A Peculiar Kind of Gospel

Status
Not open for further replies.

OMEGA

New member
SOZO, Don't you know anything about the Bible.

DOCTRINE

1. A principle taught or advanced for belief,
as by a religious or philosophical group:

a. teaching
b. dogma
c. tenet

----------------------------

Don't the Numbskulls in this Backward Idiotic World

BELIEVE in Christmas as Christs Birthday

along with the Belief that Santa Claus exists and

goes down People's Fireplaces [into a Fire]
 
Last edited:

servent101

New member
Omega
Don't the Numbskulls in this Backward Idiotic World

BELIEVE in Christmas as Christs Birthday

along with the Belief that Santa Claus exists and

goes down People's Fireplaces [into a Fire]

Most people - adults that is loose their belief in Santa Claus - but many people, even as adults believe that there was a person who's birthday we celebrate at Christmass - though the exact date of Jesus's birthday may be in question - most people just accept that the date is December 25 - the Ukarians celebrate Christmass after boxing day - most likely cause they can get their pressents on sale then. HO HO HO...

Anyways even though you started your post with an attemtp at logic
DOCTRINE

1. A principle taught or advanced for belief,
as by a religious or philosophical group:

a. teaching
b. dogma
c. tenet

most people who are not as you put it
Numbskulls
know that the dictionary has been changed quite a little bit in it's support of the idiocity of beliefs in dieties.

and most people who are trying to improve the world look for the good in the things around them and look for things to say positive things about. So since it is Christmas - could we try to forget for a time that this world is as you phrase it
Backward Idiotic World
- afterall (again) it is Christimas ya know.

With Christ's Love

Servent101
 

OMEGA

New member
Ukarians

Ukarians

servent101 said


" the Ukarians celebrate ."
---------------------------------------------

I think that the Ukrainians would be offended if you Celebrated

their Independence day on the Wrong Date.

Therefore, Jesus would be offended if you Celebrated his Birthday

on the Wrong Date. Most Theologians say it was Sept 28 during
the Feast of Tabernacles.

----------------------------------------------------------
Ukrainian independence is proclaimed.

Elections of Parliament (Verkhovna Rada)

and the President Leonid Kravchuk. Jan.22,1991.
 
Last edited:

Crow

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

How do you describe Jesus' clarification of the law being more than physical acts of adultery and murder (lust and hate)? It is not my intent to make a big doctrine of 'spirit of the law'. It is just a general phrase contrasting the true intent of the law with a legalistic interpretation (Jews added hundreds of little laws to the original laws of God...they could not even brush their teeth on the Sabbath...Jesus showed them the 'spirit'/intent of the law in contrast to their wooden legalism/literalism).

I believe that Christ's intent was to show people how hopelessly impossible that it was for them to keep the Law perfectly and be righteous of their own works.

The Law did indeed have an intent. It was to show us that we could never earn salvation, that we cannot be saved outside of the righteousness that comes from God.

The Jews, instead of realizing that they weren't able to keep the Law instead became zealous for the Law. They indeed missed the lesson that the Law was to teach--that they could not save themselves.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Crow

I believe that Christ's intent was to show people how hopelessly impossible that it was for them to keep the Law perfectly and be righteous of their own works.

The Law did indeed have an intent. It was to show us that we could never earn salvation, that we cannot be saved outside of the righteousness that comes from God.

The Jews, instead of realizing that they weren't able to keep the Law instead became zealous for the Law. They indeed missed the lesson that the Law was to teach--that they could not save themselves.

Correct. The Law condemns us as lawbreakers. We are not saved by keeping the Law. It convicts us of sin and reveals God's holy nature.

Is there not another aspect where the law does give us principles for relationships with God and man (love God supremely and man equal to ourselves= Jesus' summary). He fulfilled the Law, but He did not say it was evil or not from God. Like the beatitudes, it gives us principles for right living and society (it is good and right to not murder and commit adultery and steal). Our legal system is based on the Judeo-Christian ethic/laws.

OT dietary and ceremonial laws separated God's people from the pagans.

So, while the primary purpose of the Law was as you say, I do not think it becomes wrong for a believer or society to base its values on God's unchanging moral law. We certainly need His power to live up to the law. Unbelievers or believers may commit adultery, but only believers with the Spirit can be free of lust and hate.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

... and reveals God's holy nature.
Wrong!!

Who are God's Father & Mother?

Whom does God have as God that He has no other god's before Him?

Whom does God refrain from committing adultery with?

The Law has nothing to do with God. The Law is created by God to reveal sin in man. God's character is not revealed by the Law.
 

servent101

New member
Omega
I think that the Ukrainians would be offended if you Celebrated

their Independence day on the Wrong Date.

Therefore, Jesus would be offended if you Celebrated his Birthday

on the Wrong Date. Most Theologians say it was Sept 28 during
the Feast of Tabernacles.

I do not think Jesus is like that - offended too easily, I think Jesus is offended when we ignore posts like these (no one responded to my latest thread)
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=640632#post640632
Seems to me that people in general still use the carrot or the stick - and the cheapest is the stick... take for example poor people - but it is hard to look at poor people to deduce the effects of poverty - there is no such thing as a poverty related death in North America - the experts simply do not discuss the lack of money in relation to death... simply not done, there are no statistics on this issue - but it is there.

As well there seems to be no instruction to the poor as to how to motivate themselves to a better income bracket - information is out there if one is already aware of what the terms etc. of wealth accusition are, but for the average smoe there is not chance that he or she will stumble on the concepts that will help them get out of poverty.

All in all - what is used is the stick, and when the poor people die, and when the stick handlers refuse to keep track of their 0% sucess rate in motivating people out of poverty by using the stick method - well what have we done?

Well we have for the most part lost our ability to look at what we are doing, and to determin what is the best way to acomplish a task - and to even articulate what we are trying to do. As a Nation when we take away one segment of the population's rights, we loose our intelligence to coherently analize what we are doing across the board.

So the solution - to poverty and poverty related death, sorrow, crime etc. is not the stick - it is not in sweeping the facts of how people die out of view - it is in keeping track of what works and what does not work in bringing a person to a income level where they are free of poverty related issues - death, hunger, disease, etc.

I do not have the answers, and as well I have no data on the situation, but I am aware that for the most part, poor people are simply bullied in the hope they will find a way to contribute to society in a meaningful way. Of course the process does not work - and the cause of death is never listed as poverty, stupid government policy, or capitalism.

With Christ's Love

Servent101
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Sozo

Wrong!!

Who are God's Father & Mother?

Whom does God have as God that He has no other god's before Him?

Whom does God refrain from committing adultery with?

The Law has nothing to do with God. The Law is created by God to reveal sin in man. God's character is not revealed by the Law.

Are the 10 commandments not consistent with the love, wisdom, and holiness of God? God did not arbitrarily create the law. He did reveal principles for the people of God to separate them from the heathen nations who sacrificed children, etc. They are from the heart, mind, and hand of God. They are consistent with His perfect values.

Anton Lavey's Satanic Bible has principles and laws that are consistent with his character and the ways of Satan (everything is opposite of Christianity).

God is love. This is an aspect of His nature and character. Love God and hate idols. This is consistent with His nature to seek the highest good of the most valuable, worthy being in the universe.

Do not steal. This is consistent with loving your neighbour. Our love for others is a limited reflection of God's love for us. He gives abundant life. Satan robs, kills, destroys.

God does not murder us for no reason. We are not to murder in cold blood. This law reflects the wisdom and holiness of God. If murder was allowed by God, then that would be a revelation of the kind of evil god He would be.

His Laws are not contrary to His wisdom and goodness. Just because God does not commit adultery (obviously) does not mean that His ways are fickle or contrary to who He essentially is. If adultery was holy and good, He would promote that.

Absolutes in right living are based on who God is. Without God, anything goes. There is no moral standard. Abortion would become a legitimate option. Situational ethics and relativism would be valid. The moral law giver and His righteous character is the basis for absolute truth. Most Christians do not dispute this. Let us not confuse these truths with areas of salvation/justification by faith.

If you do not live by God's standards subsequent to salvation, then what 'law' do you live by? Do you murder, steal, hate parents, commit adultery, covet, etc. and encourage other believers to do the same? No. This is all I am saying. Do not read more into it and make it sound like we are saved by keeping the law or that the law makes us holy rather than condemn us as sinners who fall short of the glory of God.

The Law had twin purposes. It shows us that we are sinners who need God's grace. It is also a guideline for right living under grace as believers (we should not shoot people for sport). An extreme view that is against the Law in every sense is known as the heresy of antinomianism. There are various shades of this heresy. Most orthodox believers, including Paul, refute this half truth. It came up under Luther's time. Being saved and living under grace does not mean that we live ungodly, lawless lives.

Do a study of antinomianism in a theological dictionary. Trace the history of this view through the centuries. It will clarify the OT and NT believer's relationship to the Law. This should satisfy you that your view and mine (not saved by keeping the law) is compatible with a proper understanding of the biblical view of justification, sanctification, discipleship, godly living in a godless society, etc.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

Are the 10 commandments not consistent with the love, wisdom, and holiness of God?
Yes they are, but that is not what you have been claiming about the Law.
Anton Lavey's Satanic Bible has principles and laws that are consistent with his character and the ways of Satan (everything is opposite of Christianity).
You're :kookoo: ! Anton Levay is not Satan's spokesman. Anton Levay is :kookoo: , and his "bible" is ficticious. Satan's minion's are those who use the Law for a purpose in which it is not intended. Satan teaches the same gospel you do! He teaches a gospel of righteousness through human effort. Satan believes that he is right because he does right. That is why he is full of pride.
Do a study of antinomianism in a theological dictionary.
Don't try and patronize me, you dumbass. I know exactly what antinomianism is, and just because some idiot theologian creates a strawman out of some bogus term, does not in any way validate it.

God, Jesus, Paul, and I are all against the Law for righteousness. Is God an antinomianist?
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Sozo

Yes they are, but that is not what you have been claiming about the Law. You're :kookoo: ! Anton Levay is not Satan's spokesman. Anton Levay is :kookoo: , and his "bible" is ficticious. Satan's minion's are those who use the Law for a purpose in which it is not intended. Satan teaches the same gospel you do! He teaches a gospel of righteousness through human effort. Satan believes that he is right because he does right. That is why he is full of pride. Don't try and patronize me, you dumbass. I know exactly what antinomianism is, and just because some idiot theologian creates a strawman out of some bogus term, does not in any way validate it.

God, Jesus, Paul, and I are all against the Law for righteousness. Is God an antinomianist?

I needed to refresh my memory on the historical variations of antinomianism. It seems to me that you also are not an expert on this heresy throughout the centuries. This is not patronizing, but an encouragement to understand the issues fully (which I do not).

I do not teach righteousness through human effort. I am clear that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ and His finished work. You agree that we should not murder and commit adultery. Why am I a dumbo for saying this and you are perfect for believing the same thing? I am not saying we are right because we do right (standing before God). I am saying that to walk in the light as He is in the light and to live as Daniels in the world in a way that glorifies God is to not live as reprobate lawbreakers who murder, kill, steal, hate parents, etc. You must agree with this, so quit reading more into my comments than they say.

Paul was not an idiot theologian. Maybe you need to understand what he was teaching about law and grace. Romans and the 10 commandments are not from different Gods and are not mutually exclusive. Christians should not murder and steal. Paul and Jesus reinforced these things. These truths for Christian living do not contradict the great doctrine of justification by faith that we BOTH defend. You can do it. Call me brother and we can start anew loving as we are loved. It could be your New Year's resolution :p
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by godrulz

I needed to refresh my memory on the historical variations of antinomianism. It seems to me that you also are not an expert on this heresy throughout the centuries. This is not patronizing, but an encouragement to understand the issues fully (which I do not).

I do not teach righteousness through human effort. I am clear that we are saved by grace through faith in Christ and His finished work. You agree that we should not murder and commit adultery. Why am I a dumbo for saying this and you are perfect for believing the same thing? I am not saying we are right because we do right (standing before God). I am saying that to walk in the light as He is in the light and to live as Daniels in the world in a way that glorifies God is to not live as reprobate lawbreakers who murder, kill, steal, hate parents, etc. You must agree with this, so quit reading more into my comments than they say.

Paul was not an idiot theologian. Maybe you need to understand what he was teaching about law and grace. Romans and the 10 commandments are not from different Gods and are not mutually exclusive. Christians should not murder and steal. Paul and Jesus reinforced these things. These truths for Christian living do not contradict the great doctrine of justification by faith that we BOTH defend. You can do it. Call me brother and we can start anew loving as we are loved. It could be your New Year's resolution :p
The problem is not that you say Christians should not do these things. It is that you say we can lose our standing with God if we fall, and do one of these things. And that you say it is a sin, when there is no law to transgress.
 

LightSon

New member
For some reason, the following verse comes to mind.

Heb 10:14
For by one offering [Christ] hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by lighthouse

The problem is not that you say Christians should not do these things. It is that you say we can lose our standing with God if we fall, and do one of these things. And that you say it is a sin, when there is no law to transgress.


Christians should not do these things. This is what I am saying and we seem to agree.

I did not say we losing our standing with God if we do one of these things and fall. I recognized with you that pastors commit adultery and do not fall out of the kingdom instantly.

The Bible calls murder and adultery and lying and stealing sins. If you want to give it a euphemism like 'unprofitable thing' to maintain your preconceived theology, do not foist the semantics on me or the Bible.

OSAS is a controversial teaching that is not supported by many godly evangelicals. There is a difference between unconditional eternal security and biblical eternal security. If one becomes reprobate and renounces Christ in the end, it is not the same thing as a believer committing one sin in a lapse of obedience. An ongoing rejection of God and the work of Christ will result in apostasy. Having a brief affair, repenting, and returning to faithfulness is not a parallel issue.
 

Sozo

New member
Originally posted by godrulz

OSAS is a controversial teaching that is not supported by many godly evangelicals.
It is impossible to be a Christian and believe that salvation can be lost or forfeited.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by godrulz

The Bible calls murder and adultery and lying and stealing sins. If you want to give it a euphemism like 'unprofitable thing' to maintain your preconceived theology, do not foist the semantics on me or the Bible.
The Bible defines sin as a transgression of the law.

OSAS is a controversial teaching that is not supported by many godly evangelicals.
And?

There is a difference between unconditional eternal security and biblical eternal security.
No there's not. You don't understand what eternal security is.

If one becomes reprobate and renounces Christ in the end, it is not the same thing as a believer committing one sin in a lapse of obedience.
The latter is in Christ, the former never was.

An ongoing rejection of God and the work of Christ will result in apostasy.
Have you looked in the mirror, lately?

Having a brief affair, repenting, and returning to faithfulness is not a parallel issue.
Returning to faithfulness? You're full of crap. No one returns to faithfulness. No one leaves faithfulness. They're either faithful, or they're not.
 

badp

New member
If you're going to say that Salvation can be forfeited or lost, you need to explain how that can happen.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I'd like to know when exactly salvation is lost, or forfeited. At what specific moment.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Sozo

It is impossible to be a Christian and believe that salvation can be lost or forfeited.

I thought receiving or rejecting Christ (faith vs unbelief) was the criteria set out by Jesus and Paul (Jn. 3; Romans)?

Every Arminian and Open Theist is now hell bound because they reject OSAS? Only the Calvinists and followers of Enyart are saved?

You have negated the salvation of hundreds of millions of evangelicals through the centuries.

If a young child trusts Christ but does not understand OSAS then they must be going to hell?

Who has a different gospel?

Perhaps pre-trib rapture should be a condition of salvation? Style of worship? Mode of baptism? Limited or unlimited atonement?

:doh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top