Elephant in the room - accusation of judging

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

well, in this particular case you are telling me i am wrong for suggesting that you might treat people differently based upon your judgement of whether they are lost or saved, and i suggested that at the very least you would be more inclined to "convert" them, and that this is similar to imagining that you can declare other people whom you have not met lost without any examination of their fruit,

When someone says they deny the cross occurred, they're lost.

Let me ask some questions now.

Why don't you think they're lost?

and expect that this mindset would not evidence itself in other ways. So "wrong" is actually pretty ridiculous, don't you think? Our actions toward others vary based upon our beliefs and knowledge, for better or worse.

Not as far as being courteous and kind to them.

[shazeep]

...I already laid out that there is nothing I see in me that makes me better than a muslim. I cannot attribute anything in me in contrast to a muslim that personally makes me better. Taking the cross deals with SELF. And as far as SELF is concerned, I have nothing to point to that makes me feel better than a muslim, in fact thinking I am better than a muslim does not even enter my mind![/I]

no, of course not, you make no value judgements in condemning them to hell, it is simply that they lack your understanding. You don't think maybe that this is a little bit hypocritical?

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by shazeep

...I already laid out that there is nothing I see in me that makes me better than a muslim. I cannot attribute anything in me in contrast to a muslim that personally makes me better. Taking the cross deals with SELF. And as far as SELF is concerned, I have nothing to point to that makes me feel better than a muslim, in fact thinking I am better than a muslim does not even enter my mind![/I]

no, of course not, you make no value judgements in condemning them to hell, it is simply that they lack your understanding. You don't think maybe that this is a little bit hypocritical?

Sorry to jump in the middle of this, but this is a very disturbing post, shaz.
Basically you are saying that Christianity is not any better than any other religion.
So, Christ death on the Cross was of none effect.
This is truly "Christianity without the Cross".

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Sorry to jump in the middle of this, but this is a very disturbing post, shaz.
Basically you are saying that Christianity is not any better than any other religion.
So, Christ death on the Cross was of none effect.
This is truly "Christianity without the Cross".

well, i guess your feeling here is likely shared, so let me say that Christianity does not necessarily contain Christ, and might indeed be worse than any other religion when it is abused precisely because it purports to represent Christ.

i have nothing but respect for a seeker who understands Christ's message, but the Cross may be made of no effect in a spiritual fashion, possibly by those crying "Lord, Lord" the loudest, which i think would be the more tragic sin. Why else would Christ go to such lengths to command that we follow the Good Samaritan's example, and teach related parables, and indicate such things as the failure of those who cry "Lord," and those who block entry through the door, but do not enter themselves, and many, many other passages.

Does this make Pauline instructions of no effect? I don't think so, but i do think these are related to indicate the spiritual nature of Christ's sacrifice, which are often obscured by doctrine, so much so that we might declare people we do not know "lost" because of it, and Christ's commands for daily interaction are rendered moot; "Love one another is 9/10ths of the law" is ridiculed, the Good Samaritan becomes lost without your understanding, and all manner of Scripture is corrupted by this.

So i don't suggest abandoning your understanding, but i do suggest that your understanding was taught to you by men, the same way it was taught to me, and will seem right to us simply because everyone believes it, but it is a good idea to at least examine what is being stressed to us and what is being ignored, especially if they vary with Christ's Words on a matter.

I mean let's be honest, you have never heard "if you want to follow Christ, abandon your family and leave your home, without an extra shirt or purse," yet that is exactly what the Apostles did. And yes, that was modified afterward, but we don't hear much of that one, either.

[mfblume]

Shazeep, do you believe muslims or ANYONE is lost if they do not even believe Jesus died on the cross? If not, then why? If so, then why?

Shazeep,:

Joh 3:17-18 KJV For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Do you believe these verses indicate that people who do not believe they need be saved through Christ are saved? If so, why? If not, why? What does it mean to not believe on Him, and why are they condemned if they do not believe on Him?

I predict you cannot answer these questions or will refuse.

[mfblume]

Scripture showing Paul considered himself saved when he wrote the following words:

1Co 1:18 KJV For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

2Ti 1:9 KJV Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

Tit 3:5 KJV Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

So, tell me again the bible does not say we can know we are saved and explain how that is so using this scripture.

[mfblume]

bump

Originally Posted by mfblume

Shazeep, do you believe muslims or ANYONE is lost if they do not even believe Jesus died on the cross? If not, then why? If so, then why?

Shazeep,:

Joh 3:17-18 KJV For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Do you believe these verses indicate that people who do not believe they need be saved through Christ are saved? If so, why? If not, why? What does it mean to not believe on Him, and why are they condemned if they do not believe on Him?

I predict you cannot answer these questions or will refuse.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Shazeep, do you believe muslims or ANYONE is lost if they do not even believe Jesus died on the cross? If not, then why? If so, then why?

Shazeep,:

Joh 3:17-18 KJV For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Do you believe these verses indicate that people who do not believe they need be saved through Christ are saved? If so, why? If not, why? What does it mean to not believe on Him, and why are they condemned if they do not believe on Him?

I predict you cannot answer these questions or will refuse.

look, an understanding of this verse is great, but you have accepted a definition of it given to you, and now great swaths of other Scripture are ignored in the name of doctrine in order to condemn others. Didn't revealing Love in every other doctrinal verse you have quoted at me teach you anything? So, ok, let's take a look at this verse then:

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

It is God's will that all might be saved. Can you point to any instances of
God's will being thwarted? Can you even define saved for anyone other than yourself? I know you think you can, but when pressed you didn't do so well there, did you? When you can answer how women might be saved in childbirth then you can trust a little more in your understanding of "saved," ok? Why "might?"

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

ok, if you want to get technical, Jesus was not the name that Christ went by anyway, so you're doomed. And you are nothing if not technical, so i'm done. But you basically have the same issue with this verse, that your definition of "believe" is a construct, which we have already examined, and we already know that millions of people claim to believe--are you saying they are saved now? Because reading this verse in a vacuum suggests that they are, does it not?

So how then do all Catholics become lost? I don't get it. Of course, the answer is that God can make believers from rocks, and satan also believes, and it is those who do the right thing that are righteous, and the real believers. Now all this is off the cuff, and since i'm here i'll say that this is likely worded this way so that anyone who is a hater can seize upon it and use it against everyone who does not "believe" like them, thus revealing their hearts.

i see a reflection in "you will contend with them" paraphrased, maybe its "they will contend with you," @ "Ishmael" in Scripture--why would God provide a contender? Because you want to contend, not because contention of this sort is a good thing. Contend for the faith! But that likely means something different for you, i guess...so be it. your heart will be revealed, and you will reap what you sow.

Every knee will bow, and every tongue confess that Christ is Lord. If you know this, what is the point of attacking anyone who does not understand or agree with your doctrine? Or defending against them, or whatever--exhibiting the signs of fear? If the war on drugs brought more drugs, the war on poverty made us all poorer, and the war on Afghanistan results in the Taliban controlling more territory than ever, how do expect the war on Muslims to be any different?

Could you please just admit that you believe saying "All Muslims are lost" has nothing to do with our governments unilateral actions in the Mideast right now, so i can call you stupid and move on?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

look, an understanding of this verse is great, but you have accepted a definition of it given to you, and now great swaths of other Scripture are ignored in the name of doctrine in order to condemn others.

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.

Didn't revealing Love in every other doctrinal verse you have quoted at me teach you anything? So, ok, let's take a look at this verse then:

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

It is God's will that all might be saved. Can you point to any instances of
God's will being thwarted? Can you even define saved for anyone other than yourself?

Again, aside from the point., The point is WHAT YOU THINK OF THIS and how you make your conclusions based on this passage. I know it's hard, since you have a vendetta against me. But please try to focus. What are YOUR thoughts apart from any reference to me or mine?

I know you think you can, but when pressed you didn't do so well there, did you? When you can answer how women might be saved in childbirth then you can trust a little more in your understanding of "saved," ok? Why "might?"

I was not even sure what you were asking. I can deal with that then. But first things fist. Stop referring to me, stop being personal, and show what YOU get from these passages.

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

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

Can't stay away from me, can you>

And you are nothing if not technical, so i'm done.

lol

See? Dodge dodge dodge. You cannto deal with a passage in itself.

[quote] But you basically have the same issue with this verse, that your definition of "believe" is a construct, [/quote\]

I am not asking for your thoughts of my beliefs. I know them too well. lol

Just tell me YOUR beliefs and how these verses affect your thoughts/

which we have already examined, and we already know that millions of people claim to believe--are you saying they are saved now? Because reading this verse in a vacuum suggests that they are, does it not?

So how then do all Catholics become lost? I don't get it. Of course, the answer is that God can make believers from rocks, and satan also believes, and it is those who do the right thing that are righteous, and the real believers. Now all this is off the cuff, and since i'm here i'll say that this is likely worded this way so that anyone who is a hater can seize upon it and use it against everyone who does not "believe" like them, thus revealing their hearts.

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

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 see a reflection in "you will contend with them" paraphrased, maybe its "they will contend with you," @ "Ishmael" in Scripture--why would God provide a contender? Because you want to contend, not because contention of this sort is a good thing. Contend for the faith! But that likely means something different for you, i guess...so be it. your heart will be revealed, and you will reap what you sow.

You really cannot talk bible, can you? You have to attack me in every moment you get. All I asked was YOUR opinion and how YOUR faith forms from this passage. But it's MIKE BLUME MIKE BLUME MIKE BLUME.

Every knee will bow, and every tongue confess that Christ is Lord. If you know this, what is the point of attacking anyone who does not understand or agree with your doctrine? Or defending against them, or whatever--exhibiting the signs of fear? If the war on drugs brought more drugs, the war on poverty made us all poorer, and the war on Afghanistan results in the Taliban controlling more territory than ever, how do expect the war on Muslims to be any different?

Aside from the point. WHat do these verses say to YOUR faith?

Could you please just admit that you believe saying "All Muslims are lost" has nothing to do with our governments unilateral actions in the Mideast right now, so i can call you stupid and move on?

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

Wow,

[shazeep]

I believe and know the bible THAT MUCH that it's not a matter of what qualities muslims or myself have, but rather what the object of our faith is. And the cross of Jesus makes the difference. You speak more of OUR crosses by FAR than the cross of Jesus. In fact, I cannot recall ANYTHING you ever said that focuses on the cross of Jesus. As I see it, your religion is a cross carrying religion that involves nothing to do with Jesus Christ's cross. And THAT makes you think carrying the cross can be done by muslims because you think they can deny themselves in some areas, and not even believe Jesus died.

In reality, the biggest part of carrying the cross is ignored by them. And that is denying themselves of the belief that they can be good enough to go to heaven.

ok well as i see it, you are enmeshed in a pretty violent form of Jesus Cult, which is not the same as faith in Christ, but better people than me have already written about that. I'll be sure and let the GS know that he cannot be saved, despite Christ holding him up as an example.