The Scriptures and Authority

[Oblio]

As long as my salvation is not affected I don't believe I will lose any sleep about not being readup or being overly concerned about orthodoxy of any stripe. ...

And as long as you don't speak ill of that which you have yet to read up on, it's fine with us

 

[Oblio]

So in the end, is it the Greeks or Romans that have the full deposit of the "Faith"?

Who are the Greeks ? The Orthodox Church is made up of regional Churches centered around large central cities [Metropolia] (Antioch [Damascus], Jerusalem, Alexandria, Constantinople, Moscow et. al. ...) Roman Catholics are not 'Roman' but rather under the 'Bishop' of Rome, separated from the other Metropolia.

 

[Ormly]

And as long as you don't speak ill of that which you have yet to read up on, it's fine with us

When you step over the line of biblical truth to make man made reasoning to be the superior word in the matter of the record of Jesus Christ and Him crucified, rest assured you will have to contend with my opinion of the ground you stand upon..... God is no respector of church institutions.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Who are the Greeks ? The Orthodox Church is made up of regional Churches centered around large central cities [Metropolia] (Antioch [Damascus], Jerusalem, Alexandria, Constantinople, Moscow et. al. ...) Roman Catholics are not 'Roman' but rather under the 'Bishop' of Rome, separated from the other Metropolia.

Umm, ok.
I found this interesting concerning this guys rather confused view of the "world ending twice.
Note the use of the "romans" and the "greeks". Wonder which one ends up winning in the "End" and which early "churches" he is talking about.

http://www.awitness.org/lostmess/daniel.html

This would, of course, require ending the world twice (once to Revive the Romans and thus salvage chapter 9, and a second go at it to revive the Greeks and salvage chapter 12. Whether or not we can all tolerate suffering through two ends of the world is a good question, but this would be required to salvage the doctrine of 'Biblical inerrancy.'...................

...............As a final point I have to ask how, after those early churches embarrassed everyone by reading Daniel in an uncritical way and being gullible about the Bible, and prophecy in particular, you really have to wonder why any other modern church would want to do the same thing, repeat the same mistake, and embarrass themselves in the same way as those early churches did. It turns out that there are certain things you can learn by not taking the Bible literally all the time, and this lesson is certainly one of them.

 

[Oblio]

When you step over the line of biblical truth to make man made reasoning to be the superior word in the matter of the record of Jesus Christ and Him crucified, rest assured you will have to contend with my opinion of the ground you stand upon....

But since (by your own admission) you are ignorant of our Christian Faith, you have no business commenting on it or making personal judgment calls on whether it is Biblical

 

[Ormly]

But since (by your own admission) you are ignorant of our Christian Faith, you have no business commenting on it or making personal judgment calls on whether it is Biblical

Indeed!? I know my Bible, I don't believe you know yours as well, believing rather to accept something other the Biblical truth for your salvation.... and this conclusion is arrived at by me using your reasoning in this discussion. You must remember that church doesn't save people. No church, no "sacraments", no liturgy, can do that for anyone. when you discover what does, cling to it... ? One will find Jesus in no "bottle".

 

[Oblio]

Indeed!? I know my Bible, I don't believe you know yours as well, believing rather to accept something other the Biblical truth....

But we are not talking about your Bible, or rather your personal interpretation of it are we ? We are talking about you claiming that we are un-Biblical or that I don't know my Bible, when you have no clue and are ignorant of our faith.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

But since (by your own admission) you are ignorant of our Christian Faith, you have no business commenting on it or making personal judgment calls on whether it is Biblical

I guess I would have to agree.
But as far as debating atheists, jews and muslims, they don't look at denominations.

1 Thessalonians 5:5 for ye are all Sons of Light, and Sons of Day: we are not of Night, nor of Darkness;
6 So then, no we may be drowsing as do the rest, but we may be watching/grhgorwmen <1127> (5725) and we may be being sober/nhfwmen <3525> (5725).

1 Peter 4:7 Of all-things yet the End/teloV <5056> has neared: be ye of sound mind! then, and be ye sober! into the prayers:

 

[Thekla]

As long as my salvation is not affected I don't believe I will lose any sleep about not being readup or being overly concerned about orthodoxy of any stripe. ... Thanks

No problem

just be cautious about understanding lest you, because of not understanding mischaracterize ..

 

[Ormly]

But we are not talking about your Bible, or rather your personal interpretation of it are we ? We are talking about you claiming that we are un-Biblical or that I don't know my Bible, when you have no clue and are ignorant of our faith.

As opposed to receiving into my thinking, man's reasoning, indeed we are. I know my Bible and am well qualified to make those distinctions. I replied to what was presented as being "OK" with God. I see no Biblical strength for anyone's presumption when it cannot be Biblically supported.

Hey, lets end this nonsense. You wanna be, fine, be right, even at my expense. There, how's that?

Nough said.

 

[Thekla]

Indeed!? I know my Bible, I don't believe you know yours as well, believing rather to accept something other the Biblical truth for your salvation.... and this conclusion is arrived at by me using your reasoning in this discussion. You must remember that church doesn't save people. No church, no "sacraments", no liturgy, can do that for anyone. when you discover what does, cling to it... ? One will find Jesus in no "bottle".

on the matter of "the fall", for example, the difference in understanding is curious, as the Bible clearly states otherwise. The understanding of salvation in Christ takes on a different meaning when filtered through a different understanding of the early chapters of Genesis.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

on the matter of "the fall", for example, the difference in understanding is curious, as the Bible clearly states otherwise. The understanding of salvation in Christ takes on a different meaning when filtered through a different understanding of the early chapters of Genesis.

There is a thread concerning that going on over on the "Den of Heathens" board if you are interested though explaining the Christ-ian view to atheists, jews and muslims is a rather formidable task LOL.

http://foru.ms/t6301197-if-the-world-was-perfect-pre-fall.html
-if-the-world-was-perfect-pre-fall

 

[Thekla]

There is a thread concerning that going on over on the "Den of Heathens" board if you are interested though explaining the Christ-ian view to atheists, jews and muslims is a rather formidable task LOL.

http://foru.ms/t6301197-if-the-world-was-perfect-pre-fall.html
-if-the-world-was-perfect-pre-fall

I think the Orthodox Christian view would be in the minority, and just "muddy the waters" (though I've been told its closer to the Jewish)

 

[lionroar0]

As opposed to receiving into my thinking, man's reasoning, indeed we are. I know my Bible and am well qualified to make those distinctions. I replied to what was presented as being "OK" with God. I see no Biblical strength for anyone's presumption when it cannot be Biblically supported.

Like the presumption of the Bible beign the rule faith when it's not biblically supported.

Peace

 

[Rick Otto]

on the matter of "the fall", for example, the difference in understanding is curious, as the Bible clearly states otherwise. The understanding of salvation in Christ takes on a different meaning when filtered through a different understanding of the early chapters of Genesis.

I like my understandings filtered, but not flavored.
Once in awhile with a drop of cream, but no sugar.

"Like the presumption of the Bible beign the rule faith when it's not biblically supported."

Or like the erroneous conclusion that Sola Scriptura isn't a biblical principle?

 

[lionroar0]

I like my understandings filtered, but not flavored.
Once in awhile with a drop of cream, but no sugar.

What about honey???

Just doing my part and adding one more responce to the thread.

Peace

 

[Rick Otto]

Filtered honey is good. (lol)

 

[Ormly]

on the matter of "the fall", for example, the difference in understanding is curious, as the Bible clearly states otherwise. The understanding of salvation in Christ takes on a different meaning when filtered through a different understanding of the early chapters of Genesis.

I am curious to know how the bible contradicts my understanding; where the "different meanings", you allude to, are that I might re-consider my understanding?

 

[Thekla]

I am curious to know how the bible contradicts my understanding; where the "different meanings", you allude to, are that I might re-consider my understanding?

I don't know your understanding per se, rather the idea of original sin and how it effects us is what I am referring to ...

 

[Thekla]

I like my understandings filtered, but not flavored.
Once in awhile with a drop of cream, but no sugar.


Or like the erroneous conclusion that Sola Scriptura isn't a biblical principle?

sugar in coffee is heresy (don't ever ask for 'regular' in NYC)