Christian preaching...

[Zebra1552]

I know you are. That's why I said it.



Apparently not.

Then explain the post I quoted. You said yourself they can't love because they don't know God.

Ain't my fault that folks are insulted by the truth. Christ is exclusive. Most folks who reject Him don't care to hear what He says.

Then let them reject it rather than shoving it in their faces.

I will. For I have a dream that Christ will continue to be preached in the face of those who want Christians to stop preaching Christ.

I'm merely suggesting you SHARE Him rather than shove him around like some sort of grocery cart.

 

[CShephard53]

Then explain the post I quoted. You said yourself they can't love because they don't know God.

That is what I understood as well. Zaac, I wonder if you could explain the post segment Godschild quoted?

Then let them reject it rather than shoving it in their faces.





I'm merely suggesting you SHARE Him rather than shove him around like some sort of grocery cart.

I'm quite sure that while you may raise valid points there's a much nicer way to say that. PM me if you need to chat.

 

[Zaac]

Then explain the post I quoted. You said yourself they can't love because they don't know God.

Sure didn't.

Then let them reject it rather than shoving it in their faces.

I don't need your assistance to preach the word of God.

I'm merely suggesting you SHARE Him rather than shove him around like some sort of grocery cart.

Then let me suggest that you put me on ignore and save your suggestions for someone who will acknowledge one who rejects the authority of God's word.

 

[Zaac]

That is what I understood as well. Zaac, I wonder if you could explain the post segment Godschild quoted?

jawsmetroid, Nowhere in this thread or any other has it been said that they can't love. I very CLEARLY said they can't be in love.

Godschild has an agenda. He doesn't want any Christian to say anything that does not meet the approval of homosexuals or their sympathizers. As a result, he tends to exagerate about what folks have said in order to try to make his invalid points valid.

And as you have asked that stuff not to be brought into this thread, I would appreciate him not telling the same old lies over and over again.

 

[Zebra1552]

Sure didn't. Like I said, learn how to read.

I can read just fine. You said:
"Nonbelievers think they are in love when it is impossible for them to be in love if they are not in the One Who is Love. That doesn't mean they can't love because everyone possesses the ability to have a filial love. But to have the Agape love demands the indwelling of the Holy Spirit."

In short, people can't love.

Worry about what you do. I don't need your assistance to preach the word of God.

This, coming from one who views the Bible as authoritative? Dependency is a major theme in the NT.

Then let me suggest that you put me on ignore and save your suggestions for someone who will acknowledge one who rejects the authority of God's word.

I don't reject the authority of Jesus. I have told you this on multiple occasions. I even started a thread about it over in Christian philosophy and ethics.

 

[Zaac]

I can read just fine. You said:
"Nonbelievers think they are in love when it is impossible for them to be in love if they are not in the One Who is Love. That doesn't mean they can't love because everyone possesses the ability to have a filial love. But to have the Agape love demands the indwelling of the Holy Spirit."

yep that's my quote.

In short, people can't love.

Those are OBVIOUSLY YOUR words. I didn't say any such thing. So stop bearing false witness against me.

This, coming from one who views the Bible as authoritative?

It's God's word. I sure do view it as authoritative.

Dependency is a major theme in the NT.

Hey the Bible does say 5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;

6 in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight
Pro. 3:5-6

So yes, I am sold out dependent on Christ and every word that He has given.

I don't reject the authority of Jesus. I have told you this on multiple occasions. I even started a thread about it over in Christian philosophy and ethics.

Didn't say you did. You reject the authority of His word.

 

[CShephard53]

jawsmetroid, He has a problem reading. Nowhere in this thread or any other has it been said that they can't love. I very CLEARLY said they can't be in love.

I understood the same thing Godschild seems to be saying: that you're saying people cannot love. You said yourself that without the Spirit, one cannot have 'agape love' but can have 'filial love'. Explain parents with their children, who love them before themselves, unconditionally, yet are not believers. Please, explain your post earlier. He raises a valid point about your post, and I'm not quite clear myself on what it is you are trying to claim. Perhaps you could clarify what you're trying to say?

Godschild has an agenda. He doesn't want any Christian to say anything that does not meet the approval of homosexuals or their sympathizers. As a result, he tends to exagerate about what folks have said in order to try to make his invalid points valid.

I have seen Godschild's posts briefly last year, and none of his posts that I can remember showed approval of homosexuality. True, people can change, but I very much doubt it if your charge of him is true. No, he's not a nice guy sometimes, I remember that quite well. But that doesn't make him wrong. Please, try to resolve this.

And as you have asked that stuff not to be brought into this thread, I would appreciate him not telling the same old lies over and over again.

He asked you, as have I, to explain your post. True, he wasn't very polite about it, but accusing him of being a liar when he's asking you to clarify things isn't very polite either. It's obvious to me that this thread isn't going to go back on topic until you two sort out whatever difference you have, so for the time being I will appoint myself a mediator between you two, if that's okay. Let's try and broker a peace.

 

[Zebra1552]

yep that's my quote.

Then explain it.

Those are OBVIOUSLY YOUR words. I didn't say any such thing. So stop bearing false witness against me.

Yeah, it's my understanding of what you said, and that's what I'm going to walk away with unless YOU explain otherwise as I've asked you to do.

Hey the Bible does say 5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;

6 in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight
Pro. 3:5-6

So yes, I am sold out dependent on Christ and every word that He has given.

The Bible also talks about each member of the body being dependent on one another.

Didn't say you did. You reject the authority of His word.

Then I contradict myself, because I have stated many times (especially in the thread I made in Christian philosophy and ethics) that the Bible is infallible in its original form and perfectly reliable.

 

[Zaac]

I understood the same thing Godschild seems to be saying: that you're saying people cannot love. You said yourself that without the Spirit, one cannot have 'agape love' but can have 'filial love'. Explain parents with their children, who love them before themselves, unconditionally, yet are not believers. Please, explain your post earlier. He raises a valid point about your post, and I'm not quite clear myself on what it is you are trying to claim. Perhaps you could clarify what you're trying to say?

The love you're talking about is filial. Agape love is a result of the Holy Spirit. If I was saying people can't love, that's what I would have said.

They can't be IN Love. You can't be in Christ, the One who IS Love, and reject Him at the same time.

I have seen Godschild's posts briefly last year, and none of his posts that I can remember showed approval of homosexuality. True, people can change, but I very much doubt it if your charge of him is true. No, he's not a nice guy sometimes, I remember that quite well. But that doesn't make him wrong. Please, try to resolve this.

There's nothing for me to resolve with him. He will continue to bear false witness and I will continue to point out what I actually DID say.

He asked you, as have I, to explain your post. True, he wasn't very polite about it, but accusing him of being a liar when he's asking you to clarify things isn't very polite either.

He quoted what I said and then said I said something else right after it. That's called lying.

It's obvious to me that this thread isn't going to go back on topic until you two sort out whatever difference you have, so for the time being I will appoint myself a mediator between you two, if that's okay. Let's try and broker a peace.

I'm done saying anything to him on the matter and will suggest again that he keep his opinions about how he feels about me and other Christians preaching God's word to himself.

 

[Zebra1552]

I have seen Godschild's posts briefly last year, and none of his posts that I can remember showed approval of homosexuality. True, people can change, but I very much doubt it if your charge of him is true. No, he's not a nice guy sometimes, I remember that quite well. But that doesn't make him wrong. Please, try to resolve this.

Wait, you read those posts? Um...

It's obvious to me that this thread isn't going to go back on topic until you two sort out whatever difference you have, so for the time being I will appoint myself a mediator between you two, if that's okay. Let's try and broker a peace.

Yes, resolution... give me a bit to calm down, and I'll probably be up for that. I think I can be civil enough, for a time...

 

[allhart]

Basically on the sexual orientation of oneself. It has already been addressed at birth and for the one that desires differently than his or her orientation. The perspective of oneself and their meaning has to come from origin! To come to know the meaning and then morality of it all. First you must come to know your origin! For if you have no meaning you haven't known purpose or know of purpose. Only that which to fulfill your desires and opinions, therefore; only you are relative to you. So I don't condemn you, but I won't tell you you're all right either. So what else is there to talk about or say on the moral issue of your human behavior! If you don't know where you come from. How do you know where you are going.

Also this is based on reasoning and facts of known science! The fact your minds are going against the known fact of science shows there is more to reality than just science! Science doesn't sin and sin is lawlessness! And homosexuals are going against the laws of nature.
There is a difference between condemning homosexuals and analyzing the behavior!

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I have a hard time believing I'm still a Christian, since I don't believe Christ was a god.

Then you never did believe it.

Of course I did. I wouldn't have called myself a Christian if I didn't believe it.

And if I never was a Christian, my original point still stands. No one can call themselves a Christian, since you have no idea if you'll deconvert in the future.

Sure they can call themselves Christians. This is what I mean about the inability of nonChristians to understand the things of the Spirit. If you have been saved by Christ, there is nothing that you nor the rest of the world can do to pluck you from His hand.

You don't follow Christ now because you never did.

What's your definition of "follow Christ". I was a Christian for 20 years. Read the Bible several times, led a youth group, etc. What part wasn't following Christ? The fact that I eventually deconverted?

And again, if you're suggesting that anyone who deconverts wasn't a Christian to begin with, you (or any other Christian) can't with certainty call themselves Christians, since you can't be sure you won't at some point deconvert yourself. I've known ministers who've deconverted. I'm pretty sure when they were preaching they would have called themselves Christians. They also would have said they never would deconvert, and yet they did. You can't be certain either...

Are you saying the "right understanding" has something to do with extra Biblical knowledge, or in reading comprehension? In any event, since there are multiple interpretations of the Bible (you yourself have arguments with other Christians on these boards), how do you tell which Christians have the "spirit" and which don't?

Nope. Let me explain it to you this way. If I wanted to know what the author of a book meant by something that was said in his book, I'd ask and trust the author before I trusted someone else to tell me what the correct meaning was intended to be.

Likewise, GOD is the author of the Bible. it is His word. If I want a correct understanding of His word, I will ask HIM. I'm indwelled by Him. The Holy Spirit is the deliverer of truth.

This is why nonbelievers can have their interpretation of what they THINK God's word means. But they can't have GOD's KNOWING about what HE means.

Only those indwelled by GOD can have this knowledge. And you will know when they are listening to GOD or themselves by whether or not what they say contradicts something else He says in His word.

GOD does not author confusion. Men do.

So what you're saying is that being a "true Christian" involves receiving extra Biblical information. I'm guessing that when you say you ask God about a passage in the Bible, you mean you pray about it, correct? I assume that other Christians say they pray as well, and receive an opposite conclusion as you do about certain passages. Clearly you can't both be right.

So according to you, the solution to the problem is to look in the Bible to see if your view contradicts other passages in the Bible. But then the extra Biblical information you say you received wasn't needed in the first place, since you just go back to the text to confirm your opinion anyway. And if you believe the other person is wrong, then what exactly happened when they prayed?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Then I contradict myself, because I have stated many times (especially in the thread I made in Christian philosophy and ethics) that the Bible is infallible in its original form and perfectly reliable.

You're talking about the Autographs, correct?

That seems the most logical viewpoint. But here's an interesting question:

Do you believe the Autographs would have imparted the correct meaning to each passage by using completely unambiguous language (or as close to it as would be possible), or would they have still needed correct interpretation based on ambiguous word choice? It seems to me that the infallible part of your statement almost suggests the former. The latter idea brings into play the same problems you have today, i.e. arguing over what you think a passage means based on what you think the Holy Spirit is telling you it means.

Or you just could become Catholic and let the magisterium take care of it...

 

[Zaac]

Of course I did. I wouldn't have called myself a Christian if I didn't believe it.

If you believed it, you still would. That's just the way it is. Once Christ saves you, you can't unsave yourself. Once He turns your heart to belief, you can't unbelieve.

There are just entirely too many people out there who think it is within their power to save themselves and then unsave themselves if they don't want to believe anymore.

If you don't want to believe anymore, question whether you ever did.

What's your definition of "follow Christ". I was a Christian for 20 years. Read the Bible several times, led a youth group, etc. What part wasn't following Christ? The fact that I eventually deconverted?

That's religion. That's ritual. Anybody can follow a task list of things to do. Do a bunch of church tasks and reading the Bible doesn't make you a Christian anymore than barking makes you a dog.

To be a Christian demands that you confess and repent of your sins and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. He died on the Cross, was buried and resurrected on that Third Day so that you would not have to spend eternity in hell. It's about letting Christ be your forever sacrifice and growing in your relationship with Him because of what He did.

If Jesus Christ saved you, there should be evidence of a changed heart, not just a change of activities.

And again, if you're suggesting that anyone who deconverts wasn't a Christian to begin with, you (or any other Christian) can't with certainty call themselves Christians, since you can't be sure you won't at some point deconvert yourself.

I'm saved and washed in the Blood of Christ. My sins have been forgiven and I am forever His. I don't know about the rest of Christendom's certainty, but I have it on the assurance of The Living Christ that I have been saved. And I can't deconvert myself from that which I didn't convert myself too.

People are saved by Christ. If He does the saving, it is impossible for us to "deconvert".

I think you, like a lot of folks, confuse religion and ritual activities with being saved. They are not the same. They will be a lot of folks who go to hell because they think their "good deed checklist of activities" warrants it.

But God has purposely said that 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

Salvation is the gift of GOD not of man. You can't do good works and save yourself, and then stop doing good works and unsave yourself.

If you have not confessed and repented of your sins and accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior then there is no list of good works that can keep you out of hell.

I've known ministers who've deconverted.

What you know are "ministers" who never knew Christ. Ain't no deconverting cause man cannot convert himself. That's a work of GOD.

I'm pretty sure when they were preaching they would have called themselves Christians.

Doesn't matter. they could call themselves the Queen of Sheba and it wouldn't make it so.

The Bible speaks of such people who felt like they were doing such acts for Christ. But in Matthew 7:21-23, He makes it clear that these folks who thought they were Christians just because they did a lot of Christian activities will be cast away as evildoers.21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers.

They also would have said they never would deconvert, and yet they did. You can't be certain either...

Sure I can. God is God alone. You can't deconvert from that which you didn't convert yourself.

So what you're saying is that being a "true Christian" involves receiving extra Biblical information. I'm guessing that when you say you ask God about a passage in the Bible, you mean you pray about it, correct? I assume that other Christians say they pray as well, and receive an opposite conclusion as you do about certain passages. Clearly you can't both be right.

The Holy Spirit delivers truth. And if you're dealing with the Holy Spirit, It is nt going to deliver anything that contradicts the word of God.

So according to you, the solution to the problem is to look in the Bible to see if your view contradicts other passages in the Bible. But then the extra Biblical information you say you received wasn't needed in the first place, since you just go back to the text to confirm your opinion anyway. And if you believe the other person is wrong, then what exactly happened when they prayed?

Who said they prayed? God's word is pretty basic as far as what it says. It's men and their "interpretative" skills who author the confusion. That's why folks would save themselves a lot of trouble if they would just deal with what's on the page first.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

If you believed it, you still would. That's just the way it is. Once Christ saves you, you can't unsave yourself. Once He turns your heart to belief, you can't unbelieve.

People believe in something one day and not the next. This happens all the time. Are you saying that it's possible with everything other than Christianity? This is called special pleading. It's a logical fallacy. You'd have to prove that there's a reason to believe this is an exception.

That's religion. That's ritual. Anybody can follow a task list of things to do. Do a bunch of church tasks and reading the Bible doesn't make you a Christian anymore than barking makes you a dog.

To be a Christian demands that you confess and repent of your sins and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.

Did it.

He died on the Cross, was buried and resurrected on that Third Day so that you would not have to spend eternity in hell. It's about letting Christ be your forever sacrifice and growing in your relationship with Him because of what He did.

If Jesus Christ saved you, there should be evidence of a changed heart, not just a change of activities.

You're throwing out stock phrases again. Please provide a list of things that constitutes a "changed heart".

I'm saved and washed in the Blood of Christ. My sins have been forgiven and I am forever His. I don't know about the rest of Christendom's certainty, but I have it on the assurance of The Living Christ that I have been saved. And I can't deconvert myself from that which I didn't convert myself too.

I'm sure every devout Christian who deconverted would have said the same thing as you are now. I would have said that. You're no different from any of us in that regard. So my point still stands - according to your logic, anyone on the outside can't be sure you're a Christian since we can't be sure you won't at a later date deconvert. Your saying you wont means nothing, since we know there are cases of people saying that and later deconverting. And since you can't say with 100% certainty you won't deconvert (I know you believe you wont, but people who deconvert think that as well), you can't be sure you're a Christian either.

Who said they prayed? God's word is pretty basic as far as what it says. It's men and their "interpretative" skills who author the confusion. That's why folks would save themselves a lot of trouble if they would just deal with what's on the page first.

You're contradicting yourself. First you say you can't understand the Bible without being a Christian, now you seem to say you can, since it's "pretty basic". Which is it?

And you said God helped you understand passages, correct? What happens when God helps other Christians to come to conclusions you don't share?

 

[Zebra1552]

You're talking about the Autographs, correct?

That seems the most logical viewpoint. But here's an interesting question:

Do you believe the Autographs would have imparted the correct meaning to each passage by using completely unambiguous language (or as close to it as would be possible), or would they have still needed correct interpretation based on ambiguous word choice? It seems to me that the infallible part of your statement almost suggests the former. The latter idea brings into play the same problems you have today, i.e. arguing over what you think a passage means based on what you think the Holy Spirit is telling you it means.

Or you just could become Catholic and let the magisterium take care of it...

I don't interpret the Bible with the Holy Spirit, and I don't see why anyone who is educated would. The Bible has tons of history and culture behind it, and the only way to know what it says is by learning about it, studying it, and reflecting on said history. Not ignoring it in favor of some feeling you get.

So yes, I assert that they did use fairly unambiguous language. I fail to see why translators often go for readability rather than accuracy in many cases... the NIV is a prime example of this, the NIRV being even worse.

 

[allhart]

I don't interpret the Bible with the Holy Spirit, and I don't see why anyone who is educated would. The Bible has tons of history and culture behind it, and the only way to know what it says is by learning about it, studying it, and reflecting on said history. Not ignoring it in favor of some feeling you get.

So yes, I assert that they did use fairly unambiguous language. I fail to see why translators often go for readability rather than accuracy in many cases... the NIV is a prime example of this, the NIRV being even worse.

Well, can we know a book with no introduction and author? It would just be a bunch of words! There is 40 persons at different times writing and remarkably having the same authoritative message. God breathed! Principle can be applied to different perspectives and can be seen in time of today. God may not pacifically stating it, but you can have fence posts of principles that surround you in-like a fence and if surrounded you step past the barrier,so you can know your out of the will of God!

God's word is relative today, but have ya'll read a book that wasn't? Like books that state years that have come and went that have UFO technology etc

 

[Zebra1552]

Well, can we know a book with no introduction and author? It would just be a bunch of words! There is 40 persons at different times writing and remarkably having the same authoritative message. God breathed! Principle can be applied to different perspectives and can be seen in time of today. God may not pacifically stating it, but you can have fence posts of principles that surround you in-like a fence and if surrounded you step past the barrier,so you can know your out of the will of God!

God's word is relative today, but have ya'll read a book that wasn't? Like books that state years that have come and went that have UFO technology etc

I fail to see how that addresses what I presented.

 

[CShephard53]

If you believed it, you still would. That's just the way it is. Once Christ saves you, you can't unsave yourself. Once He turns your heart to belief, you can't unbelieve.

There are just entirely too many people out there who think it is within their power to save themselves and then unsave themselves if they don't want to believe anymore.

If you don't want to believe anymore, question whether you ever did.






That's religion. That's ritual. Anybody can follow a task list of things to do. Do a bunch of church tasks and reading the Bible doesn't make you a Christian anymore than barking makes you a dog.

To be a Christian demands that you confess and repent of your sins and accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. He died on the Cross, was buried and resurrected on that Third Day so that you would not have to spend eternity in hell. It's about letting Christ be your forever sacrifice and growing in your relationship with Him because of what He did.

If Jesus Christ saved you, there should be evidence of a changed heart, not just a change of activities.



I'm saved and washed in the Blood of Christ. My sins have been forgiven and I am forever His. I don't know about the rest of Christendom's certainty, but I have it on the assurance of The Living Christ that I have been saved. And I can't deconvert myself from that which I didn't convert myself too.

People are saved by Christ. If He does the saving, it is impossible for us to "deconvert".

I think you, like a lot of folks, confuse religion and ritual activities with being saved. They are not the same. They will be a lot of folks who go to hell because they think their "good deed checklist of activities" warrants it.

But God has purposely said that 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

Salvation is the gift of GOD not of man. You can't do good works and save yourself, and then stop doing good works and unsave yourself.

If you have not confessed and repented of your sins and accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior then there is no list of good works that can keep you out of hell.



What you know are "ministers" who never knew Christ. Ain't no deconverting cause man cannot convert himself. That's a work of GOD.




Doesn't matter. they could call themselves the Queen of Sheba and it wouldn't make it so.

The Bible speaks of such people who felt like they were doing such acts for Christ. But in Matthew 7:21-23, He makes it clear that these folks who thought they were Christians just because they did a lot of Christian activities will be cast away as evildoers.21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers.



Sure I can. God is God alone. You can't deconvert from that which you didn't convert yourself.






The Holy Spirit delivers truth. And if you're dealing with the Holy Spirit, It is nt going to deliver anything that contradicts the word of God.



Who said they prayed? God's word is pretty basic as far as what it says. It's men and their "interpretative" skills who author the confusion. That's why folks would save themselves a lot of trouble if they would just deal with what's on the page first.

Zaac, are you willing to settle the score and make peace with Godschild with myself as a mediator? He has expressed a willingness to do so, albeit hesitantly. I believe it would be conducive to a better environment. And who knows, we might learn something from it.

 

[Zaac]

Zaac, are you willing to settle the score and make peace with Godschild with myself as a mediator? He has expressed a willingness to do so, albeit hesitantly. I believe it would be conducive to a better environment. And who knows, we might learn something from it.

I don't have a score to settle with him.

I don't interpret the Bible with the Holy Spirit, and I don't see why anyone who is educated would.

That's his quote. There will never be any middle ground between me and anyone who isn't led by the Holy Spirit in discerning God's word.

Thanks for the offer though. As long as he contends that the Bible isn't authoritative, which his not being led by the Holy Sirit to discern it further testifies, there won't be any middle ground.

He can do his thing and I'll continue to correct it with God's word.