EvC Forum: Is God determined to allow no proof or evidence of his existence?

Faith writes:

Ta da!! I declare Legend the winner of this thread!!
He's made the best arguments and you've copped out.

Well Faith. Isn't that special.

Anyone else in this thread feel that Legend is the winner?

Faith, for the sake of this discussion, I'm going to try really hard to hold back the sarcasm. It's not usualy like me to use sarcasm anyway -- so I apologize if I've said anything to hurt your feelings. However, I do believe that there are certain assumptions that you are making that do not actually conform with certain Christian thoughts.

I'm going to take the time to explain them as consisely and patiently as I can. In doing so, I'm also praying that the Lord would guide both of us by the Holy Spirit to show either one of us where we might be wrong -- because, in all fairness, we could both be wrong here.

Faith writes:

There is no reason in the world why he has to answer your question. It's off topic for starters.

I've already explained why it's not off-topic for this discussion -- particularly if he comes from some kind of "All-Purpose Protestant*" denomination just like you.

Faith writes:

He's made the best arguments and you've copped out.

In your opinion he has. Yet you and him repreatedly state that there is no other way that one can read those Pauline passages -- that Paul is conclusing the following:

Legend writes:

Paul is very clear. I don't persist they can only be translated in a certain way, I'm repeating what Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans. Noone can be saved by deeds of the law. Only by faith in Jesus.

I maintain that many Christians do not believe that Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter.

And I've pointed to many denominations that do not think this is what Paul is saying -- because they all agree in one form or another that people who do not believe in Christ can nonetheless be saved by Christ.

For example, Catholics like myself believe in Purgatory. Baptists believe in an Age of Accountability. Many other protestant groups believe that Christ saves those that do no know him by virtue of various interpretations of what is more commonly known as Natural Law. The United and Unitarian churches tend to accept some kind of Universal Grace (sometimes by Christ as God and sometimes just by God as God) that effectively saves all people -- and that there is no such thing as hell. And Mormons tend to believe in some form of universal salvation, even allowing the baptism of the dead in order to allow a lost one into their Latter Day fold.

Although none of these groups are in exact agreement as to how these people can be saved, all are agreed in one form or another that Christ can nonetheless saves those that do not know him or have confessed his name anyway.

This doesn't even include Episcopal and Presbyterian Churches, alhough some of their thoughts can be found in the above examples, usually either leaning in the direction of Natural Law or else universal salvation when such thoughts are expressed.

Consequently, this does count for about 1/2 to 3/5ths of the Christians in the world. Catholics alone account for over a billion**, and there are only about 2 billion Christians in the world today.

** Statistics Redirect

Seriously. Do the math Faith.

Actually, now that I think about it, my upper estimate of 3/5ths of the Christians in the world is probably under the actual number of Christians that believe that Christ is capable of saving those that do not directly believe in him.

In other words, although they disagree on the certain particulars of how Christ saves, the theologians of each of these denominations nonetheless understnad the Pauline passages significantly different from how Legend and you understand them.

Now, for the sake of discussion, let's take a look at what Legend stated in his previous messages:

Legend writes:

in Re: Belief in the Bible? (Message 200) I asked:

Listen Mr Ex., enough beating around the bush, does Paul say we can only be saved by faith or not ?

If no, tell me what he says about how we can be saved.

If yes, isn't the implication that people who don't know jesus (and can't have faith in him) will not be saved ?

My simple answer to this is that I believe that any Christian who believes that Paul is saying that we are saved by "our own" faith is missing the mark. Our own faith doesn't save us -- because that would be works righteousness. It is Christ's faith that saves us. He is the one who is faithful and true, not us.

Do you understand this Faith?

I'll explain it more below to clarify it.

Legend writes:

in Re: Belief in the Bible? (Message 201) you replied

Legend writes:

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Yes, but you've interjected your own interpretation as to "why" he is saying this by stating the following:

Legend writes:

It's a bit like a judge before a trial stating what level of evidence is needed to find a defendant guilty. It doesn't mean that the defendant will be found guilty, it just outlines what is needed for guilt to be established.

No...I'm using analogy to emphasize Paul's point. I don't know -or care- why he's saying it. He's just saying it, whether you like it or not. If you don't think this is what he's saying, then tell me what he's saying about salvation in Romans.

And, as I've said above, I maintain that many Christians are either directly or indirectly saying that "our own" faith doesn't save us -- because that would be works righteousness. It is Christ's faith that saves us. He is the one who is faithful and true, not us. More specifically, Paul (and many other apostles I might add) continually and repeatedly focusses on how Christ is alive in us by the Holy Spirit.

For example,

NIV writes:

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

I Corinthians 6:19-20

or here...

NIV writes:

Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?

1 Corinthians 3:16

or again...

NIV writes:

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Galatians 2:20

or again here...

NIV writes:

In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.

Ephesians 2:21-23

or more specifically...

NIV writes:

And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God lives in him and he in God. And so we know and rely on the love God has for us.

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.

1 John 4:14-16

or even more so...

NIV writes:

We proclaim him, admonishing and teaching everyone with all wisdom, so that we may present everyone perfect in Christ. To this end I labor, struggling with all his energy, which so powerfully works in me.

Colossians 1:28-30

Do you understand this Faith?

In other words, it is Christ who is doing the work. Not us. Once we start to believe that we are saved by "our own faith", then we are engaging in the exact same "works righteousness" as those who think they can do "good works" to get into heaven.

But I'll explain this more clearly for you down below.

Legend writes:

How does this answer the question :

Legend writes:

Listen Mr Ex., enough beating around the bush, does Paul say we can only be saved by faith or not ?

If no, tell me what he says about how we can be saved.

Mr. Ex Nihilo's interjection writes:

Faith, are you paying attention here?

Clearly, Paul is saying that we can do nothing to be saved. Christ is doing all the work, correct?

If yes, isn't the implication that people who don't know jesus (and can't have faith in him) will not be saved ?

Mr. Ex Nihilo's interjection writes:

Faith, are you paying attention here?

Clearly, as I said before, Paul is saying that we can do nothing to be saved. Christ is doing all the work.

Do you agree with this?

If not, could you explain to me why?

If so, then having firmly established that Paul is clearly saying that we can do nothing to be saved, what options does that leave us?

I don't think I'm beating around the bush anymore.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

For the record, not all Christians agree with what you've just said here.

Legend writes:

Totally irrelevant. How does this answer the question :

Legend writes:

Listen Mr Ex., enough beating around the bush, does Paul say we can only be saved by faith or not ?

If no, tell me what he says about how we can be saved.

If yes, isn't the implication that people who don't know jesus (and can't have faith in him) will not be saved ?

Faith, please take note that Legend believes that simple repitition can get his point across. But, for your sake Faith, I'll finally interject a simple response:

I think that Paul was warning self-rightoeous Christians about the danger of thinking too highly of themselves. More specifically, he was repeatedly pointing out that it is Christ who is doing the work in us -- and that we could do nothing unless Christ was moving us to do so.

So, for example, within the Pauline passages, whenever he notes that it is only through Christ that we are saved, his admonition is not so much about stating that non-Christians are damned to hell. Rather, in my opinion anyway, I think it is more accurate to say that he is warning his Christian brethren about falling into the same temptation that the adversary himself did -- the hubris of thinking that we have somehow achieved these glorius things without God.

This actually falls exactly in line with many of Paul's warnings.

For example:

NIV writes:

(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.

1 Timothy 3:5-7

or again...

NIV writes:

Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.

Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.

II Timothy 2:22-26

or again, as James states...

NIV writes:

But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such "wisdom" does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, of the devil. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.

James 3:14-16

or, as Ephesians 4:27 clearly yet simply states, he's trying to ensure that we...

NIV writes:

...do not give the devil a foothold.

Legend writes:

If you think my interpretation is wrong , could you show me where and how it is so?.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I already started to do this above by noting that not all Christians agree with some of your initial assertions, such as, "It's a bit like a judge before a trial stating what level of evidence is needed to find a defendant guilty."

ummm........How does this answer the question :

Legend writes:

Listen Mr Ex., enough beating around the bush, does Paul say we can only be saved by faith or not ?

If no, tell me what he says about how we can be saved.

If yes, isn't the implication that people who don't know jesus (and can't have faith in him) will not be saved ?

Faith, what I was trying to explain to you was that the Pauline passage more than likely have nothing to do with a "trial like" scenario, at least in the sense of determining the final destination of non-Christians.

More specifically, "stating what level of evidence is needed to find a defendant guilty" doesn't even read into these Scriptural passages at all if one views it as Paul warning his Christian brethren about falling into the same temptation that the adversary himself did -- the hubris of thinking that we have somehow achieved these glorius things without God.

As far as I can determine, Paul is repeatedly emphasizing that we can do nothing to be saved so that Christians do not fall into the temptation of being conceited and thinking that they are better than others. Or, in other words, Paul is saying that Christ is the one doing the work -- not us. We are just the vessals upon which the Holy Spirit has taken a permanent place so that God may do his work through us. Or, stated differently, we manifest God's works by the Holy Spirit and we know our redeemer lives in us to do so.

One passage of Scripture really captures these thoughts very well in my opinion.

NIV writes:

But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them - yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me.

1 Corinthians 15:10

or even better...

NIV writes:

Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to Godthis is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is - his good, pleasing and perfect will.

For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you.

Romans 12:1-3

and perhaps the best one of all...

NIV writes:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Ephesian 2:8-10

So, once again, we see that we simply cannot do anything by our own power -- and that it is the grace of God by Christ that enables us to do anything good in Gods eyes. Consequently, "faith" itself is a gift from God as well -- which means that this too is not of our "own power" but from God himself by the Holy Spirit.

But, taking a particularly closer look at the Scriptural passage found in Ephesians 2:8-10, we even see (once again) a warning that Paul is saying this so that "no one can boast". As I noted patitally above, he even goes on to say that this "Grace through faith" is not from ourselves -- but is a gift from God.

Legend writes:

Mr Ex.Nihilo writes:

However, when you and Faith continue to say that any other interpretation is not the "true Christian understanding" of these Scriptural passages, I'm left at a loss as to how you can both validate that when many Christians disagree with it.

Legend writes:

First, I never said that "any other interpretation is not the true Christian understanding". Quote me where I said this or retract this statement!

Considering that Legend said the following...

Legend writes:

...I tend to think that he'll be waiting a long time before any retraction occurs.

Likewise, Legend specifically said to jar the following:

Legend writes:

well, if you accept Paul's teachings then accepting his Son as our saviour, is the only way to be saved. Paul's letters are deemed to be divinely-inspired and are a part of the Bible, by all canons I'm aware of. If you reject those, you reject the Bible. You might believe in a loving, benevolent god but it's not the Christian God. The Christian God, as defined in the Bible and only there, wants you to be saved and you can only do so by accepting his Son as your saviour.

For the record, I've never denied that these writing were divinely inspired. I've also never denied salvation only comes from the Lord. I've persistently stated that we cannot earn our own salvation through works.

What I have rejected, however, was that many of these writings were written with the intent to damn non-belivers. I also reject the "evidence for conviction" analogy which, despite claims to the contrary, seems to basically pervade Legend's entire interpretation of the Pauline writings.

Why?

Because I maintain that many Christians do not believe that Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter.

Why?

Faith, please take note how Legend answers this question for me in his very next quotes and I think you might begin to understand why I think this.

Faith writes:

Second, you're hammering the point that because many Christians disagree with my or Faith's point then it must be invalid.

It's actually a good thing that I didn't say this to my recollection. I've admitted many times that I could be wrong in fact. However, for the sake of this discussion, I will recall what I actually did say in regards to these observations:

Legend writes:

Besides, Paul is pretty clear on the matter.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

In your interpretation of it, which could be wrong -- just like mine could be wrong.

Different churches try to reconcile the rest of the scriptures with Paul in different ways.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Or perhaps they simply understand the rest of the Scriptures with Paul in different ways.

Consequently, since about 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world disagree with your (and Faith's) interpretation of what Paul is saying, I think this should count for something more than simply being the "wrong understanding" of what the Scriptures are saying.

Faith, looking back into what I said, it seems to me that I've never been hammering the point that because many Christians disagree with your's or Legend's point then it must be invalid.

It seems to me that I've been hammering the point that because many Christians disagree with your's or Legend's point then the claim that Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter must be invalid.

Legend writes:

This is doing nothing for your argument. Do *you* disagree with my point ? If yes, maybe you can answer this question:

I've snipped this same old message because I'm getting tired of reading it -- by now the bush must be a burning bush if I've been beating it that long writes:

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Even despite this, it still remains true that about 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world disagree with your (and Faith's) interpretation of what Paul is saying -- even if they haven't read the full text of Romans.

Legend writes:

oh well, I hadn't realized that if 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world disagree with me, then I must be wrong.

Checkmate, if you're still out there, know now that you're wrong because 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world disagree with you.

Any LDS (Mormons) out there? There must be around 10 million of you. That's nothing compared to 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world! You're all wrong!

Jehovah's witnesses ? ditto!

Anyone with a non-Catholic doctrine out there ? you must already be challenging your own theology, presented with the fact that 1/2 to 3/5ths of all the Christians in the world think you're wrong.

.....seriously now, this is just sad.

Faith, like I said above, looking back into what I said, it seems to me that I've never been hammering the point that because many Christians disagree with your's or Legend's point then it must be invalid.

It seems to me that I've been hammering the point that because many Christians disagree with your's or Legend's point then the claim that Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter must be invalid.

Legend may be correct in his interpretation of what these Pauline passages mean. Although I'm explaining why I think your's and his interpretation is incorrect, I've always maintained that you both could be correct.

However, Legend is incorrect in his claim that the Pauline passages can only be understood in the way that you and he have claimed: that Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter. My pointing out these different denominations does display this fact.

As far as I can determine, Paul is repeatedly emphasizing that we can do nothing to be saved so that Christians do not fall into the temptation of being conceited and thinking that they are better than others. Or, in other words, Paul is saying that Christ is the one doing the work -- not us. We are just the vessals upon which the Holy Spirit has taken a permanent place so that God may do his work through us. Or, stated differently, we manifest God's works by the Holy Spirit and we know our redeemer lives in us to do so.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Likewise, you may have even used very faulty assumptions and analogies in doing so -- such as your own words: The reason that Rom 2,6:7 can only be read as a declaration of standards is because Paul makes very clear, in the next chapter, that these standards cannot be met by any man, noone can be justified by deeds of law, noone is righteous enough to do (only) good (Rom 3:20, Rom 3:9-19 emphatically).

Show me how and where you think this is a faulty assumption and analogy.

I think by now the answer is becoming apparent to Legend.

More specifically, "stating what level of evidence is needed to find a defendant guilty" doesn't even read into these Scriptural passages at all if one views it as Paul warning his Christian brethren about falling into the same temptation that the adversary himself did -- the hubris of thinking that we have somehow achieved these glorius things without God.

What do you think Faith?

Legend writes:

That still doesn't answer the question:

snipped...hmmm...that bush is still burning. writes:

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Actually, when I stop and look at just how many different Christian bodies do agree in some way with the idea of God saving those that do not know him, I'm left perplexed by your claim, "Paul is pretty clear on the matter."

Legend writes:

show me how and where Paul is unclear on the matter of salvation!

Faith, my layout skills using html code here on this forum are dramatically improving.

Legend writes:

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Mental gymnastics such as this (I quote your words here below)?

Legend writes:

Paul says in Rom 2,6:7 that each person will get what they deserve. But Paul's doctrine was that no one would gain eternal salvation on the basis of principles like these, noone deserves it because noone is righteous. Consequently, the only road to salvation is through "the righteousness of God which is through faith in Jesus Christ" (Rom. 3:21-26)

show me how and where you disagree with this!

Faith, I think part of Legend's problem with understanding this comes from a possibly basic flaw in his comprehension of the Scriptures themselves. Of course, this is only my opinion -- so I'm not stating this as a 100% definite fact. I readilly concede that you'll most likely disagree with me -- and I respect that.

However, I think I should interject a few basic principles that Catholics employ (along with Eastern Orthodox and many Protestants as well).

According to the Handbook for Today's Catholic:

Handbook for Today's Catholic writes:

The Church teaches us that God reveals through Scripture and uses human authors to do it. We "...must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that times, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current" [110]. If we are to do this, then we must study.

This is only one principle of interpretation, however. We must also remember that Scripture is the inspired Word of God. We need to call upon the Spirit to help us understand. This is not just personal inspiration, but the living Tradition of the Church. Interpretation of Scripture can never contradict the truths that are revealed.

Catholics should embrace the Scriptures. We do not need to fear the "science" of Scripture, for that is the very science relied upon by the Magisterium. If we read, study, and pray the Scriptures, then we will always be ready to hear the prompting that the Spirit makes in our lives.

Another important thing to note from the Handbook reads as follows:

Handbook for Today's Catholic writes:

There are few things that divide Christians more than the interpretation of sacred Scripture. Those who hold for the literal interpretation of Scripture are called fundamentalists...

...Catholics themselves can be "fundamentalist" in some of their interpretations of Scripture. Everything in Scripture is inspired, but not everything is literal. Robert Frost used to say that he couldn't wait for the critics to read his poems so that he could find out what he really meant. We want to know the meaning of Scripture and, like poetry, the meaning is not contained wholly in the words.

Bascially, what I'm saying here Faith is that Legend seems to be relying on a very restricted view of what the Scriptures are capable of saying -- a vary narrow Protestant definition I might note.

In fact, without the Holy Spirit moving a person, they probably won't ever embrace the Scriptures to the level that God desires them too. They certainly won't (in my opinion) ever be able to grasp the meaning of the Scriptures if they are relying solely on the Scriptures themselves to fill in all the meanings not wholly contained in the poetic words inspired by God.

In fact, one is basically reduced to the making the following assertions over and over and over again...

Legend writes:

Listen Mr Ex., enough beating around the bush, does Paul say we can only be saved by faith or not ?

If no, tell me what he says about how we can be saved.

If yes, isn't the implication that people who don't know jesus (and can't have faith in him) will not be saved ?

But to get back to Legend's other points, I note the following:

Legend writes writes:

Show me where and how Paul is unclear on the matter of salvation.

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I've already pointed out a few things, such as when a pagan is married to a believer, and the pagan is sanctified by the faith of their beleiving spouse.

Legend writes:

where in Paul's writings can I find this ?

I already pointed this out to you, didn't I Faith? Which message was that in anayway?

Mr Ex.Nihilo writes:

I think there's a lot of confusion on this issue.

Legend writes:

there certainly is, on your side.

I have to say that Legend amuses me quite a bit.

He makes statements such as, "why he has allowed such flimsy, contradictory and weak evidence when he wants all of us to believe (and be saved) ? ..................... for me this is the crux of the matter, all else is just philosophical hypothesizing, sorry."

Then he proceeds to write volumes arguing over stuff he doesn't even believe in -- stuff which is apparently nothing more than "just philosophical hypothesizing".

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I've also noted how Christ will separate the goats from the sheep at the end of time, and how some believers will actually be thrown into hell while some non-believers will actually be in heaven -- and I've noted that this was specifically because Christ came to them in the form of the poor and destitute.

Even more, when Christ pointed to the little children he said, "For such is the kindgdom of heaven." This apparently indicates that Christ is also present whenever children are present.

Or, let me put it this way: Does the kindgom of heaven go to hell according to Judeo-Christian thinking, specifically the Christian Scriptures?

I don't think so. Do you?

Legend writes:

How does that answer the question:

Faith, do you think Legend missed that I was displaying in Scriptures areas where salvation is basically acknowledged by Christ in contradiction to his (and your) claim that that no one who doesn't know Christ can be saved?

snipped -- because bush still burning writes:

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

And, despite claims to the contrary, you even tried to explain to jar what he wasn't understanding about his own faith -- despite his clear explanantions about what you weren't understanding about the nature of his own Unitarian faith.

This alone shows that you are attempting speak from someone else's point of view.

And, for the record, you have tried to speak decisively about what I'm not understanding about the Scriptures too -- once again seeming to indicate that what you said above is incorrect.

Legend writes:

After arguments by authority and arguments by popularity you're now introducing non-sequitirs (i.e. it doesn't follow). Are you going through the list or something ?

BTW, all the above still doesn't answer the question:

snipped bush is flaming writes:

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Well...um...maybe if you and Faith are coming from the same theological background, it might explain why you are both in so much agreement...duh...

Legend writes:

I understand that you find it disconcerting that two people from vastly different backgrounds and with conflicting beliefs can reach a conclusion that challenges your theology.

And with this I think Legend is bascially disclosing his former affinity with some type of All-Purpose Protestantism.

What do you think Faith? Sound familar?

Legend writes:

However, that still doesn't answer the question:

. I got to get to bed.]-->

snippy doodle bush burning in a boodle: sorry guys, it's late. < !--UB

. I got to get to bed. writes:

-->

snippy doodle bush burning in a boodle: sorry guys, it's late.

. I got to get to bed. writes:

< !--UE-->

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I can try to refute it, though I don't think I can change your mind on it. I've already pointed out many inconsistencies I think.

Legend writes:

You've yet failed to give me a single reason as to why you think Paul is unclear on the matter of salvation. Let me repeat the question:

Legend writes:

However, that still doesn't answer the question:

snipped...hmmm...the flame has gone out but the bush is still there writes:

~snip~

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I'll answer these questions as the Spirit allows after you tell which denomination you were formerly associated with.

Sound fair?

Legend writes:

no, it doesn't. This a debate board, not a denominational fight-by-proxy arena. I've presented you my views. You can do one of the following:

1) agree with them
2) challenge them by backing your argument up with scriptural evidence
3) drop the subject

up to you

Faith, is this an example of an All-Purpose Protestant debating style?

Legend writes:

P.S Never mind the spirit, maybe you can give me some answers based on Paul's writings.

Faith, this is an All-Purpose Protestant debating style, isn't it?

*For the record faith, what is an all-purpose protestant?

I've read a fair amount about various Christian views and I must confess that I've never heard that phrase before in any Christian circles that I've worked with, such as Pentecostal, Lutheran, Baptist, Eastern-Orthodox and (of course) Roman Catholic.

When I did a search for it on Google (searching for "All-Purpose Protestant" in quotes as noted here), I only came up with a few responses.

You can see them here if you like:

"All-Purpose Protestant" - Google Search

When reviewing the following sites, I was able to gather the following:

Raspberry World writes:

For the first half of my life, I was what you might call a sort of all-purpose protestant. My mother's family was Presbyterian, my father's was Methodist and Baptist. I went at different times to all three of those churches. Later, in college, I attended the Episcopal church for a time. I was christened in the Methodist church as a baby, and later baptized in the Baptist church as a teenager. When we lived overseas, my mother and sister and I attended the interdenominational protestant services at the military base chapels.

OSC Answers Questions writes:

...as opposed to the all-purpose Protestant congregational religion that we see in many movies.

Healesville writes:

In 1865 town lots were sold and the first local pub and sawmill were built. The following year saw the construction of both the district's first school and a police station. A small building constructed of palings was erected in 1869 to serve as an Anglican church. A more substantial church building was erected in the early 1870s in the town's main street for the use of all Protestant denominations.

Yahoo Groups Liturgy writes:

Comment: Anyway, that to which I was referring was an Ed Sullivan type variety show service order. The announcements-offering-middle hymn were a sort of seventh inning stretch without Harry Carey, with the long sermon in the second half. The first half was a mish-mosh of ALL the other service parts, sometimes in no particular order.

Response: This sounds like the general all-purpose protestant service of my childhood in southern NH. No wonder I fell in love with the
Episcopal Church when I met it.

*sigh*

So, upon closer examination, telling me that you're an All-Purpose Protestant doesn't really tell me much anyway -- especially since some protestant denominations agree with what I'm saying and some don't -- with more agreeing with me than disagreeing.

ah well...good night...

Incidently, the Scriptures themselves say in 1 John 3:16:

NIV writes:

This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers.

The whole issue of forgiveness is repeadtly displayed in many people, religious or not. Traits of self-sacrifice are also seen among many people, religious or not. Traits of self-sacrifice are even evident in certain animals so as to prolong their own species for that matter.

Whenever someone sees this, they are seeing exactly what God desires in all of us -- without having even read or heard the gospel message. Consequently, when such a thing happens, the Spirit is moving so as to more closely align them to God's will. If God considers it good, then no one does it except by the Holy Spirit.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 212 by Faith, posted 05-26-2005 8:09 PM		Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 216 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 6:21 AM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied
	Message 217 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 6:31 AM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied
	Message 227 by Faith, posted 05-28-2005 4:12 PM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied
	Message 228 by Faith, posted 05-28-2005 5:21 PM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied
	Message 229 by Faith, posted 05-28-2005 5:54 PM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Faith

Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)

Posts: 35298

From: Nevada, USA

Joined: 10-06-2001

Faith Posts Only

Message 215 of 301 (211723)
05-27-2005 6:11 AM

Reply to: Message 210 by jar
05-26-2005 7:17 PM

Re: Faith or works according to Jesus?

time and time again Jesus says you should believe what he is teaching. That is quite different from saying you should worship him.

Most of those quotes speak of believing ON him or IN him, not in what he taught. And although I'm sure you have a different idea of what the gospel is than I do, my idea is that it means faith in Jesus Christ.

Jesus is God and we are to worship God. If you want scriptures on that I can produce them.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 210 by jar, posted 05-26-2005 7:17 PM		jar has not replied

Faith

Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)

Posts: 35298

From: Nevada, USA

Joined: 10-06-2001

Faith Posts Only

Message 216 of 301 (211725)
05-27-2005 6:21 AM

Reply to: Message 214 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
05-27-2005 3:06 AM

Re: Another misrepresentation!

Well that's quite a tome, Mr. Ex. I can't deal with all of it right now.

However, I do believe that there are certain assumptions that you are making that do not actually conform with certain Christian thoughts.

If you define everything a certain way I guess you can't help but win the argument. You want to call "Christian" whatever you call "Christian" and not what I call "Christian." That's what I call an impasse. Nowhere to go from here. One at least needs to agree on some basic terms and we don't.

What Legend has been spelling out is the most orthodox Protestant view. He's been doing a great job of it. I know when it comes to supposed contradictions between Paul and Jesus and that sort of thing we are going to disagree completely, but he does an excellent job of presenting Protestant Pauline theology. I agree with it. There is no way you are going to convince me otherwise, so I don't know what there is to discuss any more. Shouldn't we just agree to disagree at such a point?

This message is a reply to:
	Message 214 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-27-2005 3:06 AM		Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 222 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-27-2005 11:59 AM		Faith has not replied

Faith

Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)

Posts: 35298

From: Nevada, USA

Joined: 10-06-2001

Faith Posts Only

Message 217 of 301 (211726)
05-27-2005 6:31 AM

Reply to: Message 214 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
05-27-2005 3:06 AM

Re: Another misrepresentation!

My simple answer to this is that I believe that any Christian who believes that Paul is saying that we are saved by "our own" faith is missing the mark. Our own faith doesn't save us -- because that would be works righteousness. It is Christ's faith that saves us. He is the one who is faithful and true, not us.

Do you understand this Faith?

Please don't patronize me.

Anybody who knows Protestant theology knows that we do not trust in our own faith but in God. We are saved BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH and the faith is the gift of God. No it is not Christ's faith that saves us, it is His grace that saves us, His gift, His forgiveness, His sacrifice, etc, not our faith, and not His faith whatever that means.

This message has been edited by Faith, 05-27-2005 06:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
	Message 214 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-27-2005 3:06 AM		Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5037 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Legend Posts Only

Message 218 of 301 (211727)
05-27-2005 6:47 AM

Reply to: Message 209 by Faith
05-26-2005 4:47 PM

Re: Faith or works according to Jesus?

Faith,

I want to copy and address your message Message 209 in Paul of Tarsus - the first Christian? , if you don't mind. The reasons for my suggestion are :

1) That thread is specifically to discuss Paul and his teachings, while this thread is -supposedly- about whether God is determined to allow proof of his existence.

2) This thread -despite its title- has turned into a platform for Mr. Ex to quote denominational doctrinal differences, misrepresent others' positions, argue using logical fallacies and evade backing up his position with scriptural evidence. It is, therefore, no longer a forum for meaningful debate.

Let me know if you object.

** EDIT for grammar

This message has been edited by Legend, 05-27-2005 06:52 AM

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
	Message 209 by Faith, posted 05-26-2005 4:47 PM		Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 223 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 2:11 PM		Legend has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5037 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Legend Posts Only

Message 219 of 301 (211728)
05-27-2005 6:50 AM

Reply to: Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
05-26-2005 8:05 PM

Mr Ex.Nihilo, you're a fraud!

Mr Ex.Nihilo writes:

Legend writes:

First, I never said that "any other interpretation is not the true Christian understanding". Quote me where I said this or retract this statement!

Mr Ex.Nihilo writes:

I already said what you needed to do to hear my view on it. Answer the single question in regards to your past denominational affiliation and I'll answer all of your questions for you.

The fact that I'm accusing you of mis-representing my position has nothing to do with my past denominational affiliation.

Your answer speaks volumes of your intellectual honesty and your attitude towards constructive debate.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
	Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-26-2005 8:05 PM		Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5037 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Legend Posts Only

Message 220 of 301 (211730)
05-27-2005 6:55 AM

Reply to: Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
05-26-2005 8:05 PM

In conclusion...

Legend writes:

I've presented you my views. You can do one of the following:

1) agree with them
2) challenge them by backing your argument up with scriptural evidence
3) drop the subject

up to you

Mr Ex.Nihilo writes:

.... all I can say is "bye bye" until you let me know which denomination you were formerly associated with.

I see you chose (3).

You are the weakest link. Goodbye!

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
	Message 211 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-26-2005 8:05 PM		Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 221 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-27-2005 11:13 AM		Legend has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo

Member (Idle past 1367 days)

Posts: 712

Joined: 04-12-2005

Mr. Ex Nihilo Posts Only

Message 221 of 301 (211777)
05-27-2005 11:13 AM

Reply to: Message 220 by Legend
05-27-2005 6:55 AM

Re: In conclusion...

Bye bye.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 220 by Legend, posted 05-27-2005 6:55 AM		Legend has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo

Member (Idle past 1367 days)

Posts: 712

Joined: 04-12-2005

Mr. Ex Nihilo Posts Only

Message 222 of 301 (211791)
05-27-2005 11:59 AM

Reply to: Message 216 by Faith
05-27-2005 6:21 AM

Re: Another misrepresentation!

Faith writes:

If you define everything a certain way I guess you can't help but win the argument.

Faith, you're the one who is saying that the Pauline writings can only be interpreted to mean that Paul is saying that non-believers are damned. You're also the one who is insisting that this is the only "valid" Christian way to understand Paul's writings too.

You even went on to say that anyone who doesn't understand it the way that you and Legend are understanding it are guilty of the following:

Faith writes:

You are simply making up your own theology. That's your right, but it bears no relation to what scripture teaches. It is no longer Christianity. Believe it if you like but calling it Christianity is indefensible.

You even said previously that:

Faith writes:

It merely shows that you have a fleshly /carnal /earthly / merely human / fallen understanding of what mercy and love mean. Most of us do.

Who's defining everything a certain way so that you can't help but win the argument Faith?

Faith writes:

You want to call "Christian" whatever you call "Christian" and not what I call "Christian." That's what I call an impasse. Nowhere to go from here. One at least needs to agree on some basic terms and we don't.

Well...

...I think we both believe that God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
...I think we agree that God created the heavens and the earth.
...I think we agree that Jesus is true God and true man.
...I think we both agree that Christ is the only true savior for all mankind.
...I think we both agree that no one can do anything good in God's eyes except by the Holy Spirit -- even Christ was led by the Holy Spirit when he "emptied himself" to incarnate here on earth.
...I think we actually agree on many things that would define what it means to be a Christian.

Actually, I'd say that the things that unite us are far greater than the things that divide us.

What we don't agree on is whether the Pauline writings were written with the specific intention of damning those that do not believe in Christ. I specifically disagree with the "assumption" that "Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter."

As I quoted and outlined above, I think that Paul was warning self-rightoeous Christians about the danger of thinking too highly of themselves. More specifically, he was repeatedly pointing out that it is Christ who is doing the work in us -- and that we could do nothing unless Christ was moving us to do so.

So, for example, within the Pauline passages, whenever he notes that it is only through Christ that we are saved, his admonition is not so much about stating that non-Christians are damned to hell. Rather, in my opinion anyway, I think it is more accurate to say that he is warning his Christian brethren about falling into the same temptation that the adversary himself did -- the hubris of thinking that we have somehow achieved these glorius things without God.

Faith writes:

What Legend has been spelling out is the most orthodox Protestant view.

Actually, what Legend is spelling out is a restricted Protestant view -- since many orthodox Christians disagree with his assumptions.

As I said before, this doesn't prove that his interpretation of the Scriptures is wrong. You and he may be correct for that matter. However, since I've pointed out many different Protestant views which conclude in some way or another that those who do not know Christ can noentheless be saved by Christ, it think you assertion that this is the "most orthodox Protestant view" is both incorrect and misleading.

Faith writes:

He's been doing a great job of it.

He sure has done a great job of expessing a view that you and he share. For that much, I thank him for his input. I also think that he's done a great job defending his thoughts -- which, as you note, reflects an "orthodox Protestant view".

Faith writes:

I know when it comes to supposed contradictions between Paul and Jesus and that sort of thing we are going to disagree completely, but he does an excellent job of presenting Protestant Pauline theology. I agree with it.

Of course you agree with it. Why wouldn't you?

You both have concluded that the Pauline writings were written with the specific intention of damning those that do not believe in Christ -- so that Christ's glory may be revealed.

Many other Christians disagree to some extent with this view though. I've pointed to many denominations that do not think this is what Paul is saying -- because they all agree in one form or another that people who do not believe in Christ can nonetheless be saved by Christ.

I still maintain that many Christians are either directly or indirectly saying that "our own" faith doesn't save us -- because that would be works righteousness. It is Christ's faith that saves us. He is the one who is faithful and true, not us. More specifically, Paul (and many other apostles I might add) continually and repeatedly focusses on how Christ is alive in us by the Holy Spirit.

We both know that we simply cannot do anything by our own power -- and that it is the grace of God by Christ that enables us to do anything good in Gods eyes. Consequently, "faith" itself is a gift from God as well -- which means that this too is not of our "own power" but from God himself by the Holy Spirit.

We can't even say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit.

Faith writes:

There is no way you are going to convince me otherwise, so I don't know what there is to discuss any more. Shouldn't we just agree to disagree at such a point?

Sure. But I wouldn't claim Legend is the winner in doing so.

Just sayin'

This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 05-27-2005 12:11 PM

This message is a reply to:
	Message 216 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 6:21 AM		Faith has not replied

Faith

Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)

Posts: 35298

From: Nevada, USA

Joined: 10-06-2001

Faith Posts Only

Message 223 of 301 (211831)
05-27-2005 2:11 PM

Reply to: Message 218 by Legend
05-27-2005 6:47 AM

Re: Faith or works according to Jesus?

OK by me to move to that thread, but I won't have time to post there until later today.

I agree about Mr. Ex's dealings on this thread.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 218 by Legend, posted 05-27-2005 6:47 AM		Legend has not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 225 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 05-28-2005 12:06 PM		Faith has not replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo

Member (Idle past 1367 days)

Posts: 712

Joined: 04-12-2005

Mr. Ex Nihilo Posts Only

Message 224 of 301 (211923)
05-27-2005 4:45 PM

Could jar, Phatboy, or Monk give me some feedback?

Does anyone feel that I've dealt unfairly with Legend or Faith here?

I admit that I have not minced any words debating them -- often to the point of being very sarcastic and gruff -- and have often called them on their assumptions. But I sincerely believe that the points I made have merit -- and that I have backed them up with much research within the Scriptures and Church history.

What Faith and I don't agree on is whether the Pauline writings were written with the specific intention of damning those that do not believe in Christ. I specifically disagree with the "assumption" that "Paul is unambiguously saying in Romans that no one can be saved by deeds of the law -- or only by faith in Jesus for that matter."

So, for example, within the Pauline passages, whenever he notes that it is only through Christ that we are saved, his admonition is not so much about stating that non-Christians are damned to hell. Rather, in my opinion anyway, I think it is more accurate to say that he is warning his Christian brethren about falling into the same temptation that the adversary himself did -- the hubris of thinking that we have somehow achieved these glorius things without God.

I think, based on my analysis of various denominational positions, church history, and a detailed examination of Scriptures, that I've presented an extremely valid alternative to the position being advanced by Faith and Legend. I've never said that their position is wrong. I've only demonstrated that the Pauline passages can be interpreted in other ways that do not necessarilly point toward damnation for non-believers -- but instead warns against conceit for the beleivers themselves lest they fall into the adversary's trap.

jar? Phatboy? Monk? I'm listening if anyone thinks that I've gone too far and am certainly willing to admit I'm sorry for doing so. Could jar, Phatboy, Monk or someone else who participated in this thread give me some feedback?

I tend to think that Faith and Legend are simply upset because I've actually presented a valid alternative to their interpretation -- and used Scriptural references at that. But I admit that I could be wrong.

Edit: for reference, I think that message 214 really strikes at the heart of their assertions. It's very long, but I think it captures the central focus of Faith's and Legend's argument and distills many of their points very well. At the very least, I think it seems to disprove that the Pauline passages can only be interpretted in the way they say they can.

Edit: corrected spelling.

This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 05-27-2005 04:58 PM

Replies to this message:
	Message 226 by Monk, posted 05-28-2005 12:26 PM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has not replied
	Message 244 by Monk, posted 05-31-2005 12:28 AM	Mr. Ex Nihilo has replied

Mr. Ex Nihilo

Member (Idle past 1367 days)

Posts: 712

Joined: 04-12-2005

Mr. Ex Nihilo Posts Only

Message 225 of 301 (212114)
05-28-2005 12:06 PM

Reply to: Message 223 by Faith
05-27-2005 2:11 PM

Re: Faith or works according to Jesus?

Faith writes:

I agree about Mr. Ex's dealings on this thread.

Faith, you certainly seem to enjoy making sweeping assertions about people in your own arguments, don't you?

You're one of the people here at EvC who most persistently assume things and make negative generalizations about other people, their theologies, or even the sincerity of their faiths for that matter.

I've taken the time to intensely research this, looking at it from multiple denominational angles, examining the Scriptures, exploring church history, examining other religion's thoughts, and ultimately praying and listening to that which I felt the Holy Spirit had to say on the matter.

I have addressed all Legend's thoughts on the matter. Since you agree with him, then you should be able to comment on them. This is probably even more true since it's very possible that you could both share the same kind of all-purpose protestant background.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 223 by Faith, posted 05-27-2005 2:11 PM		Faith has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Rew

...

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	PaulK, Tangle
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,919 Year: 4,176/9,624 Month: 1,047/974 Week: 6/368 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/1