Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Faith is not to be accompanied by anything at conversion?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
    I did not intend "Sight and hearing come to the blind and deaf through those who see and hear." to be taken as an inevitable outcome (though on re-reading, I see that it can easily be so interpreted.)

    What I had in mind was τουτο εστιν το εργον του θεου ινα πιστευσητε εις ον απεστειλεν εκεινος "this is the work of God so that you may・can have believed on the one that he sent"

    As you have pointed out, no action will be of any effect when people block their ears and shut their eyes.
    Amen!

    Question? When the apostles approached Jesus and asked him to "increase" their faith - how can faith be increased? Faith is Faith or does Faith increase like the mustard seed? Starts small and then grows? Sometimes I think it's like asking someone to increase love or belief?

    Second, he helps their faith grow by telling them in Luke 17:7–10 that when they have done all they are commanded to do, they are still radically dependent on grace. Jesus gives an illustration. You might want to read it again in verses 7–10. The gist of it is that the owner of a slave does not become a debtor to the slave no matter how much work the slave does. The meaning is that God is never our debtor. Luke 17:10 sums it up: “So you also, when you have done all that you were commanded, say, ‘We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty.’” We are always his debtor. And we will never be able to pay this debt, nor are we ever meant to. We will always be dependent on grace. We will never work our way up out of debt to a place where God is in our debt. “Who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?” (Romans 11:35). How Jesus Helped His Disciples Increase Their Faith

    ************

    When a father brought his demon possessed boy to Jesus he believed that Jesus could heal him by saying “I do believe” (Mark 9:24). So why did the father say in this same verse, “Help my unbelief?“ He asked Jesus for help in his unbelief. He believed Jesus could heal him yet he still had some doubt and asked Jesus to help in his lack of belief. This has been my own experience as well. I believe and have faith in Jesus, but I also experience times of doubt that seem to overwhelm me.
    Read more: http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow....#ixzz4YDQevUfi
    Last edited by Marta; 02-09-2017, 12:54 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
      Did Jesus misspeak when he said that the centurion, who had merely expressed a belief, had more "pistis" than the people of Israel?
      He did not just believe, he believed Christ ought to be obeyed as his men obeyed him ... whether it be the ailing body of his servant or the will of a man created in His image.

      Also, we don't know (as far I haven't checked with Patristic comments) that his faith was then and there salvific for his soul.

      We can conclude from the remark that Israelites as a people were then and there infidels.
      http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

      Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by 37818 View Post
        One is not born again through water baptism. One is born again through faith in Christ (1 John 5:1).
        You might want to check that one out with John 3 "who is not born again of water and spirit" ....
        http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

        Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
          What notable faithfulness did he demonstrate that was greater than the people of Israel?
          They were looking for excuses not to keep the law of God.
          http://notontimsblogroundhere.blogspot.fr/p/apologetics-section.html

          Thanks, Sparko, for telling how I add the link here!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Hans George
            He did not just believe, he believed Christ ought to be obeyed as his men obeyed him ... whether it be the ailing body of his servant or the will of a man created in His image.
            Okay. So do you agree with me that if someone believes that Christ is someone who "ought to be obeyed," then that person will be saved and go to heaven?

            Comment


            • #51
              Where is it that the disobedient wind up, again?

              Oh yes ... Rev 22:14-15

              But what does "ought" mean? - δει - it is necessary・obligatory Matt 23:23, Mark 13:14, Luke 11:42, 12:12, 13:14 + 16, 18:1, John 4:20 and so on. Of course, "ought" also means τις "something", so of course, some people (those who don't like the idea that one word can mean two or more things depending on context) will be free to continue ignoring the facts.
              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
              Scripture before Tradition:
              but that won't prevent others from
              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
              of the right to call yourself Christian.

              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

              Comment


              • #52
                I'm not gonna waste time on you, tabibito, because you stopped addressing my points.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  Where is it that the disobedient wind up, again?

                  Oh yes ... Rev 22:14-15

                  But what does "ought" mean? - δει - it is necessary・obligatory Matt 23:23, Mark 13:14, Luke 11:42, 12:12, 13:14 + 16, 18:1, John 4:20 and so on. Of course, "ought" also means τις "something", so of course, some people (those who don't like the idea that one word can mean two or more things depending on context) will be free to continue ignoring the facts.
                  There was an argument that was posted a while back about that if you broke "one" precept of the law you broke them all?

                  James 2:10, 10 Whoever keeps the whole Law but stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

                  For while the Jews taught that 'he who transgresses all the precepts of the law has broken the yoke, dissolved the covenant, and exposed the law to contempt; and so has he done who has only broken one precept;' they also taught, 'that he who observed any principal command was equal to him who kept the whole law,' and gave for an example the forsaking of idolatry. To correct this false doctrine was the object James had in view.

                  Now considering there are differences in the "mainstream" of denominations within the Jewish faith; Orthodox, Conservative and then, Reformers - now reconstructionist. How could one judge "how" the law is being observed or who would be in the right to say? If, for example, I'm a reformer but I don't believe in the authenticity of the Torah - have I broken the law? or if I reject kashrut (Jewish Dietary Laws) and kippah (Jews to fulfill the customary requirement held by orthodox halachic authorities that the head be covered.)? However, if I maintain the belief about the main principle of the law then have I kept the whole of the law - ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind’: This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like unto it: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.’ On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”....and the rest is commentary, as Hillel would say.


                  The Law, attributed to Moses, contains 613 rules and regulations that Israel used to keep order in their society during ancient times. So, Jewish view is that God will reward those who observe His commandments and punish those who intentionally transgress them. If one refuses to observe Sabbath and the Festivals, by definition, one is not loving God, since “all the Torah” hangs from “love the LORD your God” which means not a single commandment exist that is outside the category of loving God. (The law) Halakhah, when one follows it, is solely based on one's faith? or "the path one walks", or governing one daily routine.


                  Halakhic Interpretation from a
                  Constitutional Perspective


                  Jews who happen to be atheists, because they deny the total existence of God, need not approach halakhah as in any respect God-given or rooted in God-given foundations. They may chose to regard some halakhic elements as folkways or they may regard all halakhic elements as obsolute or irrelevant. However, even for believers there have been radical transformations. For example, the Reform movement was founded on a reemphasis in the belief in God as One who manifested Himself in this world in modern liberal, progressive, and up-to-date ways. Thus the Reform movement could emphasize the belief in God along with the abolition of the binding character of halakhah. This allowed them to pick and choose among halakhic requirements, now no longer required, on the basis of what they perceived to be progress in the world and changes in modern sensibilities.

                  By the same token, the Conservative movement has tried to have its cake and eat it too. On one hand it has proclaimed itself irrevocably faithful to halakhah. On the other hand, it feels very pressured by the transformations of modernity and postmodernity and the sensibilities that they have evoked. Their resolution of this conflict has normally involved halakhic decision-making that reaches the same conclusions as modern contemporary sensibilities and on finding the halakhic grounds to do so. Exactly how this should be done and to what extent, has been a matter of continuing debate within the ranks of the Conservative leadership.
                  In Christianity, also with the mainstream tenants (principles) of our beliefs and practices and with faith (in union with) in Jesus and that of his apostles, how does one judge according to different principles within the congregations? Each denomination has its own principles of interpretation? Same breath.


                  Psalms 103

                  7 He made known his ways to Moses, his deeds to the people of Israel:
                  8 The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love.
                  9 He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever;
                  10 he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities.
                  11 For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him;
                  12 as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us.

                  and Isaiah 63

                  15 Look down from heaven and see from Your holy and glorious habitation; Where are Your zeal and Your mighty deeds? The stirrings of Your heart and Your compassion are restrained toward me. 16For You are our Father, though Abraham does not know us And Israel does not recognize us. You, O LORD, are our Father, Our Redeemer from of old is Your name. 17 Why, O LORD, do You cause us to stray from Your ways And harden our heart from fearing You? Return for the sake of Your servants, the tribes of Your heritage.…


                  Commentary from Matthew Henry

                  Would it not be glorious to his name to remove the veil from their hearts, to return to the tribes of his inheritance? The Babylonish captivity, and the after-deliverance of the Jews, were shadows of the events here foretold. The Lord looks down upon us in tenderness and mercy. Spiritual judgments are more to be dreaded than any other calamities; and we should most carefully avoid those sins which justly provoke the Lord to leave men to themselves and to their deceiver. Our Redeemer from everlasting is thy name; thy people have always looked upon thee as the God to whom they might appeal. The Lord will hear the prayers of those who belong to him, and deliver them from those not called by his name. http://biblehub.com/isaiah/63-16.htm

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                    I did not intend "Sight and hearing come to the blind and deaf through those who see and hear." to be taken as an inevitable outcome (though on re-reading, I see that it can easily be so interpreted.)

                    What I had in mind was τουτο εστιν το εργον του θεου ινα πιστευσητε εις ον απεστειλεν εκεινος "this is the work of God so that you may・can have believed on the one that he sent"

                    As you have pointed out, no action will be of any effect when people block their ears and shut their eyes.

                    Found this article. Hopefully, the comments will connect with my last post, I think that it will:


                    As to whether or not all sins are capital sins deserving of eternal judgment, Paul says in Romans 6:23 that the wages of sin is death. He doesn't qualify his assertion, as if to say that the wages of only some sins is death. Sin, all sin, by its nature merits death. Happily, Paul goes on to say that the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. The salient question for us, then, is not whether we have ever sinned (for we all have) but whether we are in Christ Jesus. Are we abiding in him? (John 15:1-16)

                    ******

                    In this passage, he relies on the Jewish scriptures as an authority for the injunction to love your neighbour (James 2:8 "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture ..."), although he could equally have referred to Jesus had he known that Jesus had spoken the same words (eg Matthew 19:19).

                    Verse 17 summarises the theme of chapter 2:

                    James 2:17: Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
                    Burton L. Mack says in Who Wrote the New Testament, page 214, this sounds like a treatise written against the Pauline notion that the Christian faith opposed the “works of the law”. However, as Mack points out, this is a misreading of Paul's true position. When Paul uses the term ‘faith’, he means means trusting that Christ's death and resurrection can restore a person to a right standing before God. Paul taught that one does not have to do the works prescribed by the Jewish law in order to trust Christ - one does not need to observe the Sabbath, keep kosher food laws, be circumcised and so on. At no point in his undisputed epistles does he say that one need not do good works.

                    Later authors, such as the author of the Epistle to Ephesians, transformed Paul’s teaching that the works of the Jewish law could not bring salvation into a teaching that said good works could not save, an important difference that we see clearly in Ephesians 2:8-9:

                    Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

                    https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.c...s-breaking-all

                    Comment

                    widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                    Working...
                    X