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.
Yes. When a person realizes that Christ died for them to redeem them because they are a sinner, they are realizing the key thing. This definitely isn't contingent on reading a single word in the Old Testament, even though I'd recommend it all to anyone in time, after the New.They need to recognize that they are a sinner in some capacity.
The thief on the cross had that much.
The NT quotes (and builds on) the OT. Even if one does not know the OT, embracing the NT includes embracing those parts referenced.This definitely isn't contingent on reading a single word in the Old Testament, even though I'd recommend it all to anyone in time, after the New.
Definitely.The NT quotes (and builds on) the OT. Even if one does not know the OT, embracing the NT includes embracing those parts referenced.
The thief on the cross did not even have the NT, just the OT.
I did not know that I even needed a Savior until I learned how OS applied to me personally.I know you'll agree, that's not contingent on any amount of knowledge and advanced understanding like about original sin and so on.
There are indeed many ways to hear the gospel message, including ways that begin with learning (in any manner) that one is more sinful than one already realized. (And all of those also are not the only way, but a way!) Many realize they are sinners in need of forgiveness simply by just hearing that Christ died to save us from our sins.I did not know that I even needed a Savior until I learned how OS applied to me personally.
And my church, BC, taught both OS and the Nicene Creed.
I believed both, but it was not until I recognized my own sin nature* that Jesus' death made any sense to me.
*I had mistakenly believed that human fallibility was just a byproduct of our mortality.
God's star dust, which He brought into existence. This is what concerns me about YEC at times: they don't always seem to believe that God can do these things. It's like a lack of faith, at times.Joni Mitchell certainly thinks so.
But such will face a dilemma down the road betweenBut, one can realize one needs forgiveness even without having an explanation, just realizing it intuitively, or automatically. So, there are many avenues/beginnings to realizing we need forgiveness. All of scripture is helpful.Yet, nevertheless, it's not our understandings that save us.
Romans chapters 7 and 8. Or 1rst John chapter 1. If we want to help people on this particular challenge, we will best teach from the New Testament on this. People do need those, especially to learn they need to confess sins as they go along.But such will face a dilemma down the road between
- I am inclined to sin &
- there is no historical basis for such an inclination.
I agree.Definitely.
But if you don't have a bible, or never read scripture, you can still be saved with faith in Christ, upon hearing the gospel, the message about Christ. And anyone is saved only by having faith in Christ. So, as I know you'll agree, that's not contingent on any amount of knowledge and advanced understanding like about original sin and so on. One can know zero doctrines of any particular denomination. One doesn't have to have a normal IQ or better even. It's not our knowledge or personal virtues that save us.Praise be to God for that, because we have "all fallen short" on our own.
I'm sure many do. Like those that believe in "America first" even when it is unjust, that is, even when it goes against God's Word.I agree.
But I can't understand someone being saved and continuing on for years believing some of the things they believed in before they were saved.
In this dispensation, I can understand AMERICA FIRST, but only because Israel is currently SECOND on a technicality -- (think dispensationalism).I'm sure many do. Like those that believe in "America first" even when it is unjust, that is, even when it goes against God's Word.
In this dispensation, I can understand AMERICA FIRST, but only because Israel is currently SECOND on a technicality -- (think dispensationalism).
Ah, the "unjust" attitudes some might have using the political slogan (often by non believers, but sadly also by some believers), to politically say "America First" as a political slogan, which I referred to in my post, is how this can try to justify unjust attitudes against our neighbors that are not acceptable to God, we hear directly from clear scripture:In this dispensation, I can understand AMERICA FIRST, but only because Israel is currently SECOND on a technicality -- (think dispensationalism).
Um ... I do believe the slogan is AMERICA FIRST -- not AMERICANS FIRST.
A close race between Andorra and Lichtenstein.Um ... I do believe the slogan is AMERICA FIRST -- not AMERICANS FIRST.
Question: Which country do you want to be first?
Obviously some of the N.T. is allegorical, Regarding "Jesus believe it" bring it on, lets talk specifics. I am not trying to tell people what they should believe, I am pointing out the facts that there are differences of opinion even among scholars as to what should be considered literal as well as what a specific scripture means.Yes, but too many Christians see that as a slippery slope. If the OT is allegorical, then how much of the NT is as well? They won't accept that.
And then there's the "Jesus believed it," trope to deal with...
I would not know, science was not my college major.Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't science confirmed we come from star dust?
Yes, you can still be saved. The Church actually signed on to evolution.Let's not beat around the bush here. Is evolution a salvation issue?
Is it possible to accept Genesis as allegorical and still be saved by the Grace of Christ?
Because it seems to me that if the answer is yes, debating it is pointless for creationists, and if the answer is no, debating it is pointless with creationists.
I'm just curious regarding what people really think coming into these discussions...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?