Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Support Group
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 106 of 331 (398635)
05-01-2007 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Phat
05-01-2007 6:28 PM


Re: Hostility and judgementalism
Thats quite an accusation! Do you honestly think that so many Christians would willfully lie?
Sure they do. It is the easy answer. They lie mostwise to theyselves and do it so much that it jess comes natural to 'em.
You yourself said "It is good to have my beliefs challenged, but I get irritated at times when I actually have to think!".
You have said that I make you uncomfortable, that you fear moving outside your comfort zone.
Christianity isn't easy.
The Gospel the Christian Cult of Ignorance sells is comforting and easy, jess believe what they say and don't question it and you WILL BE SAVED!
On the otherhand, I think the Gospel is totally different.
I think the Gospel is that GOD tells us it's okay to fail, but it is not okay not to try.
Several times you and Buz and Rob and Iano and Faith and others have commented that I don't talk about my relationship with GOD.
Such Testifying is a big part of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. Oh, it might make folk feel good, or even raise a joyful sound, but what does it mean?
How is it tested?
If so, this world is in a bigger spiritual war than I thought!
And it's not a Spiritual War. It is just plain laziness and ignorance. Nothing more. It is just folk trying to take the easy way, finding it easier to tell others than to actually do.
There's no war, simply apathy.
Edited by jar, : No reason given.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Phat, posted 05-01-2007 6:28 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 3:03 AM jar has replied
 Message 114 by iano, posted 05-02-2007 9:35 AM jar has replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4058 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 107 of 331 (398641)
05-01-2007 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by jar
05-01-2007 8:33 PM


I should point out in this thread what I've pointed out before, which is that for all practical purposes, there is really very little significant differences in the canons of the churches that care a lot about canons.
Yes, Jewish sects will vary a lot from Christian sects, but in a Christian discussion about the Canon, that's insignificant. The Orthodox canon adds several OT books. For most evangelicals that's only slightly significant. The Assyrian Orthodox Church of the East leaves off the books from 2 John onwards. That would probably be THE most significant difference in canon in any church that would fit into the Christian pale by most mainline definitions.
Anyway, though jar is right about no exact canon, I can't agree that there's really much significant difference in canons.
This despite the fact that I am among those who heartily disagree that a canon should ever have been sent. I commonly tell people who ask that the only part of the Bible I object to is the cover. It's a limit I don't think God acknowledges.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by jar, posted 05-01-2007 8:33 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Equinox, posted 05-02-2007 1:16 PM truthlover has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 108 of 331 (398660)
05-02-2007 2:50 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by ringo
05-01-2007 7:28 PM


Choosing Sides
Ringo writes:
If you're choosing up spiritual sides, how do you know you're on the "right" side?
I don't always know. All I can be responsible for is myself. My quote for this occasion?
NIV writes:
Rom 3:3-4--What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God's faithfulness? Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar.
In other words, it is whether I can trust myself and my relationship with God above all other criteria.
Ringo writes:
Have you really chosen a side? Does either side "need" you?
No, God does not need me in the sense that I add to His abilities. The scripture that comes to mind?
NIV writes:
Acts 17:24-25-- "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else.
Of course we could question where Paul got his ideas about God. Were they imparted by the Holy Spirit to Paul or were they a product of his education and upbringing as well as his spiritual epiphany?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by ringo, posted 05-01-2007 7:28 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 109 of 331 (398661)
05-02-2007 3:03 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by jar
05-01-2007 8:53 PM


Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
What are the exact defining qualities of your criteria to be labeled as part of the Cult Of Ignorance? Do you include entire denominations in this cult? (Such as the Assemblies Of God?)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by jar, posted 05-01-2007 8:53 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2007 3:28 AM Phat has replied
 Message 116 by jar, posted 05-02-2007 11:01 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 110 of 331 (398669)
05-02-2007 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Phat
05-02-2007 3:03 AM


Re: Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
It seems pretty clear. It's those people who refuse to accept knowledge that contradicts their beliefs.
The ones who insist that an unbiased mind won't find any contradictions in the Bible, while simultaneously insisting that the correct reading requires a strong bias against finding contradictions.
The people who insist that 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 1 Corinthans 2:12-13 "unquestionably" refer to the Bible as we have it despite the fact that 2 Timothy only mentions unspecified "scripture" and the Corinthians reference refers to spoken preaching. They don't even want people to know what the bible really says !
The people who refuse to accept any finding of Biblical scholarship that contradicts their beliefs. The ones who reject the copying between the Synoptic Gospels (to the point of abandoning discussion rather than dealing with the matter). The ones who insist that the dating of Daniel is solely driven by a rejection of the possiblity of prophecy.
These are people who do not want you to know about the bible - not even what it really says. If I had to question any part of Jar's description it would be the "Christian" part.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 3:03 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 8:08 AM PaulK has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 111 of 331 (398695)
05-02-2007 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by PaulK
05-02-2007 3:28 AM


Re: Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
PaulK writes:
It's those people who refuse to accept knowledge that contradicts their beliefs.
Well, the Gnostics were ostracized from the rest of Christianity. I myself believe several things that are refuted by knowledge. The main reason that I made this very topic was to showcase the idea that beliefs are often not rational. If that makes me part of the ignorant ones, so be it. I prefer truth over knowledge any day, even if the ideas are taken from a belief statement.
That showcases a basic difference between taking a fundamental stand and remaining 100% open to new ideas. How can anyone be a Christian if they can't even define the God they believe in?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2007 3:28 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2007 8:43 AM Phat has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 112 of 331 (398698)
05-02-2007 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Phat
05-02-2007 8:08 AM


Re: Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
quote:
Well, the Gnostics were ostracized from the rest of Christianity
Except I'm not talking about Gnosticism, am I ? I'm talking about ordinary knowledge, the sort of knowledge that comes from reading and study. Not the mystical "knowledge" of Gnosticism (I suppose that you could call yourself a Gnostic since your religious experience(s) seem to be important to your belief but that wouldn't really help your argument).
quote:
I myself believe several things that are refuted by knowledge. The main reason that I made this very topic was to showcase the idea that beliefs are often not rational. If that makes me part of the ignorant ones, so be it. I prefer truth over knowledge any day, even if the ideas are taken from a belief statement.
Of course, this is fundamentally self-contradictory. What you really seem to mean is that you prefer to believing that you are right over believing the truth.
quote:
That showcases a basic difference between taking a fundamental stand and remaining 100% open to new ideas. How can anyone be a Christian if they can't even define the God they believe in?
Except I'm not talking about really new ideas, either. Look at the examples I gave.
I think that what you mean is that fundamentalism is based on tradition and only pretends to be based on the Bible (which is mainly important as an excuse for putting words in God's mouth).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 8:08 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 8:55 AM PaulK has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 113 of 331 (398701)
05-02-2007 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by PaulK
05-02-2007 8:43 AM


Re: Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
PaulK writes:
What you really seem to mean is that you prefer believing that you are right over believing the truth.
Knowledge is always evolving. The conclusions that many scholars make are by no means the final word on a subject. What is truth, anyway?
IMB, Jesus is alive today, always has existed, is Gods character, and according to the Bible called Himself truth.
Yo may say that my belief is based on cultural indoctrination and dogma, but you can't declare with any absolute certainty that I am wrong.
Granted, you can string together a fairly good argument showing my irrationality, if you so choose.
But why would you want to do that? BTW Paul, since this is a thread about evangelical beliefs, what are yours?
Do you have a belief statement? We are, after all, talking about God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2007 8:43 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by PaulK, posted 05-02-2007 1:17 PM Phat has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 114 of 331 (398703)
05-02-2007 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by jar
05-01-2007 8:53 PM


Re: Hostility and judgementalism
jar writes:
Several times you and Buz and Rob and Iano and Faith and others have commented that I don't talk about my relationship with GOD
Just to head the attempt at historical revisionism off at the pass:
If I recall correctly the comments (from Faith and myself at least) had to do with our view about you not having a relationship with God to speak of. Which is why you don't speak of it. It was abundantly clear from our many conversations that the relationship you have going is not with God himself but with his Law. In other words: if you try your damndest to keep Gods law then somehow or other you will be on the right side of God come the time when such things are counted. Your most oft referred to text: Matthew 25's sheep n' goats" was always interpreted in this light. "If at first you don't succeed then try, try and try again - and maybe God'll pleased."
Such Testifying is a big part of the Christian Cult of Ignorance. Oh, it might make folk feel good, or even raise a joyful sound, but what does it mean?
It means that you speak of what you know. When you don't know it you can't speak of it. This Gospel of Ignorance you refer to is commonly called the Gospel of Grace (as opposed to your Gospel of Works)
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by jar, posted 05-01-2007 8:53 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 10:33 AM iano has replied
 Message 117 by jar, posted 05-02-2007 11:26 AM iano has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 115 of 331 (398716)
05-02-2007 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by iano
05-02-2007 9:35 AM


Exclusivism versus Inclusivism
Iano writes:
This Gospel of Ignorance you refer to is commonly called the Gospel of Grace (as opposed to your Gospel of Works)
The argument is, in my opinion, not so much centered on Grace (Gods unmerited favor) versus Works (Earning your way to spiritual completion).
The debate is more focused on exclusivity versus inclusivity. Read what John MacArthur has to say about it:
MacArthur writes:
In the Jesus Movement of the 1960s and '70s, the "One Way" sign-the index finger held high-became a popular icon. "One Way" bumper stickers and lapel pins were everywhere, and the "One Way" slogan for a time became the identifying catchphrase of all evangelicalism.
Evangelicalism in those days was an extremely diverse movement. (In some ways it was even more eclectic than it is today.) It encompassed everything from Jesus People, who were an integral part of that era's youth culture, to straight-line fundamentalists, who scorned everything contemporary. But all of them had at least one important thing in common: They knew that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. "One Way" seemed an unshakable belief that all evangelicals held in common.
That is no longer the case. The evangelical movement of today is no longer unified on this issue. Some who call themselves evangelicals are openly insisting that faith alone in Jesus is not the only way to heaven. They are now convinced that people of all faiths will be in heaven. Others are simply cowardly, embarrassed, or hesitant to affirm the exclusivity of the gospel in an era when inclusivity, pluralism, and tolerance are deemed supreme virtues by the secular world. They imagine it would be a tremendous cultural faux pas to declare that Christianity is the truth and all other faiths are wrong. Apparently, the evangelical movement's biggest fear today is that Christians will be seen as out of harmony with the world.
Postmodernism
The dominant worldview in secular and academic circles today is called post-modernism. To the postmodernist, reality is whatever the individual imagines it to be. That means what is "true" is determined subjectively by each person, and there is no such thing as objective, authoritative truth that governs or applies to humanity universally. The postmodernist naturally believes it is pointless to argue whether opinion A is superior to opinion B. After all, if reality is merely a construct of the human mind, one person's perspective of truth is ultimately just as good as another's. "Truth" becomes nothing more than a personal opinion, usually best kept to oneself.
We are not supposed to think we know any objective truth. Post-modernists often suggest that every opinion should be shown equal respect. And therefore, on the surface, post-modernism seems driven by a broad-minded concern for harmony and tolerance. It all sounds very charitable and altruistic. But what really underlies the postmodernist belief system is an utter intolerance for every worldview that makes any universal truth-claims-particularly biblical Christianity.
Postmodernism and the Church
The church today is filled with people who are advocating postmodern ideas. Some of them do it self-consciously and deliberately, but most do it unwittingly. (Having imbibed too much of the spirit of the age, they are simply regurgitating worldly opinion.) The evangelical movement as a whole, still recovering from its long battle with modernism, is not prepared for a new and different adversary. Many Christians have therefore not yet recognized the extreme danger posed by postmodernist thought.
Many shy away from stating unequivocally that the Bible is truth and all other religious systems and worldviews are false. Some who call themselves Christians have gone even further, purposefully denying the exclusivity of Christ and openly questioning His claim that He is the only way to God.
The biblical message is clear. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" (John 14:6). The apostle Peter proclaimed to a hostile audience, "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). The apostle John wrote, "He who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him" (John 3:36).
Again and again, Scripture stresses that Jesus Christ is the only hope of salvation for the world. "For there is on God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). Only Christ can atone for sin, and therefore only Christ can provide salvation. "And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life" (1 John 5:11-12).
Those truths are antithetical to the central tenet of postmodernism.
Jar actually advocates a Grace Gospel in that he affirms that everyone is saved (inclusivism) rather than having to accept Jesus (through the collective personality and beliefs of organized religion)
Theopedia writes:
Inclusivism posits that even though the work of Christ is the only means of salvation, it does not follow that explicit knowledge of Christ is necessary in order for one to be saved. In contrast to pluralism, inclusivism agrees with exclusivism in affirming the particularity of salvation in Jesus Christ. But unlike exclusivism, inclusivism holds that an implicit faith response to general revelation can be salvific.
( Salvific? I don't understand everything I google! )
In other words, God has done the basic job of salvation for all of us. It is up to us to respond.
Whether or not we respond through trust (Grace) or through effort (Works) is not mutually exclusive. I would think it a combination of both.
Several key points:
  • Postmodernism is a convenient buzzword for any thinking that is not absolute. I think that even fundamentalists have postmodern views that they are unaware of.
  • Grace and Works are not mutually exclusive, IMB.
  • Another key issue which pertains to all of this is whether God can be known and if so, whether that is important for us and for Him.

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 114 by iano, posted 05-02-2007 9:35 AM iano has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 118 by ringo, posted 05-02-2007 11:44 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied
     Message 119 by iano, posted 05-02-2007 11:49 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    jar
    Member (Idle past 393 days)
    Posts: 34026
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 116 of 331 (398723)
    05-02-2007 11:01 AM
    Reply to: Message 109 by Phat
    05-02-2007 3:03 AM


    Re: Jars Christian Cult Of Ignorance
    What are the exact defining qualities of your criteria to be labeled as part of the Cult Of Ignorance? Do you include entire denominations in this cult? (Such as the Assemblies Of God?)
    There can be exceptions in any group so I would not define it by label or denomination.
    Instead, the defining characteristic would be pretty many of the things listed in the belief statement you quoted. A belief that the Bible is historically and scientifically 100% factual would be one such characteristic. The belief that if you can conceive of a solution to problems then the problems don't exist is another. Any YEC or Biblical Creationist would fall into the group as would anyone who believes the Biblical Flood or Exodus happened as described in the Bible.
    I would exclude little children as members even if in that environment because there is always the hope that they will learn.
    The HEART of the Christian Cult of Ignorance is not the followers though but the leaders, the Pastors and Ministers and Televangelists and those like AIG, and Discovery Institute and ICR that promote and enable the Cult of Ignorance.

    Aslan is not a Tame Lion

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 109 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 3:03 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    jar
    Member (Idle past 393 days)
    Posts: 34026
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004


    Message 117 of 331 (398728)
    05-02-2007 11:26 AM
    Reply to: Message 114 by iano
    05-02-2007 9:35 AM


    Re: Hostility and judgementalism
    It means that you speak of what you know. When you don't know it you can't speak of it. This Gospel of Ignorance you refer to is commonly called the Gospel of Grace (as opposed to your Gospel of Works)
    Which simply shows that you have ignored what I have said, so I will repeat it one more time.
    Mankind is forgiven. It is a done deal. No one is born damned. You cannot earn salvation because it is freely given to all.
    The Gospel is really very simple.
    GOD says that it is okay to fail, but it is not okay to not try.
    If I recall correctly the comments (from Faith and myself at least) had to do with our view about you not having a relationship with God to speak of. Which is why you don't speak of it.
    And you know that how? You know I don't have a relationship with GOD because I don't talk about it because if I had a relationship with GOD I would talk about it?
    Too funny for words.
    I ask once again, to those who claim to know GOD, "How do you know it is GOD?"
    It was abundantly clear from our many conversations that the relationship you have going is not with God himself but with his Law. In other words: if you try your damndest to keep Gods law then somehow or other you will be on the right side of God come the time when such things are counted. Your most oft referred to text: Matthew 25's sheep n' goats" was always interpreted in this light. "If at first you don't succeed then try, try and try again - and maybe God'll pleased."
    Again, that simply shows that you have either not read or not comprehended what I have said, so I will try again.
    The Garden of Eden story is one of the ascent of Man. In the story, Man is given the Knowledge of Good and Evil, a great gift. But the gift comes with a charge, that we are expected to try to do what is right, and to try not to do what is wrong.
    It is not a matter of trying to please GOD, it is what we are charged to try to do here, now, in this life, because it is the best way to live.
    We can't do anything for GOD.
    Come on, She created the whole universe. What the hell can we do for someone who can create all that is, seen and unseen?
    All that we can do is try to do for others, for the world we live in, for plants and animals the environment, for friends and enemies and for children and knowledge.
    All we can do is try to do our best, honestly try to evaluate our behavior, honestly acknowledge when we do wrong, try to make amends when we do screw up and try to do better in the future. That really is all that we can do.
    It really is that simple.

    Aslan is not a Tame Lion

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 114 by iano, posted 05-02-2007 9:35 AM iano has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 120 by iano, posted 05-02-2007 11:59 AM jar has replied
     Message 205 by Phat, posted 08-03-2015 2:15 AM jar has replied

      
    ringo
    Member (Idle past 411 days)
    Posts: 20940
    From: frozen wasteland
    Joined: 03-23-2005


    Message 118 of 331 (398732)
    05-02-2007 11:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 115 by Phat
    05-02-2007 10:33 AM


    Re: Exclusivism versus Inclusivism
    Phat writes:
    ... rather than having to accept Jesus....
    I have argued before on this forum that "accepting Jesus" means accepting His message rather than accepting His divinity, His self-sacrifice, etc.
    Evangelicals tend to run away from that idea. They like to pretend that His divinity, self-sacrifice, etc. are His message.
    I consider that the lazy approach. All you have to do is believe and you'll be "saved". You get a balcony seat to watch the poor unbelievers roasting in hell - those fools who didn't "accept" Jesus but only did what He told them to do.
    Truly "accepting" Jesus means to embrace what He said and what He did. What or who He was is secondary.

    Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
    Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 115 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 10:33 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 1940 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 119 of 331 (398733)
    05-02-2007 11:49 AM
    Reply to: Message 115 by Phat
    05-02-2007 10:33 AM


    Re: Exclusivism versus Inclusivism
    Phat writes:
    Jar actually advocates a Grace Gospel in that he affirms that everyone is saved (inclusivism) rather than having to accept Jesus (through the collective personality and beliefs of organized religion)
    Its a works 'gospel' Phat - whichever way you want to spin it. Universal salvation as a start point but with the possibility of losing it if your works don't stack up - is a works based 'gospel'. No different than a 'gospel' which has you start out unsaved but gain your salvation by works. The emphasis is on YOU in both cases. And what YOU do.
    You can spin a works gospel anyway you like but it remains a works gospel - whether you have it and can lose it or don't have it and can gain it.
    quote:
    Inclusivism posits that even though the work of Christ is the only means of salvation, it does not follow that explicit knowledge of Christ is necessary in order for one to be saved. In contrast to pluralism, inclusivism agrees with exclusivism in affirming the particularity of salvation in Jesus Christ. But unlike exclusivism, inclusivism holds that an implicit faith response to general revelation can be salvific.
    I'm not sure that your "in other words" accurately reflects what this article is saying. It seems to me that it is saying only that a person need not explicity know of Christ in order to be saved. And I agree with that. For the way in which a person is saved is given to us: "Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness". Abraham didn't know of Christ. Neither need the shepherd up the side of a remote mountain in Tibet know of Christ.
    I can't see that there is even a need to know that what is believed stems from God. Only that what stems from God is believed. Once that criterium is satisfied, what God says is believed, then a person will have that belief credited to them as righteousness.
    In other words, God has done the basic job of salvation for all of us. It is up to us to respond.
    This is very Roman Catholic notion. Christ opened the doors of heaven so that sinners who were previously excluded might possibly enter (the basic work of salvation). But the door sits at the top of a stairs. It is for us to climb it. Roman Catholicism is a mainline works based Religion.
    trust (Grace) or through effort (Works)
    "Effort = Works" - alright. But "Trust = grace"? From whence this notion?
    Another key issue which pertains to all of this is whether God can be known and if so, whether that is important for us and for Him.
    I would have thought the issue is otherwise:
    quote:
    Matthew 7:22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
    The issue is not whether you think you know Christ. But whether Christ is sure he knows you.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 115 by Phat, posted 05-02-2007 10:33 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

      
    iano
    Member (Idle past 1940 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 120 of 331 (398735)
    05-02-2007 11:59 AM
    Reply to: Message 117 by jar
    05-02-2007 11:26 AM


    Re: Hostility and judgementalism
    I know the elements of your works based 'gospel' already Jar. I was just pointing out what Faith and me actually have said regarding your relationship. Not what you would have it that we said.
    Its a record-straightening exercise only.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 117 by jar, posted 05-02-2007 11:26 AM jar has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 127 by jar, posted 05-02-2007 1:39 PM iano has not replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024