Purveyor of Confusion

[thomas_t]

Now, what is repentance, in your view, now that we've established it's necessary to salvation?

Repentance is "I'm sorry Jesus for all the mistakes I've made in life. Sorry if I did harm to anyone, please forgive me. I want to accept you as Lord now!"
and this you can very well speak in your heart...

It's just that I can't make any sense of acknowledging Jesus as Lord and be unwilling to repent at the same time.
It's like a soccer player saying "I accept the rules of soccer, but I won't budge one inch".
Or it's like someone saying "I accept the rules of common law. But I'll keep everything I stole!" It just does not make sense.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

What does one being older than the next, matter in this scenario? Is Mark 'truer' than John, because it was presumably written before?

No its about knowing what the original Christians thought and it is quite clear from the first century writings by Christians that they thought Christ was God incarnate. It is only in the second century onwards that other ideas tried to rear their heads. The fact that the ongoing church opposed such groups with letters and other things that we know that there is some kind of orthodox belief that these new groups did not have.

As such Unitarians are not Christian any more than you or Muslims (who believe Jesus was a prophet).

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Not if Matthew 25:31-46 has anything to say about it.... Maybe a doubter, but in the back of their mind wonders or keeps their options on the table, and helps others often, is maybe revered above and beyond a claimant of 'true faith', whom lacks helping others as much.?.?.?

Well if you are going by Matthew 25 as the only arbiter of this fact, which it is not. How do you reconcile this with:
'through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand' (Paul)
'I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me' (John)
'And their is salvation in no-one else' (Luke)
even Matthew says 'The Son of Man... will repay each person according to what he has done' and 'Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.'

Your interpretation means that a good person gets saved (sheep), ours that there are other criteria involved and that this parable is just one part of the bigger picture.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

Me: I haven't actually said anything about Matthew 12:32 at all (unless my memory is going). So you certainly don't have 4 brave soldiers - at most 3.

Your response:

Post #363

"In my opinion, this is a passage spoken to Jews and then regurgitated in a Jewish gospel for the sole purpose of pointing out to Jews that their ideas of righteousness are completely wrong. See also Matthew 6:1"

I don't know if you can see the numbers after the word Matthew in each case, but they are different. Completely different.

 

[SPF]

Third, I find it funny how you, along with some other Christians, seem to use this mode of 'defense'

I find it funny how you disregard context as not meaningful when context determines how we interpret everything in life.

I was pulled over once while rushing my wife to the hospital. When I explained the context of why I was speeding to the officer, he did not give me a ticket, but instead gave me an escort. Context matters.

Context is key in properly interpreting and understanding many things, it's really common sense that this is true.

Heck, just google "importance of context" and you'll find no shortage of pages explaining why it is important. The very fact that I even have to say out loud that context is important makes me wonder how serious you actually are about engaging in conversation.

Is this what [you] conclude about the 'translation of Matthew 12:32; that you agree with @dcalling ? "Non-Christians cannot commit this sin, and true believers never would?

I don't know what dcalling said, but I would suggest that all non-Christians commit the unpardonable sin and no Christians do.

Second, please tell me why my conclusion for Matthew 12:32 is incorrect, but @thomas_t , I mean @dcalling , I mean @Silly Uncle Wayne 's rendition is correct?

Probably because you're wrong, and they're right? That would be why your conclusion is wrong and theirs is not.

 

[agapelove]

Then there would be many, whom I have spoken to first hand, whom teach Hermeneutics none-the-less, whom would state [you] are mistaken. And that the Bible IS the perfect Word of God. They are armed and ready to 'support' every supposed contradiction, tell me that all verse is literal, and also will tell both me and the rest how they are not well versed enough to interpret - if they conclude something different than their view(s).

Which begs the question....

If Hermeneutics IS the standard, how can some read the same very verse, but get differing answers?

A few years ago, I was attending my wife's chosen church, a non-denominational branch. I noticed one pastor there was a young-earther. I noticed another pastor was an old-earther. I requested to debate both of them simultaneously, to get to the bottom of the matter. I wanted to find out how they could view the same text, and get differing conclusions, and both support them with evidence just-the-same.

Their answer.... 'We will not invite discord among us brothers."

Seems as though religion is often sheltered in such a way; from inquiry and investigation. Maybe this is one of the reasons why I hang out so much here....?

There is no such thing as a "standard hermeneutic" there is only individual or denominational hermeneutics. I left the church for this very reason and that's why I'm here too. Proverbs 25:2 "It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out."

To those who are so quick to call their hermeuntical extrapolations the "Perfect Word of God" and then take issue with people who conclude differently, here is what the Bible says:
Isaiah 66:2 "These are the ones I look on with favor: those who are humble and contrite in spirit, and who tremble at my word."

Faith is not about knowing everything, though religion makes it seem that way. Faith is knowing that you know nothing, and believing anyway.

Why is it [your] provided verse, and NOT instead John 1:1? Just curious?

The "Word" in John 1:1 is not the Bible. The Bible was not with God in the beginning in fact it was not until the 5th century that all the different Christian churches came to a basic agreement on Biblical canon.
The "Word" in John 1:1 is Jesus Christ (ie. The Word Became Flesh).

Not me. And I tried for 3 decades. The only thing I've seen, with tangible evidence, which is claimed to be from Him, is the Bible. Everything else is anecdotal. And these claims are a dime a dozen.

Have you thought about how maybe God knows you so well that when He speaks to you, you don't even realize it's Him and you call it something else?

The Bible is far from the only evidence that He's given us. He is the creator of the cosmos. He is love, grace, mercy, justice. Where do you think these things come from?

Well, I've never met God, so I would not know. But it seems like He wants to know us, based upon what I've read.

Seems kind of 'cruel', if you ask me. He wants you to know Him, but then plays hide-and-go-seek.

Yes, because He wants us to seek Him. That is what faith is.. the willingness and trust to seek. He manifested Himself to us through Jesus Christ and through Him we may have eternal life. This is the Biblical definition of eternal life: "Now this is eternal life; that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3.

If this is hard to understand; absolute truth is hard to understand. You may see it as cruel but I see it as compassion. We do not know Him right now because we are not ready to know. We do not see because we are not ready to see.

I understand that some assert we are saved by some, or all, of the following... grace, faith, works.
Now, if we can just get to the bottom of which one(s) is/are the ones, in regards to salvation, then we are golden

We are saved by grace. Everything else is secondary.

 

[BigV]

Repentance is "I'm sorry Jesus for all the mistakes I've made in life. Sorry if I did harm to anyone, please forgive me. I want to accept you as Lord now!"
and this you can very well speak in your heart..

Christians I know of define repentance as not only saying “sorry” but also adjusting the behavior.

remember that Judas Iscariot was sorry too.

 

[miknik5]

Okay, you claim it is. I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

Youĺl find the answer in John 6...

 

[miknik5]

Okay, you claim it is. I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?



What institution provides the best Biblical education? And furthermore, what are they teaching, in regards to the tenets to salvation? Is it the Catholics, other, other, other?



Why not?



Are [you] equipped to correctly interpret all verses, which, on the surface, appear not to align with your own moral assessment?




Okay. Let's start with an axiomatic one, it seems. The Bible makes a flood claim. Is this literal or figurative? And how do you support your conclusion, if not literal? Again, in line with the fact that we first take all verse as literal, until proven otherwise; according to you.

Both...literal and figurative...

GOD, in HIS WISDOM, knowing our limited humanity, that we ever and always require signs and representations to understand HIS HIGHER and HIDDEN SPIRITUAL TRUTHS.

The flood was symbolic of baptism in which only 8 people survived...8, sir...being symbolic of a new, 8th day creation, having passed through the LORDŚ 7th day SABBATH REST....

No one could have known that the BIBLE was a well fitted puzzle and picture pointing to the fullness which would come...even the prophets spoke in shadows not fully understanding all that they prophecied pointed to CHRIST.

 

[miknik5]

Yes, the Bible does make such claims. You must confess with your mouth. You must believe He is your savior. You must, even further still, repent as a sinner.

But is this verse, granting even further latitude above, enough?

What about all the humans God deems as 'rich'? And by 'rich', please remember Jesus was a homeless preacher. Thus, I would imagine someone whom owns electronic devices, a car, rent/owns property, has any retirement savings at all, has money in the bank; heck, even a refrigerator stocked with food, might surely be considered 'rich' to Jesus.

Thus, I add, if you profess to be a follower of Jesus. And by follower, I would dare to say a disciple, do [you] adhere to Luke 14:33 as well? If not, why not?

The WORD of GOD also says store up treasure in Heaven...for where your heart is, there also will your treasure be.

It is good that HE alone knows the hearts of HIS CHILDREN and whether their hearts are towards temporal treasures and trinkets rather than what is TRULY TREASURE...

 

[miknik5]

How do you know God does not deem you as rich? Again, from the perspective of Jesus, maybe you are considered rich.

We are...we were made rich the moment we heard the GOSPEL and believed...we have all that is needed and needful in CHRIST JESUS...so yes, we are rich...already...and that has nothing to do with material wealth

 

[miknik5]

Preemptive response, in the hopes I am not talking to a wall.



Aren't you a follower? Don't you attempt to keep the Commandments? Don't you attempt to follow the golden rule? Don't you repent directly to Him? Don't you ask yourself, from time-to-time, 'does Jesus think this is right or wrong?' etc etc etc.... I again ask... Why does Luke 14:25-33 not apply to you?



I'm afraid this answer appears dissatisfying. If you admit God deems you rich, it would appear axiomatic in His request, that He asks that you give it all away, via Luke 14:33. He adds no qualifiers here. And in something as important as the topic for salvation, seems as though Jesus would not want to remain ambiguous, would He? I see no footnote to also reference other verse.

As I've stated here many times, many can support their position, when they can pluck out any verse from the Bible they choose. But in the case for Luke 14:25-33, again, why are you exempt?

[Your] responses appears, to me, to 're-purpose' His request, by insinuating all the money you keep, and spend on whatever you see fit, is glorying Him. But that is clearly not what He says in Luke 14:25-33. Can you explain?



My point here, is the tenets for salvation differ from one to the next. You claim yours is the correct one. Thus, if you admit you do not know what the others are preaching or asserting regarding salvation, how are you so sure yours is right, while there's in wrong?

The verse in Matthew 25:31-45 states Jesus will separate the saved and unsaved by their works. [You] stated works are not required. I see conflict here. Again, I read the entire passage in it's context. Further...

Luke 14:25-33 states if you are rich, you are to give up everything. Again, why are you exempt?



The rest here seems to create too much hostility to address. I'll leave it alone for now.

You are looking at Luke 14:25-33 incorrectly...In fact, you concentrate on the last statement but neglect most of what 14 is about. JESUS knows who will follow HIM, sir...and the majority in this chapter DO NOT follow HIM...which is why HE says, (of HIMSELF)...who builds a tower and does not first count the cos, lest HE not be able to complete the building...or what KING does not first consult HIS army that HE be victorious lest HE not have to draw back...

We didn´t chose HIM sir...HE chose us...
HE knows who will follow HIM

Please read all of Luke 14

As to Matthew 25 31-45, those IN CHRIST JESUS have already passed from death to life and will not come under condemnation...those spoken of in Matthew 25 are those spoken of in John 5 as well as in Revelation 20

You see, there are those who hear HIS VOICE now, sir...these are those who have passed from death to LIFE...but, a time WILL come when all will hear the VOICE of the SON of GOD...and all will rise to be judged...those who have done good to eternal life, and those who have done evil, to condemnation.

But CHRISTIANS, those who have heard HIS VOICE now...they have a part in the first resurrection

 

[miknik5]

Then you would be incorrect. Here's why...

First, I have genuine doubt that a man rose from the dead. You claim I'm lying. Okay, I guess you really got me there, please!

Further, to add to the rest of your reply....The Qur'an is also a collection of evidence, in the sense that I'm sure there exists (some) stuff which can likely be corroborated. But it's another to assume that, because we can verify some physical evidence from the Qur'an, as claimed from the Qur'an, that we can then [also] assume that a man named Muhammad flew up to heaven on a white horse.

So again, what 'testimony' affirms <100's> seeing a postmortem Jesus? And before you answer, I trust we are in agreement that there exists a fairly large difference between 100's of individuals independently claiming the same witnessed event, verses, one claiming many others saw something - without any sort of documented corroboration, right?



Nope. The Bible is the claim, where a resurrection is concerned. Just like the Qur'an is the claim, for a man flying up to heaven on a white horse. Without the Bible, there exists no claim of a man rising from the dead, via eye-witness attestation. But until you explain to me how we have 100's of verified independent eye-witness accounts, of a man rising from the dead, as you assert; we appear to have a problem.



You use this example a lot. But let me tell you why this fails.

My objective here is to point out that it appears we have conflicting assertions for salvation. You say it's this, others disagree. My point, is that there really exists no way for either you nor them to verify who is correct/incorrect. Why, because as I'm currently telling another, in one passage, God states the saved/unsaved will be separated by their works (Matthew 25:31-45). In another, God is clear that the rich need to give up all possession to be a follower (Luke 14:25-33). In other passages, God tells you to believe and have faith (John 3:16-18). Or maybe you need to keep the commandments, which is also works based.

Thus far, I would at least agree that without faith, the rest doesn't matter. I sincerely doubt an atheist can 'earn' their way to heaven. Or can they???? However, in many cases, belief/faith/repent alone does not appear to be enough. So is it, or not???????

Remember, the title of this thread is 'purveyor of confusion.' I'm not accusing you of being wrong. I'm not accusing you of anything really. My accusation is to the author(s). Which, in my estimation, is the claims of a dead preacher, at best. And at worst, were augmented, added to, etc from many later authors... (In which I could make a case for that, in another thread...)

Is it belief alone? Are any works required? etc...?



Oh goodie! I'm dishonest in a third way....

Please see above. I care not to repeat myself.

Faith in JESUS CHRIST alone is salvation sir...and the TRUTH that even today there are those who HEAR HIS VOICE, means that not only is Romans 10 is sufficient for those to whom HE has revealed HIMSELF to...
9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

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

11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.


By the way, the heart is not hidden from GOD...

 

[miknik5]

I already asked him that I have yet to get a clear answer. My point there was to demonstrate the Catholics are going to teach something likely quite different than a Protestant, in regards to salvation.

All these outward denominations are simply an outward profession before the eyes of men of who we say we belong to and how we worship in community with other such believers...but GOD doesn´t look outwardly HE looks inwardly, upon the heart, and HE isn´t fooled...HE lsees that true inward confession/profession of who we say we belong to, that can NOT be hidden from HIM...

And mixed in among EVERY outward denominational church are those who worship in SPIRIT and in TRUTH...and those who do not know who and what they worship.

 

[miknik5]

Welp, that makes two of us.



Yes, you get Christians on here, whom claim they know the path to salvation, and seem to side-step the presented conflict(s) - until proven otherwise. Where as I openly admit, that if I were a Christian, I would not be able to figure out how to actually be saved - (even if I read the Bible 500 times).

But to follow up, do you ever wonder if your chosen path is enough for Him? And if you do, does He answer you? And if not, do you ever wonder why God remains so mysterious, especially when we are speaking about something as important as your eternity? Seems like fair enough follow-up questions, doesn't it?

Don´t worry about it...as Paul said, no one can lay any other foundation than the one that was laid.
This alone is sufficient to ALL CHRISTIANS...

 

[miknik5]

Sounds as if you are saying God opts to, not only present Himself to certain people, but then gets them to do things?

I prayed to this perceived God for 30+ years, and nothing. I guess I was not worthy? I also ask/asked people here to demonstrate God. No such luck. And since God knows what evidence would be necessary to convince me of His existence, and chooses not to furnish as such; at best, God chooses not to interact with me regardless.

However, it sounds like you are saying God interacts with some, maybe even against their will? And others, like me, He chooses not to. Thus, I have to ask, seems we have yet another conflict, via
Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23.



Seems odd that God makes great efforts to make sure some get it right, but leaves others alone completely; even when asked of Him for decades? What a mysterious God... And more curious still, is the ones claiming they know, conflict directly with each other. Again, very curious....?

But getting back to the tenets for salvation, seems you have not really answered the question. And at best, kind of confirmed my statements in post #1.... (i.e.) There does not exist one standard for salvation.

Belief in the GOSPEL sir...that CHRIST died so that through faith in HIM we are washed and reconciled to GOD by, through and in CHRIST JESUS...

That there is only ONE WAY back to the FATHER and it is through THE SON, who came forth from GOD and into the world, covered in our covering, so that through faith in HIM, we may be covered in HIS COVERING...HIDDEN in HIM...in THAT TRUE CITY of REFUGE which GOD has provided all mankind found only IN HIS SON...

 

[miknik5]

page 4

 

[miknik5]

Sounds to me like you are essentially saying, that I harbor pride. And that is why I have not felt God's contact, in prayer? Or, further, that I am requesting His contact on my terms.

Welp, like I stated prior, a large point you failed to address... I trust you believe petitionary/intercessory prayers sometimes work? If not, then we have even further conflicts, regarding the passages you did not address in your last post (i.e) Matthew 7:7, Matthew 21:22, Mark 11:24, John 14:13-14, John 16:23.

Who was CHRIST speaking to sir in these above verses which you quote? Was HE speaking to those who believed in HIM. Or those who did not believe in HIM?

 

[miknik5]

You have misunderstood what I was saying. The evidence speaks for itself - (we have thousands of opposing claims and beliefs).

As @Loversofjesus_2018 also pointed out...

1) Many Chriistians 'think' their interpretation is the correct one; including you I happily admit I'm confused.

2) I do see conflict/contradiction. Hence, reading any book, which presents such conflict, or having apologists 'explain' how there are not conflicts/contradictions, will not reconcile the contradiction. See below for further explanation of this proclamation...

And further still, as I asked @SPF , 3) who is teaching the right path for salvation, the Catholics, the Protestants, other other other? I trust you understand that the tenets for salvation, between those two factions alone, differ.



Let's test this... Since it would appear you think you know, and likely think you are bound for heaven; maybe you can solved this riddle for me?

What if it is ingrained in my nature to help others? But, I doubt a man rose from the dead, due to lack in evidence? Or, that I do not believe in the supernatural? Can I force myself to believe it anyways? Just the same... if I were to study the evidence for Muhammad, and his claims, over and over and over again, listen to educated people, claiming they know, maybe I would then believe Muhammad did fly up on a white horse? You see where I'm going with this yet?

If I have studied all given pieces of 'evidence' for a resurrection, and find it falls short, but I..

1) still help others when I can, and also...
2) treat others like I want to be treated, is that enough?

Welp, not according to John 3:16-18, which is listed directly upon your avatar

Thus, belief appears mandatory. But, how much belief is required? A mustard's seed of belief/faith, like I doubt aliens have made contact here, but cannot disprove a one time anecdotal claim from the past? Or, full blown belief/faith like I believe my mom exists, or, somewhere in the middle?



Beg to differ.

I was brought up in Christianity. I was taught the golden rule, and still apply it, as much as I can, to this day. Do I fall short? Of course. I was taught to help others, and I do, when I can. Do I fall short? Of course.

However, I was also taught that a man rose from the dead. I studied the evidence for this claim. I found it lacking, like I do for all opposing claimed deities and their supernatural claims. Hence, what now? How am I supposed to profess a relationship, especially love, for a deity for which I do not think exists?

And further still, if this God does exist, is God cool with that; in light of the fact I still attempt to adhere to the golden rule, and try not to steal, trespass, lie, etc etc etc etc etc? Is God cool and okay with the fact that I believe in His present existence, about as much as I believe in Vishnu's? Which is to say, it is not 100% off the table, but I have severe doubts?

So again, how much belief is enough? How much of the golden rule is enough? How much of helping others, is enough?

So we can again loop right back to my former question... How do you know Luke 14:25-33 does not really apply to you as much so as John 3:16-18?



Addressed above



This is a false analogy. There exists a huge difference here in your reply. As I told you prior, I'm now just a casual observer, in a sense. Why? Because I doubt this dead preacher still lives today. You think this assessment is insincere do you????

I don't think He rose from the dead to 'save' us. Could I be wrong? Of course. However, the given analogy is a non-starter. Where as, if I were to marry someone, I would at least first 'know' they exist

I again ask though... How much faith is enough (John 3:16-18)? How much of the golden rule is enough (Matthew 7:12)? How many works are enough (Matthew 25:31-46)? How much of giving away all positions, as they demonstrate your love of possessions instead of God, enough (Luke 14:25-33)? Etc...



Why should they stop 'worrying'? Isn't Jesus the one whom introduced the concept of eternal condemnation for not following correctly? Yes. I believe He was. Heck, it's only the comfort of our eternity we're speaking about here. Yea, you are right... Why should Christians 'worry' or pose question?

Again, I don't agree. Like I stated above. I was taught to be kind to others. I was taught to help others. Those things I still do as much as I can. Is this enough? If not, then it may seem 'morals' are irrelevant, where Christianity is concerned. Unless you want to make the argument that not believing a claim is 'immoral'???

Again, I was also taught that a man rose from the dead. And once I studied for myself, I found this claim lacking. Hence, have as much doubt for Jesus, as I do for other claimed gods.

No. HE is NOT cool with that, sir...

GOD, by sending HIS SON into the world, shut up the mouths of every lying, self-professed deity sir

For many profess to have god(s) but deny THE SON...and those who deny THE SON, deny THE FATHER who sent HIM...and in a sense, call GOD a liar...they do NOT believe HIS TESTIMONY which HE has given us of HIS SON...

 

[miknik5]

Claims of a man rising from the dead, or the claims of a man ascending to heaven on a horse, are completely disconnected to what they taught or did, while on earth. Right?

You must investigate the claims of a man rising from dead, in and of itself. Have you done that? I have. And at present, I don't buy the story. Hence..., makes it kind of hard to be told to 'love' something I don't think exists, right?

But sure, I still question the conflicting assertions in the Bible, as a casual observer, and do so here (in the appropriate arena)... Just like I might of the Qur'an, Rigveda, etc.....



Nothing in this response pertains to my request, for which you quoted? Do you care to substantiate the claim, that 100's of eye-witnesses saw Jesus after His dead? Because @John Helpher doesn't seem to want to partake; as he skipped right over it?

Jesus rising from the dead and ascending is NOT disconnected from what was taught and what is very much a part of the GOSPEL...

By this, we know, for those who believe, HE conquered death for us...