifical blood if the Son of God….. enter into a new vibrant relationship with God Himself.
Also, as ….who was it? …..Old Hat? Like him…..Whether or not some individual has a saving faith in Jesus” is not my call.”
Having said this … I get a bit concerned when I read someone defending a “denomination” ….. be it Catholicism, Baptist, Mormon, Church of Christ…whatever…. It is not the denomination that saves…. It is not a strong held belief in some theological system that saves….. it is Jehovah God….. it is the one and only Son, Jesus enables a sinful man to stand righteous before God.
I'm not sure if I qualify as a fundamnetalist,but I can tell you that I fall short everyday. I do like to share my faith with people who are interested,but do not want to arrogantly impose my beliefs on anybody.
I just consider myself to be a follower of christ who belongs to a local church
Confused about religion during a time of revival in the state of New York where he lived in 1820, 14-year-old Joseph read a passage in the New Testament and went to the woods to pray. Joseph records that God and Jesus Christ appeared to him. "I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head," he wrote, "above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me." Within that light, he saw two personages — one of whom spoke Joseph's name, pointed to the other, and said, "This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" Church members refer to this experience as the "First Vision." It forever changed Joseph Smith and has become a central tenet of Latter-day Saint belief. It began the work of restoring the Church of Jesus Christ to the earth.
No trick, obviously both Paul and Smith came 'after' Jesus, with similar claims. Both wrote powerful words that inspired many people. I really liked Billy Graham growing up, was able to see him live a couple times in my teens, he definitely was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
I don't have to believe any of their words are scripture to live in Christ.
I accept that Christ has a plan and path for every man as he said.
I accept that my path isn't the only road and neither is someone else's.
I don't have to conform to worldly words to live spiritually.
I will NEVER question another's personal salvation as Christ instructed.
But I will question those that, even thinly veiled, do. Where do you get the authority?
Someone here asked how many God's there were. Well God's infinite. Narrow minded people think they can understand infinite, it just goes forever... It does more than that, if you could somehow put a pin in a starting point, not only would it go forward, but forward in an infinite direction, it also would go backwards in an infinite direction, it would expand infinitely and collapse infinitely. There is an infinite amount of points all doing the same thing. Time goes forward and backward infinitely... It's unexplainable in finite words.
God isn't just 1, a finite number... he's infinite.
Go ahead and contain God in a small book of finite words, it's all good. But don't judge other's who see an infinite God.
Kent
Good response…. But…. But pls do not think that I personally believe God is “contained in a small book of finite words.”
God indeed must be worshiped in spirit and in truth. Only a few words, but they are the words of God. They stand.
I also believe that God is NOT the God described by the “all things to all people” folks. What one believes does indeed matter… it is of great importance.
Now, to a sticky point….. does one have to understand God with all the theological implications that may accompany a saving faith? I did not when I became a follower of Jesus.
Seems to me that God can have a …. or cause…. a life changing experience with a small child…. The child … or even an adult with limited theological knowledge can….through the call of the Father, the witness of the Holy Spirit and the power of the saving sacrifical blood if the Son of God….. enter into a new vibrant relationship with God Himself.
Also, as ….who was it? …..Old Hat? Like him…..Whether or not some individual has a saving faith in Jesus” is not my call.”
Having said this … I get a bit concerned when I read someone defending a “denomination” ….. be it Catholicism, Baptist, Mormon, Church of Christ…whatever…. It is not the denomination that saves…. It is not a strong held belief in some theological system that saves….. it is Jehovah God….. it is the one and only Son, Jesus enables a sinful man to stand righteous before God.
This Paul, Christ, bible is an old argument here on the fire over the last 10 years, I kind of take a different approach than the last 5 times to get people to think. I'm not busting someone faith, just maybe expand it to accept another's... I do admit I enjoy sarcasm and pointing out ironic'ism.
As brief a history of my faith as possible.
I knew of the Holy Spirit with my first memories, though I didn't understand obviously... 3 years old? That or I had an imaginable friend like Harvey the pink rabbit. I just knew of this presence, a really good presence.
I was baptized at 12, mom said I just got up and walked forward one sunday morning when the call was made, it surprised her. What I remember was I wasn't changed or born again. I realized I was born with. Later I came to believe we are all born with and what is claimed to be 'born again' is finally awareness, it's a good thing whenever it happens regardless of baptism by water.
I always worked my brother and I, chopping weeds in irrigation ditches, raising calves, growing corn to sell on the corner, chores. When I was 11 I started delivering papers, I did it till I was almost 16 when I got a real job at Tastee freeze. It was 2 miles bike ride from the country to the subdivision and paper route. The crux of this is I thought a lot about God and who he was, what he was in my life on those miles. Not a normal child's thoughts maybe.
At 14 the church decided I was to be groomed for the ministry. The combined church leaders decided to create a seminary class at my school, they had to ask the Mormons to use their building just off school grounds, the Mormons and school agreed. The year before on my own I had started reading the bible straight through. During that first year I had finished the bible and I never fully accepted what they taught what the bible said vs what I read it said... But the real reason for mentioning this is the teachers were the DRs of the various churches, and more than once when we were in the Mormon's building they allowed us to use, those DRs would make fun of and denounce the Mormon and things they had on the walls. They were so sure they knew the path to God and the Mormons weren't saved... didn't sit right with me.
I was taught to use chapter and verse and wield them as shield and sword against all others, including Mormons and even Catholics. Many of my cousins are Mormons and we had some terrible theological battles, each side thinking they won.
Next few years continued on, I was preaching from the pulpit at 16 when a substitute was needed, prepared sermons... the prodigy of the church. I was shown the working of the church behind the scenes, the personalities and the difficulties in balance, not of spirit but of men.
I read the bible again at 18, reading the new testament again I could see Christ's life example in the Gospels and the contrast of man in the rest. I could clearly see the church's direction and what it was based on. Seeing new christians put their faith in the church and lose their faith because of the church when the minister gets caught with the choir lady... and yes that really happened.
I couldn't accept to be a suit and tie at the pulpit, preaching beyond the simple truth Christ brought.
Ok…. Pls bear with me …..Let me ask a clarifying question in a “made up” scenario….
Here is the scenario…. You have died and you are standing at Heaven’s Gate talking with Peter…he reads from his “book of your life”….. he gets a concerned look on his face and he asks you “Why should we let you into Heaven?”
To some it’s all about believing correctly. The church went to war with itself over beliefs. They argued over words, and they argued over peripheral things. During the reformation tens of thousands of people died as Christian groups went to war with each other. People were arrested and strangled and burned over the issue of what is the right thing to believe. The core beliefs of Christianity are really quite simple. There will always be some haziness around the periphery, but there is extraordinary clarity around the core.
When Peter said “you’re the Christ, the son of the living God”, Jesus said “you’re exactly right, and I’m gonna build a brand new movement around this one simple idea, my identity, who I claim to be”, that He would later punctuate with His resurrection. And that is a core belief. Perhaps the only thing we have in common in terms of belief with other Jesus followers throughout the world is that core belief. And toward the end of His ministry He gave us a new commandment, not a list, just one...”you are to love one another the way that I have loved you.” This was so core, so central, that He said this, “by this kind of unique love everyone will know that you are my followers if you love one another.” He said this is how His followers would be recognized. This is at the very center of the center of the center of what it means to be a follower of Jesus.
Long before there was ‘the Bible’, long before there were chapters and verses, there was a version of the faith that got people’s attention because of how it’s followers behaved and not simply because of what they believed. A small group of em’ in the butthole of the Roman Empire...the leader of whom had been rejected by His own people and executed...would over time be embraced by the same empire that tried to stamp em’ out.
They were squashed between the Jewish Temple and the Roman Empire, and Jesus’ ekklesia should have been entombed alongside its founder. But nope...nowadays Christians from around the world visit the ruins of the Forum in Rome...and across the Mediterranean tourists are takin’ pictures of the ruins of the Temple in Jerusalem.
How’d ‘that’ happen...? What’d those early 1st-century followers of Jesus know that we don’t...?
Ain’t seein’ much of that kinda compelling or attractive faith overall from the Church...or those in it...anymore. Not nowadays. Not by a long shot.
The publican said it best ''God, be merciful to me a sinner''. That is what I'm asking. Like the prodigal son "I am not worthy"
Here's a blessing
John 3:16... Jesus said, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
Ok…. Pls bear with me …..Let me ask a clarifying question in a “made up” scenario….
Here is the scenario…. You have died and you are standing at Heaven’s Gate talking with Peter…he reads from his “book of your life”….. he gets a concerned look on his face and he asks you “Why should we let you into Heaven?”
Let me ask a clarifying question in a “made up” scenario…. Here is the scenario…. You have died and you are standing at Heaven’s Gate talking with Peter…he reads from his “book of your life”….. he gets a concerned look on his face and he asks you “Why should we let you into Heaven?” How do you respond?
There is a contradiction between universal salvation - Jesus died for the sins of mankind, therefore sin has been wiped away and all are saved - and predestination, as the verse tells us, "vessels' fitted for destruction."
"Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?" Roman 9:21
Ok…. Pls bear with me …..Let me ask a clarifying question in a “made up” scenario….
Here is the scenario…. You have died and you are standing at Heaven’s Gate talking with Peter…he reads from his “book of your life”….. he gets a concerned look on his face and he asks you “Why should we let you into Heaven?”
How do you respond?
Well, there's nothing in this life that I can do to deserve it. I exist in this world the best I can and treat others the best I can. There's no salvation to be won in this world. People struggle with the concept we have to do something here above our ability.
Peter is just another man, the good news is he has a responsibility given to him. I can't be saved by this life but I can be tempered for whatever responsibility God has in store for me. I believe these responsibilities are harder than anything we can experience here... So much for laying at God's feet in bliss eating grapes and shaded by palm leaves.
You won't read yourself to salvation, or study, or preach. Christ will come to us all.
He brought salvation through death and resurrection, we can say we believe as hard as we want, or say we don't believe as hard as we want. But the bright light will come to us all, every man, we will hear and we will see... a death brought salvation and our death salvation revealed.
Jesus didn't write any word, his word is to be heard, he is the word, he waits for me and us all at death, we will be born again in the light of the spirit.
John 5:24-26
24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
Ok…. Pls bear with me …..Let me ask a clarifying question in a “made up” scenario….
Here is the scenario…. You have died and you are standing at Heaven’s Gate talking with Peter…he reads from his “book of your life”….. he gets a concerned look on his face and he asks you “Why should we let you into Heaven?”
How do you respond?
Not Kent, but:
St. P: Fub, let's see what we got.
Fub: K
St P.: Well, there's some good stuff and some bad stuff, I dunno......
Fub: I think I made the cut.
St. P.: What makes you think you've done enough?
Fub: Well, there was that time I rescued that girl from bein molested by a motorcycle gang.
St. P. (flipping through pages): What?
Fub: Yeah, I stopped em from molestin her. Was drivin by, saw her on the sidea the road with those losers. So, I gott outta my car, grabbed the tire iron, walked up ta the biggest @sshole biker there, whacked him upside the head with the tire iron, turned to the others, and said: Who's next?
St. P. (flippin through pages): I don't see anything like that, and you *know* I have the best information. Don't lie to me. When did this happen?
Originally Posted by EthanEdwards Originally Posted by IZH27 Originally Posted by lvmiker Ok I think I get it. All who fail to adopt a certain belief system will go to the fiery furnace. That is exactly what those smelly guys in turbans believe.
Does anyone believe in a kind god that embraces all who are good?
mike r
That's kinda what I was aiming for in one of the points in the OP. Fundamentalism really isn't a good thing. Look at Afghanistan right now.
I'm not really sure how to respond to the idea of a belief system. I've kinda come to the conclusion that all religions in the world are about belief systems. Christianity stands out as being different. Christ kept it pretty simple when he said that all who believe have eternal life. Maybe all men are fundamentalists at heart because it's hard to find anybody who will let Christ's words stand as they are. Men want to add a bunch of do's and don't's to the proposition and make it a system of belief rather than something that is given to them In a quick perusal of your posts, it seemed to me from the get-go you were trying, as the MSM does, to use the term "fundamentalism" to lump conservative Christians in with fundamentalist sects of Muslims and other groups that generally are terroristic. Fundamentalist Christians vary wildly from group to group but are, in general, simply conservative believers in Christ and the Bible. Christianity is greatly different from any other religion. As Rockchuck is trying to point out, at its core is the belief that there is nothing an individual can do to save himself. Salvation only comes through belief/faith in Jesus Christ and that faith is a gift from God. It comes from without, not from within. That is the huge difference between Christianity of any stripe and all other religions. Buzz words/terms like "fundamentalist" and "evangelical" usually come from sources that wish to put Christians in categories with other religions and liken them to them. They cannot be as Christianity is truly different.
A kind God is what we have. One Who holds everything together by strict adherence to the law and Who found a way to salvage His imperfect creation even while adhering to the last letter of that law. Praise God (Jesus) for ever and ever. Amen.
That was never the intent of a the post. You have read into my posts something that isn’t there.
Unfortunately both the word fundamentalist and evangelical were not words assigned to Christians but schools of thought developed by Christians. These schools of thought “further defined” the faith. No matter the endeavor be it religious or secular the original begins to change when isms and ists are added.
Originally Posted by IZH27
I’ll stand by my statement that Christian Fundamentalism does not preach the Gospel but rather a gospel. That has to do with a misuse of the law and confusing the law as a means of Grace after salvation. Considering the American churches roots in the influence of Revivalism and Wesleyanism it isn’t hard to understand how we arrived at a broad embrace of fundamentalism.
Fundamentalist Christianity in America is much much more than a nod at “just following the Bible”. When it is taken to it’s full logical end it results in a liberal or conservative legalism. It produces practitioners who are judgmental, condemning and filled with self righteousness. We witness that regularly in posts made on the fire.
You just proved my point. I know of no sect that calls itself "Fundamentalist". There may be one, but I don't know of it. Lots of churches identify with fundamental Christian beliefs. It's a far cry from a Fundamentalist as far as Islam is concerned. AFAIK the term could be applied to either a faith-based Church or a works based one.
I apologize for taking so long to respond. With the pre holiday schedule and 4 days off the week was hectic.
There are definitely similarities between fundamentalism and legalism. My understanding of Legalism is that it takes the Law/Ten Commandments and develops those commands into a litmus test to determine the holiness or righteousness of a member of the church. They claim salvation through faith in the work of Christ but beat their members to death by using the Law as a measure and means of maintaining their status before God.
Fundamentalism does the same thing only Law is replaced or combined with law small L. It has developed into a high moralism but is legalistic all the same. Inclusions and exclusions abound and are used to control and manipulate the members just as in traditional Legalism.
This is the extent of my comparison between these movements and Islam. Rules and regulations are used as a means of manipulation and control.
While there are a handful of denominations which openly identify as Fundamental/Fundamentalist I don't see it as a necessary title to adopt in order to be practicing Fundamentalist Christianity. It's been a while since I dived deep into the nuances of Fundamentalism and it's influence on the American. The influences exist in nearly all denominations. It can be argued that those influences have led to the liberalism that is now so rampant.
I'd say that we both know Democrats who have no idea that they have slowly been swayed to adopt and champion progressive liberal ideology. Even though they don't self identify as progressives they have become progressive. To me that analogy holds with the fundamentalist influence on the American church.
Jesus told the disciples who he sent out to teach that if a town wouldn't listen, shake the dust from their feet as they left. This passage was almost written for Christians posting on the Fire.
Mat 10:14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. 15 Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. 16 Behold, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.
What do you do when the false prophets follow you from thread to thread or town to town attempting to prevent others from turning to faith in Christ? THAT is the reality of what's going on. And then there are those like Elymas...
Paul dealt with them all the time. The false teachers he wrote about so often were either Jews or agnostics who were lead by Satan to fight against Paul and others who were spreading the word.
He sure did. They even followed him from town to town. He kept on Preaching the gospel as you and a few of our brothers here have already expressed so clearly. Since the Elymas started this thread, I noticed that it doesn't get the typical attacks as it normally does. Maybe the devil's are waiting to see how they can misdirect and demonize the Bible believers first?
I'm curious. How do you know my status before God? I was reading in Proverbs this morning. I read a passage there noting that God looks on the heart, determines the status of a man by looking at his heart. Do you claim that ability? or are you simply practicing condemnation of a human being of which you know little to nothing?
BTW. A correction to your assessment of me as the originator of the thread. Barabbas would be a much better comparison.
People want a small God, a God they can contain in a single book, a God in the image of words they write, a God in their image.
Kent
I'd say that's pretty much the sum of things. Men want a God that they can control. I believe that this was the emphasis behind Calvin's comment that the heart is a perpetual factory of idols.
It seems to me that there is a point of tension in all truths of Scripture. God is transcendent yet condescending. In His condescension we have very limited knowledge of Him. I think that because of this we want to define Him and wring out everything so that it conforms to a framework that we can comprehend. It's seem a whole lot easier to try to learn to let there be a tension between what we know and the vast amount that we don't know.
Yep. So is John 1:14, which was also referenced. “Word” as it’s used by Apostle John in his Gospel in the very first verse is a translation of the Greek λόγος (logos), and is widely interpreted by translators and Bible scholars as referring to Jesus, as indicated by other verses later in the same chapter (verses 14-17).
It’s: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.
It’s not: In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God.
If you are agreeing with Jim and I on those verses, then I think we have a consensus. The translation is "word" for a reason. Why Jesus is called the "word" is up for debate, but I want to go on the record as believing that the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit are the Trinity, just in case there's any confusion.
I agree with you HC regarding the Trinity. It is a bed rock Scriptural concept which if denied is a sure indicator of heresy. I fellowship with many questions who have differing interpretations about some verses in the Bile. I have no problem with this. I personally will never fellowship with someone who denies the Trinity.
If I remember correctly, that was one of the Fundamentals written about by Southern Baptist J. Frank Norris. That term was used a hundred years ago to describe the doctrines that were well established throughout Scripture. You just mentioned a couple more like , inspiration of the written Word, the person of Christ, redemption through faith in Him alone. These are taken for granted by most of us who read and believe the Bible. At the time of Norris' pastorate, he disputed with the liberal pastors of the SBC over issues like evolution and creation. Even in a large Southern Baptist Bible college of his day, they were teaching darwinian evolution as fact, among other heresies. He and others wanted the denomination to go back and re-establish the fundamental basic distinctives that evangelical conservative, Bible believing christianity was based upon. From what I can tell, in the 1980s there was a demonization of the term as the islamic religions were being labeled "Fundamentalists". It took 5 seconds for the liberal pastors, media and govmt to use this to intentionally demonize christianity with this term. Look at who their enemies are today? Peaceful, conservative christians who stand in their devil's way to world tyranny. If they had their way, the gospel would be silenced and Jesus'name would be but a curse word. Bible literalist who believed as we, who make up the majority of christianity in north amerIca for the past many decades, were in fact be refered to as fundamentalists by liberals like Izh who started this thread. Rather than acknowledge the fact of what the term really meant for the past century, they redefined it to turn the ignorant public against true christians. Notice how he, IZH, demonizes us with the term and equates those who believe in the fundamentals of the faith with the Islamic radicals who are known to murder christians like us throughout the middle east. He established a false definition (lied) which suits his agenda to undermine the clear teachings of Scripture on this message board. He, along with beaver, NVhunter biden, lvmike reprobate, rene' 50, Jim the Conman etc. have been trying their hardest to attack doctrines essential to Christ's free gift of salvation since I first proclaimed it. They probably did this with others who cared enough to share this long before I joined too. I'm explaining this to you since you have spiritual eye's to see and display the spiritual courage to not worry what those demonic trolls think about you. If they want to attack me in order to silence the message embedded in my signature, so be it. I'll just redouble my efforts. There's doors to knock on and people everywhere that need to be saved.
Happy Camper
Who has attacked you? Please don't make the thread about you.
If you haven’t noticed HC try’s to make every thread about him. His delusion that everyone here is attacking him is comical at best. Most of us have figured out he’s nothing but a Charlatan and a BS artist.
