- Oct 28, 2006
- 24,757
- 11,568
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
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.
And then we go back to my argument about how the Bible is simple, an argument so air-tight that you can do nothing but employ absurd counterarguments, like your claim that there are no stupid people.
You're espousing divine command theory. I'm glad you're not a theist for the sake of your psychological health. Not being snazzy here. Once again: if you interpret something about God commanding us to do something bad, who's to say we should follow it rather than, I don't know, following practical reasoning and doing the good thing?
Yes, I believe that.
At the bottom of all of this is a spirit of legalism, which I don't really blame you for having seeing how almost all of Christendom is down with it.
Legalism is reflected in the idea that you just need to do such-and-such in order to be a real Christian, as opposed to the Christian idea that goodness reflects dikaiosune, or inner goodness, which is fashioned by spiritual disciplines and then expresses itself through our behavior. A person who gives everything to the poor without changing his character is none the better in terms of the kingdom, which works through modified character. Again, Jesus was making a point: if you aren't willing to sell all your possessions, you can't enter the kingdom of God, and he was saying this precisely to the person who is attached to his possessions, hence the verse on how difficult it is for the rich to enter the kingdom. At the end of the day we can't forget that according to the most basic exegetical principles Jesus was speaking to a particular person about a concrete action, which reflects a general principle. The action he commanded isn't the general principle. He said "hey, you dude, go sell your stuff," and not "you can only enter the kingdom if you sell your stuff."
NV, do you have amnesia?I know you're smarter than this.
So you hold your own reasoning above that of your Lord? Curious...
Remarkable.
Any fears you might end up in hell then? Since you're disagreeing with the majority of Christianity.
You need to pay attention. I have said on multiple occasions that this thread is about EXTREME CHRISTIANITY. It is about GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND. So your claim that He said "hey, you dude, go sell your stuff," and not "you can only enter the kingdom if you sell your stuff" is completely irrelevant. It is quite aggravating that I have to spell this out over and over.
I would think of an extremist Christian as one who sells all that he owns, gives his money to the poor, and wanders the world to preach the gospel and do good works. This was not an impossible task for John the Baptist, and he didn't even have the gospel to work with.
You can disagree that such a thing is what constitutes an extremist Christian, but my question still stands: why is there no one on earth doing this?
If it's just about extremist Christianity, then why did you respond at post 129 when my previous response would have closed the deal between us? Your response with the two questions indicates that you perceive extremist Christianity to involve these two points, which in positing to me you're expecting a response, which I've given and now you've found me disagreeable because I've done so.
And my responses so far go with the OP in answering why there are no extremist Christians: because there's no need for extremist Christians given that the callings of the disciples were their callings. What God cares about in the New Testament is changing one's character to Christlikeness through practices like the spiritual disciplines while also being cognizant and obedient to the calling God has for your life. All the other stuff above we've been discussing relates to the extremist question.
Mother Teresa.
Jon Pedley.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1004/08/ctw.01.html
George Carroll
Yevgeny Pushenko
One way or another I'm going to prove to you that stupid people exist.
NV, I think I already implied that I have some agreement with you about "stupid" people back on post #105, where I said,
"Of course I think there are ridiculous people out there in the world. It's just that I like to hold out a bit of hope for everyone, that's all..."
But, even with that being the case, in what way would proving the existence of stupid people contribute to your contention about there being 'no extremist Christians' as you expressed it in your OP? Or, do you want to create a separate thread of discussion for that?
2PhiloVoid
How or why did homosexual lifestyle come into this discussion? You just popped that in there.Yes. And one who lives in decadence and gluttony while the world is poor and starving is in a perpetual state of deliberate sin, no different from how you view the homosexual lifestyle.
The REAL meaning behind this is that God does not want our possessions to mean more to us than he does. The rich man was saying that he wanted to follow God, but then showed that his possessions meant more to him than God when he would not give them up. It does not necessarily mean to go out and sell everything we own.We went over this. It's related to the OP because of my claim that the Bible is simple, and so if it says you should sell all that you have and give to the poor, then it's saying that and not trying to be mysterious. I said the Bible must be simple so stupid people could understand it.
Mother Teresa was Catholic and thus disqualified. She supported the hoarding of US $10-15 billion while the world starves. How does that fit in line with selling all that you own and giving to the poor?
Don't know who the others are.
How or why did homosexual lifestyle come into this discussion? You just popped that in there.
The REAL meaning behind this is that God does not want our possessions to mean more to us than he does. The rich man was saying that he wanted to follow God, but then showed that his possessions meant more to him than God when he would not give them up. It does not necessarily mean to go out and sell everything we own.
Catholics are Christian.
The others are millionaires who became Christian and gave away all their material possessions to live in huts.
It has no bearing on the conversation so it is a very bad example.
That's not what I said. Read what I said againCan you please explain why God, who is also Jesus, inspired John to put this passage in the gospel if this conversation wasn't meant for anyone but the rich young ruler?
I don't alter the quote box1. You are misquoting me. You altered the quote text box.
2. I'm saying that in both situations, a Christian is living in a perpetual and deliberate state of sin.
Perhaps. But I do consider an extremely unreasonable person to be one who is quite similar to what we might also call ... a 'stupid' person, being that a person's ridiculousness typically infers some level of unreasonableness.No... for example, you are being quite ridiculous with this whole charade, but you are not stupid. Also, just because someone is not intelligent doesn't mean they're a ridiculous person.
So ridiculous and stupid are independent variables.
I'll go half way with you and say that some portions of the Bible are somewhat "simple" and more easily grasped by the common man and woman. But there are definitely other portions of Scripture that are obviously complex--hence, the existence of many diverse denominations, as well as a plethora of bible scholars who just happen to not infrequently disagree on this, that, and the other on doctrine, with some perhaps being guilty of misapplication.We went over this. It's related to the OP because of my claim that the Bible is simple, and so if it says you should sell all that you have and give to the poor, then it's saying that and not trying to be mysterious. I said the Bible must be simple so stupid people could understand it.
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?