Love One Another and the Cross

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Completely necessary. It is the difference in having Christ on your lips, and having Christ. It isn't even a matter of which comes first; they go together, or they do not. What is "faith in Christ?" It is a phrase, anyone can say it. Many people do. Scripture will tell you that if it leads to such conclusions as "now i am saved, and look, they do not do this, so they are lost," then you have missed the point. You have found another way to be proud and arrogant. This is outlined in many places, several parables.

28“But what do you think? A man had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘My son, go, work in the vineyard today.’z

29“He answered, ‘I don’t want to! ’ Yet later he changed his mind and went. 30Then the man went to the other and said the same thing.

“ ‘I will, sir,’ he answered. But he didn’t go.

31“Which of the two did his father’s will? ”

but you are welcome to make this about Jews and Christians, if you like.

Was Peter arrogant in Acts 2 or Acts 10, when he told them what they needed to do to be saved?
Now, we can present the Gospel in such a way that people are not receptive to it. I believe that is what you may be referring to overall.
We need to live it and be prepared to witness when the time and place is right.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Now, we can present the Gospel in such a way that people are not receptive to it. I believe that is what you may be referring to overall.
We need to live it and be prepared to witness when the time and place is right.

amen!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Was Peter arrogant in Acts 2 or Acts 10, when he told them what they needed to do to be saved?
Now, we can present the Gospel in such a way that people are not receptive to it. I believe that is what you may be referring to overall.
We need to live it and be prepared to witness when the time and place is right.

Amen. I asked him this weeks ago. I asked if he thought they really were lost but asked if his point was how we present it, thinking we should not say they are lost even though they are. He never responded.

He actually believes they can not be said to be lost even though they deny the Son and deny His very crucifixion. When i ask what the detailed purpose of the cross was, then, he never answered.

[mfblume]

In my talks with a Muslim on http://www.ask-a-muslim.com I said no such thing as "You are lost, and I can prove it with scripture." He said I was lost. Do I believe the man is lost? Yes! But the approach is important. I showed kindness and honoured his thoughts with respect but also showed him the Word.

He that winneth souls is wise. But wisdom does not include the error that a person need not consciously agree with the crucifixion of Jesus nor consciously accept the fact that God has a Son to be saved.

[mfblume]

Still loving the work of the cross! Every sermon points to it the more I serve the Lord.

People talk about a bloodless gospel just as the prosperity doctrine, but at the same time don't think religious adherents of other faiths need the blood of Jesus on the cross in their faith to be saved. The lack of blood noted in reference to bloodless gospels is the lack of the blood of the cross and lack of the demand for one to consciously know about the cross and Christ;'s vicarious death as us.

I think of the only sign Jesus said He'd give to an adulterous generation. The sign of Jonah. As Jonah was in the whale three days and nights, He would die on the cross, be buried for three days and resurrect from that grave. In other words, of all the signs He could have given, He gave the one that is death, burial and resurrection to be front and centre, indicating to us one is lost as lost can be without faith in the death and resurrection of Christ for their sins.

So, what is truly the bloodless gospel?

[shazeep]

well, what is faith? Is it something one proclaims?

Originally Posted by mfblume

Amen. I asked him this weeks ago. I asked if he thought they really were lost but asked if his point was how we present it, thinking we should not say they are lost even though they are. He never responded.

He actually believes they can not be said to be lost even though they deny the Son and deny His very crucifixion. When i ask what the detailed purpose of the cross was, then, he never answered.

Look, i answered; you just cannot hear me. When you say "thinking we should not say they are lost even though they are," i am told all i need to know; that you will not listen, no matter what i say, or what anyone else says. I obviously can provide direct answers from Scripture that are inadequate, and refuted by you immediately, not even considered on their merits as direct quotes, so what is the point?

You have found a superior path; a yardstick by which to measure everyone else, and your mind is now revealed to be closed on the matter. I will let you be the judge, because after all, you are just quoting Scripture, and so you cannot be wrong (that is reserved for anyone else quoting Scripture). The detailed purpose of the cross is obviously to bash people over the head with--praise the White Jesus--and you must have found that narrow path, that is sooo hard to find, by insisting that all converts agree with you, or be damned. Congrachalations.