Purveyor of Confusion

[cvanwey]

Oh yes it is. You cannot separate Christ from salvation. Acts 4:11-12

I think we might be speaking past one another here. Anyone, whom labels them self a 'Christian', is going to believe that Jesus is their Messiah. And further, that following Jesus is their way to salvation. This is the bare minimum. Otherwise, you probably cannot plant your 'flag', and label yourself a 'Christian'.

But in looking at the verses you provided, they do not specify how to achieve salvation. Is it Romans 10:9-10, is it Matthew 25:31-46, is it Luke 14:25-33, is it a combo deal? Is it simply grace? Is it other?

And what about the ones whom cannot perform any of these traits? -- The ones born with severe defects, the still-born, child death, other? Does the Bible mention if these people get a free pass?

Actually where you are going is further and further away from salvation. You are right in saying that if you do not achieve the required goal, then you are hosed... but the goal is Jesus. It's not that difficult to grasp.

If 'Jesus' is the goal, we are right back to the above unanswered set of questions. What constitutes 'Jesus' being the goal?

 

[cvanwey]

No my response was to YOUR post. I had no prior belief. I had no belief. I was an atheist. I read the Bible (strictly speaking the New Testament and Genesis as well as dipping into other OT writings) and then I was a Christian.

I find this difficult to believe. See below...

I was pointing out that your argument doesn't hold up as I read the Bible and I became a Christian.

Again, you are changing the argument. I said what would happen if all professed Christians decided to read the Bible. It's likely you would loose some. I know of at least one. Me.

And just to elaborate.... It was not instant. It took a couple of years, after asking many questions, and pondering the many assertion in there, which did not align with my reality. Not just wham bam.

This is why I have difficulty believing you became a Christian, after reading the Bible. How many times did you read it before you started to believe it? Was it instantly? Did it take a while?

How many professed Christians would remain Christian if they were to decide to read the Bible? The answer is certainly a lot more than you think.

My point is that you would loose some. That's it.

 

[cvanwey]

Do you think you have succeeded in that goal? I didn't see it in the responses I read. Well apart from your responses that is.

My objective isn't to change the mind of the person for which I engage upon, or even the ones whom participate. It's more-so intended for the ones on the fence, whom watch from the side-lines, and read these posts later. The ones whom do not have any skin in the game. -- And later read these responses without too much bias, if that's even possible

 

[cvanwey]

I am de-referencing your reference of "true Scots man", you got a better source I am all ears.

No, my definition stands just fine

That is not what I said. What I said is no true Christian could ever curse God AFTER they know God's character. I have said it again and again and again. Please don't twist my word. I caught you multiple times.

Honestly, it would not matter what you said. Jesus does not even say or elaborate That's the point...

Again, 'you can speak against A, but not B.' That's it. Fin.

For such a threat, would be nice to elaborate upon the threat just a bit. I mean, He has no problems giving detailed instructions in other parts of the Bible, which are more seemingly mundane requests. Seems odd, that for something so important, He cares not to even give the same amount of effort as the mundane ones...?

But hey, I guess God has His reasons

Exactly, it did not talk about give to anther person. So as long as I don't value the possession above God, they are all God's. Christians is only a temporary property manager for God under this world, everything belongs to God.

Um that's not what the verse says. Otherwise, seems logical He would just TELL you not to value anything above Him. He literally tells you to give them up. But nice try there...

That is only your personal opinion.

It's not opinion, it's what is written:

32 Anyone who speaks a word against (A) will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against (B) will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

But nice try all-the-same.

Satan can, as he knows God and still revolted, spread lies about God's character

Old post copy pasted here.
You need to put it in context. Here God show us what CAN be forgiven, i.e. blasphemy against God and Jesus, which is 2 CLEAR examples, and what not very clear, blasphemy against Holy Spirit, might not be something that we can fully understand as humans, that related to supernatural beings or people who is not chosen. This is what we call hidden messages of God, as when we teach Newton's laws in elementary school, we don't need to put in Quantum physics to confuse the students.

Your response does not address my point. My point is that if no one can blaspheme the Holy Spirit, it would be just as useless as saying...

"All people that are not going to heaven, are not going to heaven." It's a useless and pointless verse.

 

[thomas_t]

Again, every denomination thinks they are right, and back it with Bible verse(s). So yes, the authors provide confusion.

I disagree, backing stances up with Bible verses does not mean doing it correctly. Furthermore, there are many denominations that do not contradict each other.

According to Scripture, backed by other Scripture, you can. Please ask God, so we can clear this up, once and for all. Does He mean you are going to a 'lesser' heaven, or hell, when you speak against Him? I'll be waiting. Oh, and please reference (Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23)

No, I don't like the whole approach.
Don't get me wrong. I appreciate your way of dealing with the details.
But here, the point of departure was false, I think.
Your whole point of seeing a contradiction between the unforgivable sin on the one hand, and salvation by faith alone on the other, ... hinges on the assumption that there is no such thing as a heaven with restrictions for some. If this assumption does not depict reality... you can't claim contradiction any more.
So the onus was on you... and I don't want to give in to the impression that the burden of proof somehow shifted towards God in this matter.
That's why I don't ask him here.

Jesus addresses humans. Stop bantering semantics and answer the dang question already .

Jesus adresses groups in the one verse, and individual persons in the other (own interpretation). There is a difference between these two.
In sports, there are single competitions and team competitions. In tennis turnaments, for instance, you have singles competitions first and double competitions last. Both are seperate. You can win in tennis singles... but apart from that you might win or not in doubles, too. The latter one is a complete different competition. There are even tennis players who specialise in doubles.
Granted, the rules set for singles competitions in faith are apparently completely different from the ones for team competitions that I claim to exist apart from singles. So here, I'd still have to work on the analogy.
Thanks for the exchange we're having.
Thomas

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Depends. If the Book states the Book is based on all actual events; and you find, from the jump, it likely wasn't, many may not waste their time engaging or reading further.

Or maybe, just skip directly to the end.

Well since we were originally referring to the Bible, does the book state that it was based on actual events.

You might also give consideration to the film U-571. It was based on actual events... but very loosely. It is a fiction, but includes some facts (though not many if memory serves).

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

But in great contrast, look at Luke 14:25-33. Have [you] given up everything to follow Him? If not, why does this verse exclude you?

Yes.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

I'm afraid I disagree...

They both provide mutually opposing methods for salvation. Matthew makes no mention of faith. Romans makes no mention of works. You state you think Romans is more hard and fast, but have not given sufficient reason to discard Matthew. You said it yourself, "There are actually very few instances where Jesus' words are ambiguous."

That's because you are putting these two passages forward as the explanation of salvation when neither is that.

It is like having two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that don't fit together in any way. Just because that is true does not mean that they don't fit into a bigger picture.

 

[dcalling]

Your response does not address my point. My point is that if no one can blaspheme the Holy Spirit, it would be just as useless as saying...

"All people that are not going to heaven, are not going to heaven." It's a useless and pointless verse.

Satan can, as he knows God and still revolted, spread lies about God's character

Old post copy pasted here.
You need to put it in context. Here God show us what CAN be forgiven, i.e. blasphemy against God and Jesus, which is 2 CLEAR examples, and what not very clear, blasphemy against Holy Spirit, might not be something that we can fully understand as humans, that related to supernatural beings or people who is not chosen. This is what we call hidden messages of God, as when we teach Newton's laws in elementary school, we don't need to put in Quantum physics to confuse the students.

 

[cvanwey]

I disagree, backing stances up with Bible verses does not mean doing it correctly. Furthermore, there are many denominations that do not contradict each other.

Please read what I stated carefully:

"Again, every denomination thinks they are right, and back it with Bible verse(s). So yes, the authors provide confusion."

On one end, you have Unitarians. On the other, maybe you have evangelicals. Then you have the Catholics. Get a representative from those three factions alone into a debate about the correct beliefs about salvation, while referencing Scripture, and watch what happens.

When you have a book of ambiguity - (open to more than one interpretation), scattered messages, and seemingly important or even threatening verses left merely to conjecture, is it no wonder you can have many denominations?

No, I don't like the whole approach.
Don't get me wrong. I appreciate your way of dealing with the details.
But here, the point of departure was false, I think.
Your whole point of seeing a contradiction between the unforgivable sin on the one hand, and salvation by faith alone on the other, ... hinges on the assumption that there is no such thing as a heaven with restrictions for some. If this assumption does not depict reality... you can't claim contradiction any more.
So the onus was on you... and I don't want to give in to the impression that the burden of proof somehow shifted towards God in this matter.
That's why I don't ask him here.

My request for you to ask in prayer is merely to solve a very simple question. I asked God myself, but he never responded. In accordance with the many supported verses in Scripture, I then asked if [you] could ask God. And this specific question is, again, very simple.

When Jesus states "but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come", does He mean the believers whom commit this offense still go to heaven or not?

Again, in accordance with Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23, looks like you have the green light to ask Him. It's a simple question, since God seems to leave this conclusion possibly up for conjecture?

Jesus adresses groups in the one verse, and individual persons in the other (own interpretation). There is a difference between these two.
In sports, there are single competitions and team competitions. In tennis turnaments, for instance, you have singles competitions first and double competitions last. Both are seperate. You can win in tennis singles... but apart from that you might win or not in doubles, too. The latter one is a complete different competition. There are even tennis players who specialise in doubles.
Granted, the rules set for singles competitions in faith are apparently completely different from the ones for team competitions that I claim to exist apart from singles. So here, I'd still have to work on the analogy.
Thanks for the exchange we're having.
Thomas

I'm sorry @thomas_t , but this analogy does not follow. And please mind you what @Silly Uncle Wayne said about parables. Though there exists non-literal references in there, the main message is literal, and hardly ever left to conjecture - (paraphrased).

Jesus states:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

Basically, the literal translation here is when Jesus comes back to collect His chosen humans, he will separate by saved/unsaved.

'All the nations' merely means all people of all areas on earth. And if you disagree, you will again need to consult Jesus directly in prayer, as the verse begins at verse 31, and ends in verse 46, with no further clarification or reference.

Later, Jesus states:

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

The literal translation here suggests to help all humans you come into contact with, providing the same level of help you would help Jesus. Meaning, you better roll out the 'red carpet' for everyone in the same fashion. And if you don't, I'm going to through you into a perpetual burning pit.

And finally:

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Again, the take away here, is He separates into two conclusions.

Sheep = humans = deemed true helpers = heaven
goats = humans = deemed not helpful enough = hell

 

[cvanwey]

Well since we were originally referring to the Bible, does the book state that it was based on actual events.

Um, it is the claimed Bible we are speaking about here. Are you suggesting it is NOT based on actual events?

You might also give consideration to the film U-571. It was based on actual events... but very loosely. It is a fiction, but includes some facts (though not many if memory serves).

If you want to equate the Bible to "Hollywood", I won't stop you.

However, I know what you are trying to say... If I watch a documentary, read a biography, or watch a Hollywood movie depicting 'actual events', I already know there will be quite a bit of flavor added; mostly for entertainment purposes.

 

[cvanwey]

Yes.

How so?

 

[cvanwey]

That's because you are putting these two passages forward as the explanation of salvation when neither is that.

It is like having two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle that don't fit together in any way. Just because that is true does not mean that they don't fit into a bigger picture.

Disagree...

Matthew 25:31-46 is a parable. It's literal conclusion, is that He separates the saved/unsaved, by Him judging how much they help others. The ones that do not perform to Jesus' satisfaction are thrown into hell. This is direct instruction on what is required, to stay out of hell.

 

[cvanwey]

@Silly Uncle Wayne

I have some rather important questions for you. Ones I've asked a couple of times now, which has gone unaddressed:

1. How does one achieve salvation? Stating 'Jesus is the way', is erroneous and undefined. Is it Romans 10:9-10, is it Matthew 25:31-46, is it Luke 14:25-33, is it a combo deal? Is it simply grace? Is it other?

2. What about the ones whom cannot perform any of these traits? -- The ones born with severe defects, the still-born, child death, other? Does the Bible mention if these people get a free pass?

3. You state reading the Bible is what turned you from an atheist to a believer. What did it for you?

 

[cvanwey]

Satan can, as he knows God and still revolted, spread lies about God's character

Old post copy pasted here.
You need to put it in context. Here God show us what CAN be forgiven, i.e. blasphemy against God and Jesus, which is 2 CLEAR examples, and what not very clear, blasphemy against Holy Spirit, might not be something that we can fully understand as humans, that related to supernatural beings or people who is not chosen. This is what we call hidden messages of God, as when we teach Newton's laws in elementary school, we don't need to put in Quantum physics to confuse the students.

I'm sorry @dcalling , I can't do this any more. I have repeated my response numerous times, for which you do not address.

Yet again, according to you, the verse adds nothing of value, under your definition.

 

[thomas_t]

When you have a book of ambiguity - (open to more than one interpretation), scattered messages, and seemingly important or even threatening verses left merely to conjecture, is it no wonder you can have many denominations?

the false teaching is responsible for having many denomoinations, Bible is perfect, in my opinion.

Again, in accordance with Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23, looks like you have the green light to ask Him. It's a simple question, since God seems to leave this conclusion possibly up for conjecture?

yeah that's my point. In my opinoin, he did leave it up for conjecture indeed. One thing is sure though: faith saves. Once you're applying Romans 10:10 you're saved. However, it is questionable whether or not Christians are able to commit this sin later. In this sense, it is conjecture.
So better not blaspheme against the Holy Spirit.

'All the nations' merely means all people of all areas on earth.

according to you. I disagree. It's groups. Also, you're following lines here apply to entire groups, I think:

The literal translation here suggests to help all humans you come into contact with, providing the same level of help you would help Jesus. Meaning, you better roll out the 'red carpet' for everyone in the same fashion. And if you don't, I'm going to through you into a perpetual burning pit.

Groups. Groups are not the sum of the individuals partaking in that group. In a music group, the music is not the sum of every instrument played, either. You can't just put 5 musicians in the same room and let them play at the same time the same song... and then think it is the same music that develops when the musicians really play together interacting with each other and adopting different functions in the band.
A band is not the sum of it's players. It's more.
It is interaction, assuming roles, helping and suppotrting each other, ebening out each other's weaknesses and so on.
It's not just making music next to each other.
Similarly, a nation is not just a bunch of people.


--------------

 

[cvanwey]

the false teaching is responsible for having many denomoinations, Bible is perfect, in my opinion.

The evidence demonstrates otherwise:

On one end, you have Unitarians. On the other, maybe you have evangelicals. Then you have the Catholics. Get a representative from those three factions alone into a debate about the correct beliefs about salvation, while referencing Scripture, and watch what happens.

Which of these (3) alone are delivering 'false teachings', and why?

yeah that's my point. In my opinoin, he did leave it up for conjecture indeed. One thing is sure though: faith saves. Once you're applying Romans 10:10 you're saved. However, it is questionable whether or not Christians are able to commit this sin later. In this sense, it is conjecture.
So better not blaspheme against the Holy Spirit.

You keep avoiding my point. Let's try this, yet again...

You claim the verse, which states 'in the age to come", still means some level of heaven for believers whom commit blasphemy. I say the context suggests (not heaven). We disagree. And yet, the verse remains ambiguous. We cannot reference an adjacent passage, in this context, because this is basically all the author says.

You have one interpretation, I have another. Seems perfectly reasonable, in line with ALL the verses I provided for you, for us to ask God for clarification.

Hence, can you ask Him to clear up this disagreement? I mean, it's only an eternal threat we are speaking about here.....

according to you. I disagree. It's groups. Also, you're following lines here apply to entire groups, I think:

Groups. Groups are not the sum of the individuals partaking in that group. In a music group, the music is not the sum of every instrument played, either. You can't just put 5 musicians in the same room and let them play at the same time the same song... and then think it is the same music that develops when the musicians really play together interacting with each other and adopting different functions in the band.
A band is not the sum of it's players. It's more.
It is interaction, assuming roles, helping and suppotrting each other, ebening out each other's weaknesses and so on.
It's not just making music next to each other.
Similarly, a nation is not just a bunch of people.

Another disagreement apparently. Let's ask God. Can you ask Him what He means here as well?

 

[dcalling]

I'm sorry @dcalling , I can't do this any more. I have repeated my response numerous times, for which you do not address.

Yet again, according to you, the verse adds nothing of value, under your definition.

Yes you can

Anyway that is not what I said, you are moving what I said out of context and moved words around those.

Old post copy pasted here.
You need to put it in context. Here God show us what CAN be forgiven, i.e. blasphemy against God and Jesus, which is 2 CLEAR examples, and what not very clear, blasphemy against Holy Spirit, might not be something that we can fully understand as humans, that related to supernatural beings or people who is not chosen. This is what we call hidden messages of God, as when we teach Newton's laws in elementary school, we don't need to put in Quantum physics to confuse the students.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

So, in a nutshell, you are saying that the message behind the parable is still literal. Noted....

The parable speaks clearly that Jesus will judge based upon how much they help others. And further, that the saved/unsaved hinge upon such acts/deeds/works. He

makes no tie-in to faith here.

Actually the whole parable is a tie in to faith as you would know if you read the whole parable and not just the bit that suits. It also deals with the faith and works issue and clearly comes out in favour of faith.

Take a look at what he says to the sheep.

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

So these people are doing the one thing that is required of them and they are not even aware of it. Which is the whole point. It is not even a case of how much 'feeding the hungry', 'hospitality to strangers', 'providing clothing' or 'visiting the sick' - it is just that they did it and they did it without feeling the need to do it to please God or fulfil some list of worthy deeds.

So this passage still fits in to the 'Works as as consequence rather than Works as the means.'

 

[cvanwey]

Actually the whole parable is a tie in to faith as you would know if you read the whole parable and not just the bit that suits. It also deals with the faith and works issue and clearly comes out in favour of faith.

Disagree. And I mentioned the entire passage (31-46), not just parts.

31 - When Jesus returns
32-33 - He will separate the saved from the unsaved; saved = right, unsaved = left
34 - The ones to the right, come with me
35 - 36 Because you helped me
37 - 39 The ones to right responded, "Jesus, we did not help you"
40 - Jesus states "no silly, by helping others, you helped 'Me' - it's a metaphor guys, get with the program"
41 - 43 - Jesus tells the ones on the left, you did not help, so I'm sending you guys to burn

etc.......

Even as a Christian, this parable looks to send the message that helping others IS the criteria for which Jesus will judge you. Thus, at BEST, to support [your] position, it's a combo of faith and works. But then the question becomes... How much faith, how much works?

And at worst, meaning, for all the ones whom read this passage and scratch their heads - (both Christians or just curious onlookers), it's quite possible Jesus' meter-stick for salvation is based upon humans helping other humans. -- Which is not necessary a 'bad' thing, in 'my book.'

The 'bad' part remains, is that we have confusion, from both believers and 'nitpickers', whom might be here to merely chastise Chapter and Verse.