what's with all the 'everyone gets saved' thinking.

[holeinone]

I can't recommend the current series of broadcasts on The Whitehorse Inn enough. Their year long topic, "The Romans Revolution." To date it has been fantastic - although I can hardly believe the answers to their "man on the street" questions. Sometimes I just have to yell at the radio the answers are so sadly lacking. If I were the one asking the questions I'd have a tough time not hitting the respondants upside the head with my microphone

edie

Could you post a link?

 

[edie19]

Could you post a link?

simple enough. . . .

www.whitehorseinn.org

They update the on-line broadcast each Sunday. The current broadcast has John Warwick Montgomery as a guest. He's terrific - I'll be checking out his apologetics in the not too distant future.

edie

 

[heymikey80]

I think it's a sign of the contemporary approach to religion. Since the early 1900's, westerners treat religion and morality as totally subjective. It was a part of the modernist project to objectify ethics, which failed -- and so ethics must be totally subjective in a totally objective reality.

Of course reality is in the Eye of the Absolute Person, and that's where I look for my ethos.

But the rest of the postmodern world really believes modernism left a crater where ethics once stood.

Best philosophical book I've read on the subject: Alasdair MacIntyre, "After Virtue". Tough, subtle book. But the intro chapter (available on Amazon) tells it all.

 

[reformedfan]

i've always thought of universalism as a logical extrapolation of the 'Jesus died for everybody' Armin belief, given what i know about the root cause (if that's the right word) of justification.

Van Til sez the farthur a person/denom etc. moves away from Calvinism, which is Biblical Christianity, the closer they eventually resemble a cult, which has universalism as it's hope or goal or whatever they'd call it.

why is it against the rules to debate this? i've been away mostly & am pretty outta da loop on all things CF

 

[Nadiine]

I think it's a sign of the contemporary approach to religion. Since the early 1900's, westerners treat religion and morality as totally subjective. It was a part of the modernist project to objectify ethics, which failed -- and so ethics must be totally subjective in a totally objective reality.

Of course reality is in the Eye of the Absolute Person, and that's where I look for my ethos.

But the rest of the postmodern world really believes modernism left a crater where ethics once stood.

Best philosophical book I've read on the subject: Alasdair MacIntyre, "After Virtue". Tough, subtle book. But the intro chapter (available on Amazon) tells it all.

I think the other problem is, people are rejecting TRUTH as absolute. Not only morality.

As if whatever you THINK or want to believe literally BECOMES TRUE FOR YOU.
The absurdity of that worldview boggles my mind.

We all hate & dislike cancer & aids... but does our hatred of them cause them to cease to exist for us?
Absolute Truth is under heavy assault today.
Relativism/subjectivism are more Pleasant (politically correct).

What's most odd about this, are those of the liberal persuasion who uphold these central beliefs/values, ARE THE VERY ONES THAT CLAIM ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS ARE WRONG AND ARE PREDOMINANTLY INTOLERANT OF ALL WHO DISAGREE WITH THEIR WORLDVIEWS (to the point of hostility).

They attack Christians for being so mean & harsh, while at the same time they're MEAN & HARSH with anyone who doesn't accept their beliefs/values!
They hypocrisy runs rampant in it.

If truth and values/spiritual beliefs are all 'subjective/relative' as so many claim, then they cannot argue with fundamentalists or conservatives about being wrong at all.
They disallow orthodox Christians/conservatives/traditionalists to use the same method/system they use to decide truth/values.

It refutes the very belief system they use for themselves. -circular-

Their whole foundation rests on marbles .