Originally posted by footwasher
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Theology 201 Guidelines
This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Aspects of Atonement: What Did Jesus' Death on the Tree Accomplish?
Collapse
X
-
Is there an answer in there somewhere to my question? Do you think the Lord's prayer is now obsolete? Should we no longer pray, "Forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us"? Why can't you simply answer a question?אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by footwasher View PostScripture describes good behavior as full compliance with the law. Cursed are those who choose to live under law and do not observe all of it. Why put yourself under a curse. If you have a problem with this take it up with James and Paul.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by footwasher View PostYou seen very fond of quoting Scriptute out of context. The text is used in context with keeping promises, not with interpreting Scripture, which can be highly nuanced:
James 5:12But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath; but your yes is to be yes, and your no, no, so that you may not fall under judgment.
Θέλεις δὲ γνῶναι, ὦ ἄνθρωπε κενέ, ὅτι ἡ πίστις χωρὶς τῶν ἔργων ἀργή ἐστιν;
ὁρᾶτε ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος καὶ οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον;
Just answer ναί for 'yes' and οὔ for 'no'.Last edited by robrecht; 04-24-2014, 07:10 PM.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by footwasher View PostHe wanted the ruler to beg God for mercy. You may be unaware, but observing the law does do that to a person. That was before Christ was sent to the Cross. Notice that when Cornelius petitioned God, He brought Him to receiving Christ. Those who receive Christ receive mercy. Petition for forgiveness of sin is no longer required after that.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Originally posted by footwasher View PostYou state that James and Paul taught different doctrine.
Originally posted by footwasher View PostI say that they teach the same doctrine.
Originally posted by footwasher View PostI don't know how you equate your view to be that of a loyal Christian.
Originally posted by footwasher View PostAbraham didn't understand God, but he was loyal and jumped when God asked him to. You may not understand that God is the same yesterday today and tomorrow, but what is required from you is loyalty. Understanding comes later.
יברכך יהוה וישמרך׃ יאר יהוה פניו אליך ויחנך׃ ישא יהוה פניו אליך וישם לך שלום׃Last edited by robrecht; 04-24-2014, 07:37 PM.אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃
Comment
-
Actually there is no answer for you there because the answer is only for believers. For unbelievers, there is only law:
1 Timothy 1:1Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus according to the commandment of God our Savior, and of Christ Jesus, who is our hope,
******2To Timothy, my true child in the faith: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.
******3As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. 5But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
******8But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
Let me place this separately, so you can read it without getting mixed up:
The law is not made for the righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious,
Originally Posted by footwasher
Scripture describes good behavior as full compliance with the law. Cursed are those who choose to live under law and do not observe all of it. Why put yourself under a curse. If you have a problem with this take it up with James and Paul.
When Jesus describes the behavior of the Good Samaritan, is he not describing good behavior, without any mention of 'full compliance with the law?
Originally Posted by footwasher
You seen very fond of quoting Scriptute out of context. The text is used in context with keeping promises, not with interpreting Scripture, which can be highly nuanced:
James 5:12But above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath; but your yes is to be yes, and your no, no, so that you may not fall under judgment.
This is funny! Did you understand the Greek. I was asking you to let your yes be yes and your no be no, exactly as James himself says. No need not add anything. I don't want you to add anything, just give a straight answer to James' (and my) questions:
Θέλεις δὲ γνῶναι, ὦ ἄνθρωπε κενέ, ὅτι ἡ πίστις χωρὶς τῶν ἔργων ἀργή ἐστιν;
ὁρᾶτε ὅτι ἐξ ἔργων δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος καὶ οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον;
Just answer ναί for 'yes' and οὔ for 'no'.
Originally Posted by footwasher
He wanted the ruler to beg God for mercy. You may be unaware, but observing the law does do that to a person. That was before Christ was sent to the Cross. Notice that when Cornelius petitioned God, He brought Him to receiving Christ. Those who receive Christ receive mercy. Petition for forgiveness of sin is no longer required after that.
You did not answer the question: Are you trying to say that Jesus did not want the rich young ruler to follow the commandments?
Luke 18:13"But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, 'God, have mercy on me, a sinner.'
He keeps raising the bar, to get that response, even with the Pharisees.
The point is that reformed theology understands justification to be a phased project, a time bound, interactive checklist, requiring completion. like my cockpit checklist: Oil pressure > Check. Temp > Check.
Phase 1: hear Gospel > pledge of loyalty > come to the feast > Check
Phase 2: hear God's voice > show loyalty > accept testing > Check
Phase 3: hear God's voice > persevere in loyalty > put on wedding garments > accept the marks of Christ > Check
So justification is a state, a condition, speaking of facing requirements of compliance according to deeper understanding of the requirements, the same requirements Israel and Christ faced, in the wilderness. Paul was combating Judaizers, James fighting against protoGnostics, but their teachings were same. Paul was teaching loyalty without law keeping and James was teaching loyalty with demonstrations of that loyalty. So a person is saved by loyalty alone, against loyalty plus law keeping, as some rebellious ex-Pharisees insisted on. Do you understand that a statement, "he teaches a requirement for law keeping" is tantamount to saying that a person who teaches this has yet to reach realization of inadequacy?
Originally Posted by footwasher
I say that they teach the same doctrine.
Then why won't you simply answer his questions with a simple 'yes' or 'no'?
Originally Posted by footwasher
I don't know how you equate your view to be that of a loyal Christian.
Actually, you don't seem to even know what my view is, as attested once again above. And, even 'though you do not know my view or cannot keep yourself from misrepresenting it, if you do know it, you once again sink to ad hominem statements about whether or not I'm a loyal Christian. Are you proud of your behavior? Or does it not matter to you because you think the moral law has been nullified?
Originally Posted by footwasher
Abraham didn't understand God, but he was loyal and jumped when God asked him to. You may not understand that God is the same yesterday today and tomorrow, but what is required from you is loyalty. Understanding comes later.
I will continue to bless you and pray that you might come to understand and not misrepresent.Last edited by footwasher; 04-25-2014, 01:29 AM.
Comment
-
Perhaps this thread should die in the name of love and peace(?).For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>
Comment
-
Originally posted by footwasher View PostUmm, the context proves exactly the point I'm making. As long as you are loyal to God you are "saved".
The unmerciful servant broke faith with the merciful king, was disloyal.
The servant wasn't adulterous, hadn't avoided visiting the poor, feeding the hungry. He just wasn't being loyal to his Master. He was being loyal to mammon.
Comment
-
Originally posted by hedrick View PostI'm not sure quite what point you're making here. Adultery and failure to help the poor and hungry are actions against our neighbor. So is the servant's fairly to forgive, and in fact throwing the person in prison for a minor debt. The fact that God had forgiven him first makes that action particularly bad. But it still shares with the others a failure to love the neighbor. I also believe adultery and failure to help the poor are also disloyal, since they are violations of Jesus' commands. So it seems to me that all of the things listed are offenses both against our neighbor and Jesus.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment