You Know... Maybe The 'Church' is on to Som'n Here?

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
d
I've investigated both, on many of occasions, and still cannot make a positive claim as to whether God(s) and aliens do or do not exist ;)

Should I just assert that both God(s) and alien(s) either [do or don't] exist anyways? Or, is it maybe wise to remain neutral, because I do not have enough information to evaluate accordingly?

By all means, if you have investigated to your satisfaction, but you assume that everyone else should have the same level of scepticism when their investigations have yielded different results. That is where you are going wrong.
 
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

I seem to recall you were the only one who insisted on works as being the only thing necessary for salvation, while everyone else pointed out the that works was the result of salvation not the cause. Also Grace of God is a given. Again I didn't see any contradiction there apart from yours.


Some ascribe to universal salvation. Heck, this was just mentioned in another thread. Post #2 (How will my wife be happy in heaven?)... This contradicts your belief. You both take 'truth' from the same Book. Please just admit, once and for all, that you can read the Bible while asserting mutually opposing beliefs. It's not going to hurt you. Stop being so stubborn :)


I doubt many Christians would disagree with you, but some things are clearly more important, because we are CHRISTians and there is little point to Christianity if it is devoid of the central message.

Wouldn't you agree salvation is of the most importance? Some claim salvation is given to all. Some claim not. This is a pretty large HOLE to fill, wouldn't you agree? Who IS right?

I read about half of it and realised that a) most Christians were saying the same thing with different emphases and you were taking the emphases as implying there was something different about everything they were saying. Despite everyone saying to interpret a particular parable in light of the rest of scripture, you were insisting we had to interpret it in such a way as it didn't make sense... because you wanted it to not make sense.

Please see above.

And you were saved from Catholicism then?

It sounds like the kind of circles you were mixing in was fundamentalist in nature. I've come across such ideas but rarely. Mostly people talk about being saved from Catholicism, none doubt that they are probably going to Heaven as well.

The Fundi's are wrong?
 
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
d


By all means, if you have investigated to your satisfaction, but you assume that everyone else should have the same level of scepticism when their investigations have yielded different results. That is where you are going wrong.

That is not what I said. This is what I said:

"I've investigated both, on many of occasions, and still cannot make a positive claim as to whether God(s) and aliens do or do not exist ;)

Should I just assert that both God(s) and alien(s) either [do or don't] exist anyways? Or, is it maybe wise to remain neutral, because I do not have enough information to evaluate accordingly?"
 
Upvote 0

the iconoclast

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it
Feb 10, 2015
1,130
81
✟39,361.00
Country
Burkina Faso
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
In regards to you, the only thing that is 'important', is responding to the requested thread I asked of you many months ago...

I'm growing tired of your shenanigans. I have pressed you for a response to a very serious inquiry, waaay back in January.

Post #403:


Resurrection Evidence

Hey hey my dear :)

I want a reset. Lets use the conversation material from resurrection evidence and start small.

There must be a point or a subject in that discussion we can start with? Go on the attack and give me something.
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Some ascribe to universal salvation. Heck, this was just mentioned in another thread. Post #2 (How will my wife be happy in heaven?)... This contradicts your belief. You both take 'truth' from the same Book. Please just admit, once and for all, that you can read the Bible while asserting mutually opposing beliefs. It's not going to hurt you. Stop being so stubborn :)

I don't have a problem with the fact that there are different viewpoints. However, having multiple viewpoints doesn't make them right. A person who says they are a Christian and then says that the only way to be saved is to pay money into their account has a belief, but does it have any credence. Who agrees with it and is it something that early Christians believed?

Every Christian agreeing on every doctrine is never going to happen, nor is it going to work if you include every wacko idea. Excluding those there are a few differences (Universalism is one of them). The key thing is, does the theology get supported by the Bible and Universalism doesn't - it is based primarily on a philosophy of omnibenevolence and a false understanding of personal choice.

You made more of Grace/Faith/Works originally. Does this mean that you now accept God's Grace as given? That Faith is the only necessity, but that Faith is demonstrated by works or are you still maintaining that Works are the only way to salvation?

Wouldn't you agree salvation is of the most importance? Some claim salvation is given to all. Some claim not. This is a pretty large HOLE to fill, wouldn't you agree? Who IS right?

Well, here's the thing... I would say to you, try reading the Bible and seeing what it says on the subject, but I know you then get hung up on one passage that you see as of prime importance even though you then read it in such a way as to contradict the remainder of the Scriptures.

Those seeking to find the truth, however would find a number of passages that would indicate the traditional view of God's Grace & Man's Faith resulting in Man's Works.


Getting Universalism out of that would be much more difficult.
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
That is not what I said. This is what I said:

"I've investigated both, on many of occasions, and still cannot make a positive claim as to whether God(s) and aliens do or do not exist ;)

Should I just assert that both God(s) and alien(s) either [do or don't] exist anyways? Or, is it maybe wise to remain neutral, because I do not have enough information to evaluate accordingly?"
You are at liberty to remain neutral, but it is clear that remaining neutral is not enough for you. You want everyone else to have that same neutrality... which is not likely to happen.

Nor should you expect that everyone else who investigates such claims will necessarily reach the same conclusion that you have.
 
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
I don't have a problem with the fact that there are different viewpoints. However, having multiple viewpoints doesn't make them right. A person who says they are a Christian and then says that the only way to be saved is to pay money into their account has a belief, but does it have any credence. Who agrees with it and is it something that early Christians believed?

Every Christian agreeing on every doctrine is never going to happen, nor is it going to work if you include every wacko idea. Excluding those there are a few differences (Universalism is one of them). The key thing is, does the theology get supported by the Bible and Universalism doesn't - it is based primarily on a philosophy of omnibenevolence and a false understanding of personal choice.

You made more of Grace/Faith/Works originally. Does this mean that you now accept God's Grace as given? That Faith is the only necessity, but that Faith is demonstrated by works or are you still maintaining that Works are the only way to salvation?

It looks like you are remaining stubborn here :) Some believe all are saved. Some believe not. You seem to be dancing around this fact. We are not talking about trivial or mundane claims, which don't really matter. We are speaking about the claimed destiny of your eternal soul. You all read from the same Book. And yet, you come to differing conclusions. Salvation seems like one of the biggest claims the Bible makes. And yet, you guys cannot agree on how one receives it...?

Well, here's the thing... I would say to you, try reading the Bible and seeing what it says on the subject, but I know you then get hung up on one passage that you see as of prime importance even though you then read it in such a way as to contradict the remainder of the Scriptures.

Those seeking to find the truth, however would find a number of passages that would indicate the traditional view of God's Grace & Man's Faith resulting in Man's Works.

I'm pointed out the following... Furthermore, it is not (one) Verse, it's several:

Option one: Romans 10:9-10, John 3:16-18, Mark 16:15-16

Or:

Option two: Matthew 25:31-46 (I broke this down for you, in depth, in my response to you in the other thread) :)

Option one and option two are mutually exclusive to one another. I need not go any further in regards to salvation.


Getting Universalism out of that would be much more difficult.

And yet, I get people responding here as such. The seeming beauty of the Bible, is as believers, one can argue or justify more than one mutually opposing position. Again, by only speaking about salvation alone.
 
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
You are at liberty to remain neutral, but it is clear that remaining neutral is not enough for you. You want everyone else to have that same neutrality... which is not likely to happen.

Nor should you expect that everyone else who investigates such claims will necessarily reach the same conclusion that you have.

You keep 'straw manning' me.

I have responded to many, that if I had received revelation, I would likely be arguing from their position. But I have not. Thus, I grapple with the whole divine hiddenness concept quite a lot. I do not say I want everyone else to have the same neutrality. I say I doubt myself. This is what makes me a skeptic.

Thus, I ask you, yet again, if I have not received my own revelation from God, even after years and years of seeking and asking, is it not logical for me to remain skeptical, just like I remain neutral about that fact I have heard countless anecdotal attestations of alien encounters?.?.?.?.?.?..?..?.?.?.?
 
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
Hey hey my dear :)

I want a reset. Lets use the conversation material from resurrection evidence and start small.

There must be a point or a subject in that discussion we can start with? Go on the attack and give me something.

Post #120
 
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

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
You keep 'straw manning' me.

I have responded to many, that if I had received revelation, I would likely be arguing from their position. But I have not. Thus, I grapple with the whole divine hiddenness concept quite a lot. I do not say I want everyone else to have the same neutrality. I say I doubt myself. This is what makes me a skeptic.

Thus, I ask you, yet again, if I have not received my own revelation from God, even after years and years of seeking and asking, is it not logical for me to remain skeptical, just like I remain neutral about that fact I have heard countless anecdotal attestations of alien encounters?.?.?.?.?.?..?..?.?.?.?
Of course it is logical. But it is not logical to insist that because you haven't had those experiences nobody else can have had them.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Tone
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
It looks like you are remaining stubborn here :) Some believe all are saved. Some believe not. You seem to be dancing around this fact. We are not talking about trivial or mundane claims, which don't really matter. We are speaking about the claimed destiny of your eternal soul. You all read from the same Book. And yet, you come to differing conclusions. Salvation seems like one of the biggest claims the Bible makes. And yet, you guys cannot agree on how one receives it...?
While not trivial, it doesn't really matter.

Put it this way:

Christian F believes that faith is required for salvation.
Christian U believes that all will be saved.
Christian F believes that Christian U is saved, because Christian U has professed faith in Christ.
Christian U believes that Christian F is saved, because all will be saved.

So in respect to Christians it is irrelevant which is right or which is wrong. And ultimately it will be for God to decide who has been saved or not, not us.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tone
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
I'm pointed out the following... Furthermore, it is not (one) Verse, it's several:

Option one: Romans 10:9-10, John 3:16-18, Mark 16:15-16


Or:

Option two: Matthew 25:31-46 (I broke this down for you, in depth, in my response to you in the other thread) :)

Option one and option two are mutually exclusive to one another. I need not go any further in regards to salvation.

Or it's Option Three: All of the above - I didn't see anyone else having an issue with reconciling any of these passages, only you... and it was only ONE passage - Matthew 25 - which you continued to read and interpret in isolation, despite many people saying that the way you were interpreting it was contradictory and unnecessary.

When you gather information to make a decision, you can always stop with the information you have... or keep looking. You say you need go no further, and that is true, but those who have gone further have no problem with these passages, so you going no further is not something to be trumpeted, for it is basically an admission of ignorance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tone
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
While not trivial, it doesn't really matter.

Put it this way:

Christian F believes that faith is required for salvation.
Christian U believes that all will be saved.
Christian F believes that Christian U is saved, because Christian U has professed faith in Christ.
Christian U believes that Christian F is saved, because all will be saved.

So in respect to Christians it is irrelevant which is right or which is wrong. And ultimately it will be for God to decide who has been saved or not, not us.

?

Your 'logic' needs some work.


Christian F believes that faith is required for salvation.
Christian U believes that all will be saved.


Okay, thus far, logical.... However.....

You failed to mention if 'Christian F' requires faith prior to natural death. Many believe that human death marks the demarcation regarding possible salvation, and God's ultimate point of judgement.


Christian U, on the other hand, may argue the notion that salvation can come after human death. Christian U may also argue that all ultimately come to Christ, in time.
 
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
Or it's Option Three: All of the above - I didn't see anyone else having an issue with reconciling any of these passages, only you... and it was only ONE passage - Matthew 25 - which you continued to read and interpret in isolation, despite many people saying that the way you were interpreting it was contradictory and unnecessary.

When you gather information to make a decision, you can always stop with the information you have... or keep looking. You say you need go no further, and that is true, but those who have gone further have no problem with these passages, so you going no further is not something to be trumpeted, for it is basically an admission of ignorance.

I'm still scratching my head here.... You are failing to acknowledge basic concepts. Option 1 and option 2 are mutually exclusive to one another.

Like I also stated prior, the beauty of the Bible, is that one can argue more than one viewpoint. If you read Matthew 25:31-46, in context, you will clearly see that faith is not a requirement, but Jesus judges, based upon deeds, and deeds alone. You continue to be stubborn :)

It's the age-old argument of 'faith (vs) works'. Why do you think this argument even exists? It is because the Bible demonstrates [both] concepts for salvation.
 
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
Hey hey my dear :)

Cool, so let me know if there is a particular point in that post you would like to address. I'm ready and waiting.

Dont be shy. :)

Post #120 of this thread, which points to post #403 of the requested thread.

May I again emphasize [shenanigans].
 
Upvote 0

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
?

Your 'logic' needs some work.


Christian F believes that faith is required for salvation.
Christian U believes that all will be saved.


Okay, thus far, logical.... However.....

You failed to mention if 'Christian F' requires faith prior to natural death. Many believe that human death marks the demarcation regarding possible salvation, and God's ultimate point of judgement.


Christian U, on the other hand, may argue the notion that salvation can come after human death. Christian U may also argue that all ultimately come to Christ, in time.
No that is just adding unnecessary complications. And it doesn't change the basic logic. After all. Christian F dead isn't going to think much of anyone.
Christian U dead isn't going to think much of anyone.

So Christian F and Christian U have to be alive to have some ideas about salvation. When they are dead they will know which one was correct... and won't care one bit.
 
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
No that is just adding unnecessary complications. And it doesn't change the basic logic. After all. Christian F dead isn't going to think much of anyone.
Christian U dead isn't going to think much of anyone.

So Christian F and Christian U have to be alive to have some ideas about salvation. When they are dead they will know which one was correct... and won't care one bit.

Uh oh...

Here comes another issue...

*State of the dead...
 
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

Silly Uncle Wayne

Well-Known Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,332
598
57
Dublin
✟102,646.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
I'm still scratching my head here.... You are failing to acknowledge basic concepts. Option 1 and option 2 are mutually exclusive to one another.

Like I also stated prior, the beauty of the Bible, is that one can argue more than one viewpoint. If you read Matthew 25:31-46, in context, you will clearly see that faith is not a requirement, but Jesus judges, based upon deeds, and deeds alone. You continue to be stubborn :)

It's the age-old argument of 'faith (vs) works'. Why do you think this argument even exists? It is because the Bible demonstrates [both] concepts for salvation.
No they are not mutually exclusive and if you read Matthew 25 in context you will know that the person reading it already has faith because those who heard the parable were people of faith and those who read the parable were people of faith... and perhaps to read it any other way makes it contradict everything else.

Faith and Works is something taught time and again in the first century church, because clearly people couldn't get the balance right, not because they couldn't get their theology right.

Faith without works is dead (James 2:17). Faith needs works else it is empty, but so is works without faith (Ephesians 2:9). Faith is an intellectual affirmation of the truths of God. Works are the deeds that are done, which don't need intellectual affirmation. Time and time again the New Testament warns those who take one extreme and ignore the other, and Matthew 25 is no different - it warns of the extreme of Faith only thinking, just the same as James does.

Read through the New Testament and you will see that a lot of the time writings that are aimed at Jewish audiences warn against ignoring works, while writings to Gentiles warn against neglecting Faith.

Get the balance right and all of the passages make sense.
 
Upvote 0