The new rules for the Exclusively Christian forum

[Danoh]

I mostly shared it to show the Jewishness of Peter and Paul's subsequent chastising.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

That is one of "the things that differ" that was not wrong but in Peter's failure in it.

Paul's point about Peter's living as do the Gentiles had not been the actual diet issue.

Rather, that Peter's et al's "dissimulation" had reversed "the truth of the gospel" - that The Law had concluded "ALL under sin" and how that therefore "ALL" can only be "justified through the faith" (finished work) of Christ."

All - "even we Jews also" Paul had basically reminded them all that day - both Jews and Gentiles.

But Jews, they had rightly remained.

Peter et al, were of "the Israel of God" Paul later also wishes peace upon and on the justification basis.

Paul and his converts were not.

They...were of God's New Creature: the Body of Christ.

But perhaps we should take any further exploration of this issue over to the ECT forum, as this is not the place for a drawn out back and forth on this.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12.

[shopkinslpskids]

That is one of "the things that differ" that was not wrong but in Peter's failure in it.

Paul's point about Peter's living as do the Gentiles had not been the actual diet issue.

Rather, that Peter's et al's "dissimulation" had reversed "the truth of the gospel" - that The Law had concluded "ALL under sin" and how that therefore "ALL" can only be "justified through the faith" (finished work) of Christ."

All - "even we Jews also" Paul had basically reminded them all that day - both Jews and Gentiles.

But Jews, they had rightly remained.

Peter et al, were of "the Israel of God" Paul later also wishes peace upon and on the justification basis.

Paul and his converts were not.

They...were of God's New Creature: the Body of Christ.

But perhaps we should take any further exploration of this issue over to the ECT forum, as this is not the place for a drawn out back and forth on this.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12.

I'm new so I'm confused as to why we can't just discuss here? Also, I tend to lean ecumenical...

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Tambora]

I'm new so I'm confused as to why we can't just discuss here?

With Danoh, your studying has got to be done his way or you can hit the highway.

You are doing fine.
Don't let his lecturing distract you.

[shopkinslpskids]

With Danoh, your studying has got to be done his way or you can hit the highway.

You are doing fine.
Don't let his lecturing distract you.

I honestly don't understand half the things people say on here...lol

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Danoh]

I honestly don't understand half the things people say on here...lol

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Look for what principle or rule of thumb any passage appears to be following or basing what it is talking about on.

Sort of like the difference between merely watching an object fall; and looking at it's fall through what governing principle(s) it's fall might be following (law of gravity; and of force equals mass times acceleration, etc.)

Doing so will allow you to see much more than you would absent of said principles.

Note this principle about principles that things follow or are governed by, mentioned in a passage like the following...

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead..." -Rom. 1:20

One aspect of that one right there is the very basis of what we now know as Creation Science.

Scripture is chockful of such guiding principles.

They allow the Bible student to see far much more, and with a deeper understanding of one thing or another, than studying one would be able to absent of their aid.

Give yourself time, you'll find them as you go along, via that question I suggested.

And follow the three principles obvious in Acts 17:11,12 - no matter who might be the individual asserting what; focus on what principles they might be looking at things from, and or following, and you'll benefit from their points even should you disagree with their points, and so on.

After a while, such governing principles become easily obvious.

You'll read a post by someone, or something in a book, or read passages in Scripture, and right off begin to see their governing principles as clearly as the words you are reading.

You'll also find yourself less and less at the the milk of "well, maybe this means" such and so, "or perhaps..." this, that, the other.

Because when you even start to go there, various things that differ kinds of principles you'll have picked up through the Scripture, will kick in, simply "by reason of use" Heb. 5:14, and you'll find yourself better able to navigate said passages' waters.

At which point, most will not know where you are coming from, when you assert a point, or point out one thing or another - wich is what the following passage is referring to, lol

1 Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12

[Sonnet]

I realize this is not going to make everyone happy but I have discussed this issue with the other TOL owners and here is the decision we have made regarding the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum.

Originally when we decided to create this forum we wanted a place to discuss AND debate Christian theology without unbelievers distracting the debate with mindless comments like... "so... how did all the animals fit on the ark?" or... "the Bible has been translated so many times.... bla bla bla".


The "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum was never intended to be a place where there would be no debate..... and excluding those who think they are Christian based on our standard of Christianity excludes too many possible participants to promote healthy debate.

Therefore...
The new standard for the "Exclusively Christian Theology" is to allow anyone to post here who considers themselves to be Christian and considers the Bible to be inspired by God.

Yes that creates a much bigger tent, but that's a good thing for healthy debate!

So... if you consider yourself a Christian and you consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God then you are welcome to post in the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum.

Furthermore...
We are also willing to let any other unbeliever or follower of another religion post here if they are honestly seeking an answer to a question or have constructive input to the discussion. In other words... if an atheist has a question about God and he asks it in an honest, upfront way we will gladly deal with that question without booting him out of the forum.

Said in short...
This particular forum will be dedicated to debating biblical issues without debating the legitimacy of the Bible itself.

There are plenty of other forums here at TOL for debating the legitimacy of the Bible.

And unlike morality the above rules and guidelines are very SUBJECTIVE so we ask that you honor our moderators requests if your input if out of line for this particular forum.

If you have any questions regarding these new guidelines please ask them on this thread.

Do you have a statement of faith that formally defines a Christian?

Do you have a definition of the Gospel?

[Danoh]

Rom. 5:6-8.

[Bladerunner]

I will try to keep it inside the fence posts.

Blade

[BobRyan]

Sounds good to me

[Child of God]

I realize this is not going to make everyone happy but I have discussed this issue with the other TOL owners and here is the decision we have made regarding the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum.

Originally when we decided to create this forum we wanted a place to discuss AND debate Christian theology without unbelievers distracting the debate with mindless comments like... "so... how did all the animals fit on the ark?" or... "the Bible has been translated so many times.... bla bla bla".


The "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum was never intended to be a place where there would be no debate..... and excluding those who think they are Christian based on our standard of Christianity excludes too many possible participants to promote healthy debate.

Therefore...
The new standard for the "Exclusively Christian Theology" is to allow anyone to post here who considers themselves to be Christian and considers the Bible to be inspired by God.

Yes that creates a much bigger tent, but that's a good thing for healthy debate!

So... if you consider yourself a Christian and you consider the Bible to be the inspired word of God then you are welcome to post in the "Exclusively Christian Theology" forum.

Furthermore...
We are also willing to let any other unbeliever or follower of another religion post here if they are honestly seeking an answer to a question or have constructive input to the discussion. In other words... if an atheist has a question about God and he asks it in an honest, upfront way we will gladly deal with that question without booting him out of the forum.

Said in short...
This particular forum will be dedicated to debating biblical issues without debating the legitimacy of the Bible itself.

There are plenty of other forums here at TOL for debating the legitimacy of the Bible.

And unlike morality the above rules and guidelines are very SUBJECTIVE so we ask that you honor our moderators requests if your input if out of line for this particular forum.

If you have any questions regarding these new guidelines please ask them on this thread.

That is decent.

Can I be Christian and not follow Paul?

[Child of God]

Apparently the Apostles, and all the Jews and Gentiles they expressed the Faith to, did not follow Paul, but worshiped God.

Can I worship God if I do not worship Paul?

[Lon]

We are also willing to let any other unbeliever or follower of another religion post here if they are honestly seeking an answer to a question or have constructive input to the discussion. In other words... if an atheist has a question about God and he asks it in an honest, upfront way we will gladly deal with that question without booting him out of the forum.

Said in short...
This particular forum will be dedicated to debating biblical issues without debating the legitimacy of the Bible itself.

There are plenty of other forums here at TOL for debating the legitimacy of the Bible.

And unlike morality the above rules and guidelines are very SUBJECTIVE so we ask that you honor our moderators requests if your input if out of line for this particular forum.

If you have any questions regarding these new guidelines please ask them on this thread.

This one. If it continues with banter and vitriol isn't up to TOL standards for exclusively Christian debate and discussion. The Exclusive section is open for honest debate, not drive bys or trolling to get members to take bait for what isn't genuine. "Trinitarians are murderous? " Nobody will debate? Both are vitriolic. That he has to lie he is a Muslim to get discussion? While TOL is open to 'other' in this section, I'm not sure we are purposefully open to this kind of charade in guise of debate/discussion. There doesn't seem, to me, to be a reason for it to be placed in exclusive other than baiting 'exclusive' as a challenge. I don't believe exclusive is set up this way unless he can honestly listen to answers. He is here to challenge exclusive Christians, not 'be' one. THat isn't the goal of this section of the forum. -Lon

...you have the ENTIRE rest of TheologyOnline to post in.

Several years ago we created the Exclusively Christian Forum based on the requests of our overwhelmingly Christian membership. They wanted just one forum where they could discuss Christian topics without the typical distractions. I think that's fair.

I really couldn't care less that you don't like my rules. And if you reject my rules I will simply ban you from the forum. And sorry to say but that doesn't bother me in the least.

[Hilltrot]

What Lon has been trying to do here has precedence. It is not the first time people associated with forums and organizations have tried to shut down conversations questioning what is considered by some to be traditional doctrine.

Greg Boyd explained the reaction to his exploration of open theism.

"My first encounter with the “backlash” you mentioned took place in the mid-90’s when John Piper launched a public crusade to get me fired from Bethel University and to have my church kicked out of the Baptist General Conference on the grounds that I was a “heretic.” There were also attempts by some to force publishers to stop publishing my books and for Christians to boycott bookstores that sold them. Hundreds of pastors signed a petition to get me fired, with only one of them taking the time to ask me what I actually believed and why I believed it."

At this time, Greg Boyd had not even half-way developed his Open Theism beliefs and his first book on the subject was in the year 2000.

In 2003, the Evangelical Theological Society voted on ejecting Pinnock and Sanders. The majority voted to eject Sanders, however not enough to succeed. They tried to eject Greg Boyd but found that his membership lapsed. In 2000, the Southern Baptist Convention modified their faith and message to say "and His perfect knowledge extends to all things, past, present, and future, including the future decisions of His free creatures." People in these organizations are shutting down the conversation before they even begin.

Similar things have happened online. If you examine other forums, you will find that most of them either outright eject open theists or they force them into the section for atheists. This is exactly what Lon is trying to have done to me on this forum. However, from what I understand, Knight created this forum because there was not a place to truly discuss theology elsewhere.

The problem is that when one allows for a number of different people, conversations about Biblical matters continually get interrupted, by those like atheists primarily but also Muslims and others who do not believe the Bible is inspired scripture. Others disbelieve in whole books or sections of the Bible. This becomes problematic if one refers to James and the opposing side suddenly declares that the book of James isn't inspired.

As a result, many discussions devolved into arguments over the inspiration of scripture or the existence of God or one had to continually skip over people who would spam such into a thread. From what I can understand, this is why the Exclusively Christian Forum was created. Knight wanted only those who considered themselves Christian and considered the Bible to be the inspired word of God to have a place to post. He admitted that this would create a bigger tent than many - like Lon - would want. But as he said, "That is a good thing for a healthy debate".

One last thing - Lon has libeled me by implying that I don't consider the Bible to be inspired by God. I have not posted anything of the sort nor do I believe anything of the sort.