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
See more
See less

Chiefsinners Subduing Creation derail

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

  • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
    At last, addressing the situation. Look guys, I want you to stay on topic so that I can say, "It is finished" and disappear. That's the script, so just play your parts. Tear the argumentation apart, with nice, scholarly rebuttals. The kangaroo court should be the last resort.
    Your "I'm more spiritual than you guys" attitude betrays your sincerity. It would have been so much better if you had shown your hand in the first place, that all you're doing is advancing the NPP.

    The Achilles Heel of the New Perspective on Paul


    The ‘New Perspective on Paul’ and Its Problems


    An Explanation of the New Perspective on Paul
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • The coulpe that died in Acts, were killed for lying, not for only giving part of the proceeds.
      If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
        The coulpe that died in Acts, were killed for lying, not for only giving part of the proceeds.
        They didn't have to give up their possessions, we all know that. They could have not stepped up and still lived. They added the lying to their failure of not stepping up and passing. So what else you got?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          Your "I'm more spiritual than you guys" attitude betrays your sincerity. It would have been so much better if you had shown your hand in the first place, that all you're doing is advancing the NPP.

          The Achilles Heel of the New Perspective on Paul


          The ‘New Perspective on Paul’ and Its Problems


          An Explanation of the New Perspective on Paul
          Why so defensive? Why jump to conclusions? I never said I'm more spiritual than anyone. This is the Way. Aim high. God will save. His work will be displayed in me. Praise will flow to God. Yeehah!
          Last edited by footwasher; 09-01-2020, 12:35 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
            They didn't have to give up their possessions, we all know that. They could have not stepped up and still lived. They added the lying to their failure of not stepping up and passing. So what else you got?
            They didn't "add lying" to their "failure of not stepping up". There was no such requirement. This was a voluntary act based on the power of the Holy Spirit in the community.
            Acts 4 tells us that many, from time to time, sold houses or possessions to aid in the relief of the poor - totally voluntary, and not perpetual, not required.

            It appears that A&S got into this with deception from the start.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
              At last, addressing the situation. Look guys, I want you to stay on topic so that I can say, "It is finished" and disappear. That's the script, so just play your parts. Tear the argumentation apart, with nice, scholarly rebuttals. The kangaroo court should be the last resort.
              If you want to write the rules, get your own site. This is a debate forum and people are allowed to not follow your preconceived notions of what is allowed.

              And you say that you are not claiming to be "holier than thou" here? Your use of Christ's statement "it is finished", your usage of the names Footwasher and Chiefsinner shows me that you are placing yourself on the same plane as Christ and Paul. And, buddy, you ain't neither by a long shot.

              Why bother coming back at all if you just want to win (not likely going to happen) one argument and then leave again? We'd all likely be happier if you just stayed away in the first place and took your nonsense elsewhere.


              Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

              Comment


              • Also, as Craig Blomberg points out, everybody did not give up all their possessions at once. They were sold as the need arose.
                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
                  Why so defensive? Why jump to conclusions?
                  Why be such a dork and jump to the conclusion that I'm being defensive?

                  I never said I'm more spiritual than anyone.
                  You don't have to say it -- it comes across in pretty much everything you write.

                  This is the Way. Aim high. God will save. His work will be displayed in me. Praise will flow to God. Yeehah!
                  What's being displayed in you is arrogance and a cult-like adhesion to yet another "something new".
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                    Also, as Craig Blomberg points out, everybody did not give up all their possessions at once. They were sold as the need arose.
                    EGGzackly - they stepped up, in my opinion, as the Spirit revealed the need.

                    Nobody was blasting them for "failure to step up". If that's not legalism, what is?
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                      Also, as Craig Blomberg points out, everybody did not give up all their possessions at once. They were sold as the need arose.
                      Seriously?

                      Acts 4:34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,

                      35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

                      I hope at least you won't need me to point out your error.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                        If you want to write the rules, get your own site. This is a debate forum and people are allowed to not follow your preconceived notions of what is allowed.

                        And you say that you are not claiming to be "holier than thou" here? Your use of Christ's statement "it is finished", your usage of the names Footwasher and Chiefsinner shows me that you are placing yourself on the same plane as Christ and Paul. And, buddy, you ain't neither by a long shot.

                        Why bother coming back at all if you just want to win (not likely going to happen) one argument and then leave again? We'd all likely be happier if you just stayed away in the first place and took your nonsense elsewhere.
                        No one's leaving. Just waiting for unjust execution. Part of the script to share in the work remaining

                        Comment


                        • Where did the misconception that the problem was that A & S didn't give all of the money come from? Peter even states that they lied to the Holy Spirit, and God does not like fraud.
                          If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
                            No one's leaving. Just waiting for unjust execution. Part of the script to share in the work remaining
                            So, to the arrogance, we add the persecution complex? We have nutters here all the time, and, to my knowledge, we've never executed a one, justly or unjustly.

                            Blog on!!!!
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              So, to the arrogance, we add the persecution complex? We have nutters here all the time, and, to my knowledge, we've never executed a one, justly or unjustly.

                              Blog on!!!!
                              They said this about all Jesus's followers.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Chiefsinner View Post
                                Seriously?

                                Acts 4:34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,

                                35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

                                I hope at least you won't need me to point out your error.
                                Read the account in Acts 5 where Peter makes clear the real problem. He wasn't blasting them for "not stepping up", but for, in effect, conspiracy to lie to the Holy Spirit where others were blessed with "Abundant Grace" (4:33).
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Larry Serflaten, 02-02-2024, 04:25 AM
                                1 response
                                20 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by tabibito, 01-31-2024, 06:29 AM
                                18 responses
                                78 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Larry Serflaten, 01-28-2024, 09:31 AM
                                15 responses
                                79 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by Larry Serflaten, 01-25-2024, 10:30 AM
                                358 responses
                                1,529 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Working...
                                X