The true logic of universal salvation is that nothing of it needs to be explained or believed.
Announcement
Collapse
Unorthodox Theology 201 Guidelines
Theists only.
This forum area is primarily for persons who would identify themselves as Christians whether or not their theology is recognized within the mainstream or as orthodox though other theists may participate with moderator permission. Therefore those that would be restricted from posting in Christianity 201 due to a disagreement with the enumerated doctrines, ie the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment may freely post here on any theological subject matter. In this case "unorthodox" is used in the strict sense of a person who denies what has been declared as universal essentials of the historic Christian faith. Examples would be adherents to Oneness, Full Preterists, Unitarian Universalist Christians, Gnostics, Liberal Christianity, Christian Science to name a few.
The second purpose will be for threads on subjects, which although the thread starter has no issue with the above doctrines, the subject matter is so very outside the bounds of normative Christian doctrine totally within the leadership's discretion that it is placed here. In so doing, no judgment or offense is intended to be placed on the belief of said person in the above-doctrines. In this case "unorthodox" is used in a much looser sense of "outside the norms" - Examples of such threads would be pro-polygamy, pro-drug use, proponents of gay Christian churches, proponents of abortion.
The third purpose is for persons who wish to have input from any and all who would claim the title of Christian even on subjects that would be considered "orthodox."
The philosophy behind this area was to recognize that there are persons who would identify themselves as Christian and thus seem out of place in the Comparative Religions Forum, but yet in keeping with our committment here to certain basic core Christian doctrines. Also, it allows threads to be started by those who would want to still be identified as Christian with a particular belief that while not denying an essential is of such a nature that the discussion on that issue belongs in this section or for threads by persons who wish such a non-restricted discussion.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum area is primarily for persons who would identify themselves as Christians whether or not their theology is recognized within the mainstream or as orthodox though other theists may participate with moderator permission. Therefore those that would be restricted from posting in Christianity 201 due to a disagreement with the enumerated doctrines, ie the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment may freely post here on any theological subject matter. In this case "unorthodox" is used in the strict sense of a person who denies what has been declared as universal essentials of the historic Christian faith. Examples would be adherents to Oneness, Full Preterists, Unitarian Universalist Christians, Gnostics, Liberal Christianity, Christian Science to name a few.
The second purpose will be for threads on subjects, which although the thread starter has no issue with the above doctrines, the subject matter is so very outside the bounds of normative Christian doctrine totally within the leadership's discretion that it is placed here. In so doing, no judgment or offense is intended to be placed on the belief of said person in the above-doctrines. In this case "unorthodox" is used in a much looser sense of "outside the norms" - Examples of such threads would be pro-polygamy, pro-drug use, proponents of gay Christian churches, proponents of abortion.
The third purpose is for persons who wish to have input from any and all who would claim the title of Christian even on subjects that would be considered "orthodox."
The philosophy behind this area was to recognize that there are persons who would identify themselves as Christian and thus seem out of place in the Comparative Religions Forum, but yet in keeping with our committment here to certain basic core Christian doctrines. Also, it allows threads to be started by those who would want to still be identified as Christian with a particular belief that while not denying an essential is of such a nature that the discussion on that issue belongs in this section or for threads by persons who wish such a non-restricted discussion.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The Logic of Universal Salvation
Collapse
X
-
. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostThe true logic of universal salvation is that nothing of it needs to be explained or believed.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Ever hear why you shouldn't keep a wild animal as a pet? Or that it is impossible to have a utopia that is perfect for every single human ever?
Story time! There once was a chowder of stray and feral cats that lived in the woods. They were cold in the winter and hot in the summer. They never had enough to eat and lived lives of fear. However, there was an owner of a cat sanctuary that took pity on them. He wanted to rescue the cats and give them a home. So, his son went out to coax them to the shelter. They could have just trapped all of the cats, but they didn't want to scare them any more than needed. So, they mainly stuck to gathering up the friendly strays that would come to them and any abandoned kittens. The feral cats were afraid that the humans wanted to kill or torture them, so they ran far away and would not let themselves be caught. Now the ones that were rescued lived happily ever after in a warm cozy place full of all the things a cat would love. The feral cats continued to live as they always had, not realizing the happiness that would be theirs if only they'd been rescued.
There are humans who are like those feral cats in that they would not want to be saved. For God to save them against their will would be like keeping a wild animal as a pet. It is more stressful for the "wild animal" to be held captive than to leave it to fend for itself in a shameful existence. And it's not safe for the "tamed animals" to be around the "wild animals". The Owner can't actually be in any danger in this scenario, unlike foolish humans who have tried to keep a wild creature as a pet!If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!
Comment
-
The Logic of Universal Salvation1Cor 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
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI am going to tell you what we told Davidsun and John Martin, two other members who are doing what you are.
This site is not a blog site. It is not a platform to publish your woo. It is a discussion site. So far you seem to be under the impression it is your personal blog where you can mass post your nonsense. It isn't. Here is a great place to do that: www.blogspot.com
If you want to debate your ideas you are welcome to. But that means actually debating, not just handwaving away everything people say and then posting more woo. Keep your threads to a few points at a time, and discuss them before moving on. You have not done that.
I'll be happy to respond to intelligent, respectful and well-reasoned arguments. These have been essentially nonexistent so far in this thread. I've tried to explain my position as succinctly as I can with no indication that anyone is grasping the concepts involved.
I asked the moderator who scrapped my last post in a PM what format is admissible if personal writings are not acceptable. I was referred to this post, which is unclear. The kinds of responses being posted show that no one is expending effort to understand what I post. I'm trying to flesh out my theology in hopes the ideas an attempt to coax legitimate debate from current posters or hoping someone jumps in who has actually read the thread and will participate with intellectual honesty.
Posting Bible passages is not debate. Offering opinions is not debate. Why do you warn me when I'm trying to put logical, unified ideas out for discussion--but let the good old boy club call me a "smart ass", a liar, and post numerous expressions of contempt with nary a blink of the eye?Last edited by ke7ejx; 07-23-2017, 02:28 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anomaly View PostI'll be happy to respond to intelligent, respectful and well-reasoned arguments.
Posting Bible passages is not debate.
Again, that you don't LIKE that you seem to be in disagreement with the Son of God....
So, let me ask you - do you accept the authority of the Bible?
Do you dispute that it accurately records what Jesus actually said?
Maybe that's the problem.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
you're setting yourself up as the supreme arbiter of what qualifies as an argument.
So, let me ask you - do you accept the authority of the Bible?
Do you dispute that it accurately records what Jesus actually said?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anomaly View PostNo. I dispute that tradition accurately interprets in many cases what Jesus actually means.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anomaly View PostI accept the authority of Truth. I believe the Bible is truth.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anomaly View PostNo. I dispute that tradition accurately interprets in many cases what Jesus actually means. What is said in Scripture is the literal. Sometimes the literal means only what it says. In the figurative language of metaphor meaning transfers from one domain to another. The Bible is full of figurative language.Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Comment
-
no matter what, you are not allowed to just blog your manifesto or whatever it is. You can pick a point or two and discuss that in the thread. you can't just post more and more of your writings.
if you feel someone is not understanding what you said, then explain it to them, don't dismiss it and continue with more of your writings.
Comment
-
The problems of the allegorical method:
1. Imports meaning into the text.
2. It forces a hidden meaning behind every text.
3. It put forth fanciful and far-fetched interpretations.
4. It does not allow words and sentences to bear their obvious, normal meanings.
5. It allowed human subjectivity (the interpreter) to dominate the plain message of the original author.
6. There are no controls on interpretation, no way to evaluate an interpretation.
http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/b...section06.htmlEpistemology: The Justification of Belief (1982) author David L. Wolfe argues for the view that,
Comment
-
Originally posted by Anomaly View PostPosting Bible passages is not debate. Offering opinions is not debate.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Larry Serflaten, 01-25-2024, 09:30 AM
|
432 responses
1,978 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-17-2024, 09:43 AM
|
Comment