What do you think about speaking in tongues?

JAL said:

YOU are overcomplicating it. General Revelation is the claim that anyone who opens his eyes, looks at the beauty of the world, and concludes, "God you really exist! I accept you!" - is already saved! Why are you overcomplicating it with doctrines of Incarnation and atonement?

Click to expand...

1 cor 15:1-4 is complicated to you?

Guojing said:

1 cor 15:1-4 is complicated to you?

Click to expand...

Irrelevant question. "Overcomplicating" is a relative term. So why are you transforming the utter simplicity of conversion into a relatively complex transaction?

JAL said:

Irrelevant question. "Overcomplicating" is a relative term. So why are you transforming the utter simplicity of conversion into a relatively complex transaction?

Click to expand...

To me, its simple, "Believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and that he rose again on the 3rd day, bam, you are eternally sealed by the Holy Spirit."

I don't see why you will find that more complex than what you are saying.

Guojing said:

To me, its simple, "Believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins and that he rose again on the 3rd day, bam, you are eternally sealed by the Holy Spirit."

I don't see why you will find that more complex than what you are saying.

Click to expand...

Suppose you met me in person. How much "content" would you need to believe that I exist? None! You wouldn't need a doctrine of the Fall, Final Judgment, Hell, Trinity, Incarnation, Atonement (etc).

See the difference?

JAL said:

Suppose you met me in person. How much "content" would you need to believe that I exist? None! You wouldn't need a doctrine of the Fall, Final Judgment, Hell, Trinity, Incarnation, Atonement (etc).

See the difference?

Click to expand...

Silly comparison, that is because I have seen you, I walk by sight, I don't need faith for that.

But all of us are born after Christ ascended. When one believes in his death burial resurrection for one's sins, that takes faith.

And in the eyes of God, that faith is enough to save him for eternity. That is what walking by faith means.

Guojing said:

Silly comparison, that is because I have seen you, I walk by sight, I don't need faith for that.

Click to expand...

That's what I've been trying to tell you. Christianity IS walking by sight, NOT by faith. I discussed this earlier. I see you didn't get it. Take a hard look at 2Cor 3:18. You MUST see Jesus.

The PROBLEM is you don't realize the new birth is a vision, for two reasons.
(1) Unlike prophets, immature Christians like you and I usually don't get a DISTINCT vision.
(2) You don't realize that even emotional dynamics (such as feeling Christ's love) are part of the vision/experience.

Thus in your mind's eye, YOU see Christ - by virtue of special revelation. But you are assuming, incorrectly, that anyone who has heard your "content" will ALSO know who Christ is. He won't. He will only have a conceptual idol until he ACTUALLY sees Christ.

OR, theoretically (if his heart isn't too hard), he can accept the portrait of Christ already painted by nature (General Revelation). I don't know if anyone on the planet has a heart soft enough to accept Christ without Special Revelation. I'm not convinced that Scripture is clear on this issue.

It happens.

Not necessarily to everyone.

JAL said:

That's what I've been trying to tell you. Christianity IS walking by sight, NOT by faith. I discussed this earlier. I see you didn't get it. Take a hard look at 2Cor 3:18. You MUST see Jesus.

Click to expand...

Scary doctrine you have there, I disagree with that doctrine of yours.

2 Corinthians 5:7 Therefore we are always confident, although we know that while we are at home in the body, we are away from the Lord. 7For we walk by faith, not by sight.

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Guojing said:

Scary doctrine you have there, I disagree with that doctrine of yours.

2 Corinthians 5:7 Therefore we are always confident, although we know that while we are at home in the body, we are away from the Lord. 7For we walk by faith, not by sight.

John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Click to expand...

I addressed all those verses already earlier. My argument began by pointing out that blind faith is stupidity. Don't believe me? Fine. Climb up on top of a building and step off the edge of the building to walk on air "by faith". Just before you go "splat", don't say I didn't warn you.

JAL said:

I addressed all those verses already earlier. My argument began by pointing out that blind faith is stupidity. Don't believe me? Fine. Climb up on top of a building and step off the edge of the building to walk on air "by faith". Just before you go "splat", don't say I didn't warn you.

Click to expand...

Another silly comparison, I have faith in the law of gravity ordained by God, so why would I attempt what you are saying?

I am talking about faith in someone that you have never seen or heard, but you believe he existed because of Scripture and witnesses stated in 1 Cor 15:5-7.

Guojing said:

Another silly comparison, I have faith in the law of gravity ordained by God, so why would I attempt what you are saying?.

Click to expand...

So then Peter should NOT have attempted to walk on water?

350 posts deep, and I'm still not aware of having made any "silly comparisons".

JAL said:

So then Peter should NOT have attempted to walk on water?

350 posts deep, and I'm still not aware of having made any "silly comparisons".

Click to expand...

That is different, Jesus called him to do so. Scripture had no record of Peter ever walking on water again after that one-off event.

Of course you don't see your own silly comparisons, but others do.

Guojing said:

That is different, Jesus called him to do so. .

Click to expand...

Jesus called him to do so! Exactly! Let's analyze - maybe you'll get it this time.

Was Peter's act an act of blind faith? Of pure stupidity?

Suppose a man walks up to you and Special Revelation persuades you that you are literally seeing God in the flesh. You are SEEING Him face to face. THIS man tells you to step off a building to walk on air. What should you do? The answer is obvious.

In this case, when you step out on the water or air, you are walking by SIGHT, and NOT by faith (i.e. blind faith). That summarizes the entire Christian life, starting from conversion.
(1) Conversion properly begins when Special Revelation shows us a picture of Christ (or even General Revelation).
(2) Sanctification should NOT be acts of stupidity (blind faith) but WAITING on the Lord in prayer and praise for clear visions and instructions (see Acts 16:6-10). The high-order prophets embodied this lifestyle dramatically. Even Pentecost was simply 120 disciples gathered in prayer waiting for a clear sign/vision from heaven (they saw tongues of Fire).

We are to walk by sight, and not by faith. Would you like more examples?

One thing I find striking about Peter's attempt to hydroplane is that Peter himself initiated it! How so? According to the passage, He PRAYED the Lord for a voiced authorization. He asked the Lord for His express consent. He understood that he needed to wait on the Lord to clearly beckon him to venture out upon the waters.

It was this same Peter who, in Acts 4, prayed the Lord for signs and wonders. The Lord responded with an earthquake! Only THEN did Peter venture out upon the waters (i.e. go out to preach the gospel). Need I continue?

JAL said:

We are to walk by sight, and not by faith. Would you like more examples?

Click to expand...

So you are actually contradicting what 2 Corinthians 5:7 says?

Guojing said:

So you are actually contradicting what 2 Corinthians 5:7 says?

Click to expand...

No, I'm just translating it to Christianese. For 2,000 years most Christians have been misled to believe that "faith" ideally means a "leap of faith" and thus blind (or at least partially blind) faith. In other words we've been taught to cultivate stupidity. We've been advised to "step out on faith" - step out in a state of uncertainty.

That's not what Paul meant - and definitely not what Heb 11 had in mind. When Heb 11 says that Abraham attempted to murder his son "by faith", it means that the Voice left him feeling 100% certain that such was the morally right thing to do. (Easy to prove).

Far from advocating blind, stupid faith, Scripture summons us to faith defined as a warranted belief. Meaning, if Special Revelation has persuaded you of a conclusion irresistibly, your belief is now warranted because you cannot be faulted for a belief beyond your control. Special Revelation accomplishes this by giving us persuasive sightings and hearings of God, heaven, angels, and so on.

Setting aside Christianese momentarily, let's return to Paul's terminology:

"We walk by faith (i.e. infallible, reliable visions and voices) not by (natural) sight (i.e. fallible impressions and unreliable human opinions).

But in Christianese, this advice amounts to saying, "We should walk by sight, not by (blind) faith".

JAL said:

No, I'm just translating it to Christianese. For 2,000 years most Christians have been misled to believe that "faith" ideally means a "leap of faith" and thus blind (or at least partially blind) faith. In other words we've been taught to cultivate stupidity. We've been advised to "step out on faith" - step out in a state of uncertainty.

That's not what Paul meant - and definitely not what Heb 11 had in mind. When Heb 11 says that Abraham attempted to murder his son "by faith", it means that the Voice left him feeling 100% certain that such was the morally right thing to do. (Easy to prove).

Far from advocating blind, stupid faith, Scripture summons us to faith defined as a warranted belief. Meaning, if Special Revelation has persuaded you of a conclusion irresistibly, your belief is now warranted because you cannot be faulted for a belief beyond your control. Special Revelation accomplishes this by giving us persuasive sightings and hearings of God, heaven, angels, and so on.

Setting aside Christianese momentarily, let's return to Paul's terminology:

"We walk by faith (i.e. infallible, reliable visions and voices) not by (natural) sight (i.e. fallible impressions and unreliable human opinions).

But in Christianese, this advice amounts to saying, "We should walk by sight, not by (blind) faith".

Click to expand...

You have a very unique way of understanding scripture, alright then.

Guojing said:

Are you thinking in terms of TULIP?

Click to expand...

No way, in my mind, TULIP is an abomination.