Quote:
Originally Posted by pelathais
Did the writer truly mean for it to come out this way? If I've understood him correctly, he's saying that his "friend" who baptizes infants does so because of "sin." AND - that one of those "godly men" is teaching a particular view of eschatology because of sin.
I think an "error in doctrine" can come about with all of the best intentions and have nothing overtly to do with sin. And by "error" I'm obviously talking about those "secondary issues" as the writer calls them.
Of course, some might teach that Jesus Christ possessed no divinity and do so simply out of ignorance. Apollos and the disciples of John at Ephesus no doubt had such an incomplete idea about who the Messiah was that their teaching may have been prone to error. I don't think this was the result of sin.
|
And "So we can suffer consequences of sin without being punished for them." Suffering isn't punishment?
And "The boy who is born with a mental disability suffers a lifelong consequence of sin"?
And "When a person is mistaken it is because they are deceived. And if they are deceived it is because their hearts were not right as far as sincerity goes at a point in time, . . . ".
Oh. Sorry. That was someone else, in a different thread. (Relevant to this one, though!)
Hybrid Mode
