• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

He Gets Us campaign

Hazelelponi

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
11,796
11,206
USA
✟1,037,338.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The gospel message is to repent from your sin, ask Christ for forgiveness, receive the Holy Spirit, and follow Him. I heard nothing of that in the message.

The gospel isn't about washing other people's feet.

Not sure what they were trying to accomplish but seems like a waste of $20 million.

Did you see the alternative this Pastor made in response?

I like this one:



Such were some of us indeed. Much better.

He put it on YouTube also so I'll provide that for everyone who wants it.

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,623
11,483
Space Mountain!
✟1,358,180.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The gospel message is to repent from your sin, ask Christ for forgiveness, receive the Holy Spirit, and follow Him. I heard nothing of that in the message.

The gospel isn't about washing other people's feet.

Not sure what they were trying to accomplish but seems like a waste of $20 million.

... what a truncated interpretation and application of "the Gospel."

No wonder American evangelicals are sometimes so shortsighted.
 
Upvote 0

Merrill

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2023
1,456
1,062
45
Chicago
✟89,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
... what a truncated interpretation and application of "the Gospel."

No wonder American evangelicals are sometimes so shortsighted.
You seem long on criticism and short on encouragement

so let me ask you this:

1. What definition of the Gospel works for you?
2. What denomination do you belong to? (you seem to have a beef against evangelicals)
 
Upvote 0

childeye 2

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
5,869
3,304
67
Denver CO
✟239,560.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That is a good and thoughtful explanation and I appreciate that you took the time to share it.

I’m just too jaded to have the same discussions over and over with people who aren’t interested or capable of discussing the topic. A lot of people seem to have latched on to this particular topic because either LGBTQA+ practices give them the “icks” or because they’ve identified it as something that they don’t deal with nor will ever deal with and thus something they can be sanctimonious to others about.

My patience for giving people an excuse for which to hate on an entire group of people “in the name of God” has dwindled to practically zero. I feel like God could come down and tell them directly they’re wrong and they’d just argue with God. People shouldn’t be so quick and excited to tell others that they are sinful, especially since they themselves are sinful too.
If that we were to understand how easily it is that mankind soon forgets both where we have fallen from as well as where we were delivered from, we would understand why God humbles those who exalt themselves and exalts those who humble themselves.


36 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat.

37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,

38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.

39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.

40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.

41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty.

42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?

43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.

44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.

45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.

46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.

47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.

48 And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.

49 And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also?

50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brihaha
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,623
11,483
Space Mountain!
✟1,358,180.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You seem long on criticism and short on encouragement
I'm all about encouragement, but only AFTER the terms have been made clear. That is, IF they can be made clear. Not all terms we work with in our Christian faith are clear or have ever been clear.

And sometimes, in reflection upon the entire history of the Christian Church, what may have been clear in the 1st century has thus far been obscured by an infinite array of bad hermeneutical practices by those individuals leading each denomination.
So let me ask you this:

1. What definition of the Gospel works for you?
Whichever one was definitively at the center of the Praxis of Jesus and His first disciples. The question is: can we apply a robust enough and even handed enough hermeneutic by which to truly have in our minds and hands adequate exegetical equipment and dig up the conceptual artifact that we cite as "The Gospel," even after 2,000 years? I'd aver that despite all of the hoopla and hubris, no one denomination has it all figured out.

What criterion comes first, Merrill? The chicken or the egg? Or do we just draw up a working bibliography, pray and do the best we can to discern not only what "The Gospel" is, but also how it was always meant to be applied.

I have a question: At those places in the Four Gospels (and/or the book of Acts, too), what kinds of additional activities do we often find accompanying the presentation of the Gospel? Do Jesus and His disciples merely jabber their jaws with the Gospel and then walk away from the people they encounter?
2. What denomination do you belong to? (you seem to have a beef against evangelicals)

That question doesn't functionally offer a valid answer to what it is you're inquiring about, Merrill. Like you, I've studied quite a bit of Church History and The History of Church Doctrine. My knowledge is beyond the scope of a mere adherence to a singular denomination. But, if you want to know, I've typically hung out at Southern Baptist churches during certain years of my life and at the Christian Church/Instrumental churches (i.e. Campbell-ite) at other times. But I don't strictly adhere to either one. Hence, the eclectic and academic approach I instead aver for where I glean and learn from all of the Trinitarian denominations/traditions.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,093
7,513
North Carolina
✟343,786.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Man denied the existence of God in spite of the overwhelming evidence of such (Ro 1:19-20), worshiped idols instead and, therefore, were without excuse.
Idolatry is spiritual whoredom, and therefore God punished their spiritual whoredom with sexual sin (sexual perversion).
Homosexuality is sin, just as incest is sin (Lev 18:6-17, Dt 23:2).
Sexual perversion defiles not only the practitioner, but even the land as well (Lev 18:24-26).

Yes, homosexuality is sin as are any other practices of sin.
If that we were to understand how easily it is that mankind soon forgets both where we have fallen from as well as where we were delivered from, we would understand why God humbles those who exalt themselves and exalts those who humble themselves.


36 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat.

37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,

38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.

39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.

40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.

41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty.

42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?

43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.

44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.

45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.

46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.

47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.

48 And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.

49 And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also?

50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.
Don't confuse rejection of the normalization of abnormal (contrary to nature, Ro 1:26-27) homosexuality with rejection of persons.
 
Upvote 0

HarleyER

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2024
903
340
74
Toano
✟51,905.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Did you see the alternative this Pastor made in response?

I like this one:



Such were some of us indeed. Much better.

He put it on YouTube also so I'll provide that for everyone who wants it.

Yes, I did see that ad response. Much better and to the point.
 
Upvote 0

Merrill

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2023
1,456
1,062
45
Chicago
✟89,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm all about encouragement, but only AFTER the terms have been made clear. That is, IF they can be made clear. Not all terms we work with in our Christian faith are clear or have ever been clear.

And sometimes, in reflection upon the entire history of the Christian Church, what may have been clear in the 1st century has thus far been obscured by an infinite array of bad hermeneutical practices by those individuals leading each denomination.

Whichever one was definitively at the center of the Praxis of Jesus and His first disciples. The question is: can we apply a robust enough and even handed enough hermeneutic by which to truly have in our minds and hands adequate exegetical equipment and dig up the conceptual artifact that we cite as "The Gospel," even after 2,000 years? I'd aver that despite all of the hoopla and hubris, no one denomination has it all figured out.

What criterion comes first, Merrill? The chicken or the egg? Or do we just draw up a working bibliography, pray and do the best we can to discern not only what "The Gospel" is, but also how it was always meant to be applied.

I have a question: At those places in the Four Gospels (and/or the book of Acts, too), what kinds of additional activities do we often find accompanying the presentation of the Gospel? Do Jesus and His disciples merely jabber their jaws with the Gospel and then walk away from the people they encounter?


That question doesn't functionally offer a valid answer to what it is you're inquiring about, Merrill. Like you, I've studied quite a bit of Church History and The History of Church Doctrine. My knowledge is beyond the scope of a mere adherence to a singular denomination. But, if you want to know, I've typically hung out at Southern Baptist churches during certain years of my life and at the Christian Church/Instrumental churches (i.e. Campbell-ite) at other times. But I don't strictly adhere to either one. Hence, the eclectic and academic approach I instead aver for where I glean and learn from all of the Trinitarian denominations/traditions.
That seems awfully defeatist and somewhat evasive

We do not need to create some innovative hermeneutic of the Gospel --we have the written accounts of the Apostles, and the entirety of the Bible, which predicts the coming of Christ, and His life among us. Theologians and scholars have debated the "meaning" of various passages for sure--but to say that we are somehow lost here, and that no one has "the answers" seems too strong to me

Likewise, this idea that preaching the Gospel is a mere "jabbering of the jaws" or some kind of empty gesture, is completely wrong. Preaching the Gospel in the first and second centuries could get you killed, and it was life-changing for those who heard it and accepted it. And the early disciples and missionaries didn't simply preach--they also helped the poor and down-trodden.

Now I do agree with you in the sense that pastors who do not back up their mission with works are half-hearted, and even ineffective. And pastors who water-down the Gospel, or turn church into a therapy session, are likewise misguided. I believe that faith = salvation, and the faith bears fruit in the believer in the form of works. You are not saved because you did some work in a homeless shelter. You are saved because you believe, and in your love of God, have been compelled to help the poor.

And I don't think there is anything wrong with not adhering to the tenets of any one denomination.
 
Upvote 0

Merrill

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2023
1,456
1,062
45
Chicago
✟89,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Don't confuse rejection of the normalization of abnormal (contrary to nature, Ro 1:26-27) homosexuality with rejection of persons.
One thing I will mention, is that we have to be careful with the whole "love the sinner but hate the sin" idea

There are passages in the Bible like Psalm 5:5 and Malachi 1:2-3 in which God displays hate towards unrepentant sinners and evil-doers

Likewise, those in Hell are still actively sinning: they have turned away from God and continue to spitefully mock Him.

We are in many ways what we do. I admire the Muslims in their understanding of this--that you cannot claim to be "good on the inside" while committing affronts against God and man--it is through your actions that we understand you. Homosexuality is a sin, and an active, unrepentant, homosexual lifestyle is an affront to God (as would active adultery, or someone who routinely steals)

by "loving our gay neighbors" and excusing their behavior, we are affirming their lifestyle, and committing sin ourselves. If I offered up room & board to a known thief, and let him hide out in my house, while he continued to rob the neighborhood, I would be committing sin. If I saw my friend cheating on his wife with impunity, and simply said "well I love him, even though he does bad things" and didn't tell his wife what was happening, I would be contributing to his downfall (and mine).

The LGBT movement into the church is entryism, and it results in bad theology, and sinful behavior by otherwise devout Christians.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,623
11,483
Space Mountain!
✟1,358,180.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That seems awfully defeatist and somewhat evasive
You're the second person in the last 48 hours to tell me I'm "defeatist." Frankly, I know that it's a cheap aspersion upon my position. My position is anything BUT defeatist or evasive.

What do you want? Something more discernible like me picking up a copy of some particular thousand page tome of Systematic Christian Theology, and slamming it down on the table, then insist that we start there? Or, do you think picking up the Bible, without further commentary and investigation from the outside, flapping it open, is enough? I think we both know the answer is a big fat negative to both questions. Our understanding of "the Gospel" is bigger than the Bible alone or on a reliance of Absolute Presuppositioning from a merely 1st Order set of considerations. My citing this fact isn't "being evasive;" it's just a fact that precludes the certainty any one of us would like to have if we're pushing a particular denominational view.

Still, if a fellow Christian wants to contend with me about the "meaning" of the Gospel, then I'm all up for a full-fledged exegetical and hermeneutical discussion of it that is born from an exhaustive survey of that very term ... as we find it in the Bible alone. Shall we begin with a survey of the Gospel of Matthew?
We do not need to create some innovative hermeneutic of the Gospel --we have the written accounts of the Apostles, and the entirety of the Bible, which predicts the coming of Christ, and His life among us. Theologians and scholars have debated the "meaning" of various passages for sure--but to say that we are somehow lost here, and that no one has "the answers" seems too strong to me
I said nothing about "creating" an innovative hermeneutic. You're misreading what I've said and implying something I did not say or mean. I also didn't say ALL terms are lost ... that's not what I said. So, don't misrepresent me like so many here do.
Likewise, this idea that preaching the Gospel is a mere "jabbering of the jaws" or some kind of empty gesture, is completely wrong. Preaching the Gospel in the first and second centuries could get you killed, and it was life-changing for those who heard it and accepted it. And the early disciples and missionaries didn't simply preach--they also helped the poor and down-trodden.
Again, you failed to read clearly and discernible what I actually typed. I didn't say that preaching the Gospel is a mere "jabbering of the jaws." No, if you were paying attention, I asked a specific question (or two). I wasn't making a statement about "the Gospel."
Now I do agree with you in the sense that pastors who do not back up their mission with works are half-hearted, and even ineffective. And pastors who water-down the Gospel, or turn church into a therapy session, are likewise misguided. I believe that faith = salvation, and the faith bears fruit in the believer in the form of works. You are not saved because you did some work in a homeless shelter. You are saved because you believe, and in your love of God, have been compelled to help the poor.
It would be odd to say that we can be saved because we "believe," whatever that fully is epistemologically speaking, but that we could also, in that state of being saved, also NOT be compelled to help other people.
And I don't think there is anything wrong with not adhering to the tenets of any one denomination.

You and I will differ on this point.
 
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
11,796
11,206
USA
✟1,037,338.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I am Particular Baptist, former Muslim, reformed theology, amillenial in eschatology... a naturalized hillbilly according to my husband. :)

I do believe in God and salvation in Christ Jesus. I believe, I believe, because I am living it.

I can say former... I was, but now I am saved in Christ Jesus!

When people are saved they are sinners. They come out of some pretty hard stuff at times. I sure did.

Sanctification is a process over the course of ones lifetime but being saved is transformative and powerful. God displays more of his power in the salvation of a single soul than in the creation of the universe.

Why do you think the Angels rejoice? Because it's a mighty display of God's power and it's beautiful to behold when it occurs.

In the video I shared those are all real people, real conversations.


When you explain away homosexuality and other sins you do real people a disservice. A disservice to their soul.

This isn't to say anything about marriage or homosexuality in the public sphere, that's a completely different subject. We are talking about telling people to expect a salvation with no power.

it's a lie because salvation is powerful and transformative.

God does take us away from our sins. Maybe not immediately, maybe just one thing at a time, maybe you don't think of it at all but then you look at 10 years worth of new you and just think wow... God's really done a work here. I'm a changed person.

That's just me though. :) That's how I see things.
 
Upvote 0

HarleyER

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2024
903
340
74
Toano
✟51,905.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
... what a truncated interpretation and application of "the Gospel."

No wonder American evangelicals are sometimes so shortsighted.
If one really wants to talk about a truncated interpretation and application of "the Gospel", this ad has to be it. It isn't a message for unbelievers but a condemnation of believers for not caring enough. Oh, boo-hoo.

It isn't that American evangelicals are shortsighted. Rather most Christians have so little regard for the scriptures that all they want to do is preach the love of God. They certain don't wish to speak out about the evil around them for fear of OFFENDING. And Christians fool themselves thinking they are being loving or tolerate.

Unless unbelieving people understand they are sinners, they will never come to a point of repentence. Unless believers confront people about their sinfulness, those people will never be saved. Now which is more loving, feet washing or presenting people with the truth?

Acts 3:19 Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord;
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,623
11,483
Space Mountain!
✟1,358,180.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If one really wants to talk about a truncated interpretation and application of "the Gospel", this ad has to be it. It isn't a message for unbelievers but a condemnation of believers for not caring enough. Oh, boo-hoo.

It isn't that American evangelicals are shortsighted. Rather most Christians have so little regard for the scriptures that all they want to do is preach the love of God. They certain don't wish to speak out about the evil around them for fear of OFFENDING. And Christians fool themselves thinking they are being loving or tolerate.

Unless unbelieving people understand they are sinners, they will never come to a point of repentence. Unless believers confront people about their sinfulness, those people will never be saved. Now which is more loving, feet washing or presenting people with the truth?

Acts 3:19 Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord;

Somehow, I don't think the commercial was intended to be taken as meaning that all we have to do is wash people's feet.

To assume as such is to fail to realize that there are unspoken aspects of the message that are implied in the commercial. This isn't to say that you or I have to assimilate to the theological praxis of the organization that runs the commercial. But we should be wise and educated enough to realize the commercial is only meant to present one aspect of their overall position about what they think Christians "should" be doing ... or saying.

Would you like for me to mis-represent your denomination?
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,093
7,513
North Carolina
✟343,786.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
One thing I will mention, is that we have to be careful with the whole "love the sinner but hate the sin" idea
There are passages in the Bible like Psalm 5:5 and Malachi 1:2-3 in which God displays hate towards unrepentant sinners and evil-doers
Likewise, those in Hell are still actively sinning: they have turned away from God and continue to spitefully mock Him.
We are in many ways what we do. I admire the Muslims in their understanding of this--that you cannot claim to be "good on the inside" while committing affronts against God and man--it is through your actions that we understand you. Homosexuality is a sin, and an active, unrepentant, homosexual lifestyle is an affront to God (as would active adultery, or someone who routinely steals)
by "loving our gay neighbors" and excusing their behavior, we are affirming their lifestyle, and committing sin ourselves. If I offered up room & board to a known thief, and let him hide out in my house, while he continued to rob the neighborhood, I would be committing sin. If I saw my friend cheating on his wife with impunity, and simply said "well I love him, even though he does bad things" and didn't tell his wife what was happening, I would be contributing to his downfall (and mine).
The LGBT movement into the church is entryism, and it results in bad theology, and sinful behavior by otherwise devout Christians.
The LGBT movement into the church is sin, and we are to judge and expel (excommunicate) open sin in the body (1 Co 5:1, 12-13, Gal 6:1).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hazelelponi

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
11,796
11,206
USA
✟1,037,338.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Who likes Spurgeon?

The Form of Godliness without the Power

Charles Haddon Spurgeon June 2, 1889

Scripture: 2 Timothy 3:5

From: Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit Volume 35

"Christian people fall into a certain outward method of procedure, a peculiar outward mode of uttering their faith, which becomes to true godliness what the body is to the soul.

The form is useful, the form is necessary, the form ought to be vitalized; just as the body is useful, and is necessary, and is vitalized by the soul.

If you get both the form, as modelled in the Word of God, and the power, as bestowed by the Spirit of God, you do well, and are living Christians.

If you get the power alone, without the ordained form, you somewhat maim yourself; but if you get the form without the power, then you dwell in spiritual death.

The body without the spirit is dead; and what follows upon death with flesh? Why, corruption, corruption so horrible, that even love itself has to cry, “Bury my dead out of my sight.” So that if there be in any the body of religion without the life of religion, it leads to decay, and this to corruption; and that has a tendency to putridity of character.
The raw material of a devil is an angel bereft of holiness"

 
Upvote 0

Merrill

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2023
1,456
1,062
45
Chicago
✟89,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You're the second person in the last 48 hours to tell me I'm "defeatist." Frankly, I know that it's a cheap aspersion upon my position. My position is anything BUT defeatist or evasive.

What do you want? Something more discernible like me picking up a copy of some particular thousand page tome of Systematic Christian Theology, and slamming it down on the table, then insist that we start there? Or, do you think picking up the Bible, without further commentary and investigation from the outside, flapping it open, is enough? I think we both know the answer is a big fat negative to both questions. Our understanding of "the Gospel" is bigger than the Bible alone or on a reliance of Absolute Presuppositioning from a merely 1st Order set of considerations. My citing this fact isn't "being evasive;" it's just a fact that precludes the certainty any one of us would like to have if we're pushing a particular denominational view.

Still, if a fellow Christian wants to contend with me about the "meaning" of the Gospel, then I'm all up for a full-fledged exegetical and hermeneutical discussion of it that is born from an exhaustive survey of that very term ... as we find it in the Bible alone. Shall we begin with a survey of the Gospel of Matthew?

I said nothing about "creating" an innovative hermeneutic. You're misreading what I've said and implying something I did not say or mean. I also didn't say ALL terms are lost ... that's not what I said. So, don't misrepresent me like so many here do.

Again, you failed to read clearly and discernible what I actually typed. I didn't say that preaching the Gospel is a mere "jabbering of the jaws." No, if you were paying attention, I asked a specific question (or two). I wasn't making a statement about "the Gospel."

It would be odd to say that we can be saved because we "believe," whatever that fully is epistemologically speaking, but that we could also, in that state of being saved, also NOT be compelled to help other people.


You and I will differ on this point.
Here is the thing ...

you are claiming that I am misrepresenting your position or your claims, or that I am not "paying attention". The reason you are saying that is:

1. You are not taking a coherent position or making clear claims
2. You seem to be taking a skeptical position while putting theological window-dressing on it

We can can get deep and philosophical, or we can use ordinary language to describe what is going on here

You seem to be suggesting that we cannot know, to any degree, the fundamental message of the Gospel as given, and that one man's opinion on it is as valid as another. That thousands of pages have been written on the Gospel, but none of it is authoritative--it is all arbitrary.

But then you also say our understanding of the Gospel is "bigger than the Bible alone" --so we do need to consult other texts?

I am not attacking you for that--just trying to understand what you are saying. Why is this important?

because if regular people cannot hope to understand the Gospel, than it has no relevance in their lives.

and Jesus didn't select philosophers and theologians as His disciples. He chose ordinary people (fishermen, tax-collectors, etc.)

then you say "It would be odd to say that we can be saved because we "believe," whatever that fully is epistemologically speaking, but that we could also, in that state of being saved, also NOT be compelled to help other people."

which seems to be making a couple points but goes nowhere coherent. Being saved has nothing to do with epistemology. What I meant by faith = salvation is the assertions put forth by Ephesians 2:8 “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”
 
Upvote 0

Brihaha

Well-Known Member
May 6, 2021
2,691
2,986
Virginia
✟173,736.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The LGBT movement into the church is sin, and we are to judge and expel (excommunicate) open sin in the body (1 Co 5:1, 12-13, Gal 6:1).

Right. If the gay people are actually committing their "sin" in the church. Every person who walks through the door into a church has committed a sin in their life. We are not supposed to show respect to persons or favoritism by judgment of others. If the LGBT folks are genuinely interested in salvation they should be as welcome as the preacher in a church, if they abstain from their sinful behavior in their place of worship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Merrill
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critically Copernican
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,623
11,483
Space Mountain!
✟1,358,180.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here is the thing ...

you are claiming that I am misrepresenting your position or your claims, or that I am not "paying attention". The reason you are saying that is:

1. You are not taking a coherent position or making clear claims
2. You seem to be taking a skeptical position while putting theological window-dressing on it

We can can get deep and philosophical, or we can use ordinary language to describe what is going on here

You seem to be suggesting that we cannot know, to any degree, the fundamental message of the Gospel as given, and that one man's opinion on it is as valid as another. That thousands of pages have been written on the Gospel, but none of it is authoritative--it is all arbitrary.

But then you also say our understanding of the Gospel is "bigger than the Bible alone" --so we do need to consult other texts?

I am not attacking you for that--just trying to understand what you are saying. Why is this important?

because if regular people cannot hope to understand the Gospel, than it has no relevance in their lives.

and Jesus didn't select philosophers and theologians as His disciples. He chose ordinary people (fishermen, tax-collectors, etc.)

then you say "It would be odd to say that we can be saved because we "believe," whatever that fully is epistemologically speaking, but that we could also, in that state of being saved, also NOT be compelled to help other people."

which seems to be making a couple points but goes nowhere coherent. Being saved has nothing to do with epistemology. What I meant by faith = salvation is the assertions put forth by Ephesians 2:8 “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”

And you're claiming that you have some 'insight' into an Archimedian point that does not epistemologically exist at the level of coherence and substance that you imply it does.

My position at the moment may not seem coherent, and if it doesn't, it's because I've only scratched the surface.

Furthermore, the context of THIS thread is the 'He Gets Us' commerical, not my theology. But if you think you have what it takes to have a go at me, we can take this somewhere else.
 
Upvote 0

Merrill

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2023
1,456
1,062
45
Chicago
✟89,787.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And you're claiming that you have some 'insight' into an Archimedian point that does not epistemologically exist at the level of coherence and substance that you imply it does.

My position at the moment may not seem coherent, and if it doesn't, it's because I've only scratched the surface.

Furthermore, the context of THIS thread is the 'He Gets Us' commerical, not my theology. But if you think you have what it takes to have a go at me, we can take this somewhere else.
"And you're claiming that you have some 'insight' into an Archimedian point that does not epistemologically exist at the level of coherence and substance that you imply it does."

to which I respond

1. I never made any such claim
2. Salvation is a question of theology and eschatology, not of epistemology
3. Coherence and substance? Are we going to go down some rabbit-hole and start talking about hylomorphism now? Come on man--that has nothing to do with anything we are discussing.

back to the original discussion:

you made vague criticisms of Evangelicals, and seem to take a works + faith = salvation position. I asked you to clarify, and give us your general ideas about the Gospel. I didn't ask for a dissertation
 
  • Like
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

HarleyER

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2024
903
340
74
Toano
✟51,905.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Somehow, I don't think the commercial was intended to be taken as meaning that all we have to do is wash people's feet.

To assume as such is to fail to realize that there are unspoken aspects of the message that are implied in the commercial. This isn't to say that you or I have to assimilate to the theological praxis of the organization that runs the commercial. But we should be wise and educated enough to realize the commercial is only meant to present one aspect of their overall position about what they think Christians "should" be doing ... or saying.

Would you like for me to mis-represent your denomination?
Jesus foot washing was only focus on believers (or His apostles). The act was an expression of caring for the flock who would be soon under the care of the apostles and showed to them the need to go and do likewise to the flock. The ceremony didn't extend to gays, those who were worshipping pagan gods (as depicted by the foot washing of a Muslim), or other such people as implied in the pictures. Could one imagine Jesus washing the feet of the Pharisees-especially after He called the "whitewashed tombs"?

One must wonder who exactly the intended audience was and what was the message that was supposed to be conveyed. Given the amount of controversy this ad has sparked, it missed the point on both accounts. At best, it is simply poor theology. On the other hand, I don't trust someone who is willing to spend $20M on such an add. I'm sure others could have used the money more wisely.

I did a brief search on this organization, but it was unclear as to who was involved or what their beliefs are. For the time being I would give them the benefit of the doubt and believe they had good, but misguided, intentions.

My denomination has nothing to do with this. Where there are grey areas, I'm flexible. Where I am wrong, I welcome correction. But on this I'm not wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Merrill
Upvote 0