PDA

View Full Version : Postmodernism...



Keith Farmer
05-27-2009, 04:59 PM
Brian McLaren is one of the so called faces of the emergent church movement; a postmodernistic religious movement utilizing a twisted view of Christianity as one of its drawing cards.

Here is a statement found in A Generous Orthodoxy by McLaren and a link to his "clarification" of the statement...(just as an introduction to the way he thinks):




"I must add, though, that I don't believe making disciples must equal making adherents to the Christian religion. It may be advisable in many (not all?) circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts. This will be hard, you say, and I agree. But frankly, it's not at all easy to be a follower of Jesus in many 'Christian' religious contexts, either."


His clarification: http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/2005/05/would_you_please_clarify_this_paragraph_in_generou s_orthodoxy_237.html

His statement and his clarification are in direct opposition to Paul's instructions to the Corinthian Christians regarding the same topic...2 Corinthians 6: 14-18 ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%206%20;&version=49;)


The point, however, of this post is this...the link below is a response from Chuck Colson after McLaren wrote a response to an article Chuck wrote for Christianity Today. Chuck's response is one of the best condensed detailings I have read on the subject of postmodernism...well worth reading the entire response:

http://www.brianmclaren.net/emc/archives/imported/chuck-colsons-response.html




.

Matt McKenzie
05-27-2009, 05:14 PM
I didn't read the links, but I have to wonder, considering all the different brands of Christianity out there, how do we know which ones are "twisted" and which ones are not?

Hoosier
05-27-2009, 05:19 PM
I didn't read the links, but I have to wonder, considering all the different brands of Christianity out there, how do we know which ones are "twisted" and which ones are not?

Just noticed that was your 666th post.

Keith Farmer
05-27-2009, 05:42 PM
I didn't read the links, but I have to wonder, considering all the different brands of Christianity out there, how do we know which ones are "twisted" and which ones are not?



Matt,

Your question is framed in a sense of postmodernistic language...like that of Pilot who quipped "what is truth"; questions like his and yours are dubious.

You should read the links...may help answer your questions. At any rate,
there may be many "brands" of false Christianity but there is only one true Gospel. Paul vehemently warned the Christians at Galatia about false teachers peddling "another Gospel"...read the following verses if you wish:

Galatians 1 (New American Standard Bible)

6I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting (L (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29064L))Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a (M (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29064M))different gospel;

7which is really not another; only there are some who are (N (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29065N))disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
8But even if we, or (O (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29066O))an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be (P (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29066P))accursed! 9As we (Q (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29067Q))have said before, so I say again now, (R (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29067R))if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be (S (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=55&chapter=1&version=49#cen-NASB-29067S))accursed! (emphasis mine)

The answer to your question rests on a firm foundation. That foundation is truth...which is what is being distorted in postmodernism and the emergent church movement...therefore, the term "twisted" is appropriate to distinguish their message from the truth found in scripture and as witnessed/directed by the Holy Spirit:

John 16:13 (New American Standard Bible)

13"But when He, (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2016:13;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26740A))the Spirit of truth, comes, He will (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2016:13;&version=49;#cen-NASB-26740B))guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. (emphasis mine)


2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New American Standard Bible)

16(A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%203:16-17;&version=49;#cen-NASB-29870A))All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%203:16-17;&version=49;#cen-NASB-29871B))the man of God may be adequate, (C (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%203:16-17;&version=49;#cen-NASB-29871C))equipped for every good work.


2 Peter 1:20-21 (New American Standard Bible)

20But (A (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%202%20Peter%201:20-21,;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30500A))know this first of all, that (B (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%202%20Peter%201:20-21,;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30500B))no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21for (C (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%202%20Peter%201:20-21,;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30501C))no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men (D (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%202%20Peter%201:20-21,;&version=49;#cen-NASB-30501D))moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

.

YardleyLabs
05-27-2009, 09:14 PM
Colson writes:

"On the subject of Truth, let me say humbly that I consider myself a seeker. Pascal said once that there are only two kinds of people in the world, those who have given up to despair or donít think, and seekers. I want to stay in the latter. Postmodernists, by the way, are among the former, because, they say it doesnít matter. Believe me, Brian, it does."

Having said this he then goes on in a manner that suggests that the answer lies in revealed truth which is absolute. I believe that in Pascal's thinking that would place him into the category of those "who have given up to despair or don't think."

I believe that truth is more of a direction than an absolute destination. It is hidden behind an infinite number of onion like layers and each answer simply creates a new and often more subtle series of questions to be explored, sometimes driving us back to re-examine what we believe we already know with the perspective of what we have learned along the way. The Reformation and the Renaissance challenged orthodoxy with every breath. Descartes' examination began with first principles: Cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am. It did not end with the acceptance of any gospel but laid out a process of infinite challenge. That is the spirit that led to the creation of our country and I hope it remains the spirit that will drive us.

John Kelder
05-27-2009, 09:27 PM
Interesting reading . However , given that this is POTUS Place , the truth has no business here .....

Pete
05-27-2009, 09:47 PM
Priceless:D

Its very easy to know a conterfiet when you know what the real thing looks like.
If you don't know what the real thing looks like then its impossible to tell a conterfiet .
There are many small churches which d a decent job of getting to the heart of God. They may not be 100 accurate but they are accurate on some of the stuff that gets you where you want to go someday. And that is probably the most important thing.

It would take many life times to research and pin point everthing mentioned in the bible.

But when some says you will own your own planet and become Gods or Follow the easter bunny and there is a dead saint for every flavor of ice cream then that might be a cue to investigate a little deeper

Pete

K.Bullock
05-27-2009, 09:48 PM
Colson writes:

"On the subject of Truth, let me say humbly that I consider myself a seeker. Pascal said once that there are only two kinds of people in the world, those who have given up to despair or donít think, and seekers. I want to stay in the latter. Postmodernists, by the way, are among the former, because, they say it doesnít matter. Believe me, Brian, it does."

Having said this he then goes on in a manner that suggests that the answer lies in revealed truth which is absolute. I believe that in Pascal's thinking that would place him into the category of those "who have given up to despair or don't think."

I believe that truth is more of a direction than an absolute destination. It is hidden behind an infinite number of onion like layers and each answer simply creates a new and often more subtle series of questions to be explored, sometimes driving us back to re-examine what we believe we already know with the perspective of what we have learned along the way. The Reformation and the Renaissance challenged orthodoxy with every breath. Descartes' examination began with first principles: Cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I am. It did not end with the acceptance of any gospel but laid out a process of infinite challenge. That is the spirit that led to the creation of our country and I hope it remains the spirit that will drive us.

Jeff, you could take the position that Colson ends up the victim of Pascal's scenario from just those two statements I don't think it fits in his case though. It shouldn't surprise you I have read a lot of Colson and his take on truth is very similar to what you described. And I must say I actually like the way you described truth, for me that is exactly what religion is, a direction and not a destination just to end up. Albeit with some truths that I believe to be absolute.


The reformation did not challenge orthodoxy the reformation challenged abuses by the church. If anything the reformation served to more clearly define orthodoxy. It is similar to the renaissance in that many men with great minds were free to read, write,think and discuss. To my mind some of the greatest theological writings came out of this period.

K.Bullock
05-27-2009, 09:54 PM
But when some says you will own your own planet and become Gods or Follow the easter bunny and there is a dead saint for every flavor of ice cream then that might be a cue to investigate a little deeper



Pete, I really wish you would write a book,and not let anyone edit it. That is hilarious !:D

Matt McKenzie
05-28-2009, 06:56 AM
Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, Episcopalians, etc, etc, etc. Which ones are "false Christianity" and which ones preach the "one true gospel"? Save us the huge pile of scriptural quotes and just tell us what you believe.
And in what way was my original question "dubious"?

K.Bullock
05-28-2009, 08:35 AM
I didn't read the links, but I have to wonder, considering all the different brands of Christianity out there, how do we know which ones are "twisted" and which ones are not?

Hookset, Christians of all sects have some very important things in common known in the church as "the essentials". The trinity, the deity of Christ, his crucifixion, resurrection. That it is necessary trust in Christ to enter heaven. There are a ton of nuances between the many sects how you go about all of that, but those are the basics and essentials that have been agreed upon by all for centuries.

There are some from liberal academia teaching Gnosticsm or humanism in the place of Christianity claiming to be Christians, it is not that shocking they have always been there. Knowing they exist is good, chasing them down in my view is a waste of time. In Colsons case Mclaren wrote a very public article criticizing Colson, Mclaren is a publicity hound and has attacked conservative Christians publicly on more than one occasion it seems to me it is usually about the time he is about to release a book.

Matt McKenzie
05-28-2009, 09:36 AM
I'm aware of that. I was raised in a Christian home and have a significant level of experience with Baptists, Methodists and Episcopalians. I have sent all of my children to private Christian schools. I just get tired of the "my way or the highway" attitude some so-called Christians have. I little to Taliban-ish for me.
There's probably nothing to be gained by my contributions to this thread, so I'll politely bow out now.

K.Bullock
05-28-2009, 09:46 AM
I'm aware of that. I was raised in a Christian home and have a significant level of experience with Baptists, Methodists and Episcopalians. I have sent all of my children to private Christian schools. I just get tired of the "my way or the highway" attitude some so-called Christians have. I little to Taliban-ish for me.
There's probably nothing to be gained by my contributions to this thread, so I'll politely bow out now.

Thats, the problem with the Taliban ..the good guys tend to stay indoors when they come around proselytizing. I appreciate your sentiments.

mjh345
05-28-2009, 10:37 AM
I'm aware of that. I was raised in a Christian home and have a significant level of experience with Baptists, Methodists and Episcopalians. I have sent all of my children to private Christian schools. I just get tired of the "my way or the highway" attitude some so-called Christians have. I little to Taliban-ish for me.
There's probably nothing to be gained by my contributions to this thread, so I'll politely bow out now.

Ditto!!!
Don't know what a rational fair-minded post is doing on POTUS though

My God is better than your God, regards

Keith Farmer
05-28-2009, 10:43 AM
Save us the huge pile of scriptural quotes and just tell us what you believe.

Matt,

I believe those "huge pile of scriptural quotes"...did you read them?



And in what way was my original question "dubious"?

In that your question gives rise to uncertainty about God's preserved Word of truth. If, as you suggest in your question, there is no way to discern what truth is in terms of Christian doctrine and what is false Christian doctrine then what hope have we been given? Did God leave us to the "ravenous wolves" described in scripture (teachers of false doctrine) unprepared to do battle?




.

Marty Lee
05-28-2009, 11:36 AM
thought for the day:(the only one that really matters)
to who/what do you trust for YOUR salvation?
correct answer= JESUS as SAVIOUR period not plus anything else
i would also like to add you either know HIM or you dont and only you can answer that for yourself. have a blessed day. hoping for mankind regards

K.Bullock
05-28-2009, 02:07 PM
Ditto!!!
Don't know what a rational fair-minded post is doing on POTUS though

My God is better than your God, regards

Or if your dyslexic, my dog is better than your dog regards. ;)

Franco
05-28-2009, 04:49 PM
Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, Episcopalians, etc, etc, etc. Which ones are "false Christianity" and which ones preach the "one true gospel"? Save us the huge pile of scriptural quotes and just tell us what you believe.


None! That is because man has not come to realize the "why" of our exsistance and never will.

Keith Farmer
05-28-2009, 06:39 PM
None! That is because man has not come to realize the "why" of our exsistance and never will.

Booty, you really cannot be serious with that statement?

Do you really know what is being talked about when the term Gospel is being used? If you do I would like to read your understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ...please post what you understand the Gospel to be.




.

Franco
05-28-2009, 07:23 PM
Here is one definition from Wikipedia;
In Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity), a gospel (from Old English, gōd spell "good news (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_news_(Christianity))") is to be generally one of the first four books of the New Testament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament) that describe the birth, life, ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus). The four canonical (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon) texts are the Gospel of Matthew (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew), Gospel of Mark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark), Gospel of Luke (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke) and Gospel of John (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John), probably written between 65 and 100 AD.

My definition;
Ancient Middleastern man’s attempt to explain his exsistance.

As a child I read most of it and today I view it as fiction.

Pete
05-28-2009, 07:51 PM
Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Anglicans, Lutherans, Calvinists, Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, Episcopalians, etc, etc, etc. Which ones are "false Christianity" and which ones preach the "one true gospel"? Save us the huge pile of scriptural quotes and just tell us what you believe.
And in what way was my original question "dubious"?
__________________


Its not that its false christianity but much of the info stems from paganism. There are probably peopl from most religions who have an honest heart to serve God ,,,but often they do wacky things in the name of religion. Luckily God looks on the heart.
Its best to be completely accurate when dealing with scriptures,,but sometimes theres good enough.
Satins original intent was to steal worship away from God,,thats why he got the boot. The more myth and sometimes out right lies surrounding the word of God the more he steers people away from the true heart of God.
So you can't worship God the father of JC if you think God is a Frog,or whatever because it has nothing to do with God.
So the more wrong stuff you believe the harder it is for God to bless you. He has a will for his children ,,,and iff they try hard to learn it and do it ,,they get blessed.
If they don't care about it why should God go out of his way to bless them

God descibes himself with the father analogy because its similiar in a way that earthly fathers care for their children.
I always honor my kids when they try to do my will
When they are disobedient and defiant they don't get jack. If they try hard to do my will I'll bend over backwards for them.

There behavior doesn't make or unmake them my children. They are born of my seed and if they blow up the world they are still my kids,,,but I will turn my back on them and disown them. But they are still Petestians(get it) Pete within them by seed.

So If someone is of a weird type of religon but they believe enough to get gods seed in them then they are for ever christians,,,but their standing will fluctuate with their behavior.
So thats why one can't really be a false christian because either you have Gods seed in you or you don't. Its your applying his will that will show manifest in the life of a son of God.

Their are christians that don't like God because of something bad that might have happened,,,it doesn't make them less christian. it just makes their standing in the family of God less productive as a christian.

God made it incredably easy to be his kid Romans 10 : 9 and 10

its not tough to be a christian but it takes balls to do his will
Pete

Pete
05-28-2009, 07:53 PM
Pete, I really wish you would write a book,and not let anyone edit it. That is hilarious !:grin:
__________________


Do you think anybody would buy it:D

Pete

Keith Farmer
05-28-2009, 07:57 PM
My definition;
Ancient Middleastern man’s attempt to explain his exsistance.


Here is what the Apostle Paul wrote about the Gospel:

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
17For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." (Romans 1:16,17 NASB) Emphasis original

Paul was not just an ordinary bum from the street. His educational background in cultural studies as well as religion, philosophy, etc. were unsurpassed by any of his contemporaries of the era. He was "enlightened" so to speak. Paul went on in Romans to say that men who suppressed the truth in unrighteousness became futile in their speculations. These same men, Paul said, professed to be wise but had become fools. Perhaps the same can be said of intellectuals today who spout postmodernistic jargon bathed in Christian terminology in their effort to further suppress the truth...they pass their intellect off as wisdom but in reality, from God's perspective, they are merely being foolish.


As a child I read most of it and today I view it as fiction.

Paul also wrote the following...kinda just the opposite of your actions Booty (being that Paul was a martyr for the sake of the Gospel...he surely did not view it as "fiction"):

11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. (1 Corinthians 13:11 New King James Version)


.

Franco
05-28-2009, 08:10 PM
That is one of the great things about our country Keith, we are free to believe in what we want to. Obviously, you find comfort in yours as I do mine.

The difference between me and the Obomonites is that I respect your freedom to do so. I am not anti-ancient religions as much as I am pro freedom. The Obomonites are who the Christians should be concerned with because they won't do well is our new socialist/secular society.

Pete
05-28-2009, 08:14 PM
I could give you a scriptual referance why we exist. But then again it will come down to weather people believe it or not

Pete

YardleyLabs
05-28-2009, 08:18 PM
Here is what the Apostle Paul wrote about the Gospel:

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
17For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." (Romans 1:16,17 NASB) Emphasis original

Paul was not just an ordinary bum from the street. His educational background in cultural studies as well as religion, philosophy, etc. were unsurpassed by any of his contemporaries of the era. He was "enlightened" so to speak. Paul went on in Romans to say that men who suppressed the truth in unrighteousness became futile in their speculations. These same men, Paul said, professed to be wise but had become fools. Perhaps the same can be said of intellectuals today who spout postmodernistic jargon bathed in Christian terminology in their effort to further suppress the truth...they pass their intellect off as wisdom but in reality, from God's perspective, they are merely being foolish.



Paul also wrote the following...kinda just the opposite of your actions Booty (being that Paul was a martyr for the sake of the Gospel...he surely did not view it as "fiction"):

11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. (1 Corinthians 13:11 New King James Version)


.
Keith,

I truly enjoy reading the Bible. However, I do not accept it as fact or as revealed truth. As a consequence, I find quotations from the Bible to be pointless as a form of "reasoned" argument since the reason disappears in the absence of faith. Ultimately, faith is the antithesis of reason. That doesn't make it wrong. It is simply something different.

Franco
05-28-2009, 08:19 PM
I could give you a scriptual referance why we exist. But then again it will come down to weather people believe it or not

Pete

Go ahead and post it, it is all generally good reading and much of it has a certain amount of wisdom. Things we can all learn from as man figured out through lifes experiences over the ages, right from wrong. Afterall, we have only had 30,000 plus years to explore our exsistence.

Pete
05-28-2009, 09:42 PM
Isaiah 43:7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.

I am out of time,,gotta go air dogs

but this is the first one I could think of,God created man to worship him. God wanted a family. Why he made ,formed and created man to glorify him woiuld take a book filled with scripture build up. And most people would fall asleep reading it. If my kid hasn't hi jacked the puter while i'm airing I'll post more
I can post one liners out of the book concerning this subject but in reality its the scripture build up that makes the hair stand up on the people who believe.

Gotta go
Pete

Keith Farmer
05-28-2009, 09:56 PM
I truly enjoy reading the Bible. However, I do not accept it as fact or as revealed truth.


I believe that truth in its very condensed essence is the self expression of God. God chose to reveal Himself to man in several different ways...one of which is His written word, which is called the word of truth. Another is through nature and the heavens. As such, truth is theological.

Further, truth is ontological...the way things really are. Reality is the exact order of God expressed via His divine sovereign will. Any search for truth that sets aside God's inspired, infallible, inerrant word is spurious. Any search for truth that imposes man's wisdom over God's word is likewise spurious. Any search for truth without the inclusion of God Himself as the source or objective is foolish since God alone is the source and embodiment of truth.

Like Paul said in Romans...Let God be true and every man a liar!

Jesus Himself described intellectually driven false religious leaders as whitewashed tombs...beautiful on the outside but full of deadmen's bones and uncleanness on the inside. Vain attempts at piety are a mere whitewashing of the hideous message postmodernism spews Jeff...nothing more.





.

Pete
05-28-2009, 10:55 PM
Kieth
That was very well spoken.


I was just thinking what K bulluck said about the trinity.the diety of christ and something else I can't remember and if I try to hit the back button it will erase my post so I wont go back to look at it.
But in essence he mentioned that all christians had that in common.

Well Im someone people would classify as christen . Through research I have traced the many different origins of the 3 in 1 God and I believe that JC was the son of God not God himself.
Would that make me a false christian.:D

It was by coincidence that I posted Isaiah 43 :7 but thinking about it now if that verse was expounded on it would totally shake and crumble the foundation of ancient christianity.

Pete

K.Bullock
05-28-2009, 11:28 PM
Kieth
That was very well spoken.


I was just thinking what K bulluck said about the trinity.the diety of christ and something else I can't remember and if I try to hit the back button it will erase my post so I wont go back to look at it.
But in essence he mentioned that all christians had that in common.

Well Im someone people would classify as christen . Through research I have traced the many different origins of the 3 in 1 God and I believe that JC was the son of God not God himself.
Would that make me a false christian.:D

It was by coincidence that I posted Isaiah 43 :7 but thinking about it now if that verse was expounded on it would totally shake and crumble the foundation of ancient christianity.

Pete
I would buy your book Pete. I buy a lot of books that nobody else buys though lol :) !

The problem with expounding on one verse or expositing one passage is that it leaves out the main idea. I can string several verses together to make them say anything I want. And actually I see it done quite often. I am sure I could take a speech written by MLK and make it appear that he supported segregation if I did not pay attention to the major themes and substance of his speech.

YardleyLabs
05-29-2009, 05:26 AM
I believe that truth in its very condensed essence is the self expression of God. God chose to reveal Himself to man in several different ways...one of which is His written word, which is called the word of truth. Another is through nature and the heavens. As such, truth is theological.

Further, truth is ontological...the way things really are. Reality is the exact order of God expressed via His divine sovereign will. Any search for truth that sets aside God's inspired, infallible, inerrant word is spurious. Any search for truth that imposes man's wisdom over God's word is likewise spurious. Any search for truth without the inclusion of God Himself as the source or objective is foolish since God alone is the source and embodiment of truth.

Like Paul said in Romans...Let God be true and every man a liar!

Jesus Himself described intellectually driven false religious leaders as whitewashed tombs...beautiful on the outside but full of deadmen's bones and uncleanness on the inside. Vain attempts at piety are a mere whitewashing of the hideous message postmodernism spews Jeff...nothing more.





.

Keith, I've been accused of many things, but never "Vain attempts at piety". I have never claimed piety of any sort. The Compact Oxford English Dictionary refers to postmodernism as "a style and concept in the arts characterized by distrust of theories and ideologies and by the drawing of attention to conventions." Sounds pretty good to me.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:18 AM
I believe that JC was the son of God not God himself.
Would that make me a false christian.:grin:



Pete,
Your view is classic Arianism.

That line of thought was exactly what the Nicene creed challenged (thanks to the effort of one man who earnestly contended for the faith as urged by Jude in his self titled epistle):

From Wikipedia (Church of England common worship version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_versions_of_the_Nicene_Creed_in_current_us e )

I believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only begotten Son of God,
begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,
very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;
who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost
of the Virgin Mary,
and was made man;
and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried;
and the third day he rose again
according to the Scriptures,
and ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
and he shall come again, with glory,
to judge both the quick and the dead;
whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Live,
who proceedeth from the Father [and the Son];
who with the Father and the Son together
is worshipped and glorified;
who spake by the Prophets.
And I believe one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church;
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins;
and I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. AMEN.


Does it make you a "false Christian"? That is between you and God.

I do say, however, that the doctrine you mentioned (Arianism) is heresy and apostate in its foundation. Jude declared this:

For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ (Jude 1:4 NASB 1995)



.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:20 AM
Keith, I've been accused of many things, but never "Vain attempts at piety". I have never claimed piety of any sort


Jeff,

I was not specifically aiming that at you. Rather, I was referring to postmodernistic views/language that use but twist biblical doctrine.



.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:23 AM
The Compact Oxford English Dictionary refers to postmodernism as "a style and concept in the arts characterized by distrust of theories and ideologies


On what ground is the distrust based? If, for example, it is based on scriptural truths (as was exemplified by the Bereans) then I agree. If the foundation is humanistic and self serving (like most postmodernistic thought is) then I disagree. In fact, we are urged to do that very thing in 1 John 4:1: "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." (NASB)



.

Franco
05-29-2009, 08:49 AM
Jeff,

Rather, I was referring to postmodernistic views/language that use but twist biblical doctrine.



.

There is nothing new about organized religions all over the world adding thier TWIST in creating thier own identity. Those twist is what makes them different and creates their unique selling proposition. One thing that has not changed over the last 5,000 years is that religion is big business and largely exsist to selfserve the higher members of that sect. Those twist are needed to keep the flock in line for without the flock they have no income.

Beware of those religions that are low on spirituality and high on judgement!

And, why are today's new phenom, the Mega-Chruch so popular?

http://www.orgsites.com/ca/rusellonline/_pgg10.php3

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 09:04 AM
There is nothing new about organized religions all over the world adding thier TWIST in creating thier own identity.


Yeah Booty, but we are not discussing world religions. We are specifically discussing Christianity as it is being distorted by postmodernism.

Christianity, by definition, is monothesitic and is based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. The record of His life and teachings are first prophesied then actually recorded in what is known as the Old Testament and New Testament respectively.

A Christian, by definition, is someone who adheres to the teachings of Jesus Himself and the apostles who were set apart by God for their service. So claiming to be Christian but denying Christ is a contradiction in terms is it not?


.

Franco
05-29-2009, 09:22 AM
So claiming to be Christian but denying Christ is a contradiction in terms is it not?


.

Yes it is!

And, the various Christian sects are the biggest of businesses. More so than the more spiritual religions such as in Buddism and Hinduism.

Then, we have Islam and as far as I can tell, they like to deal in blood. Both Islam and most Christian religions deal in fear and judgement.

Pete
05-29-2009, 09:34 AM
Actually Keith it was Constantine who came up with the Nicene creed he was of Pagan origin and he tried to merge Christians with pagans to form a one world church. we know it today as the catholic church which is very trinitarian . And I grew up in that faith and the priest told me when I asked him to explain the trinity that I would have to take it on faith. Well know where in the word is the word trinity and there are only a dozen or so unclear verses that may indicate JC was God and thousands of others that indicate differently.
By the way if JC was God himself we would not be redeemed.
It would take a 100 percent man to redeem man. JC is refered to the second Adam. Was Adam God?
The word is logical.
religion is illogical.
Why did it take 4000 years from the time of the fall for God to send the redeemer?
It really is quite easy to crumble theories based on the trinity.
Because most trinitarians take things on faith they have been brought up believing in this constantine political doctrine.

It was easy to merge cristians and pagans because pagans and greeks both worshipped gods in group of 3's

There is nothing arian about what I believe. hell I don't even know what arian means:D

However I have earnestly studuied the word for 30 years without being influenced by religious belief. I have studied words,customs and manners,hebrew idiums,figures of speech, and have let the chips fall where the be.

Her is an example. If you go to the greek interlinear and look up I Tim 3:16 you will notive that the word God is used when refering being made flesh.
However at the bottom of the page you will notice 11 scolars interpreted it the word "which" because after looking at the old piece of goat skin that they translated this word the saw a definate HOS which means "which" "HO" means "God". The word HO means God. One of the scholars used his great trinitarian backround to over ride the other 11 scholars.

Now read it using the word Which.
The bible is littered with this stuff.
Here is a verse for ya.
I corinthians 15 :45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit

refering to ole JC.

Pete

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 12:14 PM
Actually Keith it was Constantine who came up with the Nicene creed


Actually, Constantine was Emporer but later refuted the creed against Arianism and was actually baptised by an Arian Bishop. The person who fought earnestly for the faith once and for all handed down to the saints (Christians) was Athanasius of Alexandria. In fact, his creed differed from the Nicene creed in that it pronounced anathemas on anyone who disagreed with the creed. The crux of his work was the defense of the Trinity...one God expressed in three persons.



By the way if JC was God himself we would not be redeemed.


From where do you get that?


Why did it take 4000 years from the time of the fall for God to send the redeemer?

I don't know Pete. God is certainly long suffering and patient. His efforts at allowing mankind to try and work out salvation through keeping religious order (the law) proved that mankind was not capable of self-salvation...man could not save himself.



And I grew up in that faith and the priest told me when I asked him to explain the trinity that I would have to take it on faith.


A religion tainted with paganism is the last source I would cite for evidence against the trinity.



Well know where in the word is the word trinity


Perhaps. But words have meaning Pete. For example, the text below is not ambiguous...three is the same as trinity, triune, etc.

7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one (1 John 5:7 KJV)



There is nothing arian about what I believe.


You should know what you believe Pete. However, your doctrinal ideology is most certainly derived from the heresy taught by Arius. Here is a wikipedia link to explain who he was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arius In short, he was declared a heretic, was exonerated, then declared a heretic again after his death. Funny thing about his death; after Arius was exonerated by Constantine Athanasius, who subsequently refused to allow Arius inclusion in the communion (and was exiled as the result), prayed that God would intervene before allowing this heretic to gain a foothold in the church. The day before he was to take part in communion he (Arius) dropped dead suddenly (interesting if nothing else huh?) Here is the story as reported by Socrates Scholasticus (source Wikipedia):

It was then Saturday, and... going out of the imperial palace, attended by a crowd of Eusebian [Eusebius of Nicomedia is meant] partisans like guards, he [Arius] paraded proudly through the midst of the city, attracting the notice of all the people. As he approached the place called Constantine's Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine's Forum, he hastened thither. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died. The scene of this catastrophe still is shown at Constantinople, as I have said, behind the shambles in the colonnade: and by persons going by pointing the finger at the place, there is a perpetual remembrance preserved of this extraordinary kind of death.

As for the rest Pete I believe scripture is clear about the doctrine of God being expressed in three persons. I believe that the apostles and subsequent church leaders supported (sometimes at their own peril) the same doctrine of the Trinity.


.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 12:23 PM
more spiritual religions such as in Buddism and Hinduism.



So:

Is spirtituality a result of emotion?

Is spirtituality based on religious practice/conduct...orthopraxy? Or is spirituality based on religious belief...orthodoxy?

Not really sure how the religions you listed are "more spirtitual"...just trying to warp...er wrap..my mind around your ideology Booty.



.

Pete
05-29-2009, 12:46 PM
Kieth
Its futile to go back and forth on these issues because the internet is time consuming.

But I believe and can prove the opposite. I dont care about who believes what I am only concerned in getting an accurate account of the word.

its a book that has been tampered with for thousands of years but most things are easily traceable.

God s word is logical and has 0 contradictions ,,,because God cannot lie like men. He built the earth which hangeth on nothing,,,to do so this universe must be orderly and follow a logic pattern.
If we start off with a false premise and follow it through logically the conclusion will always be false. That why it is incredably important to reseach out thouroly and make sure our starting point is as accurate as possible

I always enjoy your posts but it is 2 time consuming for me to debate in depth because of my archaic technical skills.
But the bottom line is we both are going to heaven and there is nothing on earth that can prevent it.
If I don't see you here I'll see you there and then I'll have plenty of time to debate:D

Pete

Franco
05-29-2009, 01:03 PM
So:

Is spirtituality a result of emotion?

Is spirtituality based on religious practice/conduct...orthopraxy? Or is spirituality based on religious belief...orthodoxy?

Not really sure how the religions you listed are "more spirtitual"...just trying to warp...er wrap..my mind around your ideology Booty.



.

I just typed a lengthy reply, hit the submit button and it all disappeared. Did it a second time and same thing. I'll write my reply on Word and copy and paste tonight.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 01:11 PM
I just typed a lengthy reply, hit the submit button and it all disappeared. Did it a second time and same thing.


Oh the drama...

Booty, it may be Karma man; might want to leave it be.


.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 01:35 PM
I dont care about who believes what I am only concerned in getting an accurate account of the word.



I too wish to hold fast to an accurate account of the word. As I posted previously Jude urged Christians (not Hindus, Buddhists, etc) to earnestly contend for the faith that was once and for all handed down to the saints. What faith was he alluding to? If not the faith that Jesus Himself orchestrated and then turned over to the apostles under direction of the Holy Spirit (the Comforter or Parakletos who was promised) then what faith?

Jesus (in an Earthly sense) was crucified for claiming to be God. If He is a liar then what hope do we place our trust in?

The truth that Jesus is fully God and fully man, the very icon of God the Father on the Earth, is essential to the very foundation of the Christian faith. It may not mean a hill of beans to a Hindu but Christianity hinges its very existence on the fact that Jesus is who He says He is...1 John 2:22 says
"Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ?" (NASB)

Now I did not say that (although I certainly agree with it) John the apostle said that...

.

Cody Covey
05-29-2009, 02:06 PM
I have a question for you Keith that is a little off topic so if you want to PM me instead that's fine. How can there be prophecies and what not but still have Free Will. If someone can know the future than everything is already laid out and I really don't have a choice. Not trying to start another arguement just something i have always sort of struggled with as a Christian. Again PM me if you feel more appropriate.

twall
05-29-2009, 02:38 PM
...what not but still have Free Will.

This is what spawned the reformation, the great debate between Luther and Erasmus. We do not have free will. Read Luther's 'The Bonadage of the Will' for a scriptural discussion. You can also look up Calvin's five points. TULIP: Total depravity of man, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresitable grace and Perseverence of the saints.

Tom

Pete
05-29-2009, 04:04 PM
JC never,, no not once claimed to be God,

He said not my will but my fathers will be done
He prayed to God all the time
If he were God why the heck is he praying to himself
he said he could do nothing without the father.

We need more investigation don't we.

My son cannot be me. However is has acess to everthing I own.

John 1:1 is probably the most legthly expounding one would have to do to unravel . remember starting with the right premise is what is important when getting to the heart of the matter.
All the rest are 2 minute jobs.

Pete

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 05:29 PM
Pete,

I respectfully but adamantly disagree with you regarding the subject of Jesus' deity. Although Jesus may have never said the exact words..."I am God"...(although He could have) He certainly set Himself equal with God even referring to Himself as "I Am" which angered the religous leaders so much they tried to stone Him on the spot. Here is the text:

(John 8:58 NASB)58Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

His assertion in the "great commission": (Matthew 28:18-20 NIV) "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." certainly sets Himself equal with God as part of the Holy Trinity.

Even deeper is this

John 14:7-10 NKJV) 7 “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.”
8 Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.”
9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? How much more perspicuous can that be?

Or:

30"I and the Father are one."

31The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.
32Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." (John 10:30-33 New American Standard Bible) emphasis added.

Now, for perspicuity's sake let's take a look at a couple of the Ten Commandments (this is a paraphrased version for specific usage here) :

1) I am the Lord your God...You are to have no other gods but me.

2) for I, the Lord your God, am a God who will not give his honour to another;

Without going so deep and eating up pages of proof I will summize by saying that if Jesus said "he who has seen Me has seen the Father" and further declared in the great commission that we are to spread the Gospel baptizing people in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit then God has either overlooked Jesus' claims/orders or Jesus was/is in fact who He said He was/is. God certainly has not relented on His Ten Commandments and is now allowing an Earthly human being (although a "good man" and a "prophet" as some claim) to share His honour...that would make God a liar. So then, we are now back to what I stated earlier...Let God be true and every man a liar!

The book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ says: (Rev 17:14 NASB) 14"These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful."

The commentary that accompanies the text is quoted below (from biblegateway.com)



The reason of the victory is, that
he is the King of kings, and Lord of lords. He has supreme dominion and power over all things; all the powers of earth and hell are subject to his control. His followers are called to this warfare, are fitted for it, and will be faithful in it. (Rev 17:15-18)


God alone is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. If Jesus fits that description as Revelation 17 declares (which I believe to be true) then He indeed is God!

Finally, the apostles and church elders have held belief in the deity of Jesus for centuries. The church has debated and subsequently debunked the ideology you are promoting as heresy...I am certainly not on equal footing with Luther, Calvin, etc. but I do affirm what they stood for.







.

K.Bullock
05-29-2009, 06:19 PM
JC never,, no not once claimed to be God,

He said not my will but my fathers will be done
He prayed to God all the time
If he were God why the heck is he praying to himself
he said he could do nothing without the father.

We need more investigation don't we.

My son cannot be me. However is has acess to everthing I own.

John 1:1 is probably the most legthly expounding one would have to do to unravel . remember starting with the right premise is what is important when getting to the heart of the matter.
All the rest are 2 minute jobs.

Pete
Your almost right Pete. The orthodox small o meaning the accepted Christian belief is that Jesus is both fully God and fully man. He did not make over the top claims about himself in large settings he alluded to his deity in ways that the pharisee and Sadducee would understand. It strikes me that when he made the very bold statement " I am" it was in response to Nicodemus a leader among the pharisee during a very discreet encounter. The conversation was about being born again into everlasting life and Jesus explained that to receive this everlasting life it is only necessary to trust and believe in the son of God. Nicodemus asked Jesus "who is this son of God" Jesus responded " I am ..do you believe me?" (except in aramaic) This is consistent throughout the new testament he met people as individuals, he treated the rejects of society with a very soft and loving hand, lifting them above their circumstances. And to those that should have known better, the Hebrew priestly class, he was very harsh. Not because God hated them but, because they should know better.

"Love one another as I have loved you"

Never not once did he accost sinners on street with an obnoxious sign attached to him and spew vile poison at them about their lifestyles or lack of belief in him,while quoting scripture from the old testament at them. He was/is quite the contrary.

twall
05-29-2009, 06:41 PM
Keith,

Back to the original topic. I agree with Colson in general. But, I think his 'long search' for truth smacks of postmodernism. Truth is simple. Truth is what God says it is.

Sola scriptura, sola gratia, sole fide, solus Christus, sole Deo gloria.

Tom

Cody Covey
05-29-2009, 06:57 PM
they debated about words written by people 50 years after Jesus was crucified (in some cases more) more than 300 years after the words were written. How are those in a council going to be setting the doctrine as the one and only way. Maybe they got it wrong. They were like you said debating. They weren't speaking with God or anyone else you may find to be divine. I was always led to believe that they were one in purpose not in being. If i go to hell because of that than so be it i suppose but i hope not. :)

YardleyLabs
05-29-2009, 07:05 PM
Happily, my heritage stems from Unitarians who lost the vote that established the Niacene Creed. In a context where 1700 synods participated in discussions under the auspices of a pagan emperor whose sole concern was the establishment of a religion that would make governance of the empire stronger, I find it hard to take seriously any claims that the result was any more than a political compromise. If disagreeing with such a compromise is heresy, than I am a proud heretic. My own brand of heresy was unitarianism, not arianism. Personally, however, I do not claim to be a theist at all. My beliefs are fundamentally humanist. I welcome the humanist contributions made by most religions, but reject the notion that any one can claim to represent a special truth.

You denounce (most?) postmodernism as "humanistic and self serving", implying that the two go hand in hand. In my mind, humanism is self serving only in the broadest communal sense of serving humanity, not the individual. Organized religion, however, seems to spend the bulk of its energies supporting its own institutions which form a much narrower audience.

Pete
05-29-2009, 07:11 PM
Keith
I totally understand where you are comming from.
But the bible is an eastern book. There are cultural and customary meanings behind some of the verses you gave.
Old idiums which are never taught.

I am my father are one ,,,,of of the top of my head I believe the word one is the word heis , I should look it up. But it is in the nueter and means unity of purpose. The same word is used to describe my wife and I being one flesh.

JC was Gods word in the flesh just as the stars are gods word in the heavans and the bible is Gods word in writting.

JC always did his fathers will ,,he did 100 mpercent of his written word,,the written word,JC and the stars all present the heart of God.


You mentioned the father ,,the word and the holy ghost,,,some of these words do not appear in earlier texts.

In heavan and in earth was added

The early manuscripts before around 6th century do not contain these words
They first appeared in latin copies and then they were added to the english. ft note bruce metzner texual commentary to the greek new testiment page 716 and 717

I believe the earliest manuscripts read as follows.
"For there are 3 that bear record,,the spirit,,thewater,,and the blood and these 3 agree in one."

they were ovious attemps by those scribes to intentionally lean the translation to a 3 in 1 god. The theology of Irenaeus and Tertullian were the first know writers to use the word trinity

I would imagine that the corruption of ! john 5 7 and 8 had not yet occured by the 4th century because they only had one scripture toutilize for there theory and that is Mathew 28 19. This is when water baptism was in,,,,you know ,,I baptise you in the name of the father and the son and holy ghost.

There are also only 2 manuscripts which show this, Also there was a guy namedEusebias who quoted in the early part of the 4th century and he never used trinitarian words ,,,rather he sited from scripture "in my name"

There are a ton of old research books on this stuff. Any way peple are falling asleep.

The trinity as far as christianity is concerned started in 325 with the nicene .
Encyclopedia bricannica"
The council of Niceamet on may 20 325 Constantine himself presiding and actively guidig the discussion and personally proposed ( no doubt on Ossius prompting) the crucial formula expressing the relation of christ to God in the creed issued by the council of one substance with the father Over awed by the emporor,the bishops with 2 exceptionsonly signed the creed many of them against their inclination.

As long as constantine lived no one challenged him openly but the expected concord did not follow. end quote


By 381 ad a second ecumental council met in constantanople. Theyt adopted a new nicene creed. stating jesus crist was god.
Sorry for the long wind
Hope this helps

Pete

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 07:50 PM
Organized religion, however, seems to spend the bulk of its energies supporting its own institutions which form a much narrower audience.


Religions in general all teach that man has to do something to earn some sort of salvation or pass to the next life...that is with the exception of Christianity. I have detailed this before so I digress.

Franco
05-29-2009, 08:05 PM
Oh the drama...

Booty, it may be Karma man; might want to leave it be.


.

As promised, I'm back!;-)

First off, Karma is a Hindu thang.



I view Christianity and Islam similar in their lack of real spirituallity and heavy on judgement. Do such and such and go to heaven. The Muslims throw in the added perks of virgins to party with in heaven. Don’t do this and go to hell for eternity. Very weak and obviously the creation of ancient man’s mentallity. By the way, I view Heaven and Hell as a control thing by both middleeastern religions, Christianity and Islam. They get their flocks to obey by threatening with damnation.

Hinduism lacks an official system of belief. Instead, focuses on life’s experiences which many in the west view as pagan because of Hinduism’s abstract and metaphysical ideas. The basic priniples which drives them are; Devotion to life, what is right, knowledge and discipline. More spiritual than judgemental. Sensual pleasure is good unlike the two middleeastern religions, Christianity and Islam

The Budhist, like the Hindus transend religious dogmas and theology in search for real and more meaningful truths of life.
The Budhist basic beleifs;
The greatest achievement is selflessness.
The greatest worth is self-mastery.
The greatest quality is seeking to serve others.
The greatest precept is continual awareness.
The greatest medicine is the emptiness of everything.
The greatest action is not conforming with the worlds ways.
The greatest magic is transmuting the passions.
The greatest generosity is non-attachment.
The greatest goodness is a peaceful mind.
The greatest patience is humility.
The greatest effort is not concerned with results.
The greatest meditation is a mind that lets go.
The greatest wisdom is seeing through appearances."

And No, the devil didn't make me write this!:D

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:13 PM
But the bible is an eastern book


Pete,

That is one of the methods used by the Catholic church to keep the written word out of the hands of common people...that being that God's Word is not knowable unless someone enlightened expounds upon its truths.

I believe God has given us a preserved word of truth. I believe the Holy Spirit is our Parakletos who guides us in the truth. I believe that God illuminates His Word to His people via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I believe the Holy Spirit bears witness with each Christian's spirit in an effort to maintain truth.

Having said all of that...if God's word is so messed up that we cannot take it at face value then we should toss our bibles in the trash...I for one do not believe that.

Jesus said you are either for Me or against Me. There is no middle ground where Jesus is concerned. You said you are a Christian Pete. By what definition are you going by if you deny the Lordship of Jesus? To what tenets of the faith of Christianity are you adhering?

Paul sums up my view precisley: Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.(Philippians 2: 9-11)

Notice that nothing and nobody is exempt from bowing to the Lordship of Jesus in the future. Everyone and everything will bow to His Lordship...



.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:17 PM
First off, Karma is a Hindu thang.



I know, thought you would like that...:cool:






Do such and such and go to heaven.


That is not what Christianity teaches. Apostates may have perverted the Gospel to include works but works are not part of the fundamental Christian doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus alone.



.

YardleyLabs
05-29-2009, 08:20 PM
I know, thought you would like that...:cool:






That is not what Christianity teaches. Apostates may have perverted the Gospel to include works but works are not part of the fundamental Christian doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus alone.



.

So instead we say worship me and believe in me and I will reward you with heaven. That's about as transactional as things can get.

Franco
05-29-2009, 08:22 PM
Apostates may have perverted the Gospel to include works but works are not part of the fundamental Christian doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus alone.



.

Huh? Are you saying that the Gospel doesn't preach eternal salvation through faith in Jesus?

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 08:37 PM
Huh? Are you saying that the Gospel doesn't preach eternal salvation through faith in Jesus?


Uh...where did you get that from?

I said that works are not part of the Christian doctrine of...salvation by grace alone (which is from God), through faith alone (faith is also a gift from God...not something we have of our own that we just decide to exercise), in Jesus alone (God incarnate...the Word that became flesh and dwelt among us who died for us).

That is to say that salvation is not based on any works that can be done by man. Rather, salvation is the free gift of God (see above). In fact, God says that our righteousness (us at our best doing the best things we can possibly do) is like filthy rags (do I need to explain what that means?) to Him.

So, unlike other world religions, Christianity is 100% based on what God has done, is doing, and will do for us...it is that way so no one can boast about doing such and such...its all about God Booty!



.

K.Bullock
05-29-2009, 08:42 PM
I know, thought you would like that...:cool:






That is not what Christianity teaches. Apostates may have perverted the Gospel to include works but works are not part of the fundamental Christian doctrine of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus alone.



.

That sounds like superlapsarian Calvinism, it imply's that the elect are saved from God's decree and nothing more.
Are they the only ones that are getting it right and everyone else a post-modern in your mind? Apostate is a big word.

Keith Farmer
05-29-2009, 09:18 PM
That sounds like superlapsarian Calvinism, it imply's that the elect are saved from God's decree and nothing more.
Are they the only ones that are getting it right and everyone else a post-modern in your mind?



Ken,

Not sure what you are driving at but my intent is aimed at apostates such as Judaizers who injected works into grace alone through faith alone, in Jesus alone salvation. Read the book of Galations...Paul addresses this very topic in detail. If you have any questions about my position regarding the plan of salvation it is summed up pretty well in that book. Further, this is my foundational stance about salvation:

8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.(Ephesians 2:8-9 NIV)

In terms of "everyone else" being post-modern...only the postmodernists are postmodern Ken...that is simple enough is it not?



Jeff,

To answer your querry about transactional salvation let me say this. Christianity teaches that one does not get saved by "worshipping me" and thereby getting the reward of heaven (that would be works based salvation). In my case, my salvation experience preceded my worship of God. That is to say that my worship of Jesus as my Saviour and Lord began after I surrendered my life to His call.

As such, worship can be said to be an extension of the salvation experience but is by no means a causal agent of salvation.

Hope that clears up any superlapsarian Calvinism ideas and the works based Christianity myth.

I am done...headed in with the girls.


.

K.Bullock
05-29-2009, 09:26 PM
Huh? Are you saying that the Gospel doesn't preach eternal salvation through faith in Jesus?
He is referring to the U in T.U.L.I.P. unconditional election, it is the belief that if you are lucky enough to be one of the elect children of God then you will be saved no matter what. You have absolutely no choice in the matter, God's grace will draw you to him no matter what you do.To me it is kind of a conceited sort of universalism for a minority of God's creation.

It is noteworthy that Calvin had never heard of Tulip and his writings The Institutes of the Christian Religion are much kinder to other Christians than the hyper Calvinism that has claimed his name. The TULIP doctrine was developed at the Synod of Dort in the 1600's in response to the Remonstrants , followers of reformation theologian James Arminius who developed the 5 points of Arminianism that included doctrine that we have a choice whether to follow God or not. TULIP was another doctrine developed more out of politics and the desire for control, there were no followers of James Arminius present at the synod of Dort because they were jailed or driven out by the then dominant Calvinists. Later though after the Synod, Arminius followers were allowed back into the "fold" so to the speak.

To read the writings of James Arminius and John Calvin you wouldn't think that they would be in conflict. Yet somehow someone always seems to find a way. Calvinism has been a minority voice in Christendom for some time. It is enjoying a resurgence however mainly due to ...strangely enough the post-modern emergent church and pastors like Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Seattle that have done well at bringing back a sort of Neo- Calvinism that is actually closer to Reformation Arminianism than true Calvinism. The unfortunate side result of that is a resurgence of Dort style hyper-Calvinism as well.

Booty you may already know this, but that does not take away from my enjoyment of writing it.
:D

Franco
05-29-2009, 09:39 PM
He is referring to the U in T.U.L.I.P. unconditional election, it is the belief that if you are lucky enough to be one of the elect children of God then you will be saved no matter what. You have absolutely no choice in the matter, God's grace will draw you to him no matter what you do.To me it is kind of a conceited sort of universalism for a minority of God's creation.

It is noteworthy that Calvin had never heard of Tulip and his writings The Institutes of the Christian Religion are much kinder to other Christians than the hyper Calvinism that has claimed his name. The TULIP doctrine was developed at the Synod of Dort in the 1600's in response to the Remonstrants , followers of reformation theologian James Arminius who developed the 5 points of Arminianism that included doctrine that we have a choice whether to follow God or not. TULIP was another doctrine developed more out of politics and the desire for control, there were no followers of James Arminius present at the synod of Dort because they were jailed or driven out by the then dominant Calvinists. Later though after the Synod, Arminius followers were allowed back into the "fold" so to the speak.

To read the writings of James Arminius and John Calvin you wouldn't think that they would be in conflict. Yet somehow someone always seems to find a way. Calvinism has been a minority voice in Christendom for some time. It is enjoying a resurgence however mainly due to ...strangely enough the post-modern emergent church and pastors like Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Seattle that have done well at bringing back a sort of Neo- Calvinism that is actually closer to Reformation Arminianism than true Calvinism. The unfortunate side result of that is a resurgence of Dort style hyper-Calvinism as well.

Booty you may already know this, but that does not take away from my enjoyment of writing it.
:D

Well, thanks for the education.

I'm not familiar with the Protestant side of Christianity, just too many different sects and lots of politics.

So, if salvation is predetermined, than it is no different than what the Muslim's beleive in that it "is written"? One's destiny that is.

The similarities between Islam and perticularly what I am reading of the Protestant side of Christianity are astounding. Probably has to do with the orgins being from the same region.

I have a question; So, what is the point of salvation if one fate is predetermined?

K.Bullock
05-29-2009, 09:54 PM
Well, thanks for the education.

I've not familiar with the Protestant side of Christianity, just too many different sects and lots of politics.

So, if salvation is predetermined, than it is no different than what the Muslim's beleive in that it "is written"? One's destiny that is.

The similarities between Islam and perticularly what I am reading of the Protestant side of Christianity are astounding. Probably has to do with the orgins being from the same region.
Not only that but if it is predetermined ....what is the point of Jesus suffering and dieing for a job that is already done?


I disagree though that protestantism is similar to Islam. They do have similar origins,that is where the similarities end though. The major themes couldn't be more different.

Franco
05-29-2009, 10:04 PM
Not only that but if it is predetermined ....what is the point of Jesus suffering and dieing for a job that is already done?


I disagree though that protestantism is similar to Islam. They do have similar origins,that is where the similarities end though. The major themes couldn't be more different.

Well, they both promise virgins and vestial virgins in the afterlife.;-)
If I thought that was real, I would repent and wouldn't insist on virgins. In fact, a little experience would be more to my liking. :rolleyes:

I've got to say that I prefer the simplicity and realness of Hinduism. Not that I am one but, thier material is profound in reading and much easier for a mere lost soul like me to relate to.

I don't believe in an afterlife and the finality of one's exsistence is too difficult for many to accept.

K.Bullock
05-29-2009, 10:22 PM
[QUOTE]Well, they both promise virgins and vestial virgins in the afterlife.;-)
If I thought that was real, I would repent and wouldn't insist on virgins. In fact, a little experience would be more to my liking. :rolleyes:

Then Ghandi's your man ..he didn't believe in waiting he took a whole gaggle to bed with him. :eek:


I've got to say that I prefer the simplicity and realness of Hinduism. Not that I am one but, thier material is profound in reading and much easier for a mere lost soul like me to relate to.
I like C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity when I am looking for profound, as well as his other books.


I don't believe in an afterlife and the finality of one's exsistence is too difficult for many to accept

I think that is the reason for things like stone henge and pyramids, we inherently have a fear of finality. It begs the question though, how is that we have knowledge of our own mortality?

Pete
05-29-2009, 11:13 PM
[QUOTE][/Jesus said you are either for Me or against Me. There is no middle ground where Jesus is concerned. You said you are a Christian Pete. By what definition are you going by if you deny the Lordship of Jesus? To what tenets of the faith of Christianity are you adhering?

QUOTE]]

keith I never denied JC as my lord and savior
I denied him as God almighty maker of heaven and earth.

Adam fell yet he was made a perfect man. Jc had the potential of screwing up . Why do you think satin tempted him for 40 days and nights. He offered him all the kingdoms of the world he JC would bow down and worship him. Also God cannot be tempted yet JC was tempted.
Yes he had the potential to put man in an unreedemable state. God held off 4000years looking for the right woman he knew would raise him in the nurture of the lord. There is so much more to this than what meets the eye.
The more you study the more it builds. Allthe libraries in the worl;d could never hold the info packed into that 2 inch book.

Its silly to think the king james version is the identical word that was original given. Most things are really close and exact but much also needs to be worked.
Just the translation from king james english to american english is a study in itself. I can spit out a list of words if taken from the king james english and used in modern day english would totaly change the word of God.

Its no wonder people are confused they read the bible and think up their own interpretation.
Peter 1 20 talks about that.

Pete

Pete
05-29-2009, 11:49 PM
Just thinking here.
If JC is the son of God and Gods children are his sons and daughters then JC would be my brother and if he is my brother then I will get everthing he gets wala

Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Also if we will be like him then we will be like gods

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

But thats blashemy isn't it. That what satin told Eve which was the original lie Ye shall be as gods

So following the logic JC can't be God almighty rather Gods son. There is a ton of this stuff. Its probably why I dig it so much.

If you follow the trinity through logically youl'l end up in a jam as far as accuracy goes. And all you'll have is what you believe. I only believe what I have worked.
But to go back to your insuation that JC is not my savior on the contrary he is my living lord and savior,hero,,if it wasn't for his remarkable tightness with God we would all be in the soup.

The word of God in greek is logos and is the root word for logic. A perfect mathematical equation . God invented physics too.:D
Anyway most are yawning by now ,,I thought I would give you my angle.
Pete

I'm not cutting anyones beliefs as a matter of fact great people are often trinitarians you included,,,but my only concern is what is Gods heart and will for us. ITIM 2 15 STUDY TO SHOW THYSELF APPROVED A WORKMAN OF THE WORD THAT NEEDETH NOT TO BE ASHAMED. and so and so.. oops cap lock. not yelling:)


Pete

Keith Farmer
05-30-2009, 06:29 AM
The more you study the more it builds. Allthe libraries in the worl;d could never hold the info packed into that 2 inch book.


I agree 100% Pete.




Its silly to think the king james version is the identical word that was original given.


I am not a "King James only" guy.

I too enjoy Greek and Hebrew word studies. Perhaps we will get an opportunity to sit down one day Pete.

Ken and Booty,

There is a great deal of rabbit trails than can be headed down with these topics. God, in His Word, urges us to study in order to show ourselves approved...I pray that each of us will endeavor to accomplish that task.

Good day fellas...training hounds and watching my babies,


KF

twall
05-30-2009, 01:57 PM
Not only that but if it is predetermined ....what is the point of Jesus suffering and dieing for a job that is already done?

Kevin,

Don't you know why Christ suffered and died? Do you really think the creator of heaven and earth does not know who will be saved? Or, that he decides who will be saved?

If you believe that man can choose to be saved them why do we need Jesus or God? We must be powerful enough if we can choose to be saved.

I am thankful my Savior humbled himself on this earth as a sacrifice for my sins and granted me His grace so I would be saved. The only good thing in me is Jesus.

Tom

K.Bullock
05-30-2009, 02:48 PM
Kevin,


I am thankful my Savior humbled himself on this earth as a sacrifice for my sins and granted me His grace so I would be saved. The only good thing in me is Jesus.

Tom

Yeah, me too.:D