Where Does The Bible Say...? (HOF thread)

JustAChristian

New member
So one must do something...?

So one must do something...?

Originally posted by Zakath

So one must do something. In this case, do some action (avoid sins of ommission) or abstain from doing others (avoid sins of commission).

Either way, the human involved in the transaction must input into a transaction, making the "gift" less than "free".

Z.,

The epistles of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter and James are FILLED with statement of requirement for sanctification, justification and salvation. Why don't you sit down and read it sometimes/ You'd be amazed at what you'd find. It could be the first time that you have ever read real Truth!

JustAChristian :angel:
 

JustAChristian

New member
Re: So one must do something...?

Re: So one must do something...?

Z.,

The epistles of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter and James are FILLED with statement of requirement for sanctification, justification and salvation. Why don't you sit down and read it sometimes/ You'd be amazed at what you'd find. It could be the first time that you have ever read real Truth! Further, I have never know any gift that didn't require some action on the part of the receipient to gain it, have you?

JustAChristian :angel:
 

philosophizer

New member
Re: So one must do something...?

Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by JustAChristian

Z.,

The epistles of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter and James are FILLED with statement of requirement for sanctification, justification and salvation. Why don't you sit down and read it sometimes/ You'd be amazed at what you'd find. It could be the first time that you have ever read real Truth!

JustAChristian :angel:


And here's an example of what I was talking about, Z.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by philosophizer

Valid? Yes. Correct? No. A football team that has never won a game is still a football team.
Not to most coaches or fans... ;)

How can an "incorrect" church be a church? What makes some group a "church" in your opinion?

Are you serious? That must be an awfully funny way to live your life-- ascribing validity only to the opinions of large groups-- the larger the better.
Hardly. I just do not feel it is important to ascribe much significance to some anonoymous voice crying in the electronic wilderness... which is, in reality, all you are to me. I can see, touch, feel, and experience organized churches through their members, their programs, their effects on the world around them.

You are merely letters on a screen...

I know what you're saying though. I'm only one person. But Christian groups are also made up of individuals --not all of them with exactly the same view. No one knows it all, and I'm sure I've got a few things wrong too.
I would have to agree with you here... ;)

Through the differences, all the Christian groups have one common thread: salvation comes through Jesus.
But what does that mean?????

What is "salvation" to you, philosophiser? :think:

Please realize, you are only defeating the semantics. You are not defeating or even touching the concept.
But for a religion whose deity is defined in his "Word" or "Logos", semantics are very important. If they are improper or carelessly used, the meaning of the terms under discussion can be distorted or even completely misunderstood.

By your argument, the word "free" should be stricken from the dictionary. It has no meaning.
Of course not. You're merely claiming that since it doesn't fit your preconceived ideas regarding your soteriology that it's meaningless.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The word "free" has a variety of meanings. It's just that none of them are accurate descriptions of what most Christians of my acquaintance mean when they discuss soteriology.

You are usually a reasonable man. But in this case, your argument is unreasonable.
All arguments that disagree with one's preconceptions appear unreasonable at first. Some, after careful consideration, show themselves to be chock full of reasonableness. :chuckle:
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Re: So one must do something...?

Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by JustAChristian

Z.,

The epistles of the New Testament written by Paul, Peter and James are FILLED with statement of requirement for sanctification, justification and salvation. Why don't you sit down and read it sometimes/ You'd be amazed at what you'd find. It could be the first time that you have ever read real Truth!
As a former pastor, I've read those documents many times in several different languages. No matter what the language they are all inherently contradictory and irrational, particularly when compared to the gospels and the Jewish scriptures.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by JustAChristian
...Further, I have never know any gift that didn't require some action on the part of the receipient to gain it, have you?
Permit me to broaden your education. :chuckle:

Biological life is one example. It is given to you by your parents without your cooperation.

Now, after birth you may refuse nourishment, fatally injure yourself, or reject life in some other manner, but you did nothing to receive it.

Certain legal statuses, like citizenship by birth, are additional examples.
 

Ecumenicist

New member
Originally posted by Aimiel

Oh no, you have to accept it? Well, that isn't free, that's pending your acceptance. And God doesn't 'appear' to hand it to you, along with a certificate and your photo in the paper. That just isn't good enough for Zak.

Perhaps the meaning of the word "accept" needs to be
discussed.

Lets take an example of a 5.00 gold coin of some rare vintage
and mint.

I can understand that coin as a shiney object, which is nice.

I can understand it as having a face value of 5.00, which is nicer.

I can understand it as an object made of gold, which by weight
alone probably excedes a 5.00 value.

I can understand its history and rareness and trade value, which
may make it even more valuable.

If I find that even more than that, its a family heirloom of some
kind, passed down through the generations, I may in fact
find it priceless in its sentimental value, beyond its rarity of mint.

If I wake up one morning and find that coin on my doorstep,
I can ignore it, or I can accept it, take it into my possession.

My accepting the coin has no relationship to my understanding
of its worth. Over time, I may learn and grow in my appreciation
of the value of the gift, but at the time I discover that gift and
accept it, my acceptance of it is NOT contingent on my understanding
of its value.

See where I'm getting here? The gift is offerred freely, and
although some of us who are mature in our understanding
of scripture and theology recognize it as "the pearl of great
price," others may not recognize its great value at first.

I can tell you from experience that cramming life, death,
resurrection, atonement, dispensation, hell, damnation,
and eternity all into a huge wad and trying to attach that all to
the simple gift scares people away. And that's exactly what
Christ warns the Pharisees against over and over. Don't
scare away my children, don't misrepresent my intentions,
I come to save the world, not condemn it!

Start with "God loves you, unconditionally." That's the simple,
shiney object. Accept that, and then, perhaps, as maturing
occurs, the rest will follow. You guys are wrapping this
beautiful, simple gift in a huge laundry list that almost makes it
unrecognizable. Smacking someone with a bible and saying
"here, read this, and accept it" is alot different from the simple
gift that salvation is.

djm
 

philosophizer

New member
Originally posted by Zakath

How can an "incorrect" church be a church? What makes some group a "church" in your opinion?
If I read a sentance and then gather the wrong meaning of the sentance, does that mean I never read it?

A church can be wrong about things. A government can be wrong. A jury can be wrong. All that means is that they're wrong about something. Everybody is.


Hardly. I just do not feel it is important to ascribe much significance to some anonoymous voice crying in the electronic wilderness... which is, in reality, all you are to me. I can see, touch, feel, and experience organized churches through their members, their programs, their effects on the world around them.

You are merely letters on a screen...
:eek: Aww, you sweet-talker, you...


But what does that mean?????
Believe.


What is "salvation" to you, philosophiser? :think:
My undeserved adoption into a royal family.


Of course not. You're merely claiming that since it doesn't fit your preconceived ideas regarding your soteriology that it's meaningless.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The word "free" has a variety of meanings. It's just that none of them are accurate descriptions of what most Christians of my acquaintance mean when they discuss soteriology.
REALLY. Okay then, describe something real that is free. Example, not definition.


All arguments that disagree with one's preconceptions appear unreasonable at first. Some, after careful consideration, show themselves to be chock full of reasonableness. :chuckle:
As it stands, your argument appears to me to be unreasonable because you don't seem willing to accept any real or applicable use of the word "free." If you can give me an example of something real that is free, I might be able to see some of your reason.

If you can't, I'll have to assume that you cannot accept any use of the word "free" and are therefore being unreasonable with the English language.
 

Ecumenicist

New member
Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by Zakath

Permit me to broaden your education. :chuckle:

Biological life is one example. It is given to you by your parents without your cooperation.

Now, after birth you may refuse nourishment, fatally injure yourself, or reject life in some other manner, but you did nothing to receive it.

Certain legal statuses, like citizenship by birth, are additional examples.

Wow, great example. I'll have to chew on this awhile...

djm
 

Ecumenicist

New member
Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by Zakath

Permit me to broaden your education. :chuckle:

Biological life is one example. It is given to you by your parents without your cooperation.

Now, after birth you may refuse nourishment, fatally injure yourself, or reject life in some other manner, but you did nothing to receive it.

Certain legal statuses, like citizenship by birth, are additional examples.

So, by this logic, why not universalism? Why atheism instead?
just curious.
 

JustAChristian

New member
Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by Zakath

As a former pastor, I've read those documents many times in several different languages. No matter what the language they are all inherently contradictory and irrational, particularly when compared to the gospels and the Jewish scriptures.

It still says, "Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free." (John 4:24). Pray tell us, How does the Truth make one free if one is made free by Grace Alone, which is your principle doctrine?

JustAChristian :angel:
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
The person must never sin, ever. There is Only One Who has ever lived that met those guidlines. He decided to give us His Grace for free.
 

philosophizer

New member
Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by JustAChristian

It still says, "Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free." (John 4:24). Pray tell us, How does the Truth make one free if one is made free by Grace Alone, which is your principle doctrine?

JustAChristian :angel:


Grace IS the Truth.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Originally posted by philosophizer

If I read a sentance and then gather the wrong meaning of the sentance, does that mean I never read it? A church can be wrong about things. A government can be wrong. A jury can be wrong. All that means is that they're wrong about something. Everybody is.
But if you call yourself an adherent of a particular religion and do not adhere to the necessary tenets (dogmas) of that relgion, are you a representative body of that religion?

:eek: Aww, you sweet-talker, you...
"You catch more flies with honey... " ;)

My undeserved adoption into a royal family.
I think this is a particularly weak analogy. One may be adopted into a family without any rational action on one's own part (i.e. an infant adopted into an existing family). Yet Christians, almost universally, claim that one must do something to be "saved"... :think:

REALLY. Okay then, describe something real that is free. Example, not definition.
See this post for two such examples. You may very well have provided a third with your adoption example...

As it stands, your argument appears to me to be unreasonable because you don't seem willing to accept any real or applicable use of the word "free." If you can give me an example of something real that is free, I might be able to see some of your reason.
Gladly. See my reply to your previous request to describe something that is free, above.
 

Zakath

Resident Atheist
Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by JustAChristian

It still says, "Ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free." (John 4:24). Pray tell us, How does the Truth make one free if one is made free by Grace Alone, which is your principle doctrine?
First you are making up your own translation of the gospels. They do not use capitalization in that way. That "T" in "truth" is not capitalized.

Second your reference is incorrect. You're citing John 8:32. :rolleyes:


I know the truth about the Christian deity and it has set me free from deities and religion. :D
 

JustAChristian

New member
Re: Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Re: Re: Re: Re: So one must do something...?

Originally posted by philosophizer

Grace IS the Truth.

The Bible seperates them into two entities...

John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

John 1:17 "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."

If you have Christ you have grace and truth, but you can not have Christ by grace alone. If so, where is it found in the scriptures?

JustAChristian

_________________________________________

“But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.� (Romans 3:21-26 AV)
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Re: Oops!

Re: Oops!

Originally posted by JustAChristian

Z.,

Are you saying you don't have to repent of your sins? Where did you say it, if indeed you did say it?



Guess I hit a sore spot. Sorry!

JustAChristian :chuckle:
"Repent of" is illogical. "Repent from" would be more correct. And that repentance is an effect of God's love. All one has to do is love God. That's it. I have sinned, but I don't own my sins. Not anymore. They have been removed from me, and forgotten.

And, btw, Paul's epistles are not full of works required for salvation. You should really go reread them.
 

JustAChristian

New member
Re: Re: Oops!

Re: Re: Oops!

Originally posted by lighthouse

"Repent of" is illogical. "Repent from" would be more correct. And that repentance is an effect of God's love. All one has to do is love God. That's it. I have sinned, but I don't own my sins. Not anymore. They have been removed from me, and forgotten.

And, btw, Paul's epistles are not full of works required for salvation. You should really go reread them.

"Repent of" is illogical

Revelation 2:22 "Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds."

And, btw, Paul's epistles are not full of works required for salvation. You should really go reread them.

Romans 1:16 ¶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Romans 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Romans 13:11 ¶ And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

2 Corinthians 1:6 And whether we be afflicted, it is for your consolation and salvation, which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: or whether we be comforted, it is for your consolation and salvation.

2 Corinthians 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Philippians 1:19 For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ,

Philippians 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

Pauls epistles definately shows that one has acts of faith (works of righteousness) that is required unto salvation and in order to maintain one's salvation.

JustAChristian
 

BChristianK

New member
JustaChristian,


It looks like you have your hands full.

Nonetheless, if you could please answer my question when you get to it, I'd appreciate it.
My question was
Final question, lets say you talk to a guy on a plane, you tell him about Jesus. He sends you an email three days later telling you he has repented of his sin, now believes that Jesus is Savior and Lord and has risen from the dead just like the scriptures say, and he is going to get baptized at his local Church of Christ the very next Sunday. You hear that a tragic accident has occurred, while he was crossing the street on his way to church on Sunday, he was hit by a greyhound bus, killing him instantly.
Now, does your theology force you to conclude that he is now rotting in hell?
Grace and Peace
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Okay. I still think "repent from" sounds more like the proper usage, based ion the definition of repent.
 
Top