|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is God determined to allow no proof or evidence of his existence? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
Then I guess you'll be waiting a while.
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. Of course, I'll probably get around to answering your questions indirectly via answering Faith's questions. But by that time I won't be interested in responding to any further questions you have that are spurred from my answering Faith's questions. With that, all I can say is "bye bye" until you let me know which denomination you were formerly associated with. See you later. Thanks for participating.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Ta da!! I declare Legend the winner of this thread!!
He's made the best arguments and you've copped out. There is no reason in the world why he has to answer your question. It's off topic for starters.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
It was a typo Faith and my apologies. It's since been corrected with "Legend" instead of "Faith".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
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:
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.
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: 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: 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 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. 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. 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: -->
Do Nothing Button Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved Version 4.2 |