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?

[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?

[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.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

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


i am not calling you into my beliefs, ok? You do not have to believe like i do. If that seems like a dodge to you, then perhaps you do not understand the point being made there, or perhaps it was not meant for you, but those are my thoughts on the matter, which i doubt would make much sense to you, tbh, so you can either extend yourself out to my comment, and seek to understand what i meant rather than what i say, and ask pointed questions about my reply that might allow for more understanding, or you can build a higher wall and say i'm dodging.

Always dodging. I asked you what these passages mean in your thinking and how that affects however way you treat the question of who is lost and who isn't. The dodging part is you do not answer. Just answer.

If it is you who is lost, it is you who must seek your own salvation. If your salvation is incumbent upon everyone else to be lost who does not accept your understanding, i am not interested in even changing that, ok? I am not the one wringing my hands over the Muslim Invasion, or saying that everyone else is lost.

I don't care what if you want to change anything. Just asking how you make sense of these scriptures and what do they make you conclude. Why can't you answer without always turning it on me and throwing more dirt on me every time? The dirt means nothing to me. Just wondering why you cannot answer.

I am just trying to connect the dots here, in a way that you have to accept is not going to be comfortable for you, similar to what i have been doing;

In other words, you're only out to demean me. I get it. That explains why you won't answer my questions without demeaning me. Weird, but I get it.

ruining your legal Pauline quotes by pointing out Love in them, pointing out all the contortions at "GS," etc. Turning "Love your neighbor is 9/10ths of the Law" back into a Christian command.

There's nothing legal about Paul's quotes. No contortions about the GS, except in your presumptuous mind. Love your neighbour still doesn't mean we're saved by works, though you desperately wish it did.

If these don't agree with your doctrine,

I could care less what you believe that disagrees with my doctrine. I just don;'t know what you ebleive.lol

I am the choice is up to you what you keep and what you discard, and so far it has been obvious.

WHy always make this about me? I am trying to see what you think of these verses and why you reason with them the way you do.

where did you even end up @ the GS salvation, anyway?

Again, you keep saying GS, not me. It has nothig to do with salvation. Now, when are you going to answer?

Who knows. Are Catholics saved now, if they obey god? No longer clear. Is "love your neighbor" now a command, or is it still attempting to follow the Law? Anyone's guess. And you say i am not being clear?

You are not being clear. RIght. You're writing is horrendously lacking of thought in your mind not coming out.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

Paul made conclusions.
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
Jesus did
But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
Peter did.
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Jude did
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

i think it is wise to reach conclusions for yourself, that being that you need to seek your own salvation, not perpetuate some Pentecostal Inquisition. Or by all means keep doing that if you like, but see that that is what has got you to here.

Yes, sponsoring 100k Muslims would be apparently "hating your life," reckless and foolish; if you are scared for your life. By all means then, keep espousing All Muslims Are Lost, and see what that gets you. I get along with Muslims just fine, guys. I have no daughters, to witness my hypocrisy, and you know what? Your daughters aren't going to come onto a forum and make it obvious, with Scripture, that you don't even believe what you have faith in, in 5-6 different places, you want me to pull them back up?

They are just going to witness that the Muslims among them now seem to be fine, they aren't even out demonstrating against our atrocities, and they are going to absorb "All Muslims are lost, all Catholics are lost, the Pents across the street are lost" from you, whether you even say that out loud or not, because surely you are making your unfounded fears known, wringing your hands about Muslims in the news, etc, and about the time you "prove" to them with Paul how terrible everyone else is, they are going to get interested in Islam, and you are going to be meeting a surprise new inlaw.

You want to lead people to Christ? That's great. Love God and your neighbor. It's 9/10ths of all that law that you are trying to justify your position with, and you aren't doing it, so the insistence on the legal part is just going to ring hollow, even if it is truth. But no, you resist even this statement by Christ, "...is 9/10ths of the law and the prophets," and somehow manage to turn it into a warning against following the law?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Lol. i never said I had no agenda with you in that chat with him. . Say what you will but you failed.

Mike, you are making at least somewhat contradictory claims one right behind the other now; have a friend review this last little exchange and get their opinion maybe. And i don't mean to imply that agendas are bad, necessarily, just that you had one, there isn't even anything wrong with it per se, but you were not engaging a Muslim in order to reconcile with him, were you?

You were going to peck away until you found some point of division, right? that, if you were both neighbors just being good neighbors, would never have come up. So congrats, now you have made another enemy of a neighbor--but you "succeeded" and i have failed. That's ok with me--i have no daughters

[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.