Skip to main content

Heb 6:4-6

For it is impossible in the case of those who have once been enlightened and tasted
the good work of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallin away,
to bring them to repentance again, since they are recrucifying the son of God for
themselves and holding him up to contempt.

Heb 10:26-27

If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer
remains sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming that
is going to consume the adversaries.

1Cor 10:9-12

Let us not test Christ as some of them did, and suffer death by serpents. Do not
grumble as some of them did and suffered death by the destroyer. These things happened
to them as an example, and they have been written down as a warning to us, upon whom the
end of the ages has come. Therefore whoever thinks he is standing secure should
take care not to fall.

Jas 2:14

What good is it, my brothers, if someone has faith but does not have have works?
Can that faith save him? If a brother or a sister has nothing to wear and has no
food for the day, and one of you say to them , Go in peace, keep warm and eat well,
but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith
of itself, if it does not have works, IS DEAD.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
Heb 6:4-6

For it is impossible in the case of those who have once been enlightened and tasted
the good work of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallin away,
to bring them to repentance again, since they are recrucifying the son of God for
themselves and holding him up to contempt.

Heb 10:26-27

If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer
remains sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming that
is going to consume the adversaries.

1Cor 10:9-12

Let us not test Christ as some of them did, and suffer death by serpents. Do not
grumble as some of them did and suffered death by the destroyer. These things happened
to them as an example, and they have been written down as a warning to us, upon whom the
end of the ages has come. Therefore whoever thinks he is standing secure should
take care not to fall.

Jas 2:14

What good is it, my brothers, if someone has faith but does not have have works?
Can that faith save him? If a brother or a sister has nothing to wear and has no
food for the day, and one of you say to them , Go in peace, keep warm and eat well,
but you do not give them the necessities of the body, what good is it? So also faith
of itself, if it does not have works, IS DEAD.


K,

Faith plus works are needed for salvation, and never take salvation for granted.
These are good things to think about.
Hi to my Roman Catholic Lady Friends,

Those are interesting Scripture passages. However, the Liberal Theology interpretation you seem to be offering doesn't ring true when one stands these passages alongside other Scripture passages.

Would any of you care to expand upon the Biblical meaning of these passages?

Just as a house cannot be built of one or two bricks -- a theology cannot be built upon one or two Scripture passages.

To build a solid home, one needs all the construction materials. And, to build a solid theology -- one MUST base it upon the complete Bible, the full Word of God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Roman Catholic Lady Friends,

Those are interesting Scripture passages. However, the Liberal Theology interpretation you seem to be offering doesn't ring true when one stands these passages alongside other Scripture passages.

Would any of you care to expand upon the Biblical meaning of these passages?

Just as a house cannot be built of one or two bricks -- a theology cannot be built upon one or two Scripture passages.

To build a solid home, one needs all the construction materials. And, to build a solid theology -- one MUST base it upon the complete Bible, the full Word of God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


bill,

My bible has 46 books in the OT and 27 in the NT. That would be the complete bible.

Anyone can understand what is being said if you read them. 1st. You can lose your salvation if
you don't watch your step. 2nd. Faith without good works is not what God wants.

This is what's clearly meant. If you read them it's easly to see and understand.
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Roman Catholic Lady Friends,

Those are interesting Scripture passages. However, the Liberal Theology interpretation you seem to be offering doesn't ring true when one stands these passages alongside other Scripture passages.

Would any of you care to expand upon the Biblical meaning of these passages?

Just as a house cannot be built of one or two bricks -- a theology cannot be built upon one or two Scripture passages.

To build a solid home, one needs all the construction materials. And, to build a solid theology -- one MUST base it upon the complete Bible, the full Word of God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill


BILL,

Would you care to expand on what doesn't ring true? The liberal interpretation is very easily
to follow.
Last edited by Kraven
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Roman Catholic Lady Friends,

Those are interesting Scripture passages. However, the Liberal Theology interpretation you seem to be offering doesn't ring true when one stands these passages alongside other Scripture passages.

Would any of you care to expand upon the Biblical meaning of these passages?

Just as a house cannot be built of one or two bricks -- a theology cannot be built upon one or two Scripture passages.

To build a solid home, one needs all the construction materials. And, to build a solid theology -- one MUST base it upon the complete Bible, the full Word of God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

BILL, Wuold care to expand on what doesn't ring true? The liberal interpretation is very easily to follow.

Hi Kraven,

If you CANNOT explain the Scripture passages which YOU introduced as your proof of no eternal security -- then, I will be happy to help you. Just let me know if you cannot explain the passages.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi to my Roman Catholic Lady Friends,

Those are interesting Scripture passages. However, the Liberal Theology interpretation you seem to be offering doesn't ring true when one stands these passages alongside other Scripture passages.

Would any of you care to expand upon the Biblical meaning of these passages?

Just as a house cannot be built of one or two bricks -- a theology cannot be built upon one or two Scripture passages.

To build a solid home, one needs all the construction materials. And, to build a solid theology -- one MUST base it upon the complete Bible, the full Word of God.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

BILL, Wuold care to expand on what doesn't ring true? The liberal interpretation is very easily to follow.

Hi Kraven,

If you CANNOT explain the Scripture passages which YOU introduced as your proof of no eternal security -- then, I will be happy to help you. Just let me know if you cannot explain the passages.

Bill



I explained them, They mean just what they say. If you don't like their meanings, change their wording.

Their self explanatory. Tell James, Hebrews and Corinthians they don't know what their talking about.

I don't expect you to believe the bible, but I do expect you to change the meaning to suit yourself.

Once saved always saved was blown out of the water 2000 yrs. ago by Jesus.

...........
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
I explained them, They mean just what they say. If you don't like their meanings, change their wording.

Their self explanatory. Tell James, Hebrews and Corinthians they don't know what their talking about.

I don't expect you to believe the bible, but I do expect you to change the meaning to suit yourself.

Once saved always saved was blown out of the water 2000 yrs. ago by Jesus.

Hi Kraven,

WRONG, my Friend! You explained nothing!

Quoting Scripture passages -- and explaining those same passages are two different animals.

Can you explain them - or can you only type the words? There is an eternal diffence.

By the way, Jesus told us, in John 6:47, "He who believes HAS eternal life." Sure sounds like eternal security to me. And, it comes straight from Jesus Christ -- unless you do not believe the Bible.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SOLA-FEDE_Outline
quote:
1Cor 10:9-12

Let us not test Christ as some of them did, and suffer death by serpents. Do not
grumble as some of them did and suffered death by the destroyer. These things happened
to them as an example, and they have been written down as a warning to us, upon whom the
end of the ages has come. Therefore whoever thinks he is standing secure should
take care not to fall.


Do the snake handling churches know of this?


nsns
quote:
WRONG, my Friend! You explained nothing


Ah, some things, like the English language, as cited in this Scripture, need no interpretation. They are just self-evident.

Now. You have seen cited Scripture (above) that clearly states that salvation can be lost- what more needs be said?
The most "liberal" theology, as well as the doctrine that actually can do harm and jeopardize salvation of others is the "once saved always saved" nonsense, that can lead people into a false sense of security.
In fact, if I threw away the Scriptures that I **KNOW*** teach us that salvation can be lost, and followed your OSAS doctrine, I would be at risk myself.
Whereas if you erred on the side of caution, and didn't think your a "shoo-in" for Heaven, you would lose nothing, and perhaps gain much.

Bill, you never address the Scripture (and there are many) that teach us and WARN us about taking our Salvation for granted. Beter is still waiting for an answer, as am I.
You just cant justify the reckless teachings you put up here.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to what they had done.
[/QUOTE]
Hi Kraven,

If you CANNOT explain the Scripture passages which YOU introduced as your proof of no eternal security -- then, I will be happy to help you. Just let me know if you cannot explain the passages.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill[/QUOTE] Kraven Bill has this thing all figured out, If I am not wrong bill said that he has a PHD now you know that that makes Bill smarter than the rest of us , and you are just supposed to say, "yes mister Bill" and let it go.
I know that he means well, but he is pushing a false Doctrine and he really wants to take all of you with him.
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, the book of life. And the dead were judged according to their works, as recorded in the books. And the sea gave up the dead that were in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and all were judged according to what they had done.

Hi David,

Revelation 20:11-15 is referring to the Great White Throne Judgment of non-believers. These people have forfeited their eternal salvation when they died in non-belief.

The believer's judgment, which we most often call the Bema Seat Judgment (2 Corinthians 5:10, 1 Corinthians 3:11-15, 1 Peter 5:4), happens back in Revelation 4-5 when the church is Raptured and taken into heaven. During that seven years in heaven -- two major things happen: The believer's judgment -- and the Wedding Feast of the Lamb (Revelation 19:7-9)

In both judgments -- believer's judgment of rewards and the non-believer's Great White Throne Judgement -- there is basically one question, one work, which will be examined: What did you do with Jesus Christ? If you believed and followed Him, you have eternal life in the presence of God. If you died denying Him, you have chosen to spend eternity in the presence of Satan in hell. Simple as that.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SAID-IT-1c
quote:
Originally posted by prince albert:
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Kraven,

If you CANNOT explain the Scripture passages which YOU introduced as your proof of no eternal security -- then, I will be happy to help you. Just let me know if you cannot explain the passages.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day, Bill

Kraven Bill has this thing all figured out, If I am not wrong bill said that he has a PHD now you know that that makes Bill smarter than the rest of us , and you are just supposed to say, "yes mister Bill" and let it go.
I know that he means well, but he is pushing a false Doctrine and he really wants to take all of you with him.

Hi Albert,

I am sad that another Christian believer will make false statements against a fellow believer. No where have I discussed my education; no where have I said I am smarter than anyone else.

What I will do is correctly, to the best of my ability, quote Scripture to support my beliefs. If you have a problem with that -- take it up with the Author. It is His book.

You say I am pushing a false doctrine. Please explain.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 0_-_CROSS-BIBLE_SAID-IT-1c
Bill,
I'm not saying you have to believe what I believe, I'm just sharing WHY I believe in faith with works. It is very evident to me that a christian must do God's will/work. Because God will ask us, When I was hungry, when did you feed me, when I was naked, when did you cloth me.
If someone is saved then they have a responsibility to God to put that faith in action in the service for others. A believer can't say "I'm saved" and be lazy, and indifferent to the needs of others, He/She may lose their soul. That's why we don't call it a "free ticket"
Catholics don't EARN their way to heaven, we simply understand our christian responsibility toward our neighbor.
We must love our neighbor as our selves. Recognizing the need to do charity for our neighbor is an essential part of salvation. A christian can't say " I'm saved" and do NO charity.


Faith and Works


"‘Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven’" (Matt. 7:21).

"‘Why do you call me "Lord, Lord," and not do what I tell you?’" (Luke 6:46).

"For he will render every man according to his works . . ." (Rom. 2:6-8).

"For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified" (Rom. 2:13).

"For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgments . . . (Heb. 10:26-27).

"What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?" (Jas. 2:14).

"So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead" (Jas. 2:17).

"But some one will say, ‘You have faith and I have works.’ Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. . . .Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren? (Jas. 2:18-20).

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (Jas. 2:24).
quote:
Originally posted by The Raven:
Easy to explain-Since salvation is a gift, would Jesus take away a gift he gave us? I think not!



Ravin,

Salvation is not gift as you think. How is salvation given? Do you earn it or is it a
birthday gift when you're born. Jesus sends no one to hell, you send yourself.

Jesus takes back no gift from us. We give them back. Our personal wants are more important
than heaven. Someone will say, so & so fired me. I bet he got himself fired.

Jesus died for us to give everyone a right to heaven, and not a free ticket to heaven.

When someone throws the so called gift back in Jesus' face, don't tell me they were never
saved in the first place. Tell me the two year isn't saved, and he can ride that destiny
to the grave.
quote:
O No!
Everybody Knows My Name
Posted 01 October 2010 06:19 PM Hide
But Bill, that is exactly what you do when you keep posting "whosoever believeth in me HAS eternal life". YOU are not taking these other verses into account.
Posts: 651 | Registered: 19 January 2010



I think Bill has me on ignore. He keeps saying you have to take the WHOLE Bible into account, and yet he discards these other verses in favor of THIS one that he keeps repeating. I'd like, rather than him repeating that one verse, to hear what he believes these other verses quoted in this thread mean, and why he believes they don't count.
quote:
Originally posted by O No!:
quote:
O No!
Everybody Knows My Name
Posted 01 October 2010 06:19 PM Hide
But Bill, that is exactly what you do when you keep posting "whosoever believeth in me HAS eternal life". YOU are not taking these other verses into account.
Posts: 651 | Registered: 19 January 2010



I think Bill has me on ignore. He keeps saying you have to take the WHOLE Bible into account, and yet he discards these other verses in favor of THIS one that he keeps repeating. I'd like, rather than him repeating that one verse, to hear what he believes these other verses quoted in this thread mean, and why he believes they don't count.


O No,

He doesn't want you to know he's wrong. He
thinks you can't see that.
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
So you are saying that we only follow Paul's words on salvation and throw out the rest of the Bible?

That does not follow the fundy guide book of all of the Bible is true and inerrant and never contradicts itself.


Hi b50m,

No, all scripture is for us, but not all scripture to us.

God has administered his dealings with humankind in a series of "dispensations," each
with various responsibilities on the part of the human. During this dispensation the only requirement for eternal salvation is to believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for forgiveness of sin.

In former dispensations, the Mosaic dispensation for example, one had to believe and also perform works of law. But now, the righteousness of God has been revealed "without law." Rom. 3: 21 ff.
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
So you are saying that we only follow Paul's words on salvation and throw out the rest of the Bible?

That does not follow the fundy guide book of all of the Bible is true and inerrant and never contradicts itself.


Hi b50m,

No, all scripture is for us, but not all scripture to us.

God has administered his dealings with humankind in a series of "dispensations," each
with various responsibilities on the part of the human. During this dispensation the only requirement for eternal salvation is to believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for forgiveness of sin.

In former dispensations, the Mosaic dispensation for example, one had to believe and also perform works of law. But now, the righteousness of God has been revealed "without law." Rom. 3: 21 ff.


midacts........OK. another free ticket deal. we can still disregard 90% of the bible, can't we?
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.



Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
So you are saying that we only follow Paul's words on salvation and throw out the rest of the Bible?

That does not follow the fundy guide book of all of the Bible is true and inerrant and never contradicts itself.


Hi b50m,

No, all scripture is for us, but not all scripture to us.

God has administered his dealings with humankind in a series of "dispensations," each
with various responsibilities on the part of the human. During this dispensation the only requirement for eternal salvation is to believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ for forgiveness of sin.

In former dispensations, the Mosaic dispensation for example, one had to believe and also perform works of law. But now, the righteousness of God has been revealed "without law." Rom. 3: 21 ff.


midacts........OK. another free ticket deal. we can still disregard 90% of the bible, can't we?


No, Kraven, all scripture is inspired by God. Many truths of the bible are "trans-dispensational," for example, loving God and one's neighbor. However, one can disregard the method of salvation that obtained under the Mosaic dispensation, like, one doesn't have to sacrifice a lamb in church every Sunday.
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.



Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.


I tend to agree with a lot of that, House of David. However, I would put the good works you mentioned under the doctrine of sanctification, not justification.
Kraven,
I wanted to share these points with you also..
do you agree with St. Paul's comments as stated below?

quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.


Midacts,

Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.
Last edited by House of David
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
Kraven,
I wanted to share these points with you also..
do you agree with St. Paul's comments as stated below?

quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.


Midacts,

Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.


HoD,

Yes I agree, It's what I've been saying. Have you ever heard of new math? Well welcome to new
bible. No midacts, bg isn't correct. If the both of you want to read that into it, go ahead.
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
Kraven,
I wanted to share these points with you also..
do you agree with St. Paul's comments as stated below?

quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.


Midacts,

Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.


HoD,

Yes I agree, It's what I've been saying. Have you ever heard of new math? Well welcome to new
bible. No midacts, bg isn't correct. If the both of you want to read that into it, go ahead.


Kraven and House of David,

How does one know when they've done enough law-keeping to be justified? Is that knowledge possible?
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
Kraven,
I wanted to share these points with you also..
do you agree with St. Paul's comments as stated below?

quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.


Midacts,

Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.


HoD,

Yes I agree, It's what I've been saying. Have you ever heard of new math? Well welcome to new
bible. No midacts, bg isn't correct. If the both of you want to read that into it, go ahead.


Kraven and House of David,

How does one know when they've done enough law-keeping to be justified? Is that knowledge possible?


One should never worry about when they've done enough, because it's not about doing enough or "whatever amount". It about living the parable of the good samaritan everyday.
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
quote:
Originally posted by Kraven:
quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
Kraven,
I wanted to share these points with you also..
do you agree with St. Paul's comments as stated below?

quote:
Originally posted by House of David:
quote:
Originally posted by midacts:
There is a lot of mixing of the gospel of the kingdom with the gospel of grace in this thread. That's why to some it seems one can lose his or her salvation.

Bill is correct because he is advocating Paul's gospel of grace, the gospel that is relevant to this dispensation of grace.

It is careless hermeneutic to read Paul's gospel back into the synoptics and into parts of the Jewish epistles.


Midacts,

Paul speaks about Christians fulfilling the law by following the command to "love your neighbor as yourself" (Gal. 5:14). He then explains that we must show the "fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:16–26) and bear one another’s burdens (Gal. 6:1ff) as a way of fulfilling the "law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2). All Paul’s teaching comes down to this: Our own works can never justify us, but works that grow out of faith in Christ are part of our justification. That’s why Paul says in Philippians 2:12 you must "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And that squares with James’s teaching that works that grow from faith justify.


HoD,

Yes I agree, It's what I've been saying. Have you ever heard of new math? Well welcome to new
bible. No midacts, bg isn't correct. If the both of you want to read that into it, go ahead.


Kraven and House of David,

How does one know when they've done enough law-keeping to be justified? Is that knowledge possible?


One should never worry about when they've done enough, because it's not about doing enough or "whatever amount". It about living the parable of the good samaritan everyday.


House of David,

But, it is the nature of law that it has to be performed explicitly. Even failing on one point renders one guilty.
quote:
Ah, some things, like the English language, as cited in this Scripture, need no interpretation. They are just self-evident.

My dear Veep,

This brings up a topic mentioned in this forum by our friend midacts, hermeneutics.

Let's say I grant your point that some Scripture is self-evident. Then why isn't it all self-evident?

You said "some" Scripture. Who decides what is literally self-evident, and what is allegory?

I asked Gray this once, long ago, before I tired of his insanity, and if I may paraphrase, he said that what he said is literal is literal and what he said is allegory is allegory, and subject to hermeneutics.

It's a rare agreement between us.

The Bible is a multi-hundred page Rorschach test. Vague images are presented to the reader, and the reader responds with whatever comes to mind. There are no right or wrong answers, it's entirely subjective. It's designed to appeal to your experiences and emotions.

"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the Earth". What would the meek do with the Earth? They'd have no idea. Besides, Jesus was through with the Earth, he preached End Times a'comin rat now. Double dammmed are the meek.

Legal hermeneutics is what keeps appellate courts in business. Poetic hermeneutics is what keeps English majors busy at their profit-less journals. Religious hermeneutics can lead to war, and often do.

Sure of salvation? What salvation? Wake up! It's all a response to nonsense. You were not born sinful, you need no salvation. There is no hell, no god, no resurrection, no Eucharist can help you.

Be good for goodness' sake and make the world a good place to live for all of life. Leave it to a Christmas pop song to distill the vacuousness of Christian morality.

If much or all of the bible is subject to hermeneutics (interpretation) then y'all are lost, sunk, hopeless. The body of humanity will NEVER agree to interpretations of such vapid and vague pronouncements.

My side unanimously agrees on this: Morality and philosophy are humanist endeavors.

When we agree to discuss morality and philosophy on human terms, we can come to certain basic agreements (murder is wrong) and leave others for further discussion (legalize drugs).

There is no objective morality. The concept is foolish and juvenile. Those who want it want a parent to dictate to them, rather than use their minds to come to terms with the problem.

Have I picked on you enough, yet, Veep? These questions are for YOU!

Smiler Jk, they're open for anyone.

Best,

nsns
well, NSNS,
You have given me a lot to think about.
The short version is this:
If all Scripture is subject to interpretation, you are completely right- the human "body" as a whole will never agree on interpretation.
THAT is precisely why we take Scripture along with Oral, Sacred Tradition- Apostolic teaching, and the Magesterium of the Church so that we can KNOW what the correct interpretation is.
God had to know that "we" would mess up interpretation, and left us the Succession of the Apostles to help along with that.
I don't feel like you're picking on me, don't worry. Wink
I know you think it's all a hoax, and I KNOW that you respect why I believe. So I am happy to answer your questions as best I can.
Now, can the Eucharist save me? Yes. It fills me spiritually, and allows me to internalize Christ and have Him be part of me.
So I believe it does make me a better person.
Be good for goodness sake.
Yes, of course. I don't believe for a minute that you "HAVE" to be a Christian to be a good person. In fact, many of my favorite people are not Christians. Christianity is not a prerequisite I have for friendship. Nor do I believe that that Christianity brings forth morality that would be otherwise absent.
Some peeps are just good, whether they are Christian or not. And we all know that many wear the "Christian" hat, but are not walking the walk.
/shrug.
we'll have to solve the world's problems another day, my friend....right now I'm too distracted watching Bama clobber Florida.
ROOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLL Tide.
Cheers!
quote:
THAT is precisely why we take Scripture along with Oral, Sacred Tradition- Apostolic teaching, and the Magesterium of the Church so that we can KNOW what the correct interpretation is.


My dear,

This is precisely the problem. Oral tradition, even written tradition, is entirely man-made, even more so than religion as a whole.

I consider traditions as bad things. We do them because we have always done them. This is the worst reason to do anything.

One of the traditions of the Catholic church is child abuse. Alter boys of the eleventh century are on record as complaining about priestly abuse, in the recognizable fashion. Because it's been going on for at least 1000 years is no reason to perpetuate an evil on the basis of tradition.

The Bishop of Usher dated Creation roughly 6000 years ago. It's become a tradition among some. It's a bad tradition, as are most.

Traditions are those things that perpetuate culture, but must not be used to impede progress. It's a delicate line, I admit, but one that must not be dismissed because "tradition" has something sacred about it. It does not. Regard progress on equal footing with tradition, and progress will usually prevail.


nsns

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×