I suppose we could read our present situation in that way. But, then again, how much disagreement is acceptable? How far back do we draw the line in order to allow more people to be included on our side? Where does tolerance really become compromise of truth and not necessarily compatible with love either? I guess those are all answers we must try to resolve for ourselves.
Not to diminish Love, but I have always considered Faith to at be the starting point in our Christian walk (where through diligence Faith and Love are intended to continue to grow).
Yes, we are. And we can decide that we're guided by the Holy Spirit in our interpretations while many others claim the same and end up with very different interpretations. That doesn't mean that we aren't Spirit-led, or that they necessarily are or vice versa. It just indicates to me that we need more-from the Christian legacy- in order to fully understand the gospel.
Yes, for its part the Catholic Church teaches that it's the starting point, "the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification...", as the Council of Trent put it. Because faith places us into relationship with God, and this communion, itself, is the basis of our justice or righteousness.
I'll put it this way, if your view was right He would've stopped inspiring Scripture just before the word "In", the first word of Genesis. Because there'd be no reason.
Christianity is not an umbrella "religion."
But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. Rom 6:22
The Catholic Catechism says something like that.
When you have passages like Acts 4:12, the answer is clearly that Christianity is not an umbrella religion.
Died for all, but most will reject Him.
Yes, because it is through our faith that God, by His grace, gave us the free gift of life in His Son; therefore, we must abide in His Son, as His Son abides in Him, and they in us: this is a voluntary relationship, empowered by God.
Yes, for it is through a living faith that the free gift is kept; otherwise, our belief would be in vain.
Of course, otherwise, God would be liar when He commands us to choose life.
God's house is not divided, but one, in Christ: any who contradict the Doctrine of Christ, are not His, but Satan's.
I'll try to keep this short. The long sequences of cause and effect are a result of cause. The fact that we effects also cause by our choices, does not eject us from the chain, more is it implied that our wills and choices are not also effects of previous causes. You may call yourself whatever you will, and you can choose whatever you will, but you will choose precisely as God has caused from the beginning.
But there's relatively little in scripture to support you're theory. If Jesus said, "If you do this- but, come to think of it, to state this in precise theological terms, you really have no choice but to do this anyway..." that would make more sense of your concepts. But He doesn't, and, again, if your theory was true there would not really be any reason for Him to say anything at all, because the revealed Word-the knowledge given- only makes sense if we can either opt to heed it or refuse to do so. Likewise there'd be no reason to be told to choose good over evil, or exhorted to strive and persevere, etc. Otherwise, again, human life is nothing but a huge, callously and unnecessarily mean puppet show.
Why else would someone help a poor homeless person unless God had commanded them? Jim Cramer of CNBC was once living in his car. Now he is a multimillionaire.
People in church fire up their ego with this silly reverse psychology humble bragging all the time. “Jeeeeesus! I am nothing! without yooooou!” But they’re always the loudest person in the room.
