Christianity (In a Nutshell)?

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I disagree. As stated to others, you can have two humans. One believes, and one does not. Thus, I ask you a very simple question, as a test.

Is the one, whom does not buy the story line of a resurrected Jesus have a snowball's chance in hell of entering heaven?

Second question, does the one that believes have a chance? What is the distiguishable difference? It's belief. If one does not believe, they, of course, would not attempt to repent to an agent they don't believe in, right?

Hence, they will both be sinners, but the only difference is the belief.




Agreed. And it's not by their choice :) And yet, it's this attribute which somehow remains the catalyst for heaven.
Some humans are born with a spark of God's spirit within them, and some are not. Upon exposure to the image of God's spirit in Jesus or the Gospels, that human will automatically be born again and believe and have faith and go to heaven. But the belief and faith are like the halo and harp - they are results of salvation rather than causes.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
64
California
✟144,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
Some humans are born with a spark of God's spirit within them, and some are not. Upon exposure to the image of God's spirit in Jesus or the Gospels, that human will automatically be born again and believe and have faith and go to heaven. But the belief and faith are like the halo and harp - they are results of salvation rather than causes.

What about the ones, whom try to believe, but do not ever encompass this 'spark'? Again, they do not believe, and will surely go to hell.

Sounds as though you might be suggesting that God decides who He wants to go to heaven? Because, as you stated,
'Some humans are born with a spark of God's spirit within them, and some are not.'

I would assume God decides this? This kind of rules out the freewill element, doesn't it?
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
What about the ones, whom try to believe, but do not ever encompass this 'spark'? Again, they do not believe, and will surely go to hell.

Sounds as though you might be suggesting that God decides who He want to go to heaven? Because, as you stated,
'Some humans are born with a spark of God's spirit within them, and some are not.'

I would assume God decides this? This kind of rules out the freewill element, doesn't it?
Yes, the Qumran sect of Essenes did not believe in freewill. (However, some of the other sects of Essenes DID believe in freewill.) The NT sometimes speaks of Christians as "the elect". That sounds like you are either born one of "the elect" or you are born one of the tares sowed by Belial (the devil). Jesus came to gather HIS lost sheep. Jesus didn't come to gather the devil's sheep. (Of course I know this interpretation of John is probably heretical. It is simply how I understand John's gospel.)

Here is one of the quotes I mentioned above John 10:14 RSV:
"I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me"
Bible Gateway passage: John 10 - Revised Standard Version
 
Upvote 0

BigV

Junior Member
Dec 27, 2007
1,093
267
47
USA, IL
✟41,804.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You'll want to check that theory against the succinct and clear words of 1rst John chapters 1 and 2 (through at least verse 2:11).

in Philippians 3 Paul says he is blameless as to the Law of Moses. If Paul wasn’t lying or mistaken in his assertion then he’d be without sin.

At any rate, only Adam and Eve had free will. Their kids were all stuck with parents’ choice of sin. And this is all Gods plan. He may as well declare breathing air to be a sin.

But, strangely, God can do no wrong! Create HELL for eternal torture of humans and you are still the perfect and sinless one.

If humans do what God does, they are sinners. God can kill, burn, torture and still not sin. I guess it’s easy to be perfect if you make your own rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cvanwey
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,122
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,854.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Following down this line of logic, it sounds like you are saying that someone, such as myself, (trying as they might have for decades to believe unsuccessfully), suffers from some unidentified deficiency? Meaning, I am unable to believe, hence, God might grant me some type of 'exception', or mercy?
It may be a possibility, yes.

This raises concern. Why? Because we have the possibility of the following:

- You might find a verse in the Bible which 'verifies' your assessment.
- You would then need to square that finding AGAINST John 3:16-18

Quite the conundrum...
Remember, I'm not the one who believes in Sola Scriptura as an accurate descriptor of Christian doctrine regarding the Bible. Additionally, I don't believe the Bible was written to be some kind of exhaustive decanter by which we are to have our EVERY spiritual question answered. No, what we can know is that if a person of average, sound mind clearly hears and understands the Gospel message of Christ and rejects it and continues to reject it until the day he dies, that person is for sure lost from the grace of Christ forever. But as for the various other levels of human unbelief, we as the Church of Christ are not in an absolute position to judge the final arbitration that will be made for those who have other forms of unbelief. Some of these other folks will also be lost forever, but some of them may, in my limited estimation as a human being, have grace and mercy applied to them despite the fact that they ............. had some complications in their brains during life that made it very very difficult to "believe" and have faith.


For now, let's discard altered brains, mental illness, Alzheimers, death before 'enlightenment', etc... Gets too messy. Let's keep it 'vanilla' for now :) Your standard human of average intelligence, whatever that means.... Both try, as they might, to believe.... One does, and one does not.

In doing so, you believe, I currently don't. Are you saying that, if I die remaining an unbeliever, God may grant me some special type of mercy?
Based on what I've said above, it may be a possibility.


If so, please demonstrate the verse(s). Again, keeping in mind what I stated above about the conundrum. Otherwise, this might instead be post hoc invented, or wishful thinking...?
Again, see all that I've written above.


Simple. Pray for God to reveal His presence to me, so I no longer doubt His specific said existence. I will then be in the boat as millions or billions, whom already believe, and have freewill to accept or decline His wishes.
Alright. I'll pray that the Spirit of God, in the truth given by our Lord Jesus Christ, in the Sovereignty of the Father, Holy and Transcendent, will impart to you a sense of His presence according to His Will. Is that acceptable to you?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
in Philippians 3 Paul says he is blameless as to the Law of Moses. If Paul wasn’t lying or mistaken in his assertion then he’d be without sin.

At any rate, only Adam and Eve had free will. Their kids were all stuck with parents’ choice of sin. And this is all Gods plan. He may as well declare breathing air to be a sin.

But, strangely, God can do no wrong! Create HELL for eternal torture of humans and you are still the perfect and sinless one.

If humans do what God does, they are sinners. God can kill, burn, torture and still not sin. I guess it’s easy to be perfect if you make your own rules.
If you meant to suggest Paul was without sin, Paul disagreed with that idea rather forcefully, as he called himself the foremost of sinners. It's also Paul who wrote that all have sinned, that all have fallen short....

To understand Philippians chapter 3 well, read it naturally as part of the entire epistel, reading through. It is a very notable chapter, in that Paul clearly states he has not yet made it, but will continue to press on towards the goal.

The idea of the second death being instead an eternal life of tortue is a view of many Christians, but many others instead believe Christ's words on this to be literal, and not figurative, that those their "perish" (John 3:16), and God will there "destroy body and soul":
Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
I think He worded this to mean just what it sounds like, as many other Christians do, and that "second death" really is just what it sounds like.

So, I won't try to justify what I understand as the false idea that human souls have eternal life in the second death -- they are not immortal like the angels, and cannot live in the lake of fire like the immortal fallen angels seemingly will, but will "perish" there instead.

God is the one who resurrects all to face the Day of Judgement. Death of this body, be it by flood, famine, war, old age, disease, or even at the hand of God, is only a removal from this temporary life into something just like "sleep" (Christ's word) from which they will awaken. And many to eternal life!
 
Upvote 0

Redac

Regular Member
Jul 16, 2007
4,342
945
California
✟167,609.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Some humans are born with a spark of God's spirit within them, and some are not. Upon exposure to the image of God's spirit in Jesus or the Gospels, that human will automatically be born again and believe and have faith and go to heaven. But the belief and faith are like the halo and harp - they are results of salvation rather than causes.
You or anyone else can feel free to correct me if I'm in error, but what you're describing here sounds something like Calvinism and predestination. I'll just point out that not all Christians hold to that view of faith and salvation.
 
Upvote 0

holo

former Christian
Dec 24, 2003
8,992
751
✟77,794.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Oh yes, it is a choice. No certain extent. We all have free will given to us by God, the matter is whether or not to follow Him.
We all have a strong intuition that we have a free will, and it's no wonder we read the bible based on that axiom. I don't believe in free will in any case, but that's a different discussion. The question here is if the bible teaches it. As far as I can remember, the only person the bible explicitly says has a free will, is God. And there are countless examples of God deciding what people choose.

I should clarify that choice and will aren't the same thing. Just because you choose something doesn't mean your choice was free. The illusionist Derren Brown has a lot of examples of how people think they are making up their own minds, so to speak, but in reality they've been primed by him to choose a particular thing or even to see things in a particular way.

Yes, Paul had a choice and he absolutely chose without a doubt in his mind to follow the risen Christ. He could have chosen not to, but that is not the choice he went with.
I can't really imagine that Paul could have somehow freely chosen to believe that whatever happened wasn't God, that it was a hallucination or whatever. Or that he could've gone "nah, I think I'd rather go on and persecute the Christians."

If he could have chosen differently, or if Judas could have, or basically any other important person in the bible, then God's plan could -and would- be thwarted. It would mean that God didn't really ordain anyone to do anything, he just knew beforehand what would happen. Anything could've gone either way.

I don't recall Paul ever saying that saints are not saints.... Paul does say this though: Romans 1:7 and Philippians 1:1
We are all called to become saints which means a choice to either follow Christ or not, but God wants all to be reconciled to Him.
I think you might be confusing ordained with predestination. All this means is that God knows who are His since the beginning of creation. God knows the hearts of mankind.
If you mean God's plans cannot be thwarted, you're right. God hardened the heart of Pharaoh to fulfill His plan to free His people, but He did so wanting them (Egypt) to repent and follow God.
I think you misread me a little. I didn't say Paul said the saints aren't saints. But that they are saints not by their own choice, but by God's choice. And as far as I can tell the bible doesn't say God simply knew who was going to believe. He decided who was going to believe.

The two main problems with that idea is of course that it conflicts with our intuition that we have free will, and that it if you believe in eternal torment for not believing, it makes God a monster. So it depends on how you see those two things. IMO, the bible teaches neither. Just mentioning it to point out that believing in predestination, or "fate" if you will, doesn't necessarily render the bible inconsistent.

But the choice is still always there for all.
Surely not for all? I mean, at the very least you would have to believe God exists and can and wants to save you, right?

For the answer to that question you have to read the next verse. God will always explain Himself if one asks.
That's not my experience, unfortunately. And looking at the myriad of conflicting denominations out there, I'm not confident that he's explaining himself to anybody else either. :)

No one can resist the hand of God because His plans will not be thwarted. There seems to be confusion between choice and God's plans.
If God has a plan for me which will not be thwarted, how can I have a free will?

That's fine, I can't change your mind. You've already admitted this is by your own interpretation, and I can tell you with certainty that the information I have been given is from God. I have tried to interpret my own way too once, that didn't go well at all.
You wouldn't be the first one to be certain that it's God himself who has given you information. Why should I put more faith in you than in some cult leader, or the Catholics or whoever else?

It's not like you're not interpreting scripture yourself.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
You or anyone else can feel free to correct me if I'm in error, but what you're describing here sounds something like Calvinism and predestination. I'll just point out that not all Christians hold to that view of faith and salvation.
That is correct. It is also similar to Christian Gnosticism. The idea that some people are lucky and some people are doomed is not very appealing.
 
Upvote 0

Pavel Mosko

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic
Supporter
Oct 4, 2016
7,236
7,312
56
Boyertown, PA.
✟768,575.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Hence, Christianity seems to encompass attributes, which really have nothing to do with morality at all, regardless of how you slice it.

That is the point of this thread.

A very strange thread. It first started out looking like a bait and switch / straw man where it seemed like you were redefining certain terms like sin etc. according to your definition or starting assumptions rather than Christian ones, but I sort of agree with the eventual conclusion but it ends up telling us (Christians) what we already know. Basically it about belief, because unlike the starting premise of sin not mattering etc. the concepts do matter when it comes to things like perfection etc. It's about belief because we cannot save ourselves according to multiple scriptures. But saying morality does not save you, doesn't mean that it isn't important to Christians as far as verifying if they are "in the Faith" and so on.


I have some differences on your assumptions regarding belief. Belief does not necessarily mean being free from doubts etc. Faith / Belief can be understood in a passive sense. One Bible translator who was working with some tribe in Africa had difficulty finding any word in their language that would fit that concept. The tribe had nothing in their Lexicon that would fit (It must have been a pretty concrete thinking culture). Eventually the missionary saw a tribesmen who had been working take a break, where the man leaned on his shovel and he realized that he could use that word to communicate the idea in the Bible he was translating.

Anyway while you may have doubts there is nothing preventing you from asking God to reveal Himself to you in the coming days and weeks ahead, that is if you haven't done that...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BigV

Junior Member
Dec 27, 2007
1,093
267
47
USA, IL
✟41,804.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If you meant to suggest Paul was without sin, Paul disagreed with that idea rather forcefully, as he called himself the foremost of sinners. It's also Paul who wrote that all have sinned, that all have fallen short...
Then Paul appears confused. Law was given as a standard of holiness, right? And Paul says he is blameless as to the Law. So there must be a different standard other than the Law.
 
Upvote 0

holo

former Christian
Dec 24, 2003
8,992
751
✟77,794.00
Country
Norway
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Some of these other folks will also be lost forever, but some of them may, in my limited estimation as a human being, have grace and mercy applied to them despite the fact that they ............. had some complications in their brains during life that made it very very difficult to "believe" and have faith.
That raises the question, what is grace exactly? I've heard people say that if it's not unconditional, and if it's not universal, then it's not grace, and I think I agree. If it depends to some degree, no matter how small, on my actions or abilities, then it is no longer only of God's grace, but grace + whatever. (I realize that many, maybe most, Christians do believe some version of this, like "the gift is free, but you have to choose to accept it" etc.)

In the end, it becomes a question of what is good enough for God. Or smart enough for God, if it's the case that he's extra lenient toward mentally retarded people, for example. It is my understanding of the gospel according to Paul that nothing will be good enough for God, that there will be no excuse for anybody. Not because everybody is so evil, but because God's standard is so way beyond anything men could achieve anyway. So therefore, if it's grace, it's nothing but grace.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,122
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,854.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That raises the question, what is grace exactly? I've heard people say that if it's not unconditional, and if it's not universal, then it's not grace, and I think I agree. If it depends to some degree, no matter how small, on my actions or abilities, then it is no longer only of God's grace, but grace + whatever. (I realize that many, maybe most, Christians do believe some version of this, like "the gift is free, but you have to choose to accept it" etc.)
Kind'a. Yeah. Personally, I'm not one of those who advocates for "easy believe-ism," so yes, you've made a good beginning distinction here, holo. But the bottom line is that despite the fact that we each need to respond to God with whatever light we have available in life, God's grace and mercy is radiant and permeates every moment of our existence, even when we don't fully perceive it. Think of it as an aspect of God's Providence.

In the end, it becomes a question of what is good enough for God. Or smart enough for God, if it's the case that he's extra lenient toward mentally retarded people, for example. It is my understanding of the gospel according to Paul that nothing will be good enough for God, that there will be no excuse for anybody. Not because everybody is so evil, but because God's standard is so way beyond anything men could achieve anyway. So therefore, if it's grace, it's nothing but grace.
Yeah, that one passage by Paul in Romans 1 is a doozie, isn't it? I'll admit that, just as for everyone else who has heard about that funky sounding word, Epistemology, I've had to wrestle with this whole passage like a lone camper in the woods who smells and hears something scary approaching ... but while I'll agree with you that God's grace is extended to us, we each, in our own way, do have to make the effort to respond to the light He's given us, however much of a luminous sliver it may seem to be. So, it's not nothing but grace ...
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
64
California
✟144,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
It may be a possibility, yes.

Remember, I'm not the one who believes in Sola Scriptura as an accurate descriptor of Christian doctrine regarding the Bible. Additionally, I don't believe the Bible was written to be some kind of exhaustive decanter by which we are to have our EVERY spiritual question answered. No, what we can know is that if a person of average, sound mind clearly hears and understands the Gospel message of Christ and rejects it and continues to reject it until the day he dies, that person is for sure lost from the grace of Christ forever. But as for the various other levels of human unbelief, we as the Church of Christ are not in an absolute position to judge the final arbitration that will be made for those who have other forms of unbelief. Some of these other folks will also be lost forever, but some of them may, in my limited estimation as a human being, have grace and mercy applied to them despite the fact that they ............. had some complications in their brains during life that made it very very difficult to "believe" and have faith.


Based on what I've said above, it may be a possibility.

Again, see all that I've written above.


Okay, so I guess that we might then have (2) possibilities, as you've confirmed...

1. Hell
2. People who genuinely try His wanted path and fail, get some sort of a 'free pass'.

If it is not the former, I guess the next question would be...

What about the ones whom used to be a 'true blue Christian', but then change their mind, prior to natural death? Does God consider them as 'no true Scotsman'? Or, once you are baptized and repent to Jesus then make you part of the 'family' eternal? (This is not me per se, I tried and could never truly believe. I'm asking for the ones whom used to believe, and now don't).


But I also have to ask... Without being of 'Sola Scriptura', how do (you) 'jockey' which parts to accept, which parts to ignore, and which parts to redefine/re-interpret? Some of these statements are pretty darn axiomatic. Hence, it might appear some may just have no choice, but to ignore them?


Alright. I'll pray that the Spirit of God, in the truth given by our Lord Jesus Christ, in the Sovereignty of the Father, Holy and Transcendent, will impart to you a sense of His presence according to His Will. Is that acceptable to you?

Okay great, I'll keep on a vigilant look out.
 
Upvote 0

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
64
California
✟144,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
Yes, the Qumran sect of Essenes did not believe in freewill. (However, some of the other sects of Essenes DID believe in freewill.) The NT sometimes speaks of Christians as "the elect". That sounds like you are either born one of "the elect" or you are born one of the tares sowed by Belial (the devil). Jesus came to gather HIS lost sheep. Jesus didn't come to gather the devil's sheep. (Of course I know this interpretation of John is probably heretical. It is simply how I understand John's gospel.)

Here is one of the quotes I mentioned above John 10:14 RSV:
"I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me"
Bible Gateway passage: John 10 - Revised Standard Version

I gather this might be the extreme minority position that your run-o-da-mill Christian might interpret?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cvanwey

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2018
5,165
733
64
California
✟144,344.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
A very strange thread. It first started out looking like a bait and switch / straw man where it seemed like you were redefining certain terms like sin etc. according to your definition or starting assumptions rather than Christian ones, but I sort of agree with the eventual conclusion but it ends up telling us (Christians) what we already know. Basically it about belief, because unlike the starting premise of sin not mattering etc. the concepts do matter when it comes to things like perfection etc. It's about belief because we cannot save ourselves according to multiple scriptures. But saying morality does not save you, doesn't mean that it isn't important to Christians as far as verifying if they are "in the Faith" and so on.

Thank you. You raise a good point. In honesty, the 'starting point' of my threads are to present conclusions, after my own extensive thought, study, research, investigation, collaboration, etc. I place them here to be challenged for accuracy. And sometimes, I chase the 'rabbit trails', and sometimes, I follow some natural progression, based upon intelligent insight in which I was not already exposed to, and in others, I challenge the responses because I do not agree.

My points here are pretty simple, in this thread... Seems as though the criteria for Jesus' heaven require attributes devoid of any 'moral' application. Which begs the question, why do so many Christians ask, 'where does your morality come from?' Or, why even bother following the commandments? Aside from the first few commandments, which seem to more directly be in line with Jesus' later assertion, (i.e.) to follow in Him or be condemned; Christianity, in a nutshell, (requires) acts void of 'moral' foundation. (i.e.) Belief

But I do wish to challenge your statement. (i.e.) "But saying morality does not save you, doesn't mean that it isn't important to Christians as far as verifying if they are "in the Faith" and so on."


It can be 'important' to them, but it doesn't really matter? As I told others here:

(Person 1) Never believes and never murders, rapes, steals, or commits adultery - and their destination will be hell. Right?

(Person 2) does not believe, and does murder, rape, steal, and commits adultery. He/She later earnestly becomes a believer; which in turn may cause them to repent of their actions. Furthermore, since this is a human, regardless of their new lifestyle, will STILL fall short (i.e) continue to sin.

Thus, I ask you, WHAT is the dividing line between (person 1) and (person 2)? It starts with belief, an amoral action. All sin is 'bad' to God. And apparently, unbelief is considered a sin? Bazaar if you ask me...

I have some differences on your assumptions regarding belief. Belief does not necessarily mean being free from doubts etc. Faith / Belief can be understood in a passive sense.

I actually agree here :) There could be varying levels of 'belief'. Thus, I ask, what is the acceptable level? Are we to incorporate the 'mustard seed' passage, or, must we follow in the foot steps of Jesus? Or is it somewhere in between?
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,122
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,854.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others

Okay, so I guess that we might then have (2) possibilities, as you've confirmed...

1. Hell
2. People who genuinely try His wanted path and fail, get some sort of a 'free pass'.

If it is not the former, I guess the next question would be...

What about the ones whom used to be a 'true blue Christian', but then change their mind, prior to natural death?
It'll depend upon how much of their wits they actually still have about them. I mean, although I don't like hypotheticals, think about this more or less realistic hypothetical. Let's say some guy who was a die-hard, true blue Christian begins to get dementia and the, as he degenerates, begins to say the pluckiest things a person could say in aggravated fashion against what had been his most values faith in Christ. I for one am just going to think, "Ok, Lord, the outcome of this only you know for sure, cuz on this side, it sounds like he's losing more than just his mind." But from God's view, I might hear the Lord tell me at some undisclosed point in the far flung future, "2PhiloVoid, this poor brother of yours has his faith, but his wagon just became disconnected from his horse, and I'm not going to judge him for that part of his existence or for that part of his own thinking that has become completely out of his own control. You couldn't have known this about your brother in Christ, but I being the Lord, DO!"

Does God consider them as 'no true Scotsman'? Or, once you are baptized and repent to Jesus then make you part of the 'family' eternal? (This is not me per se, I tried and could never truly believe. I'm asking for the ones whom used to believe, and now don't).
Again, as above. Personally, I don't advocate for EITHER 'Once Saved Always Saved,' or for the overly simplistic idea that, "Oops, your faith just rolled away like a loose oil pan screw that the technician forgot to tighten down all the way at your last oil change."


But I also have to ask... Without being of 'Sola Scriptura', how do (you) 'jockey' which parts to accept, which parts to ignore, and which parts to redefine/re-interpret? Some of these statements are pretty darn axiomatic. Hence, it might appear some may just have no choice, but to ignore them?
Well, if you'd do what I'd do by adopting Philosophical Hermeneutics, you'd understand that all of our axioms, EVEN BIBLICAL ONES, are like Lily Pads floating on a pond ...........


Okay great, I'll keep on a vigilant look out.
Awesome! That sounds like a deal. :cool:
 
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Then Paul appears confused. Law was given as a standard of holiness, right? And Paul says he is blameless as to the Law. So there must be a different standard other than the Law.
Yes, that could be confusing until one reads all of his epistles carefully. Paul means that by the standards of the Pharisees, in their overly legalistic superficial way of seeing the law, as just a bunch of rules (not a sense of goodness or true justice, but instead judgemental micro rules) -- righteousness in the eyes of some men -- that by that Pharisee standard Paul was laudable, proud.

Paul recognizes that isn't the true real righteousness, that kind of legalistic Pharisee version. That by true righteousness, such as for instance in Matthew 7:12, the real spirit of the law, the real ultimate intent, that by the higher, truer standard, he fell short (and not by just a little!) -- "all have fallen short".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Halbhh

Everything You say is Life to me
Supporter
Mar 17, 2015
17,172
9,191
catholic -- embracing all Christians
✟1,152,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
With all due respect, I don't see how your request is relevant. More below, but first...

My points are:

1. You cannot will this type of a belief. I assume you would agree with this claim? If not, please demonstrate.

...

Ok, though I was getting at this above, it might not have been clear enough (or maybe too long and too many topics?).

You are right that we cannot pretend to believe.

Instead, it's as I was trying to convey to you in a recent previous response -- faith instead....happens to us, from a special kind of listening to the word of Christ (for instance, we see this in Romans 10:17). This listening must be 'humble' in a wonderful way. It's humble to listen with a true desire to learn.

That's not the way many read (even most!), not even many in many churches. (some do and some do not) They don't read in a true listening way. A humble way.

In a true listening, a person truly wants to hear and learn.

It is so very humble -- because one isn't' thinking they already know all He is saying.

See how radically humble that kind of reading/listening is? That's what you can will, chose, do. That's under your control.


It means even though I read a gospel 4 times already, I read again what He says a 5th (or 8th) time....and truly, for real, expect He is going to teach me something I do not already know.

See how....different that is from typical reading many do? It's a key difference. It's what I've been calling "true listening".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I gather this might be the extreme minority position that your run-o-da-mill Christian might interpret?
Probably so, although Calvin and other theologians have similar ideas.

It doesn't appeal to me, because I prefer to think that everybody is going to make it to heaven eventually if there is a God and a heaven. But the 1st century Jews were not modern egalitarian people. It would have appealed to many of them.

It is difficult to know what Jesus actually taught, because the gospels were not written immediately and then they were probably edited for a few decades before becoming fixed sacred texts.
 
Upvote 0