ARCHIVE: Is it ever right to deny Christ?
- Thread starter Freak
- Start date
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Smilax that is begging the question. First of all I showed a passage that "seemed" without exception, yet it had one. Second, you are assuming that God would have us not lie in that specific situation, and that is assuming the very point that is in dispute.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Calvinist, I am missing something.. please explain...
And I state again, as I feel I must for the record, I concede this is not an easy issue. I am considering all of the points made (at least the ones that are somewhat coherent).
smilax
New member
Can you show from Scripture why you believe the lives of others are more important than the verbal confession?
Romans is discussing general behavior. This verses about denial are related to salvation. I don't think the presence of exceptions will carry over, but I'm listening. And I can sympathize with your position. I don't know if I could really go through with what I am professing. I believe this is what I should do. I don't know if I can say it is what I would do.
Why would God not have us lie? Because obedience to God is more important than even human lives, and the example of Abraham with Isaac demonstrates this.
Romans is discussing general behavior. This verses about denial are related to salvation. I don't think the presence of exceptions will carry over, but I'm listening. And I can sympathize with your position. I don't know if I could really go through with what I am professing. I believe this is what I should do. I don't know if I can say it is what I would do.
Why would God not have us lie? Because obedience to God is more important than even human lives, and the example of Abraham with Isaac demonstrates this.
Calvinist
New member
Well, the Donatists:
"In those days the church had just recovered from the last bitter wave of persecution begun in 303 by the emperors Galerius and Diocletian. When fear subsided, Christians could breathe again and indulge in recriminations over the lapses of some of their number in time of trial.
The official position of the church was that those Christians who had compromised their religion in time of persecution could, with due repentance and atonement, be readmitted to full membership in the religious community. But there was a minority faction of enthusiasts who insisted that cooperation with the authorities in time of persecution was tantamount to total apostasy and that if any traitors wanted to reenter the church they had to start all over again, undergoing rebaptism. Evaluation of the credentials of those who sought reentry would be in the hands of those who had not betrayed the church.
The logical result of the Donatist position was to make the church into an outwardly pure and formally righteous body of redeemed souls. The orthodox party resisted this pharisaism, seeing in it a rigorism inimical to the spirit of the gospels. But Africa was known for its religious zealots and the new Donatist movement proved a resilient one. Even after official imperial disapproval had been expressed, the schismatic church continued to grow and prosper. "
Donatists believed that those who recanted during the persecution were guilty of apostasy...
Not as in "Pfft, who cares" but that it is a small sacrifice in comparison to confessing Christ.
Christ commands that we forsake our family for His name if that situation ever arises. God commanded Abraham to kill his son *himself*! Knight's scenario pales in comparison.
Going the route of the hyberbole-
Col1:15 NWT "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth,..."
A person can't win against that.
God bless you Dee Dee--Jeremiah
Pauls says:
"To depart from the body is to be at home with the Lord".
Dee Dee,
IF you were put in that situation, where would you AND YOUR FAMILY end up afterwards? And I mean *seconds* afterwards?
This is why I consider the matter a mite bit more "trivial" (for lack of a better word @ the moment) than most would immediately imagine.
God bless--Jeremiah
"To depart from the body is to be at home with the Lord".
Dee Dee,
IF you were put in that situation, where would you AND YOUR FAMILY end up afterwards? And I mean *seconds* afterwards?
This is why I consider the matter a mite bit more "trivial" (for lack of a better word @ the moment) than most would immediately imagine.
God bless--Jeremiah
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
I would appreciate it if my objections to the label of triviality were dealt with in the context of which I originally ojected. No death is trivial in the sight of God. I cannot believe that this is even a point of contention.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Show me where they are not, utilizing the circumstances of the specific scenario posed by Knight.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Begging the question once again. No one doubts that obedience to God is utmost.... the dispute is over what course of action God would approve of in that situation.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
That made no sense Jeremiah. Perhaps it just did not communicate properly in written form.
smilax
New member
I didn't call it trivial.
Pretty difficult, considering the specificity of the situation.
We're back to the question of how important verbal confession is. What do you say about Romans x, 9?
A good example of the importance of words: II Samuel i, 16. But I doubt you'll accept it as relevant.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Dear Smilax:
I didn't say you said it was trivial, but various responses were made to my objection to the use of the word "trivial" and they seemed to go very far afield of my original objection.
Of course verbal confession is important... whoever denied that?? But that also is insignificant without intent. The context of Romans 10 has nothing to do with out situation here. I also do contest the relevance of 2 Samuel 1:16 here, you are right about that.
I didn't say you said it was trivial, but various responses were made to my objection to the use of the word "trivial" and they seemed to go very far afield of my original objection.
Of course verbal confession is important... whoever denied that?? But that also is insignificant without intent. The context of Romans 10 has nothing to do with out situation here. I also do contest the relevance of 2 Samuel 1:16 here, you are right about that.
P
Pilgrimagain
Guest
That's a bad question Dee Dee, I could never be anybody else than myself so any thing I might possit is meaningless.
D
Dee Dee Warren
Guest
Oops, PA, I worded that ackwardly. My bad. I meant that it was not your life that was being threatened... no matter what you say, you get to live... but it was other people who would be killed, say even nonbelievers, if you said you were a Christian. I am really sorry about that ackward wording. I think sometimes half of the disagreements here on TOL can be found to have its root in bad wording.