Love One Another and the Cross

[shazeep]

The greater point is that it really doesn't matter what we think about people being lost or saved. It matters what God thinks. And if someone tells me they're saved and obeyed what the apostles and Jesus commanded, then it makes little difference to me if they really did or not. If they didn't they still know what the truth demands, and I have no purpose than to relate the message.This is still disingenuous, and does not fairly address the statement "the overwhelming majority of churchianity accept bona fides as de facto evidence of salvation." Also, you say what God thinks is what matters, but you also say that All Muslims are lost because they lack your dogma and bona fides, and the two are not compatible. They are hypocrisy.

Obeying Acts 2:38 is much more than simply calling Jesus "Lord." But I also agree people can bey Acts 2:38 and the the ones who cry Lord Lord and be rejected in the end, IF in TIME they bear no fruit and do not carry through with all Christ said.

then you are halfway home!
by the same logic--which btw will never get one to God; logic--if one is rejected for non-bearing, they are accepted for bearing. Good fruit comes from good trees. Yes, it is a seemingly blasphemous leap; i'm still not quite sure i believe it myself. The position that one is presented with the GS merely as an example to follow has some merit, on its own; but for me, at least, taken with all of the other supporting Scripture, 9/10ths of the law, what you are insisting upon amounts to some words.

So in all conscience i am forced to look for a Scriptural situation in which the words might expressly be "no, i am not interested in your Christ, tyvm," that still end up being considered doing his father's will. And viola, the First Son. Now, you might have valid arguments against that, but i have not heard them. And that does not mean you are wrong; you do not have to believe what i believe.

I agree. But it really does not matter anyway. It matters what God sees. What we see or hear them say is not concrete for us. It's only what God sees that is concrete. But when a people blatantly deny His Sonship we know for sure in those cases.
well, it's either what God sees, or what you have defined as denying the Son, but not proven that God holds your definition; not necessarily both. Sounds good, i will admit; but frankly it is your surety that gives me pause. It is patently obvious how that can be made to be self-serving.

What if, say, i am a guy raised by two hypocritical Lord crying Bible-thumpers, and i'm now psychologically unable to follow anything that includes the terminology they used, but i have a good heart? What if i am the First Son, iow?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

This is still disingenuous, and does not fairly address the statement "the overwhelming majority of churchianity accept bona fides as de facto evidence of salvation." Also, you say what God thinks is what matters, but you also say that All Muslims are lost because they lack your dogma and bona fides, and the two are not compatible. They are hypocrisy.

You have a unique way of thinking. lol

God says denial of son is antichrist. Not me. God. And Koran denies the son's existence , let alone his words. A child could understand it.

You count heads, bag me in with the head-counters, and when I say the issue is what God sees, and who cares what the majority thinks, you say I am being disingenuous. Okaaaay.

then you are halfway home!

Oh why thank you! "TO ME" has spoken!

by the same logic--which btw will never get one to God; logic--if one is rejected for non-bearing, they are accepted for bearing.

Howso?

Yes, it is a seemingly blasphemous leap; i'm still not quite sure i believe it myself. The position that one is presented with the GS merely as an example to follow has some merit, on its own; but for me, at least, taken with all of the other supporting Scripture, 9/10ths of the law, what you are insisting upon amounts to some words.

You actually cannot grasp the issue of the NT explanation of how the law said successful compliance with Law of works causes one to have eternal life, but that route is impossible to keep, so grace brought the same life through the means of faith instead. And you cannot actually grasp the point that, yes, we all need to be like the good samaritan, nothing against that at all. BUT AFTER we're made righteous by faith not works. I've seen people in church for decades who never realized that, so don't think you actually do when it is apparent you do not, especially after thinking you abandoned that faith years ago when in reality I doubt you ever knew it.

[quot]
So in all conscience i am forced to look for a Scriptural situation in which the words might expressly be "no, i am not interested in your Christ, tyvm," that still end up being considered doing his father's will. And viola, the First Son. Now, you might have valid arguments against that, but i have not heard them. And that does not mean you are wrong; you do not have to believe what i believe.[/quote]

You are classically throwing out the baby with the bathwater due to some "TO ME" experiences in the past that paste everyone with the same tar.

2Pe 2:2 KJV And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

well, it's either what God sees, or what you have defined as denying the Son,

I'm not even listening to that nonsense any more. A child can see the point of denial of the Son.

but not proven that God holds your definition; not necessarily both. Sounds good, i will admit; but frankly it is your surety that gives me pause. It is patently obvious how that can be made to be self-serving.

You're too pessimistic to see what a child could plainly see, and how blinding must that be?

What if, say, i am a guy raised by two hypocritical Lord crying Bible-thumpers, and i'm now psychologically unable to follow anything that includes the terminology they used, but i have a good heart? What if i am the First Son, iow?

A twisted heart from hypocritical parents is far from a good one.

But this is the best evidence yet for the reason as to why you claim muslims cannot be said to be lost even though they flatly deny the Son of God. It does not matter what the WORD SAYS and if people deny the WORD. You are so stuck on the heart that you think God will overlook their fundamental hatred of what He claims is salvation, so long as their deception does not affect how kind they are to people at the same time. THAT EXPLAINS EVERYTHING! Wow.

That's the same sort of thinking that says, "Well if the Bible says Acts 2:38 is the plan of salvation, and there's a vast majority of christianity who don't obey it, then there must be something wrong with the way we read Acts 2:38. After all, counting heads is more reliable than plain reading." Forget the fact that only eight souls were saved in Noah's day.

That explains everything Shazeep! You THINK SO MUCH about whether someone is honest and sincere to themselves in your "TO ME" universe, and that you have no concept that someone can be sincerely wrong, but God does not judge by His word but buy the degree of sincerity no matter how wrong a person might be.

So, in your TO ME universe the word is arbitrary. TO ME the word says one thing but TO YOU it says another, because both of us are sincere. No, wait a minute. If TO ME the word means a group is lost then that cannot be good variance, although variance is acceptable to muslims if TO THEM it says something else because they never said muslims are lost.

Shazeep, do you think muslims as a whole think all christians are lost?

Your TO ME doctrine that gauges salvation by sincerity, except when it violates your conditions by stating a group is lost wholesale if they deny what the bible plainly says is antichrist due to such denial, has no room in its universe for the concept of deception. Deception is when someone is certainly wrong, but they think they're right. It's what Jesus referred to when he said if the darkness in a person is considered light, then how great must that darkness be. There's no existence of deception in your universe except for those who disagree with your TO ME philosophical conditions. As long as a Muslim is loving and sincere, surely there's a misinterpretation of the statement that denial of son is antichrist's in God's word. You're deceived by the "no deception exists" concept, except where you declare it to exist.

The twelve-ring circus continues! No word. Just philosophical contradictions.