Elephant in the room - accusation of judging

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Again, I know you got a weird way of thinking of the word. But tell me what this verse does to your thoughts and how it forms your conclusions about who is saved and lost. And why.


i do not form conclusions about who is saved or lost, Mike. Ever. That is extremely presumptuous, and i think we have amply demonstrated that your conclusions were tripe. You can't even define saved or lost to universal satisfaction, and i can't either. For every verse you point to that "defines" salvation, i can provide another that gives a different perspective. Doesn't this tell you something?

Obviously yes, it does. it tells you that everyone else is lost, and we will all agree with you if we just focus in on this or that one little verse, and of course accept your interpretation of it. Gee, i wonder how we all became in thrall to the state with our eyes wide open? Prolly just another coincidence.

You consistently miss my point. Likely due to your preconception. my point is how do you take those verses and apply them to your opinion about the general issue of salvation? Don't you apply those verses to anything you believe to form your beliefs?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You consistently miss my point. Likely due to your preconception. my point is how do you take those verses and apply them to your opinion about the general issue of salvation? Don't you apply those verses to anything you believe to form your beliefs?

ok, my apologies, i do try to read what you mean and not what you say, but you can hardly blame me for having this preconception here, i think. How do i take those verses about salvation? I would consider them in the light of all verses about salvation, even the ones that don't fit very well with it, and notice that there are many that deal with human interactions, while the Pauline ones seem to be mostly advanced legal type stuff that i might best apply to my understanding, after accepting the obviously simpler statements about salvation, which common sense tells me can be understood first.

But of course Paul was the first thing i heard in OP, and i think i was grappling with predestination on day 2 and i have yet to hear "just love God and your neighbor, and you'll be fine," except by a couple of OG Pents, retired pastors with no signed agenda to adhere to any longer, and of course that was one-on-one, no witnesses. You might be insisting on the 1/10th here, and ignoring the 9/10ths, I'm thinkin.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ok, my apologies, i do try to read what you mean and not what you say, but you can hardly blame me for having this preconception here, i think.

When you try to deal with what I mean, and have a preconceived idea, can't you see how that would be very untrustworthy?

How do i take those verses about salvation? I would consider them in the light of all verses about salvation, even the ones that don't fit very well with it, and notice that there are many that deal with human interactions, while the Pauline ones seem to be mostly advanced legal type stuff that i might best apply to my understanding, after accepting the obviously simpler statements about salvation, which common sense tells me can be understood first.

Amen.

But of course Paul was the first thing i heard in OP, and i think i was grappling with predestination on day 2 and i have yet to hear "just love God and your neighbor, and you'll be fine," except by a couple of OG Pents, retired pastors with no signed agenda to adhere to any longer, and of course that was one-on-one, no witnesses. You might be insisting on the 1/10th here, and ignoring the 9/10ths, I'm thinkin.

But what doe the verses in John say about what we're talking about in your estimation? What do you conclude about what's required for salvation in light of those who never believed in the cross?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Can't stay away from me, can you>


it is you who espouses a lie, Mike, don't take it personally. If you can't accept

ok, if you want to get technical, Jesus was not the name that Christ went by anyway, so you're doomed.

in the sense meant, then my apologies, i'll work on that, and please change "you're" to "we're."

It's not a matter of accepting anything. Just noting you can't answer questions without attacking me. Just answer. Why always an attack? Lol and you're attacks don't bother me. Attack away.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Wow. Could not take this single post and deal with actual bible, but you just HAVE TO make it about me.


when you can address some Scripture that you have not had too much luck with so far, we might be able to discuss some other Scripture that is easily misinterpreted. I repeat that i think your grasp of Pauline doctrine is great; unfortunately it may be killing you. God is not going to be asking Muslims why they did not accept your doctrine; He is going to be asking you why you condemned them, yet have no witness against them, and why, if you grasp the doctrine so well, you failed so miserably to impart Scriptural truth.

God wont ask me why I condemned them because I didn't. They're of no consequence to me. I just know the Bible condemned them.not me.

When are you going to present Scripture you claim I have problems with? I already explained the good Samaritan and Salvation by child birth. Are you not reading them?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

God wont ask me why I condemned them because I didn't. They're of no consequence to me. I just know the Bible condemned them.not me.

Your eye is the lamp of the body. When your eye is good, your whole body is also full of light. But when it is bad, your body is also full of darkness.

it may be that you have condemned them because when you read the Bible, you find condemnation. But you have been confronted with plenty of Scripture now that suggests otherwise, and we are all going to reap what we sow, Mike.

Originally Posted by mfblume

When are you going to present Scripture you claim I have problems with? I already explained the good Samaritan and Salvation by child birth. Are you not reading them?

they aren't important now, Mike. What matters is that your explanations make sense to you, guided by the Holy Spirit. If you explained them lately, sorry, i missed them, and i am trying to wade through this line by line.

Repost them if you like, but understand the cognitive dissonance they caused you when they were first presented, how they illustrate a different set of eyes, and witness the eyes that "helped" you to first learn Scripture. Not Rhema? Then who? And btw i have several Rhema pastors as friends, there is nothing wrong with Rhema. We see what we want to see.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Your eye is the lamp of the body. When your eye is good, your whole body is also full of light. But when it is bad, your body is also full of darkness.

it may be that you have condemned them because when you read the Bible, you find condemnation. But you have been confronted with plenty of Scripture now that suggests otherwise, and we are all going to reap what we sow, Mike.

You're preaching to the choir.

And I have not been confronted with scripture that says otherwise. You just ignore what I say about those scriptures. Which is why I want you to present them instead of just claim you have them and not say which ones they are in order to discuss them adequately.

I have not condemned them. They are of no consequence to me to think that much about taking the effort to condemn them. I merely see what the bible says about the need for the cross which they patently deny even occurred. And you made a mountain out of a mole hill in thinking that is my focus and purpose in life. lol

It came about in a chat as a side thought, and you made it the theme of life!

As I said the word already condemned them. It laid out the fact that without faith in the cross of Jesus we are lost. Simple as that. No more. Nada. That's it, in toto.

When I see the word teach me that importance of the cross, I realize that if I did not believe the cross occurred, I realize I am lost. And that's not just for me, it's for everyone. Is it my goal to point the finger to lost muslims and cry out why they're lost? No. You think it is is, though. My goal is to preach the need of the cross. Sorry if I sounded otherwise.

they aren't important now, Mike. What matters is that your explanations make sense to you, guided by the Holy Spirit. If you explained them lately, sorry, i missed them, and i am trying to wade through this line by line.

Please list the passages. Orderly. And we can go through them.

Repost them if you like, but understand the cognitive dissonance they caused you when they were first presented,

\

Just list them.

how they illustrate a different set of eyes, and witness the eyes that "helped" you to first learn Scripture. Not Rhema? Then who? And btw i have several Rhema pastors as friends, there is nothing wrong with Rhema. We see what we want to see.

Rhema is of no consequence to me. I went to a little basement-of-a-church bible school without accreditation, without theological brain candy, where we were taught to deal with the location of earth where the rubber meets the road, not hundreds of feet above it. No one taught me there the things of the cross that I have dealt with in our chats here. Seriously. In fact, the righteousness and the truths of the cross I have laid out here WERE NOT TAUGHT IN THAT LITTLE SCHOOL. Never. They just weren't. I came into these on my own studies years afterward. The school taught me to pray and fast and seek God more than ANYTHING. And once that became part of me, the studies on my own came later.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Ah, the old God deceives people with His word, trick.

ok well you say "trick," but "seeing you will not see" is in there for a reason. We have many examples of this in Scripture, so the concept exists even if it does not apply to you. The trick to me is how church becomes your mortgaged building, and God is Love is turned into "they are all lost." What a hideous concept.

Church is people. How can it be a mortgaged building? Lol

How does God being love mean Jesus was wrong when he said they're condemned already?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

yes, and it's strictly a coincidence that you espouse All Muslims Are Lost as we simultaneously bomb them back to the stone age, surely. Maybe God will consider that you are a Canadian, and give you a pass.

Again I'm confused by your reference to bombings that I have no part nor parcel in. And what governments do is not me doing it. Too funny.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

I know you think that way. Yada yada yada. That's aside from the point. That's why I am asking you for YOUR thoughts on the passage and how it affects salvation or not. You are dodging again.


but you have not established me dodging yet; you just maybe don't like my answer. My answer is possibly inadequate for you because i don't think we are qualified to be talking about salvation like we know something, and i present other Scripture to suggest this, which you are dodging, unless i am about to read a treatment of women might be saved in childbirth. Am i?

You haven't given an answer for me to like or dislike. Lol . Present your Scriptures. I keep asking for them.