Elephant in the room - accusation of judging

[shazeep]

"Hey, you believe the bible? Good! Then no matter what interpretation you have, so long as you are sincere in your obedience of what YOU think the word says (there's no singular interpretation that is right, you know), you're saved." Is that your stance?

no, it is not, and i have already said as much. i am not trying to present a better model for the arbitration of anyone else's salvation, and at present i am not trying to attack the popular model per se, as no doubt some people are led to Christ through this introduction. Nonetheless, we are told to beware wolves in sheep's clothes, and i am just pointing out the emperor's clothing, so to speak.

i could just as easily talk the talk here, and be accepted, be deemed "saved" by Unregistered, but since i am taking another tack, i am mentally deficient, a troll, etc. "Lost," iow.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You're saying the glass is half empty. You're looking at the worst possible interpretation of my words, and ignore my explanations when they don't fit your predetermined interpretation.

I am saying we must obey the word and have genuine faith in the cross, and those religions that lack that faith are not saved. You turn that into me pinpointing certain movements. I am not doing that. I am just saying ANYONE who disregards the cross purpose in granting us righteousness is lost.

It's nothing to do with a label. lol. I already said that. You not only distort the word of God but you distort my words! I say it's not black, and you respond saying, "Why do you say it's black?"

You are essenitally saying this sort of response every time:

"Isn't that essentially what "sectarian" means?"

Why don;t you ask what sectarian actually means?

"I did. I said, 'Isn't that essentially what "sectarian" means?' "

But you are not asking what the word sectarian means.

"Yes, I am. I just said., 'Isn't that essentially what "sectarian" means?' "

When are you going to ask what the word sectarian means?

Forget muslims and catholics. They're not my concern. My concern is what the bible actually says. And why do you keep making this about me? The devil is the accuser of brethren. I am accusing DOCTRINES. You keep making it about me accusing PEOPLE, and it's doctrines I am dealing with. And then you keep making each post as an attack against my person, when I am being objective about doctrines. That tendency ought to concern you.

It's not because people are mulsim that they're lost. It's because their doctrine denies what the bible says is salvationally necessary.

So, it's not about sects. It's about belief.

so, are all Catholics then not lost, or what? The tendency that concerns me is wadr more important than your continuing sensitivity at being judged, or your accusations toward me, which may or may not be correct; they simply aren't relevant. So let's just say that i am all those things that you say i am, fine. And we can also stipulate that the scenario i have described does not describe you, fine. The reality remains that many, many people are deceived into believing that All Catholics Are Lost; but you are now saying that it is not about sects. I am just seeking clarity here.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

"Hey, you believe the bible? Good! Then no matter what interpretation you have, so long as you are sincere in your obedience of what YOU think the word says (there's no singular interpretation that is right, you know), you're saved." Is that your stance?

no, it is not, and i have already said as much. i am not trying to present a better model for the arbitration of anyone else's salvation,

Neither am I.

I am saying the BIBLE is the arbiter. And the plain statements the bible gives are simply being related by my posts. I am saying believe the WORD, and if you don't, you're lost.

and at present i am not trying to attack the popular model per se, as no doubt some people are led to Christ through this introduction.

Why even talk about popular models? Why talk abotu sects?

It's about what the bible says, not me. I've repeated that more times than anything else.

Nonetheless, we are told to beware wolves in sheep's clothes, and i am just pointing out the emperor's clothing, so to speak.

When a person says the bible tells how to be saved, and those who deny those claims of the bible are lost, is not being a wolf in sheep's clothing. A wolf in sheep's clothing, as per CONTEXT of Matt 7, is someone who refuses to carry the cross.

i could just as easily talk the talk here, and be accepted, be deemed "saved" by Unregistered, but since i am taking another tack, i am mentally deficient, a troll, etc. "Lost," iow.

It matters not what I THINK about who is saved. It matters what God thinks.

You still don't see me saying "It's not black."

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

so, are all Catholics then not lost, or what?

There you go trying to twist my words. I don't say what you want me to say to justify your position, so you ask a question again to push me somewhere i am not standing.

WHOEVER denies the saving grace and righteousness of the cross is lost.

The tendency that concerns me is wadr more important than your continuing sensitivity at being judged,

You cannot help but make it about me judging me, when I am trying to get this objective but you won't allow it.

or your accusations toward me, which may or may not be correct; they simply aren't relevant. So let's just say that i am all those things that you say i am, fine.

You simply distort my words. What else can I desibe it like when you say, "It
s black, Nike," and I keep saying I AGREE?! lol

And we can also stipulate that the scenario i have described does not describe you, fine. The reality remains that many, many people are deceived into believing that All Catholics Are Lost; but you are now saying that it is not about sects. I am just seeking clarity here.

When you repeatedly take my words saying that obedience to God in faith of Acts 2:38 must be believed or one is lost, and change it to saying catholics are lost, you are missing my point. I know what catholic dogma and muslim dogma teach about salvation. It's by works. And my focus was on saving faith in the cross, and you took an instance where you spoke of muslims and I indicated the koran teaches salvation by works and denial of the cross' very existence, indicating patent wholesale denial of what saves in an entire religious movement. THAT is what makes them lost. But that can be said about ANYONE who denies the work of the cross grants us the only righteousness acceptable by God. And you went off on a detail I mentioned in passing, and forsook the entire point I made overall.

You simply want to think about a person what you want to think about them, no matter how much you are off. What makes you do that?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

There you go trying to twist my words. I don't say what you want me to say to justify your position, so you ask a question again to push me somewhere i am not standing.

Mike, you seemed to be pretty firmly standing, at the outset at least, upon "they are all lost." I am not trying to twist anything. Either they are or they are not.

Since i doubt that i will get a straight answer from you, and don't really need one anyway, i'll leave you to your discussion ostensibly meant for people other than me

with this caveat: you did a lot of shucking and dodging back there, avoiding the point repeatedly, "terminating" the discussion when you could not answer, etc, and i suggest the clues to the truth are in these. The deck was pretty stacked in my favor here, your position being so hypocritical, and i take no credit for besting you here or anything, ok?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

yes, i am surely mentally deficient now, also; be my guest and inject some rationality into the following, then.

See? I never said anything in my post about 'mentally deficient'. I mentioned something about the educational system and its failure over the last 100 years to produce rational thinkers. Doesn't have anything to do with 'mental deficiency'. But you cannot think rationally, as proven by your response.

Of course, not being a rational thinker, but a heuristic thinker, you cannot see what I am talking about. I might as well be speaking in tongues.

This goes back to my previous statements on other threads about the Eloi vs Morloch thing, it's happening in real time, I see it all over the place, here, there, everywhere. Americans and Western Europeans have literally been lobotomised by a heuristic-based group-think model of education developed and perfected by the Soviets and brought over here in the 30s and 40s as a development of socialist Dewey-style brainwashing. It's purpose was and is to create an Eloi generation incapable of rational thought.

Once a person's brain has been wired from childhood to think heuristically and to subconsciously reject rationality, it's almost impossible to communicate with them except in areas of group think (ie consensus agreements, etc).

Your response proved my point.

reason it however you like; but note that you cannot believe both that it is a matter of the heart and "All Catholics are lost."

See? You cannot reason from a to b. I'm not even going to bother showing you how irrational your statement is, because I honestly do not believe you would recognise rationality. I say that after observing your interactions here with numerous people. IF anyone disagrees with you, you fly off into Neverland.

And it may not make you very comfortable, but you accept as "saved" those who have gone through similar motions at the altar, and in fact lead others to the same path, and proclaim them "saved," while condemning others who have not had the correct words said over them at "baptism," etc.

It makes me very comfortable to know that salvation can be identified from the pages of Scripture, and that anyone can know if they are saved or not by their conformity to the Word of God, or lack thereof. The only ones who 'don't see it' are the intellectually dishonest, who don't WANT to see it, but instead want to climb up through the window instead of the front door.

You would offer to re-baptize them, surely, regardless of where their heart was on the matter, and you would strongly suggest--or more likely demand--that they are lost unless and until they do so. Correct?

If one's heart is 'right', one's life will be conformed to the Word of God. Thus, if one's heart is 'right', one will obey the gospel in the way the apostles preached it. Paul said in Romans that the ones who did not 'obey' the gospel were the ones who did not 'believe' the gospel, and vice versa.

One's heart cannot be right while their life or actions are wrong. But it takes a wee bit of rationality to see that, so let me put it to you this way: God's way or the highway, and yes I have seen God's way, and no you have not.

[shazeep]

I'm not even going to bother showing you how irrational your statement is, because I honestly do not believe you would recognise rationality

no, of course you arent. why not give it a go just for form then.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Mike, you seemed to be pretty firmly standing, at the outset at least, upon "they are all lost." I am not trying to twist anything. Either they are or they are not.

You are missing my point. It's not a certain sect that is any target. Its ANYONE who denies the work of the cross for righteousness.

You said that faith in Christ's death on the cross is vital for one's salvation. So with that in mind, tell me, do you believe someone who wholeheartedly believes this statement is saved in such a belief?

"And because of their (the Jews) saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger- they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise."

...when the bible says:

Joh 19:17-18 KJV And he bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha: (18) Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.

Rom 6:6 KJV Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

So it's a matter of who believes Jesus died for our sins and that we're saved without works of righteousness we have done. When an entire movement denies we're saved without works, and that entire movement is comprised of people who believe that concept, then everyone who believes Jesus did not die for our righteousness and salvation are lost. And that is not restricted to one religious movement. ANY movement that denies this truth is leading people to hell.

Since i doubt that i will get a straight answer from you, and don't really need one anyway, i'll leave you to your discussion ostensibly meant for people other than me

with this caveat: you did a lot of shucking and dodging back there, avoiding the point repeatedly, "terminating" the discussion when you could not answer, etc, and i suggest the clues to the truth are in these. The deck was pretty stacked in my favor here, your position being so hypocritical, and i take no credit for besting you here or anything, ok?

You're the only one here that thinks so. lol

There is no hypocrisy in repeating what the bible said. And that's all I have ever done. You have strife against the word, not me, for I have only relayed the word.

And claiming you're besting me and I am hypocritical is consistently making the issue about me. Why do you always make it about me?

[shazeep]

It makes me very comfortable to know that salvation can be identified from the pages of Scripture

me, too. unfortunately there is a lot of Scripture that is ignored, while certain others are over-emphasized; but i think this is only natural. it is a simple thing to admit that you are not the arbiter of anyone else's salvation, Esaias, or it should be.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

It makes me very comfortable to know that salvation can be identified from the pages of Scripture

me, too. unfortunately there is a lot of Scripture that is ignored, while certain others are over-emphasized; but i think this is only natural. it is a simple thing to admit that you are not the arbiter of anyone else's salvation, Esaias, or it should be.

No one is avoiding scripture. We asked you for scripture, you gave a scant list and I responded to each of those passages. But when we discuss scripture you bolt. You have paragraphs and paragraphs of assumption and opinion and theory. But never do you sit down and analyze scripture detailingly. It's an aversion for some reason.