SIGforum.com Main Page The Lounge Sigforum Christians, have you been "saved"? (And ongoing Christian faith-based discussion)
Main Page The Lounge Sigforum Christians, have you been "saved"? (And ongoing Christian faith-based discussion)Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Lawyers, Guns and Money  |
Probably not... which I suppose is why there are different religions with different understandings of scripture. "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Member |
Indeed. I'd like to know your (and others) thoughts on pacifism, as presented in my lengthy comment on page ten. Sigfreund pitched-in his .02, but I didn't hear from anyone else. | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money |
What I've said previously was that although I accept the teachings of the Catholic church, I do not claim that it is the only path to salvation. My understanding of the church is that it was instituted by Christ, but run ever since by fallible men. When Martin Luther confronted the Catholic church, he was right to do so. So, if the church makes mistakes, it can't claim an exclusive path to salvation. "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money |
As for pacifism...
I am not a pacifist in the sense of "turn the other cheek". I condemn wanton violence. I believe in being kind, forgiving, loving, gentle, and caring; but I also believe in self defense. "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Member |
What is the general inference from the New Testament, when it comes to pacifism? The Man Himself said, in Matthew 5:39 "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." What other New Testament references are there, that can be used to infer the pacifist intent (or not). So far in this thread, we have been eager to cite scripture to conclude issues. Christ's comments seem quite conclusive, even in regards to self defense. These are traps the enemy would happily watch us stumble into, which is why I want to hear what people have to say on the "controversial" topics like pacifism and salvation for pedophile priests. Pride is the most difficult thing to overcome. It was the downfall of satan himself. It is certainly the thing standing between Christians and execution of what seems to be Christ's pacifist intent. A sense of justice and fairness is another thing that's difficult to reconcile. We have, so far in this discussion, had much to say about mere belief and faith in Christ being "all" that is required for salvation. That notion becomes less warm and fuzzy when we consider it's application to clergymen involved with sex abuse allegations. These extreme, absolute topics are important, I think, in understanding things. Absolute forgiveness, absolute abstinence from violence, etc. | |||
|
| Member |
Interesting to consider. If this is leveraged against the pedophile priests, to deprive them of paradise, then there's plenty of other, "lesser" offenders who will see damnation as well: Plenty of "everyday" saved Christians we likely associate with, and even myself and others in this thread. | |||
|
| Freethinker |
Regarding the question of pacifism, what was the status of the Church when the Gospels and other books were written? I’m hardly an expert, but as some Biblical and other accounts make clear, early Christians were a minority subject to persecution, and like other persecuted minorities throughout history were not initially in a position to fight back. That would have been especially true of many adherents who weren’t only followers of an unpopular religion, but also members of lower social strata. In many situations the advice to “turn the other cheek,” just like, “Render therefore unto Caesar …,” would have made sense from a purely practical survival standpoint. But what was good advice at one time may not have been appropriate later. As one commentator pointed out, very often religious tenets are changed more by societal norms than society is changed by religion. Islam goes so far as to frankly acknowledge that some portions of the Qur’an have been superseded by later sections and are therefore no longer valid.* I suspect that should be true of the Bibles, but it isn’t, and believers are faced with trying to reconcile everything that is part of what has been accepted as canonical for centuries. As is obvious just from the differing opinions expressed in this thread, that reconciliation can be difficult and subject to much debate. I too, however, would be interested in other views about the matter. These discussions are always very enlightening. * In accordance with the Islamic doctrine that lies and deceit are justified in the struggle against non-Muslims, I’m pretty sure that “superseded” sections are often quoted to the ignorant when it’s felt to be appropriate. ► 6.4/93.6 “Most men … can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it … would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions … which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.” — Leo Tolstoy | |||
|
| Member |
I am of the opinion that, if it came out of Jesus' mouth, it transcends any social changes brought-on by the passage of time. He transcends time. He was more aware of our 21st century society then than we are even now. | |||
|
| If you see me running try to keep up  |
I think the audience would know John was referring to what he and the other Apostles taught concerning Christ and what we call the OT. They were consistent in what they taught while building the NT church. So commands encompass all that Christ taught and lawlessness refers to violation of the law. This is not referring to the Jewish law, of which most was man made. If we were there in that day, I do not see how we would think it meant anything else. The point of John, Paul, Peter and all the NT writers is that our profession should be evident in our lives. Col 1:10 - we should be walking in a manner worthy of Christ. Christ demonstrated obedience to the Father for us to emulate. He always did what pleased the Father as an example for us. And we see the example of fruit throughout the NT, a tree is known by its fruit. What fruit does a believer bear? Those things that point to Christ. | |||
|
| If you see me running try to keep up |
It isn’t specific to priests, I think every religion has had sexual deviants by people who profess Christ. Whether Catholic or Baptist, Methodist or Presbyterian, it does not matter. The question it not if we can lose salvation because we cannot, the question is whether salvation was present to begin with. And that is what John demonstrates. Hence the scripture below: John 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ P.S. Lawlessness aligns with what John states in 1 John. | |||
|
| Member |
The men He speaks of, in that John 7:21 quote, no doubt considered themselves "saved", and did perform works. But He is evidently dissatisfied with the either the insufficient degree of their works, or the apparent excessive degree of their simultaneous sin, and says they'll not see Him in paradise. So, their faith was never actually present to begin with? Their profession of faith was a lie? They weren't even temporarily genuinely convinced of their faith in Christ? If that's the case, then, of course, the wouldn't be actually saved. It seems to me that such an actor would be a rare thing. The pedophile priest who never, not even temporarily, had genuine faith in Jesus Christ would be more than a mere mortal actor driven by his sexual perversions; he'd be either perfectly possessed or demon made flesh. It is not uncommon to hear, at the Baptist church I attend, that we are saved, but we're at the same time sinners. Which I suppose is possible, so long as our conviction in Christ is true. It seems that some of the commenters here, and some of the scripture, support the idea that salvation cannot be lost, once achieved. Cases in which it seems it was, or should be, lost, it was never actually present in the first place, as counterintuitive as it may seem (as in the case of a priest). Or, in the case of the pedophile priest, he is the same kind of saved sinner that my Baptist preacher says I am. | |||
|
delicately calloused |
Matthew 7 seems to explain it to me but sounds inconsistent with what some say about being saved. That confuses me. It sounds like they’re saying it’s a one time unconditional event but reading what Christ says is an ongoing conditional process. You’re a lying dog-faced pony soldier | |||
|
| Little ray of sunshine  |
Isn't that the position of essentially all Christianity? one may be saved by grace, but remain imperfect and also be a sinner. The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything. | |||
|
Honky Lips |
No, if your committing evil, you're not saved. | |||
|
| The Ice Cream Man |
Every mortal commits evil. If you think you do not, you are unaware, or deceiving yourself. As for pacifism, Christianity is not pacifist. There are various groups who have tried to make it so, but life is a gift from God, and defending it is a requirement - even at the cost of the life of the attacker. In no way, is life to be taken lightly, but I don't think I've seen a coherent argument for man to not defend himself - Peter, and the Holy Spirit, killed Ananias and Sapphira for theft and lying. | |||
|
Member |
This is were I disagree with the position of being “saved”, we don’t get to decide if we are saved or not. Jesus does. We are all human, and imperfect, and will sin repeatedly in our lives, before, during and after any point where we “accept” Jesus or not. To think there is a single point in our mortal lives that after which we do not sin, and have gained Heaven without the possibility of losing it, is ludicrous. Luke 6:46, Luke 13:24 speak to that. | |||
|
| Honky Lips |
lets not conflate sin and evil, to use an extreme example Looking at a girl walking down the street lecherously is a sin, Raping her would be evil. | |||
|
| Honky Lips |
As a Presbyterian, I concur. There are many who when they come to meet him, Christ will not know. | |||
|
| Member |
What does the New Testament say about sin versus evil? Does it differentiate between the two? We know that man and the church have created a ranked system containing things like "mortal" and "deadly" sins, which are presumably more offensive to God than other sins. Even in looking at those lists though, I think we may not choose to assign the "evil" label to all of them. | |||
|
| Honky Lips |
Christ proclaims 2 orders of sin, Blasphemy against the holy spirit, which is unforgivable and a sin one willfully commits over a long period of time. And everything else. the basis of my sin vs evil position is based on the saved (or as I prefer, Elect, which I expect reloader-1 may also like) person abhors evil, and won't be tempted to it. to put it another way, there is no situation in which you'd vote for a socialist, the truly saved/elect would never knowingly commit evil. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
SIGforum.com Main Page The Lounge Sigforum Christians, have you been "saved"? (And ongoing Christian faith-based discussion)
Main Page The Lounge Sigforum Christians, have you been "saved"? (And ongoing Christian faith-based discussion)© SIGforum 2024