Matt. 25:46 Everlasting Punishment

[Major1]

David Koresh, leader of the Branch Davidian cult (along with many others) have claimed their beliefs were based solely on the Bible. My point? People can interpret the text incorrectly.

I agree completely with that statement.

However, when we look closer at the Jones, and Koresh's it is well known that they all had mental issues with vision of grandeur and they attracted people who needed to have their hands held because they as well were having emotional issues.

If you did not agree with them you were punished, locked up and treated as a person of treason.

If you do not agree with me, please just do not respond to anything I post and I will do the same to you.

Now of course, you do realize that your post right here applies to you as well. You are saying that YOU are correct in YOUR interpretations just as you are saying that about mine.

To me, that is like sitting on the end of a tree limb and sawing it off from the tree.

 

[Major1]

There are plenty of Scriptures (and historical records) that support what I'm asserting.

Did you mean to write that you *already* explained what "saved" means (instead of *only*)?

Well, you are free to post them if you like.

Yes. Thank you.

 

[mkgal1]

I may be wrong on this,, but it appears that you are promoting the idea of "Preterism".

If not I apologize for the post.

If you are then I must say that I can never agree with that theology.

Yes....my beliefs are identified as partial preterism (also known as historical theology or covenant theology). Just as Hillsage has said, 'This is obviously something based upon your commitment to fundamentalism mindset" - this resistance to other theological systems besides futurism. I can agree to agree to disagree, knowing where you stand.

 

[mkgal1]

Well, you are free to post them if you like.

Yes. Thank you.

It would be off topic to do so, but when I have more time I will create a new thread.

 

[huiothesia]

Thank you for the kind words.

May I say to you that I do not look for arguments and in fact I detest them.

Allow me to fix the problem that concerns you. "ALL PEOPLE" especially ME.

Yes, I am from the "Old School" of Christian fundamentalism. My past learning experience was DSTS and Liberty and you are aware that they are the headquarters of fundamental Christianity.

No, I do not believe that tongues is Scriptural today but that is for another thread.

Have a great day as this is Sunday morning!

OK--cool and a great opportunity.

Where did you find in scripture where it says that tongues isn't "scriptural" for today?

I was trying to drill down earlier in order to make a point that I think would be helpful to you.
After you came to know the Lord, you began (I assume) to fellowship with some other believers--either at an organized church or otherwise. You were a clean slate in terms of your scriptural knowledge--just as we all were at some time. Presumably, you began to learn from those around you. You trusted them and as you read scriptures in the context of that teaching, you began to develop your understanding of how they were to be interpreted.
This process of hearing and reading led you along the way. Later you came to accept a particular set of doctrines referred to as 'fundamentalism'. You were comfortable there and you found/find like minds.
You were educated within that group.
Are you aware that even within 'fundamentalism', there are differences of opinion on what is scriptural and what isn't?
And that outside the realm of 'fundamentalism' there are other believers that have even more disparate interpretations of scripture.
I am certain, that this is also true even within your local church.

This being the reality of christendom--seeing that so many persons of honest hearts and minds differ--how is it that 'your' personal understanding is "the truth of the Bible" and that all others' are not "the truth of the Bible".

Is your 'dogma' then perfect.

I can take scripture and (just as can be done with data sets) and make them fit into about any 'dogma'.

My point here is that we have all been influenced by the exposure we have had over time and this leads to differing 'opinions' based on it---reading and even deeply studying--the very same words.

Can you at least in principle agree, that some of your conclusions--some of your dogma-- may be incorrect?

 

[mkgal1]

If you do not agree with me, please just do not respond to anything I post and I will do the same to you.

This is a discussion board - meant for different views to be expressed. I see no reason why we should avoid responding to one another just because we disagree? I'm not here to merely agree with others (or expect everyone to agree with me) - I'm here to discuss and see things from the perspective of others.

Now of course, you do realize that your post right here applies to you as well. You are saying that YOU are correct in YOUR interpretations just as you are saying that about mine.

To me, that is like sitting on the end of a tree limb and sawing it off from the tree.

I posted that in response to your statement that implied that you couldn't be incorrect because your beliefs are "biblical". That's a fallacious argument (an appeal to authority).

 

[mkgal1]

Yes, I am from the "Old School" of Christian fundamentalism. My past learning experience was DSTS and Liberty and you are aware that they are the headquarters of fundamental Christianity.

It's ironic to me that you use "Old School" as a term to describe a modern teaching that wasn't around until the late 19th century.

 

[huiothesia]

It's ironic to me that you use "Old School" as a term to describe a modern teaching that wasn't around until the late 19th century.

Now that is funny...thanks for the chuckle.
We all need a second look now and then, don't we.

 

[mkgal1]

PLease understand that I do not have a doctrine. That is an incorrect idea.

What I do know comes from the Scriptures and those are Gods doctrines not mine.

Is it possible that I am not correct? Not if it is Biblical.

If it is an opinion then just like you, Yes that is possible.

Just pulling this quote forward. This is what I'd responded to - I've never made a claim that my beliefs are absolutely correct (and none of us should). This is "faith" not absolutism.

 

[FineLinen]

I don't think that is correct IMO.

The fact is, the entire Road begins in HIM and ends in Him! You did NOT choose Me>>>>

"I (the Lord Jesus Christ) chose you"

"Those who were ordained to everlasting life became believers"

 

[FineLinen]

The fact is, the entire Road begins in HIM and ends in Him! You did NOT choose Me>>>>

"I (the Lord Jesus Christ) chose you"

"Those who were ordained to everlasting life became believers"

I have decided to follow Jesus, I have decided to follow Jesus..

THE STORY BEHIND THE SONG “I HAVE DECIDED TO FOLLOW JESUS” : ChurchGist Blog |

Ordained = tasso= appointed

Ordained = kathistemi= to cause to stand/to set.

 

[Major1]

The fact is, the entire Road begins in HIM and ends in Him! You did NOT choose Me>>>>

"I (the Lord Jesus Christ) chose you"

"Those who were ordained to everlasting life became believers"

No argument from me on that.

 

[Major1]

The fact is, the entire Road begins in HIM and ends in Him! You did NOT choose Me>>>>

"I (the Lord Jesus Christ) chose you"

"Those who were ordained to everlasting life became believers"

No argument from me on that.

 

[Major1]

Just pulling this quote forward. This is what I'd responded to - I've never made a claim that my beliefs are absolutely correct (and none of us should). This is "faith" not absolutism.

God’s Word is as sacred as God Himself. This is an absolute that can serve as an anchor for our lives. The truth of God’s Word is an unchangeable reality. Like gravity or the multiplication tables, the truth of God’s Word is an absolute reality whether or not we believe it or accept it.

John 14:6...…….
I would say that "I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father except by Me" is an absolute."

 

[Major1]

It's ironic to me that you use "Old School" as a term to describe a modern teaching that wasn't around until the late 19th century.

It is true that the teaching process began in the 19th century in order to combat the German higher criticism movement which was working to deny the inerrancy of the Scriptures.

That being the case, then "Fundamentalism" is built on five tenets of the Christian faith, although there is much more to the movement than adherence to these tenets:

1) The Bible is literally true. Associated with this tenet is the belief that the Bible is inerrant, that is, without error and free from all contradictions.

2) The virgin birth and deity of Christ. Fundamentalists believe that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary and conceived by the Holy Spirit and that He was and is the Son of God, fully human and fully divine.

3) The substitutionary atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross. Fundamentalism teaches that salvation is obtained only through God’s grace and human faith in Christ’s crucifixion for the sins of mankind.

4) The bodily resurrection of Jesus. On the third day after His crucifixion, Jesus rose from the grave and now sits at the right hand of God the Father.

5) The authenticity of Jesus’ miracles as recorded in Scripture and the literal, pre-millennial second coming of Christ to earth.

The greatest failure may be in allowing Fundamentalism’s detractors define what it means to be a Fundamentalist. As a result, many people today see Fundamentalists as radical, snake-handling extremists who want to establish a state religion and force their beliefs on everyone else. This is far from the truth. Fundamentalists seek to guard the truth of Scripture and defend the Christian faith, which was “once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3).

Truth does not change, and adherence to the fundamental principles of doctrine is needful.

 

[Major1]

OK--cool and a great opportunity.

Where did you find in scripture where it says that tongues isn't "scriptural" for today?

I was trying to drill down earlier in order to make a point that I think would be helpful to you.
After you came to know the Lord, you began (I assume) to fellowship with some other believers--either at an organized church or otherwise. You were a clean slate in terms of your scriptural knowledge--just as we all were at some time. Presumably, you began to learn from those around you. You trusted them and as you read scriptures in the context of that teaching, you began to develop your understanding of how they were to be interpreted.
This process of hearing and reading led you along the way. Later you came to accept a particular set of doctrines referred to as 'fundamentalism'. You were comfortable there and you found/find like minds.
You were educated within that group.
Are you aware that even within 'fundamentalism', there are differences of opinion on what is scriptural and what isn't?
And that outside the realm of 'fundamentalism' there are other believers that have even more disparate interpretations of scripture.
I am certain, that this is also true even within your local church.

This being the reality of christendom--seeing that so many persons of honest hearts and minds differ--how is it that 'your' personal understanding is "the truth of the Bible" and that all others' are not "the truth of the Bible".

Is your 'dogma' then perfect.

I can take scripture and (just as can be done with data sets) and make them fit into about any 'dogma'.

My point here is that we have all been influenced by the exposure we have had over time and this leads to differing 'opinions' based on it---reading and even deeply studying--the very same words.

Can you at least in principle agree, that some of your conclusions--some of your dogma-- may be incorrect?

Your comment has absolutely nothing to do with this threads topic.

You have become completely involved in my life personally.

Your assumptions are silly and ill-advised and actually you are coming across as a physic trying to examine me for some reason.

But, yes, I am aware of the difference within certain areas. That is not a big news flash.

Can I agree with your premise? NO.
If you know of something I have stated which is NOT Biblically correct then I would appreciate you posting it for me. I am not talking about something of yours which is your opinion but something of the Scriptures where I have been incorrect on.


Do you have anything to say about or on the subject of this thread which might be helpful to others?

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

Good grief! This thread is closed for review.

EDIT - This thread is staying closed. It is full of flaming, goading and repetitive spamming of the same image or post.



​