Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,608 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 2,137,277
Pageviews Today: 2,892,200Threads Today: 537Posts Today: 11,374
07:46 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Say a phrase, and you are saved

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25301720
Germany
10/18/2012 10:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
"I will trust You without condition, if You remove from me my ability to create a victim."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 15244815
Indonesia
10/24/2012 10:10 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
It is a false dilemma to say that reason and faith are opposites; I hold that they are two sides of the same coin. One without the other leads to error.

I dispute your definition of salvation by faith as "blind". We have reliable eyewitness testimony to the life, death, resurrection, and ascention of Jesus, the Gospel accounts. This is the sort of evidence used in every court of law to determine to the best of our ability the veracity of a past event. Many have sought to undermine the Christian faith by proving the Resurrection a hoax or fable, only to become believers as a result of their own research. So we see that reason is used to form the basis of faith; we really can and have interviewed those first-hand accounts. Without this evidence, this fact of history, Christianity would be just another religion.

So your claimed advantage is thus no advantage at all, no different from what I'm doing. Biblical inerrancy is not a mere hope or wish but the conclusion of much study according to many experts in all the pertinent sciences and academic disciplines.

You then attempt to redefine "gift" to mean its opposite, a wage earned. But this is one thing that truly is black or white: nothing can be sort of a gift or partially a gift; it's either free or it isn't. And the Bible clearly teaches that salvation is purely a gift. What we work for is not our spiritual birth but our subsequent growth, earning wages and rewards; this is the purpose of the Bema Seat Judgment. We know this because people are divided into saved or lost before any judgments begin.

You also attempt to redefine the meaning of savior. How can we not be our own saviors if we participate in our salvation? Jesus does not throw us a life preserver and then tell us to pull ourselves to shore, but rather only says to take hold of it so He can pull us in. Paul explicitly stated that salvation by faith alone is for the expressed purpose of removing any grounds for boasting.

You say that we have no grounds for believing that Jesus blood washed away our sin, but apparently you've never read Hebrews, esp. ch. 7 vs. 23-28--

...He is not like the former ruling priests, who had to offer up sacrifices for their own failures as well as those of the people. Instead, he did this once and for all, sacrificing himself...

You still have not given specifics about the kind or degree of "work" necessary to be saved. What exactly does it mean to "live by that truth"? Give a detailed list of necessary and non-negotiable works that will render a person lost if they fail to perform all of them perfectly.

We are already in the Sabbath Rest; see Heb. ch. 3 and 4, and a concise comment at [link to www.letusreason.org] . Those who have placed faith in Jesus alone are in it, while those who have not yet done so are not.
 Quoting: Keep2theCode


We believe with faith but investigate with reason. What I meant by faith based approach is a faith that is assumed as truth without further investigation. The better term would be blind faith approach. Blind faith approach treats faith as truth. Reason based approach treat faith as possible truth that can be wrong. It is good to heed Jesus teaching not to hastily jump into conclusion in Joh 7:24 "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment."

Biblical inerrancy is an assumption. Literal Noah's ark capable of taking in all pairs of animals and food for the animals was just physical impossibility. Yet, a lot of believers still blindly claim the bible is inerrant. Origen, the third century church father, talked about un-factual statements in the bible: “What man of sense will agree with the statement that the first, second and third days in which the evening is named and the morning, were without sun, moon and stars, and the first day without a heaven. What man is found such an idiot as to suppose that God planted trees in paradise in Eden, like a husbandman, and planted therein the tree of life, perceptible to the eyes and senses, which gave life to the eater thereof; and another tree which gave to the eater thereof a knowledge of good and evil? I believe that every man must hold these things for images, under which the hidden sense lies concealed” (Origen - Huet., Prigeniana, 167 Franck, p. 142). Anyone who could reason and honest, will admit the Bible contained literally erroneous statements. Actually, errors, or what Origen called "unhistorical element" in Bible, were intentionally introduced!!! “Scripture contains an unhistorical element in-woven with the history, in order that the worthlessness of the latter may drive us to seek the spiritual meaning” (Origen quoted under Origen Adamntius; The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics by James Hastings, John A Selbie).

I affirm doctrine of salvation by faith is blind belief for the sake of being unproven. Stories of Jesus life, death, resurrection, and ascension is not the prove of salvation. Recorded witnesses of Jesus life, is not the prove of salvation, it is second hand witnesses of Jesus life. The prove of salvation is not in written word, but in direct experience. The real prove of salvation is when you experienced it yourself or others believing in Salvation by faith who've died can be interviewed to tell their after death experience whether it corroborates with the doctrine they've believed in.

About the definition of "gift", you have quite a rigid definition of gift. You are assuming one given a gift would be able to immediately use it right away. One could be given a gift of iPad, but if he/she don't know what it is or how to use it, it is like not receiving any gift. He/she should have worked to study and understand iPad for the gift to be useful. Sunlight is a free gift, but only those who experimented/worked with it who discovered solar cells that can convert the light into useful electricity. The air we breath is a free gift too, but those who know how to optimized their breath can used it for healthier life. There's need of a work to build ourselves for the gift to be effectively received and utilized. it is just common sense. That's the reason why Jesus talked about "building a house" in Mat 7:24 "Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and DOETH them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock". There's a reason why pearl and things that's holy can't be given to "dog" and "swine" (Mat 7:6). Of course dog and swine here are about spiritual states of being un-conducive for receiving the sacred gift. Even if the giver of the gift (God) are full of grace and really want to give, the gift still can't be received properly. The gift are "vibrationally dissonance/incompatible" with the spiritual state of undeveloped animalistic nature in us. There is thousands of radio broadcast in the air, but it is our duty to turn the frequency knob of our radio to receive the wanted broadcast, the sacred broadcast of salvation. It not about earning salvation, but it's about developing ourselves to the point of being able to received the sacred things being given to us. Developing ourselves is about growing up spiritually. Bible talk about spiritual growth from the babe to the grown up ( Heb 5:12-14).

About my supposed redefinition of 'savior', I don't think our present state of needing salvation is analogous to the case of being drown in a sea needing life preserver thrown by Jesus. Use your reason, look at your condition, it's not like being drown in a sea. You still can move around and walk to any direction. It more like being lost in the wood of this world, don't know what to do, where to go, and most even are not aware they are lost. One of Jesus' gift to us is the guidance from his direct experience, and what we must do is walk according to the guidance. Believing in His guidance is the faith. Walk according to his guidance is the work.

About Jesus blood, what I was saying is that the historical blood was not what saved people. Jesus suffering was Jesus sacrifice to bring us the way of "walking out of the wood", but it is not the suffering that save us although we should be very thankful for Jesus sacrifice. Jesus sacrifice allow us to eat and drink the proverbial "flesh" and "blood" of Jesus that will spiritually nourish us, build up our spiritual body (the temple of God, Joh 2:21, 1Co 3:16-17) and eventually bring us to the grown up state of being saved, the finished perfected tabernacle.

You said "We are already in the Sabbath Rest .. Those who have placed faith in Jesus alone are in it". This is hasty claim I would say. No, YOU HAVEN'T entered the spiritual Rest. Heb 4:10 "For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his." Why do you think God ceased from his works of creation? Because the creation was already perfected, that's why God rested, no need to do further works on perfected creation. Spiritual rest implied perfection. Those who've entered his spiritual rest are those who've been perfected, no further need for work or improvement. Are you perfected now? if you've entered that spiritual rest, then Heb 4:11 won't admonished you to labor to enter that rest. Heb 4:11 Let us labor therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

What kind of work then, you asked. Jesus said in John 8:31-32 "If ye continue in my word ... ye shall know the truth, and the truth (applied) shall make you free. " I would suggest knowing truth first. The most difficult obstacle to finding truth is assuming already knowing the truth. This trait of assuming is what makes having eye but can not see. Therefore we may need to heed the warning of not hastily making a conclusion as suggested in Joh 7:24. About the law, Jesus said it is still relevant till heaven and earth pass (Mt 5:18), relevant in the spiritual application not in the literal. In one of the ten commandments, it was said not to create graven image and bow down to it (Ex 20:2-3). What is this graven image? Graven image is something rigid we make, it is our unproven rigid opinion that we assume as truth. Rigid opinions is like the stony ground (Mat 4:5) that won't allow truth to grow.
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/24/2012 11:22 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
It's good that you now accept that the Christian faith is not blind. But you seem to have ignored the accuracy and integrity of the Bible as an ancient text. This cannot be lightly dismissed just because one might dispute what the text discusses. On the basis of scholarly investigation, as I mentioned, it is established that the Bible is a quality ancient text that testifies to the life, death, resurrection, and teachings of Jesus. If you have ever read the research you would know that this is not just a wish or a self-proof. For example, there is a book called Testimony of the Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf. Prof. Greenleaf was a "father" of the Harvard School of Law, whose students challenged him to apply his legal methods to the resurrection of Christ. He was an unbeliever when he began his investigation, but a believer by the time he finished.

So since it is reasonable to accept the miracle of the resurrection, by what right do we summarily dismiss any other miracles in the Bible? By definition, a miracle is a violation of known scientific laws, either in the event itself or the circumstances or timing of it. So we cannot dismiss Biblical literacy on the basis of its accounts of miracles.

You say that Noah's Ark could not possibly have contained all pairs of animals and food, but this is based upon false assumptions. The animals did not need to be adults; they did not need to be all variations (e.g., a pair of wolves have the genetic capacity to produce all breeds of dogs); some may have been in hibernation. And the Ark was not what is typically shown, but a huge sea-worthy vessel: see [link to www.worldwideflood.com] .

You cite Origen about the days of creation while ignoring the fact that Origen was not a Bible writer, a prophet, or alive during creation week. God is light, is he not? And who is to say that no temporary light source could be used during the first few days? Origen is simply using poor logic and arrogance.

After that, you return to your baseless assertion that salvation by faith is blind, just because it's "unproven". This is a contradiction of your opening paragraph, since you did not dispute my explanation of the rational, forensic basis for this faith. The proof you demand has already been given, but you reject it because you want some other kind of evidence that you'd never demand for any other past event. You are using a double standard against the Bible.

As for my alleged "rigid" definition of a gift, it is no less so than your "rigid" definition of proof. You falsely assume that a gift must be used immediately and given in its entirety. Rather, a gift is a gift because it was not earned or paid for. You are thus committing the fallacy of equivocation by using irrelevant analogies. You do the same with your objection to my analogy of salvation; we will indeed "die" if we do not accept Jesus as Savior.

Re. Jesus' blood, I never said it was his suffering that saved us; you are burning a straw man here. And his statements about eating and drinking his blood were clearly metaphorical in context. Also, it is not our spiritual bodies that make up the temple of God, but our spirits, ourselves.

My claim that we are already in the Sabbath rest is hardly "hasty" since it is in scripture explicitly. Read those Hebrews passages again. Finally, when it comes to "rigid" opinions (you sure like that word!), you have plenty of your own, as I hope is obvious by now, as you clearly force-fit your own interpretations into the text at least as much as anyone else.

At any rate, I stand by my interpretations, having backed them up with both scripture and references to external support, and having exposed several fallacies on your part and that of Origen. What gets a person into heaven is not their own works or righteousness but only those of Jesus, "the author and completer of the faith". I rest on and in what He did so that all the glory goes to Him rather than me. With Paul I say,

"Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" (1 Cor. 1:20)
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10858311
United States
10/24/2012 08:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
JAMES 2:18... Show me your faith apart from the works, and I shall show you my faith by my works.”
If you don't have works, you don't have the faith. You demonstrate your faith to others and even to yourself by your works. After all " even the demons believe -and shudder."
Examples given in Book of James, of works demonstrating faith are Rahab, risking her life because she knew who to put faith in, and Abraham offering his son,such was his faith that God could resurrect him again from the dead.

Jesus demonstrated his faith in his father's timetable "not even the son knows, but only the father" by turning down Satan's offer of" all the kingdoms of the world", which were Satan's to offer [1 John 5:19].
Jesus asked his father " when the son of God returns will he really find the faith left on the earth?" Seemed highly improbable I guess. "Nevertheless, let not my will but Yours take place, Father."
"Have no fear [of Satan's world] little flock, for I have conquered the world",by his faith. In what? his Father's power to fulfill his purposes for the earth and mankind, and that his father's purposes were all about his love, justice, and wisdom.
Those that believe God's purposes are, or were ever about destruction of the earth, death, eternal torture for those who [-rightly- I'd say] decline to perform "a single act of worship" to such an unrighteous being, "once saved ,always saved" to the cowards who don't decline and then busy themselves judging and persecuting and slandering the brave ones [like Jesus] who do refuse, and who said on the occasion, "It is written, It is
Jehovah alone you must worship, and to Jehovah alone you must render sacred service"
Those worshipping their own "graven images" of, or self-invented gods,"will become just like them" [harsh, cruel,etc]

Psalm 118:4 Their idols are silver and gold,+

The work of the hands of earthling man.*+

5 A mouth they have, but they cannot speak;+

Eyes they have, but they cannot see;+

6 Ears they have, but they cannot hear.+

A nose they have, but they cannot smell.+

7 Hands are theirs, but they cannot feel.+

Feet are theirs, but they cannot walk;+

They utter no sound with their throat.+

8 Those making them will become just like them,+

All those who are trusting in them.+
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26341145
Indonesia
10/26/2012 11:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
It's good that you now accept that the Christian faith is not blind. But you seem to have ignored the accuracy and integrity of the Bible as an ancient text. This cannot be lightly dismissed just because one might dispute what the text discusses. On the basis of scholarly investigation, as I mentioned, it is established that the Bible is a quality ancient text that testifies to the life, death, resurrection, and teachings of Jesus. If you have ever read the research you would know that this is not just a wish or a self-proof. For example, there is a book called Testimony of the Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf. Prof. Greenleaf was a "father" of the Harvard School of Law, whose students challenged him to apply his legal methods to the resurrection of Christ. He was an unbeliever when he began his investigation, but a believer by the time he finished.

So since it is reasonable to accept the miracle of the resurrection, by what right do we summarily dismiss any other miracles in the Bible? By definition, a miracle is a violation of known scientific laws, either in the event itself or the circumstances or timing of it. So we cannot dismiss Biblical literacy on the basis of its accounts of miracles.

You say that Noah's Ark could not possibly have contained all pairs of animals and food, but this is based upon false assumptions. The animals did not need to be adults; they did not need to be all variations (e.g., a pair of wolves have the genetic capacity to produce all breeds of dogs); some may have been in hibernation. And the Ark was not what is typically shown, but a huge sea-worthy vessel: see [link to www.worldwideflood.com] .

You cite Origen about the days of creation while ignoring the fact that Origen was not a Bible writer, a prophet, or alive during creation week. God is light, is he not? And who is to say that no temporary light source could be used during the first few days? Origen is simply using poor logic and arrogance.

After that, you return to your baseless assertion that salvation by faith is blind, just because it's "unproven". This is a contradiction of your opening paragraph, since you did not dispute my explanation of the rational, forensic basis for this faith. The proof you demand has already been given, but you reject it because you want some other kind of evidence that you'd never demand for any other past event. You are using a double standard against the Bible.

As for my alleged "rigid" definition of a gift, it is no less so than your "rigid" definition of proof. You falsely assume that a gift must be used immediately and given in its entirety. Rather, a gift is a gift because it was not earned or paid for. You are thus committing the fallacy of equivocation by using irrelevant analogies. You do the same with your objection to my analogy of salvation; we will indeed "die" if we do not accept Jesus as Savior.

Re. Jesus' blood, I never said it was his suffering that saved us; you are burning a straw man here. And his statements about eating and drinking his blood were clearly metaphorical in context. Also, it is not our spiritual bodies that make up the temple of God, but our spirits, ourselves.

My claim that we are already in the Sabbath rest is hardly "hasty" since it is in scripture explicitly. Read those Hebrews passages again. Finally, when it comes to "rigid" opinions (you sure like that word!), you have plenty of your own, as I hope is obvious by now, as you clearly force-fit your own interpretations into the text at least as much as anyone else.

At any rate, I stand by my interpretations, having backed them up with both scripture and references to external support, and having exposed several fallacies on your part and that of Origen. What gets a person into heaven is not their own works or righteousness but only those of Jesus, "the author and completer of the faith". I rest on and in what He did so that all the glory goes to Him rather than me. With Paul I say,

"Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" (1 Cor. 1:20)
 Quoting: Keep2theCode



On Simon Greenleaf, there were those that said they never found prove of him being Atheist. What they found was that Simon Greenleaf was a lifelong Episcopalian all before he became a professor ( [link to sandwichesforsale.blogspot.com] ). Despite that, I would hope someone with Simon Greenleaf capacity to not just relied on the Gospels, but also search for other sources to confirm it. The wider the sources, the better. On resurrection, it seem very important for you to believe in Jesus resurrection. Well, for me, it's more important to experience the resurrection. I am for direct first hand experience.

Regarding the Noah's Ark, assuming you're right in all your assumptions, then how did all the baby pairs of the created kinds (Baranim) got the drive/instinct to travel to a man made boat (Gen 7:9, 7:15)?

About Origen thought on the first three days of Genesis 1, someone with common sense will raise the same question, how come there was night and day for the first three days without a shining sun. Now you came up with magical speculation of God using temporary light. Physics of sun moon star can be described by science, could you elaborate the physics of that supposed temporary light?

Regarding what you think was my double standard, you are assuming I am looking at all those miracles in the Bible as absolute literal truth like you. Actually, my reason based approach is more similar to Thomas Paine, quoting from "Age of Reason" : "It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication -- after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him." To simplify, I am looking for a direct first hand experience, not contend with intellectual conclusion based of interpretation that was blindly believed as truth.

When you promote something like salvation by faith without experiencing it yourself (that's the reason I call it blind) , what you are doing is almost like selling snake oil (or to be fair, black box, that could be snake oil or pearl). The difference with snake oil salesman is that you are sincere. Look, you never go to hell, never go to heaven (correct me if I am wrong), but based on some intellectual conclusion you interpreted from a book (Bible), you assumed your belief system is the guaranteed ticket to heaven. People with the right mind will surely question your theory of salvation. If Jesus comes to me and sells the doctrine of salvation, I'd be more enthusiastic, cause He's walk the talk, He knows what he's saying and doing, he can satisfy the question of hell and heaven cause he's been there done that. And I doubt Jesus will accuse me of double standard if I asked for more prove about heaven and hell. But if someone like you who have intellectual conclusion but no direct experience, not belittling you, I know you are sincere and I appreciate it, people with the right mind of course will be skeptic and ask for more prove. It is just common sense.

You said "My claim that we are already in the Sabbath rest is hardly "hasty" since it is in scripture explicitly. Read those Hebrews passages again." Well, as I offer the verses that advised us to labor into that rest (Heb 4:11), which means we've not entered that rest, why don't you tell the explicit verse and also explain it's contradiction with Heb 4:11.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26341145
Indonesia
10/26/2012 11:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
JAMES 2:18... Show me your faith apart from the works, and I shall show you my faith by my works.”
If you don't have works, you don't have the faith. You demonstrate your faith to others and even to yourself by your works. After all " even the demons believe -and shudder."
...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 10858311


You put it succinctly in one sentence that summarize it all: If you don't have works, you don't have the faith.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 26007616
Germany
10/26/2012 11:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
I want to have my own home planet system.
 Quoting: oahf 25618900


me too, bro, me too.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24068631
United States
10/26/2012 11:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
Conversion is only one part ...how then will and should you live? There is the rub. Most are wanna bee s. It won't hold on most so no worries.yapping
pool
Netizen Ribbonmind

User ID: 23941261
United States
10/26/2012 11:48 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
Do not give to the spiritual ponzi. Be the one.
"The earth is mother of us all, for she is just; but you, because you are unjust have pretended that she is your mother alone; and if you do not stop, I will not permit you to remain upon her."

[link to www.livius.org]
Keep2theCode

User ID: 20545539
United States
10/26/2012 12:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
On Simon Greenleaf, there were those that said they never found prove of him being Atheist. What they found was that Simon Greenleaf was a lifelong Episcopalian all before he became a professor ( [link to sandwichesforsale.blogspot.com] ). Despite that, I would hope someone with Simon Greenleaf capacity to not just relied on the Gospels, but also search for other sources to confirm it. The wider the sources, the better. On resurrection, it seem very important for you to believe in Jesus resurrection. Well, for me, it's more important to experience the resurrection. I am for direct first hand experience.

Regarding the Noah's Ark, assuming you're right in all your assumptions, then how did all the baby pairs of the created kinds (Baranim) got the drive/instinct to travel to a man made boat (Gen 7:9, 7:15)?

About Origen thought on the first three days of Genesis 1, someone with common sense will raise the same question, how come there was night and day for the first three days without a shining sun. Now you came up with magical speculation of God using temporary light. Physics of sun moon star can be described by science, could you elaborate the physics of that supposed temporary light?

Regarding what you think was my double standard, you are assuming I am looking at all those miracles in the Bible as absolute literal truth like you. Actually, my reason based approach is more similar to Thomas Paine, quoting from "Age of Reason" : "It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication -- after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him." To simplify, I am looking for a direct first hand experience, not contend with intellectual conclusion based of interpretation that was blindly believed as truth.

When you promote something like salvation by faith without experiencing it yourself (that's the reason I call it blind) , what you are doing is almost like selling snake oil (or to be fair, black box, that could be snake oil or pearl). The difference with snake oil salesman is that you are sincere. Look, you never go to hell, never go to heaven (correct me if I am wrong), but based on some intellectual conclusion you interpreted from a book (Bible), you assumed your belief system is the guaranteed ticket to heaven. People with the right mind will surely question your theory of salvation. If Jesus comes to me and sells the doctrine of salvation, I'd be more enthusiastic, cause He's walk the talk, He knows what he's saying and doing, he can satisfy the question of hell and heaven cause he's been there done that. And I doubt Jesus will accuse me of double standard if I asked for more prove about heaven and hell. But if someone like you who have intellectual conclusion but no direct experience, not belittling you, I know you are sincere and I appreciate it, people with the right mind of course will be skeptic and ask for more prove. It is just common sense.

You said "My claim that we are already in the Sabbath rest is hardly "hasty" since it is in scripture explicitly. Read those Hebrews passages again." Well, as I offer the verses that advised us to labor into that rest (Heb 4:11), which means we've not entered that rest, why don't you tell the explicit verse and also explain it's contradiction with Heb 4:11.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 26341145

The point about Greeleaf is that he was an undisputed expert in law, and he applied his methods to the evidence for the Resurrection and found it to be as verified a past event as any other. You can do more that "hope" he relied on more than the gospels, and don't make the mistake of presuming that the Bible is not as worthy a historical record as any other. If the same standard of external requirements were applied to all historical records as to the Bible, you'd have to either accept the Bible or reject everything. And even the internal evidence, which includes hostile witnesses who would certainly have contested the gospel writers' testimonies, indicates something beyond a made-up story which would self-incriminate writers whose topic was about righteousness and truth.

Of course the resurrection is important to me; there is no point in the Christian faith without it, as even the apostle Paul stated explicitly. And you cannot directly experience everything you believe. Are you aware of the origin of the term "Doubting Thomas", and that Jesus Himself said it is better to believe without seeing (experiencing, to you)? This is the very definition of the Christian faith.

Common sense, you say? Whose definition? And how can you make any statement about what would make sense since you didn't directly experience the creation of the universe? To call my view "magical" yet fail to call other views such as evolution from pond scum to philosophers "magical" is again a double standard; this charge is not just "what I think" but a demonstrable fact. Your "reason-based approach" is no more so than anyone else's, since you make yourself the standard. And I already gave the Hebrews text about having entered God's rest.

And you still dismiss the fact that my faith is based on a fact of history, calling this "blind" by a new definition you made up. This making up new definitions is a direct contradition of your claim to rationality. This is not about sincerity but my rational acceptance of testimony by eyewitnesses. You will find out the value of indrect evidence if you're ever in a court of law.

So you infer that I am not a person "of right mind" because I accept indirect evidence, and call this "common sense". Sorry, but I've had enough of your sugar-coated condescension. We're done. Besides, this thread was supposed to be about what the Bible says it takes to be saved, not whether the Bible can be trusted, or who is more rational or blind.

Last Edited by Keep2theCode on 10/26/2012 01:50 PM
Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? (Gal. 4:16)
wise onebeenowned
User ID: 4329861
United Kingdom
12/09/2012 03:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
Oh WOW ..wise one stole this op word for word from another persons post on another forum...just wow.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 29394028
Canada
12/09/2012 03:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
LOL... How many threads from Our have you ripped off?

I find one of my threads in your list and ima bust some ass

Sad...
Kitty
User ID: 29349400
United States
12/09/2012 04:07 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved

Can't you come up with anything original that is your own work and not copied and pasted from someone else? You Sir are a fraud! Stop plagiarizing!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22076098
United States
12/09/2012 04:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
You do know this thread is stolen, word for word, from another site. Here is the OP from that site, with time/date stamp. Shame on You!!! This is the second thread I've found here tonight, you have STOLEN and claimed as your own work. You have a load of Karma to deal with, you know.

posted on 9-9-2012 @ 05:35 PM this post
I have been around many Christians, and most will say, all it takes to get saved is to say something along these lines:

"I believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, died for my sins, and rose again"

Then the person who makes them say this phrase, says now you are saved.

Anyone can say this phrase, (besides the cast out ones), this doesn't mean you are truly saved and are now a believer.

My question would be:
- Why do many think this is all it takes, just say a one line sentence, and now you are given access to heaven?
- Doesn't it take more (faith, works, belief) to be a true believer?
- Why isn't it explained that it takes more than a few sentences to be truly saved?


signature:
They claim to know God but by their actions they deny him.
You say you dont hear God I say you do.
FED UP....
User ID: 25265823
United States
12/09/2012 04:25 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
Holy cow dude....can you even create a thought on your own???

All you do is steal other people's work and copy it WORD FOR WORD.
What a loser!!

This EXACT same discussion was posted on 9/9/12 on a different site and you copy/pasted it and even left it in the same format.

You, sir, are not a Christian.
You, sir, are a thief....

This is the 2nd time tonight you've been caught.

This is despicable and low down.

You should be banned for plagiarism.

What, you think no body will find out?
That no one checks other sites for fraud copy cat losers such as yourself?

You have been marked.

We are watching....
You dont want to know
User ID: 18028409
United States
12/09/2012 04:29 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Say a phrase, and you are saved
Because Christ did all the work and all he asked is for each of us to believe.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2059065


That's a trick that causes you to over look like entirely.

Live like He did.

Meaning, go through Hell and Sacrifice.

You will become Enlightened in the end. The end which is a new beginning.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25601325


truth
hf

News