Ask God for Me

[Oncedeceived]

Yanno, if you use quotes, I'll know you have something for me to respond to. Or, you could use the @ symbol with my name.

@Kylie's point if I understand it is not about literal foundations like those of buildings. You might say Christ is the foundation of your religion and it might also be the foundation of a person of a different denomination. Nevertheless, if a Calvinist thinks that everything is ordained and that, effectively, there is no free will, then that Calvinist's religion is difference from a Christian of armenian persuasion.

That is why we have the Bible, the Bible is the means to address differences. However, that being said, differences are not usually salvation issues. If someone claims something that differs from Jesus and what is spoken of Him in the Bible that can lead to false teaching and can become a salvation issue.

Simlarly, if 2 people believe Kylie has gone to the shops, they have a similar foundation of belief about Kylie. But if one thinks she went to buy food (the Calvinist, say) and the other thinks she went to buy shoes (the armenian, say), then they are different...and one of them is wrong.[/QUOTE]

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

That is why we have the Bible, the Bible is the means to address differences.

it can be shown that the Bible does not address these differences. If it did there would not be denominations. Each Christian thinks if everyone would interpret the Bible the way I do them there would not be any differences. You claim the Bible can clear up these differences but it has not.

 

[miknik5]

Yanno, if you use quotes, I'll know you have something for me to respond to. Or, you could use the @ symbol with my name.

@Kylie's point if I understand it is not about literal foundations like those of buildings. You might say Christ is the foundation of your religion and it might also be the foundation of a person of a different denomination. Nevertheless, if a Calvinist thinks that everything is ordained and that, effectively, there is no free will, then that Calvinist's religion is difference from a Christian of armenian persuasion.

Simlarly, if 2 people believe Kylie has gone to the shops, they have a similar foundation of belief about Kylie. But if one thinks she went to buy food (the Calvinist, say) and the other thinks she went to buy shoes (the armenian, say), then they are different...and one of them is wrong.

A calvinist only sees that no matter how the GOSPEL is preached, it is GOD alone who opens the eyes and ears of the heart to the TRUTH of the GOSPEL...and that is no different than all who preach the GOSPEL...one can water, but it is GOD alone who tills the soil of the heart in order for one to believe...

As CHRIST said, in them is the prophecy of Isaiah fulfilled...

 

[miknik5]

it can be shown that the Bible does not address these differences. If it did there would not be denominations. Each Christian thinks if everyone would interpret the Bible the way I do them there would not be any differences. You claim the Bible can clear up these differences but it has not.

Again, who do the people say that I am will be the ever and always question...and there is one foundational answer upon which the BODY will be built....

 

[miknik5]

Yanno, if you use quotes, I'll know you have something for me to respond to. Or, you could use the @ symbol with my name.

@Kylie's point if I understand it is not about literal foundations like those of buildings. You might say Christ is the foundation of your religion and it might also be the foundation of a person of a different denomination. Nevertheless, if a Calvinist thinks that everything is ordained and that, effectively, there is no free will, then that Calvinist's religion is difference from a Christian of armenian persuasion.

Simlarly, if 2 people believe Kylie has gone to the shops, they have a similar foundation of belief about Kylie. But if one thinks she went to buy food (the Calvinist, say) and the other thinks she went to buy shoes (the armenian, say), then they are different...and one of them is wrong.

By the way, kylie is a woman and you are a man...as such, I would not address Kylie as sir...

 

[Oncedeceived]

it can be shown that the Bible does not address these differences. If it did there would not be denominations. Each Christian thinks if everyone would interpret the Bible the way I do them there would not be any differences. You claim the Bible can clear up these differences but it has not.

It doesn't matter, unless it is a salvation issue. Separations in the Churches happen and often times it is due to different interpretations of the Bible but unless the issues are foundational, it doesn't matter. Each will be judged in the end.

 

[Tinker Grey]

By the way, kylie is a woman and you are a man...as such, I would not address Kylie as sir...

Yeah, but I'm not monitoring this thread. And, there are other 'sirs' in this thread. Even if you use my name without a quote or without tagging me, I may not see it.

 

[NBB]

God made the gospel so its not working with scientific evidence, but God doesn't stop existing because there isn't scientific evidence. But actually there is evidence things are designed, its apparent in nature and the universe, you may like to fight me on this but if man can't make something as great as things in nature, is evolution then superior to us humans in capability? i don't think so buddy, evolution is actually very dumb, just change and death.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

It doesn't matter, unless it is a salvation issue. Separations in the Churches happen and often times it is due to different interpretations of the Bible but unless the issues are foundational, it doesn't matter. Each will be judged in the end.

There are Christians that believe baptism is required for salvation and some say it is not. This is a difference about a salvation issue. What then?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yanno, if you use quotes, I'll know you have something for me to respond to. Or, you could use the @ symbol with my name.

@Kylie's point if I understand it is not about literal foundations like those of buildings. You might say Christ is the foundation of your religion and it might also be the foundation of a person of a different denomination. Nevertheless, if a Calvinist thinks that everything is ordained and that, effectively, there is no free will, then that Calvinist's religion is difference from a Christian of armenian persuasion.

Simlarly, if 2 people believe Kylie has gone to the shops, they have a similar foundation of belief about Kylie. But if one thinks she went to buy food (the Calvinist, say) and the other thinks she went to buy shoes (the armenian, say), then they are different...and one of them is wrong.

Yeah, I don't "count" it that way. I'd rather say that Trinitarians ALL have the same religion, but with SOME different praxis in interpretation and, thereby, some differences of opinion about the overall meaning of SOME aspects of God and the faith whereby we follow Him. To say otherwise is to then obscure and over generalize the meaning of the concept of "difference." So, we DON'T get to point at all of the interpretive differences between denominations while ignoring wholesale all of the similarities of the central concept they each share.

If we want to say a Calivinist has a truly different religion, then there needs to be some major, not minor, difference with the core concepts. So, if this is the case between the various post-Apostolic teachers and leaders in the various Christian denominations, and I think it is, then something like both Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism should be categorized as "Christianity" whereas something like Theravada Buddhism, as but one example, should not be categorized as "Christianity."

 

[Kylie]

Actually no, I am sorry, you don´t...it is about HIM...I was talking about a different kind of FOUNDATION which isn´t a thing, Kylie...sorry...

Your scenario does not work...

I don´t know how many times we will have to go through this...but it goes back to a post I made a while back as well...


It has to do with this scripture:

1 Corinthians 2

Specifically 1 Corinthians 2:14

No, you don't get it. From a logical point of view, the two are identical. Both people have the foundation X, while they disagree on the details. One person has details A, B and C on the foundation X, the other person has details D, E and F on the foundation X.

You are merely claiming they are different because you want them to be different.

 

[Kylie]

@Kylie's point if I understand it is not about literal foundations like those of buildings. You might say Christ is the foundation of your religion and it might also be the foundation of a person of a different denomination. Nevertheless, if a Calvinist thinks that everything is ordained and that, effectively, there is no free will, then that Calvinist's religion is difference from a Christian of armenian persuasion.

Simlarly, if 2 people believe Kylie has gone to the shops, they have a similar foundation of belief about Kylie. But if one thinks she went to buy food (the Calvinist, say) and the other thinks she went to buy shoes (the armenian, say), then they are different...and one of them is wrong.

Yep, that's it exactly.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

There are Christians that believe baptism is required for salvation and some say it is not. This is a difference about a salvation issue. What then?

Not really. It's more of a matter of interpretation on an issue that is really asked for and implied as necessary in all Christian denominations, whether one group thinks it HAS to accompany faith and repentance and another thinks that it's something that one does as a matter of tradition and testimony. Either way, both groups would, at the very, very least, say that baptism isn't just a 'trivial' thing in one's daily attempt to follow Christ from the get go.

 

[Kylie]

Yes, Tinker and this analogy is incorrect. The point is that for the Christian Church to be a true Christian Church it must have as its foundation that Jesus was crucified to pay for the sins of everyone, and rose again. That is imperative, as Scripture states: But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse! Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you. (emphasis not mine).

The point is that for the people who believe that Kylie went to the hardware store they must have as their foundation the belief that Kylie went to the shops.

And the people who believe that Kylie went grocery shopping instead ALSO have as their foundation the belief that Kylie went to the shops.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yep, that's it exactly.

Nope. Wrong! Taoism is a "different" religion than Christianity, if by 'religion' we mean something specific and not something general. Otherwise, one could end up mistakenly saying that Lutheranism isn't a type of Christianity....which would, of course, be asinine. Like BIG TIME asinine!

 

[Kylie]

Nope. Wrong! Taoism is a "different" religion than Christianity, if by 'religion' we mean something specific and not something general. Otherwise, one could end up mistakenly saying that Lutheranism isn't a type of Christianity....which would, of course, be asinine. Like BIG TIME asinine!

What in the world...?

I was talking about how @Tinker Grey understands the analogy that I was making about how the people have the same foundation for their beliefs by both holding the belief that I went to the shops, even if they fundamentally disagree about which shops I go to.

Neither Tinker Grey nor I mentioned Taoism.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What in the world...?

I was talking about how @Tinker Grey understands the analogy that I was making about how the people have the same foundation for their beliefs by both holding the belief that I went to the shops, even if they fundamentally disagree about which shops I go to.

Well, the way things work around here lately, it would be too much for you to expect me to have read the whole spiel of this thread link by link. No, I'm just going to do what you atheists do..............and jump in and deny things wherever and whenever it suits me.

 

[miknik5]

The conversation about this analogy is over...at least for me...I will not take part in this anymore...I´m sorry...

 

[miknik5]

What in the world...?

I was talking about how @Tinker Grey understands the analogy that I was making about how the people have the same foundation for their beliefs by both holding the belief that I went to the shops, even if they fundamentally disagree about which shops I go to.

Neither Tinker Grey nor I mentioned Taoism.

Please...a church, which is what you have a problem with, is not a shop, nor can it be lumped in with your shopping spree analogy...sorry....

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Not really. It's more of a matter of interpretation on an issue that is really asked for and implied as necessary in all Christian denominations, whether one group thinks it HAS to accompany faith and repentance and another thinks that it's something that one does as matter of traditions and testimony. Either way, both groups would, at the very, very least, say that baptism isn't just a 'trivial' thing in one's daily attempt to follow Christ from the get go.

It is an issue. One teaches baptism is not necessary for salvation another teaches it is a must. You can’t just waive it away saying both think it is important. It is the difference between heaven and hell for many Christians. How do you know who is correct on salvation here. If it is required the ones teaching it is not required could be sending people to hell.