Quote:
Originally Posted by shazeep
I made a typo. It should say, "It means the law, that tried to get man to love God and have faith but failed, tried to accomplish the same thing that faith accomplishes. It's not telling us what saves us. It's telling us that faith and the New Covenant fulfills what Law tried to fulfil, so that the goal of every one of the laws of old is fulfilled without the law by grace."
no prob, i don't get either one 
Just reading your words here and seeing how you think it is possible to reconcile Paul's words with Christ's, or vice versa, shows we are simply at polar opposites when it comes to the basic and fundamental concept of whose word the entirety of the bible really is.
i know i keep bringing this up, but really you haven't acknowledged it, ever; doesn't 3 instances of Pauline legal doctrine culminating in Love unbeknownst to you tell you anything?
|
There you go back into the ditches again with the discussion. Looked good for a few hours... but then....
Why do you persist in asking me something I answered long ago... I see no problem in anything in the bible. You never answered this, but I ask it when you speak this way: Are you trying to say love in a person's heart excuses them from not knowing about the cross?
I am at a loss as to your point, because I never denied anything about love in any part of the bible. Of course it all culminates in love. But you say this sort of thing as though it is not love for people to have to come to God through the cross... since all I have been saying is people must come to God through the cross, and you speak as though that is legalism. Again s, you need to learn what legalism actually is. IT IS SALVATION BY WORKS.
We come through the same cross by which God showed the greatest love anyone could know. All I have been insisting upon is the cross is the absolute -- and I really mean absolute -- way to come to God. How does anything I said about Paul's words have to do with denying that love of God in the cross.
You refer to love and then say things like God knows the hearts and cultures that we cannot understand in entire religious movements that patently deny the cross so much as occurred. You say the cross is the greatest form of love, and then don't see God's demand for folks to come to him by that cross. And to further confuse matters, you talk to me like I deny anything pointing to love in the word, when in reality I deny that Paul's words contradict Christ's,and vice versa, and I propose that the entire volume of the bible is not legalistic just because it's written down, one is one beautiful message showing God's love works through the cross alone.
Quote:
|
Help me out here--being the antichrist
|
If I could list all the things you imply I stated that I never stated at all, wow, what a thick book there'd be.
I distinctly said I did not call you antichrist. I said the BELIEF you repeated about the lack of inspiration of the Bible is antichrist.
Okay? Got it this time? (I won't hold my breath for an answer).
Quote:
i get all these rules and such easily confused; but isn't that like the Golden Rule or something?
"Love your neighbor as you love yourself"
are you sure that is as universally understood in OP your way as you are saying? I mean do we need a poll or something...ya, i guess we need a poll or something...
|
Again, you are not clear in what you're trying to say. Please tell us what you are referring
to when you say "THAT is as universally understood..."
Threaded Mode
