@waxeagle 1.Stating what is true? 2. Yes.

@TheodoreA.Jones How you choose to communicate matters. You can be truthful and rude the same way you can be polite and lie. Text only communication means that tone is hard to convey and words not meant to be rude can sound as such. I'm informing you that what you said is rude because I care and want to help you learn to communicate better.

to #2. If you understand why he died, then why is it wrong to celebrate a great victory over sin, especially in the light of the fact that he won over death itself as well.

that's not something to mourn, in fact it's a cause for great joy.

it not only prefaces our salvation, but also our eventual victory over the grave.

2. Well you go ahead and put God to the test.

@TheodoreA.Jones huh? I'm not sure what you're getting at really

How is remembering Christ's death (like he told his disciples to) testing God?

"For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." Rom. 2:13

and?

quoting scripture with no context, and only implying the meaning is a very poor way to conduct an argument about doctrine.

you're arguing that one of the institutions created by Christ himself is sinful, that's an interesting line and I'd love to see your full proof for that laid out.

brb putting my kid to bed.

@waxeagle I thought Jesus died, because Jesus became a threat to the religious and political authorities. :P

@waxeagle Is sin a bad thing or good thing?

@Anonymous bad

@waxeagle Yeah. That's what I thought. Though, if it's bad, then what's the purpose of evil in the world?

@Anonymous religious yes, political no, he was quite clear that he was not the political leader the Jewish zealots were expecting

@Anonymous the purpose of evil? ah the great question, I believe it is so that God can show his glory in a greater form.

A hero isn't a hero without a villian, but that's a pretty small spectrum picture

@waxeagle I was referring to the Romans.

@waxeagle So, evil is present, because evil is necessary?

@waxeagle Tell you what. Go ask Jack what I said to him yesterday regarding this subject.

@Anonymous I know. The Jews at the time were expecting the messiah to come as a military hero, not a politically passive religious nut

@TheodoreA.Jones What's that have to do with waxeagle's putting his kid to bed?

@Anonymous lol, reply to a different message I assume :)

@waxeagle Maybe the messiah is to redeem Israel from all corruption and foreign domination.

@Anonymous that was the expectations, Christians believe it was not the reality

@waxeagle Do you think evangelism has a purpose in the United States? How can an American NOT KNOW about Christianity, given that there is a church in every neighborhood?

@Anonymous yes. Because Christianity is not something you inherit.

because there are plenty of folks who don't know Jesus, in spite of the fact that they might know some Chrisitans

@Anonymous nothing. He wants to see what I've laid out, ask Jack. Jack is my witness. Why is redundancy necessary? Everything I've said is already on this site

@TheodoreA.Jones because, frankly, if you make a claim that counter to orthodoxy you should have a ready defense when asked. You should be able to point to clear scriptural statements preferably with some academic authority.

@waxeagle What type of Christians?

@Anonymous in this case basically all of us

those that deny the divinity of Jesus might be an exception here, but I'm not sure

@waxeagle OK. Then, what is the "reality"?

@Anonymous the reality is that he came to fulfill God's promise to Abraham to bless all the nations. Not by military conquest, but by making disciples of all nations (ie proselytization), you might have heard of the "Great Commission"

@waxeagle Well, Christian parents do like to raise their children Christian, as much as atheist parents like to raise their children atheist or Muslim parents like to raise their children Muslim.

@waxeagle I thought the example of Christians should be the manifestation of Christ.

@waxeagle The defense has already been stated and I'm not an academic. I think it was asked a long time ago, "Where is the scholar?" wasn't it.

@Anonymous yes, though some do a better job than others, and not everyone has a Christian friend who would feel comfortable sharing their faith with them.

@TheodoreA.Jones Can you point to a scholar who shares your belief by any chance? Where did said belief come from?

and if it's personal revelation, how do you reconcile the fact that basically everyone else disagrees with your interpretation?

and in fact that it disagrees with a good bit of scripture itself

@waxeagle Actually, I thought that being with a Christian can make a non-Christian copy the Christian habits, and then everybody make the world a better place together.

@Anonymous perhaps, though do remember that Faith in Christ is what matters first and foremost, not one's behavior

@waxeagle The term "proselytization" may be too general. "Evangelization" or "Christianization" may be more specific terms.

@Anonymous Evangelism specifically, the command is "go and make disciples" which goes beyond evangelism or even Christianization.

@waxeagle I still think behavior is more important. It's more observable and measurable than beliefs.

@Anonymous genuine faith produces measurable works :)

@TheodoreA.Jones Forgive the pointedness, but I'm wary of any heterodox position that doesn't come with an external source attached to it. Specially if you'd like to spread that POV on this site. We're not a place to develop new theology, we ask and answer questions about established doctrines.

@waxeagle In reality, I think it is difficult to determine who has genuine faith and who has not. Sometimes, a person may claim that he is faithful but produces no measurable works, and may also claim that he is faithless but produces philanthropic, altruistic deeds.

Prove that what is say is discordant with the scriptures. How many find the gate according to what He said in the scripture. I know of no contemporary or historical religious scholar who would not disagree with my convictions. But this is to be expected since there are only very few that find the gate and even the scholars do not agree among themselves what the gate is.

@waxeagle Maybe God is working in the world, but God's presence is somehow not observed.

@TheodoreA.Jones to be clear, I'm not saying that. I'm saying it's not orthodox.

A couple of major reasons. 1. First and foremost if there isn't an external resource oftentime theology becomes a shifting sand, an external resource provides a fixed point. 2. It provides further reading for someone who's interested and a more full defense than can be given in the short space of an answer.

essentially, we need testability. We're trying to be an academic resource best we can be.

Ok, time for me to go, Time for snacks and the X-Files.

I'll pick up any pings later tonight or in the morning.

@waxeagle I hope the snacks are vegetarian and the X-Files have some educational value in them.

not a chance on either count :)

@waxeagle OK. What is the snack food?

@waxeagle Look wisemhimer. I've have clearly stated my belief yesterday. Go and read what I've said or ask Jack. Then register your complaint.

@waxeagle which is why I like to go for the academic peer-reviewed journals. They are foolproof.

@Anonymous cheap pizza, some leftovers (chipotle chicken stuffed sweetpotatoes), and tomato bread (sort of like pizza)

@Anonymous well, they're at least more reliable than Joe Blow's blog :)

@TheodoreA.Jones look, if you want to call names, I'd go ahead and leave now, it will not go well for you. I'm merely making you aware of our policies.

ok, really gone now.

@Anonymous Yeah right. And there are 30 to 50 thousand different "Christian" sects, a church on the corner of every block and several more in between those two, and the man who does know says there are only a few that ever find the gate. And it your stated judgement that "they are fool proof". Now Wisenhimer which one of us is in dispute with Him?

OOPS sent to the wrong party.

@waxeagle How cheap is the 'cheap pizza'? What does 'cheap' mean in this context - inedible, unpalatable, or inexpensive? What is 'chipotle chicken'? Is that chicken from Chipotle? How starchy are the sweet potatoes? How are they done or prepared? What is 'tomato bread'? How do you make bread out of tomato? Man, you eat strange foods.

@TheodoreA.Jones Huh? FYI, academic journals are not teachers of salvation. Relax. They are not teaching you how to get to heaven.

@waxeagle Are they store-bought or home-made?

@waxeagle Actually, it seems that almost everything can be store-bought - even Chinese food!

@waxeagle Wisehimer, as to testability. If you make the claim to be one of His crew and what you do for Him does not result in your stinking tail getting thrown out of the places where religion is taught. You ain't one of His. That is his stated judgement and I am very certain you have not and will not pass the test.

@waxeagle How often do you or your wife prepare home-cooked meals? Do you and your family sit at the table and eat? Do you pray at the table too?

@waxeagle I didn't know your real name was Wiseheimer. Are you of German descent?

To all I failed my Dale Carnegie course. I am not here to win friends, but I do intend to intentionally influence you people in regard to the sin of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. And even tho it might cost me my head; you all will be thinkinking you've done a favor for God.

@Anonymous Spiritual gifts cannot be sold nor bought. Every seminary, Bible college and Bible school is in the business of making the attempt to sell those gifts. Which is why there are 30 to 50 thousand different "Christian" sects that scattered the flock. Those schools are only false teacher factories, and one of their products is in every pulpit today. The bad seed is restricted to only using physical means of distribution. But the Living God teaches his children himself. No man teaches them.

@Anonymous cheap in this instance would be inexpensive. Chipotle here refers to the peppers (smoked jalapenos), sweet potatoes are somewhat starchy, but more sweet, they are definitely more veggie than starch unlike a typical potato.

@Anonymous The potatoes were baked, cut in half, scooped a bit to remove some flesh, then stuffed with spinach, chicken and chipotle peppers and topped with cheese. Tomato bread in our house is some kind of bread (in this case flat bread) with slices tomatoes and cheese baked like a pizza

@Anonymous pizza and flat bread are store bought, rest is home made

@Anonymous yeah, you can buy a lot of stuff in the store, often at a pretty big markup from what you can make it at home for (though there are exceptions to that)

@TheodoreA.Jones Was is really murder in light of Matthew 26:53. You might argue suicide, but murder makes it sound like there was nothing He could have done about it. He apparently had 12 legions of angels waiting on His whim!

@Anonymous a couple of nights a week, we eat a lot of leftovers and either bring home food from out or go out to eat a night or two a week. We're making a concerted effort to eat dinner at the table every night, and doing pretty well at it. Tonight was an exception because we got home very late.

@fredsbend See Acts 7:52 "murdered him" and then see 1 Cor. 4:6 'Do not go beyond what is written." Stephen is described by the scripture as a man who is full of grace and TRUTH is he not? It is only a sociopath who thinks that a man's murder was his own fault.

@TheodoreA.Jones If you want us to read it you should link to it at least. I don't even know this Jack you are referring to.

@TheodoreA.Jones You are neither winning friends nor influencing people (positively, anyway).

@TheodoreA.Jones But we aren't talking about a mere man are we? We are talking about the Son of God, God in Flesh. There was nothing He could not have done. As for the passage in Acts, the words clearly separate the "Righteous One", who is Christ, from the prophets who spoke of Him. You are bending Scripture to your beliefs instead of the other way around.

@fredsbend it would still be murder I think. Just because you could stop someone from killing you and choose not to is not the same as giving permission

@TheodoreA.Jones if no man teaches them, then why did Jesus instruct us to go and make disciples of every nation

if people can't be taught from the experiences of others (through the leading of the spirit in what they take from it) then we would have no reason to be involved at all

there is a difference between teaching a gift (which you are correct in saying that you can't do) vs teaching. That said, I could see some argument for or against the merit of general theology. Certainly taken without allowing the spirit to reveal truth in it can be very negative, but that isn't to say that theology doesn't have value when pursued rightly

just the same as Biblical study has value only when pursued rightly

@fredsbend Jack is a moderator of some sort as far as I can tell. He conned me, as he thought, into a chat with him yesterday nefariously as he is. As for the link and such I have no idea how to perform what you are requesting. The only thing I can say is click Jack. Right now I am flooded with your questions. So be a bit patience and I will give you the answer. For my computer skills are very limited.

as has been proven by the numerous different, contradictory things that people have claimed the Bible says over the years

@TheodoreA.Jones @fredsbend if I'm understanding correctly he's talking bout @JackDouglas

chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/11024530#11024530 and it looks like the discussion starts there

without discernment and the leading of the spirit, no amount of reading or education or study will help, but studying scripture is still necessary and theology, studied rightly, can aid in learning

@TheodoreA.Jones Jack is a moderator on our sister site about biblical interpretation/translation Biblical Hermeneutics

(the mods there are Jack, Caleb and Ray, the moderators here are myself, Caleb, El'EndilStarman and Mason Wheeler).

removed my prior comment as I realized that wasn't the room you were talking about

@AJHenderson sadly that discussion will have to wait a while...possibly a whole year :(

@waxeagle yeah, so I heard, I wasn't even sure exactly what the topic of discussion was here with Theodore, so I wasn't sure if it was a name change or what, but I see it's a different person now as I'm putting it together

I got confused by the Jesus as a prophet bit and the law based bits which are both decidedly Islamic views

yeah, I can definitely see where the confusion is coming from

and I still hadn't managed to find the start of the dialog, but the link to The Library cleared it up I think

so I atleast understand the base points that are being discussed

@AJHenderson I haven't read their backscroll yet, I'll do it later I guess...I'm mostly curious how one comes by such an interesting heterodoxy

and now that I've understood that, I'm not all that interested in seeing more

actually I do have one more question for @TheodoreA.Jones. What makes you right and 2000 years of Christianity wrong? Isn't that a massive stroke of arrogance?

@waxeagle picking and choosing from the bits that appeal to our sense of desire to fix our own problems

fundamentally, isn't that the basis of the fall

we think we can do it better than God and that God is unneccessary

the closer you can get to Truth while preserving that core corruption, the more appealing it is

@AJHenderson yep, that's the fall in a nutshell.

it's the exact same reason that Islam is so attractive to people

btw Peter Mayhew did an AMA tonight

@AJHenderson That is flawed logic stemming from some sort of pacifism. But since our context is Scripture we should examine scripture. The Gospels are abundantly clear that Jesus came for His sacrifice. The mode of His sacrifice and the would be "murderers" is somewhat irrelevant.

@TheodoreA.Jones Sorry, I'm not really interested anymore. Your Carnegie comment made me not want to listen to you at all.

@AJHenderson Me too. I almost asked if he was Muslim, but remembered he called himself Protestant with four exceptions.

@fredsbend agreed, but his willingness makes it a sacrifice, it doesn't mean it isn't still murder

if someone said they would kill you or your family and you asked them to kill you, is it not murder?

but it is still certainly a sacrifice

the two are not mutually exclusive

ok, better question, if Jesus was tried, convicted and executed, is it murder?

@waxeagle that's a fair question, though I'd argue it wasn't so much a conviction

since Pilot said he could find no fault with him

it's about as much a conviction as a lynch mob is

because really, that's what Pilot had on his hands

but the thing is we celebrate the sacrifice, not the murder

and his death was a sacrifice since it wasn't taken from him

but given willingly

even if the method of that may have been murder

@AJHenderson right, this is the important part

don't get me wrong, I'm not intentionally supporting Thomas's point, just pointing out that saying it wasn't murder probably isn't the strongest defense of our view that his death on the cross and the victory over death is something to be celebrated

I'm just one of those people who will point out anything I see as a potential hole in an argument, no matter if it supports my side or not, even if it is a flaw I notice in something I said earlier :)

because generally I find it helps everyone focus on the core of what they are trying to say

@waxeagle So... there is no saying grace?

ok, random question, what is the opinion on this site of sharing theories that don't necessarily conform to a direct theological stance as the answer to a question? I'm sure that I'll end up hitting weird cases where that becomes a factor in my answers since I tend to have very many different possible theories when it comes to things that are not clearly explained in scripture and are not what I would call "core theological issues" ie, not factors in salvation

and I can't completely say they are views I hold, since I just see them as theories and I have many

since ultimately, if the Bible doesn't spell it out clearly and it's a side issue, theories are all we really can have to be sure of unless you are very confident in your skills at discernment on less than critical topics

but theories where Biblical support can be given as reference to them

well anyway, think it is bedtime for me, goodnight (or whatever time it is where you are) and God bless

@TheodoreA.Jones I think you are conflating academic literature with "spiritual gifts". Your lengthy tirade on academia is unsourced.

@Anonymous "Where is the scholar?" is a quote. It is not a quote that can be attributed to me, is it? Where is it found? But it is indeed Scripture is it not?

Theories of salvation? And there is actually a (singular) gate? But very FEW actually ever find the thing and your b/s posterior says that what HE says cannot be true? You've progressed a long way baby haven't you!? Yes or No?

All of you! Isn't it written in Scripture? "And for Your lifeblood I will surely DEMAND an accounting. I WILL DEMAND an accounting from every animal. AND from each man,too, I will (SURELY) DEMAND an accounting for the LIFE of His fellow man." Which man did he give this promise to?

@TheodoreA.Jones I'm honestly not even sure what you are trying to say here? Who are you talking to and about what?

@TheodoreA.Jones and how is this supposed to make your point quoting a scripture that says that God will hold people and animals accountable for taking human's lives. He doesn't say what the accounting will be

granted, yes, elsewhere it says that the penalty for sin is death, but this isn't outlined as any worse of a penalty than any other sin

@AJHenderson just that external sources are required if asked for

@TheodoreA.Jones if it's so tiny, what makes you think you've found it? What makes you different from me? Here's what I know, I'm a sinner, saved by grace, not by my own ability (in fact in spite of it) the Holy Spirit dwells in me. What more must I do to be saved?

@waxeagle Sinners. We all are. But you are misunderstanding what God's grace is. And for that reason the Holy Spirit cannot be dwelling within you. You've been had, duped. Remember the truth of God has been exchanged for a lie. Unless you identify what the lie is from the Scriptures you will always make an error in judgement about Jesus crucifixion and disseminate that lie instead of what is really true about his crucifixion.

What makes me different form you is that the Holy Spirit does dwell within me. And it is he that teaches God's children and only them.

@waxeagle And just what rule are you referencing? Going by that you would have contested Jesus himself to his face had you been one of his contemporaries. Would you not?

@TheodoreA.Jones can't say, I do know that he engaged with learned men of his time in an intelligent manner, and I know he was a student of the scriptures, he quoted them often. However, this is not a church, this is an academic reference site.

@fredsbend Isn't he addressed as "Prophet and Priest and King"?

@TheodoreA.Jones doesn't answer the question. What makes you so certain you're right, and I'm wrong?

@waxeagle I don't give a tinker's dam what this site is about. Looks to me that y'all were arguing "my religious dog is better than your religious dog". But all of you boy's religious dogs combined CAN'T HUNT!

please watch the language or I'll put you out on your ear. I've warned you about name calling already. If you cannot be respectful you will not be welcome here.

I'm trying to engage you in civil dialogue because I'm interested in your beliefs, specifically how they relate to the rest of Christianity, if you don't want to engage in such dialogue, please feel free to step aside. If you do, then cease with the ad hominem, and using language that is not appropriate for the audience of this site.

@waxeagle "i'm interested in your beliefs"? yeah right. "how they relate to the rest of "Christianity"? They don't. Because what you view as "Christianity" isn't. Your mistaken view is preponderancy. Which is; the more of them that are alike establishes the truth that they are alike. Puts you in a circular redundant trap which is impossible to escape from unless you change your mind. "Very few find it." Axiomatically in that his statement cannot be untrue your pertinent agenda is to

prove "few

@TheodoreA.Jones not exactly. my stance is that we've been given doctrinal differences to make us spread out, to scatter the church to fulfill the great commission. I believe most churches have enough of the truth for salvation, though I do not believe everyone is right. I agree that the way is narrow, however, I disagree quite strongly that the elect are very few.

I believe that the Bible holds the truth, but that it must be correctly interpreted, and when an interpretation is counter to the historical interpretation that it should be examined very closely to determine the truth.

False teachers scatter the flock.

@TheodoreA.Jones they do, though I believe they have a purpose in God's plan. Because quite often their false teaching is not so false that they lead people away from Christ. There is often sufficient truth there, even though there are other lies.

Speaking as an outsider, I think what matters most is what most Christians believe in. Then, I would examine the beliefs of minority groups and individuals.

Since the Christianity.SE is really supposed to be a secular/academic website, the validity or truthfulness of a theological opinion is not important.

@waxeagle HMMMMM. If it is historical is only true that it is historical. Confab conundrum.

@TheodoreA.Jones agreed with that, even history should be examined, however, how scripture has been interpreted in the past matters greatly, assuming that we've only just now gotten to the truth 2000 some odd years later is...odd. Abraham was promised to be a blessing to all nations, Jesus commanded us to go forth and make disciples, are you saying that Christ's last commission has completely failed?

That God did not keep his promise to Abraham?

Your conjecture is; "Since it is historical it must also BE the truth." False conjecture.

@TheodoreA.Jones not saying that. I am saying that if you're going to make the assumption that historical Christianity is false, the burden of proof is on you to do so.

see yah in half an hour.

@waxeagle Define "historical Christianity".

@waxeagle I think it's more accurate to say "historical Christianities". Even when United States of America was born, IIRC, people wanted one party. Then after the first presidency, the party system became the norm.

@Anonymous essentially the collected doctrines of the church over the past 2000 years.

@waxeagle Which church?

@Anonymous one could say this, though it would probably detract from the view that one believes there is actually only one Body of Christ :)

@Anonymous :) now you sound like me. In this case I mean the chuch universal or invisible. IE actual believers, not their congregations or denominations

this would the little c catholic church

@waxeagle The term "church" can mean many things. It can mean (1) all Christians in the world, (2) a Christian denomination, (3) a Christian sub-denomination, (4) a building, or (4) a nomadic organization without a permanent building. This is why specificity is important.

@Anonymous yep :)

@waxeagle which is why Jehovah's witnesses - and TRiG will probably agree with this because he is raised as one - call their houses of worship "Kingdom Halls".

@Anonymous yes they do, some sects also call their houses of worship temples, cathedrals and tabernacles

@waxeagle Maybe there was one physical body of Christ, and this "physical body of Christ" now presides at the Eucharist, so that all who drink the blood of Christ and eat Christ's flesh become part of his physical and spiritual body. I think it's supposed to be a pun, though.

@Anonymous I believe that Christ's commands were metaphorical, others (namely the Catholics) believe they were literal.

@waxeagle The church invisible makes more sense. An unified church really is invisible. LOL.

@Anonymous :)

@waxeagle It would be inaccurate to call a Kingdom Hall a cathedral, because a cathedral is supposed to hold the seat of the bishop, and JWs reject clergy. Instead, they have elders, which in a way is like having clergy without the formal education or training. Temples usually refer to the Mormon temple or the temple that is to be built in Jerusalem but over the course of history has been destroyed many times. Tabernacles is a misleading term, because that is the box that holds the Eucharist.

@Anonymous baptists will also sometimes use the "temple" verbiage. Tabernacle was also a historic Jewish structure (their pre-temple house of worship)

@waxeagle I have heard that traditional Jews would be offended by the term "temple" to be used for the congregational house of worship. For political correctness, I think the correct term would be "synagogue".

I've been imagining a fictitious religion in my mind. It is called the Temple of Reason, and basically adherents worship in The Temple of Reason.

In the Temple of Reason, there are two altars. One altar serves the God of Reason, and the other altar serves the Goddess of Rhyme. Without Rhyme and Reason, nothing in the universe makes sense!

@Anonymous yes, they have only one temple.

and it was destroyed over a millenia ago

@waxeagle They can always rebuild it. :)

@waxeagle However, Christians probably do not need it, because Christians already have Jesus as their lord and savior who has sacrificed himself on the Latin cross in order to redeem humanity of sin.

@Anonymous I believe there's a bit of an issue with a mosque where they think it should be.

@Anonymous right

@waxeagle Convert to mosque into an interfaith house of worship?

@Anonymous you're hilarious

@Anonymous That would be acceptable to exactly none of the parties involved.

@Caleb What's wrong with sharing?

@Anonymous other than the fact that both groups consider each other incredibly heretical?

@Anonymous You seem to have forgotten that we're talking about mono theism here.

@waxeagle Maybe one group reserves the place in one location of the building, and the other group reserves the place in a separate location of the building.

@Caleb But Jews and Muslims worship one God.

@Anonymous note that Jews would have very specific construction requirements, that would differ wildly from the current structure or any structure a Muslim would build

@Anonymous And both believe that doing that worship the wrong way is blasphemy.

@waxeagle The other option is to reread the scriptures and check to see if the location is right.

@Caleb Does that include Christians too?

@Anonymous not my area :)

Apparently, the spiritual children of Abraham and Sarah are bitterly divided, sharply polarized, and extremely hostile toward each other.

@Anonymous naw really?

@waxeagle Well, you would expect the Patriarchs would welcome all their spiritual children to their home and worship together. Though, Christians have a thing about circumcision. At least the Coptic Orthodox Christians circumcise themselves.

There may be certain restrictions between casual interactions of a circumcised male with an uncircumcised male.

@Anonymous I can talk to myself!

@waxeagle Have you ever gone on a pilgrimage to St. Thomas Becket's Shrine in Canterbury - the shrine portrayed in Geoffrey Chaucer's famous Canterbury Tales?

I wonder if there are saints in the Presbyterian Church.

Well, the P in TULIP stands for Perseverance of the Saints.

I wonder how Presbyterians take into account of Perseverance of the Saints and Soli Deo Gloria.

The word "Saint" may be defined differently in Presbyterianism.

@Anonymous nope, haven't made it to the UK yet

@Anonymous it means any Christian in protestantism

@Anonymous everyone

saints are made sinless by Christ

@PaulA.Clayton Mr. Clayton it is impossible that anything stated via "Grace to You" has or will state the information that you must understand and obey to receive the grace from God be allowed into the kingdom of God. "For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." Rom. 2:13 And the word law in that fellow's statement is not a reference the OT written code of law.

@TheodoreA.Jones what is it a reference to?

@TheodoreA.Jones The Romans reference was my own to give a feel for what the person was saying with respect to how much of the factual content of the gospel is necessary for saving faith. (I wrote the blog post sufficiently after hearing the program that my weak memory did not retain much of the specific content.)

@waxeagle Maybe out of context, but I think Muslims are particular about not only where mosques should be, but also what direction they face, and what kinds of things go on around them.

@waxeagle Now, how do you apply that in a modern setting, given that there is a group called "atheists" who believe collectively that there is no god? Maybe you mean atheists are "sinful" in that they "turn away from the biblical god" but they are not "sinful" in that they are "wicked/bad".

@waxeagle and Jesus' references to scriptures would be external references

@TheodoreA.Jones I can't speak for other participants, but personally, to me, this site is a place where I can help to address the academic walls that people have put up blocking them from allowing themselves to follow Jesus on the grounds that they think it is illogical or provably false. These are people that would never even dream of setting foot in a "Christian site" but are comfortable having discussions on a secularly operated site.

@Anonymous all are judged by God regardless of their belief in him

@TheodoreA.Jones Theodore, I can agree that the in-fighting is evidence of a problem within the church, particularly within the US. With the culturization of the church, many people associated with the church not because of belief, but simply because it was socially acceptable. As such, it is quite possible that many were not saved who claimed to be Christian.

this also stroked tensions that resulted in animosity between different physical churches, even within denominations, let alone across them

@waxeagle Isa. 2:3 "for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." Isa. 51:4 "for a law shall proceed from ME." Acts 7: 53 "who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it." Rom. 5:20 "The law was added so that the trespass might increase." Rom. 5:20 Gal. 3:19 "The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator." Heb. 7:12 "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there MUST also be a change of the law."

@waxeagle a millenia?!

but what we are seeing as Christianity moves out of the cultural norms is that churches are pulling together

despite minor differences in non-critical interpretations

(as an example, pre vs post vs no tribulation really don't matter in the grand scheme. We'll find out when it happens.)

@TRiG Yes, I have noticed that the noun does not match its article.

@waxeagle OK. That makes sense.

@Anonymous the first thing I can think of is that the design of the Jewish temple is precisely laid out

the building itself simply wouldn't conform

@AJHenderson The churches you see is the crop the bad seed has proudced.

btw theodore, not ignoring you, I'm just currently commenting my way through the back dialogue. I should be caught up in a few minutes

@TheodoreA.Jones Theodore, I'm sorry, I missed your original point so I'm not sure what you are trying to get at by those verses you mentioned. The law did come so that trespass might increase. The point of the law was to show that no man can possibly follow the law on their own because we are all wicked. And when there was a change in the priesthood (Christ took the roll of high priest from the Levites) then there must also be a change in the law. (It is no longer by works but by grace.)

the entirety of the Old Testament demonstrates that no matter how much we are guided and protected, we are not able to follow the law on our own accord

@TheodoreA.Jones and if the churches I see are all the result of bad seed, then why are they seeking to reconcile together as one body now that there are fewer among them who do not truly believe the core theology?

@AJHenderson Those verses in totality are not referencing the law inscribed on stone. For if the word law in Rom. 2:13 is a ref to the law inscribed on stone it can only mean that obedience of that code does result in a person being declared righteous by God and there is no reasonable for the Lord's murder. "For it is not those who (just) hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." Rom. 2:13

@TheodoreA.Jones what law is it then? You just quoted a bunch of verses and none of them explain anything.

@TheodoreA.Jones I can tell that you are upset. Can you spill out what is the matter? The tone of voice in your language seems angry, frustrated, and whiny.

@TRiG sorry I was going to say 2 millenia, but it's not been quite that long

I believe the law in this case to be the whole entire OT law, particularly the moral code. Which condemns all of us.

@TheodoreA.Jones but that's just it, nobody CAN follow the law. I agree that the law in that verse does not apply specifically to Levitican law (which was simply a spelling out of what the Law looks like if followed), but if someone truely followed the Law they would be righteous

but nobody can

well, no human

Jesus is the only one

the Law exists so that trespass might increase

this is the verse you quoted

the law is there to convict us of the fact that we are incapable of following God's Law on our own

@waxeagle What happens to the eagle with wings of wax whenever he flies to close to the Son?

@TheodoreA.Jones :) ooyey gooey melty goodness :). Also who said the wings were wax :P

@waxeagle I would disagree on that, the old testament law is simply a specification of what it looks like to follow God's Law (effectively Love the Lord your God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself). All other laws are derivative from this

they are specified so that people can't deceive themselves in to thinking they have followed the law

@AJHenderson I'd agree with that

@AJHenderson I'm not quite sure that's true, or at least that it's not intentionally nefarious.

Most of the OT laws, particularly the ceremonial ones can be seen as pointing to Christ. They were also given the laws of the nation.

@waxeagle that's a fair point

but the law in so far as it says the law exists so that trespass may increase it is true for

But ultimatley, let's consider for the moment that as humans we are fully incapable of keeping the first commandment. Everything else was meant to show us how terrible we are at teh first :)

but you are right, ceremonial law doesn't appear to fit the same bill

at least not in a way that is easily seen

@AJHenderson with this I agree fully

The law exists to convict of us our sins and convince us of our need for a savior

@TheodoreA.Jones I suppose the question I should ask is "do you believe that you are saved by personally following the law?"

if not, what do you see as the means of salvation

if not by accepting the sacrifice of Christ for the forgiveness of sins

@AJHenderson What does He say in Jn. 16:8?

8When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 about sin, because people do not believe in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11 and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned

the world's view is that they can earn their goodness by being better

you can see this in the prevalence of the view of earned salvation in every other world religion

@waxeagle Beyond that, you believe that Jesus is above the law, surpasses the law, and replaces the law with his own commandment.

@AJHenderson I don't think other religions have the concept of "salvation", or at least not the same as Christianity.

true, it was a poor choice of phrase

@Anonymous fulfills is a better word :)

but the idea of earning our way in to whatever afterlife is prevelant

the way of the world is to take it on ourselves to fix us

@AJHenderson Not all religions maintain belief in an afterlife.

true

but then it is typically some other form of better rebirth or some such

@AJHenderson No person will be declared righteous by God for following/observing the OT written code. But that does not mean that there is no law you must have the faith to believe exist and MUST have the faith to obey it with your mouth to escape from serving the penalty of eternal death which is the penalty only this law carries.

whatever reward they have, comes as a result of self help

@TheodoreA.Jones I do believe there is a law, but I don't think it requires faith to believe in it, it is spelled right out in the Bible, what verse indicates that the law is only revealed to those who have your particular view?

Mark 12: 29-31

29“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.e 30Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’f 31The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’g There is no commandment greater than these.”

if there is no commandment greater than these (Jesus' words) then where does your hidden law come from

hiya @KitFox not every day we see you in this part of the stack :)

I was called.

I don't usually tread on sacred ground.

uh oh, that's the second step :P

Don't worry. I'm quite proof against conversion.

> And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

:)

Indeed.

Many were called, but only a few felt like showing up.

;)

You coming to the Writer's chat tomorrow? You're doing NaNo, right? You decided. Right?

@KitFox lol, not sure on either count. First day back at work after a long weekend, not sure what the workload will look like. I think I'm doing nano, I should really start an outline

or maybe write a synopsis

Right. Holiday for me today and then the eldest starts kindergarten tomorrow. I'm taking the day off work to celebrate.

Well, maybe I will see you. I'm off for now anyway. I was just confused about a flag in a silent room.

Later!

oh fun, we just started proper pre-k this year. My wife did the same for his first day last week...unfortunately all those plans came crashing down when her car passed away

@Anonymous Git'in around to it. I know what I'm doing.

@AJHenderson Ok. "When he comes he will convict the world (inclusive) of GUILT in regard to sin" i.e. a singular sin. The Holy Spirit's ministry of convicting the world of GUILT in regard to sin began on the day of Pentecost, (and for ref. to the time frame), about eighty to seventy five days post of that announcement and post of the Lord's murder. Relative to the Lord's command given through those apostles what is the corporate sin they had the faith to repent of relative to the

term "whom you crucified"?

@TheodoreA.Jones sin is often used in the singular to mean a plural. Are you making this argument solely from a study of the english or is the Greek there plural?

@TheodoreA.Jones sorry, I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by the statement "Relative to the Lord's command given through those apostles what is the corporate sin they had the faith to repent of relative to the term "whom you crucified"?"

It would seem you are referring to the passage in Acts 2, but I'm not sure what you mean about "the corporate sin they had the faith to repent of"

unless you are simply implying that they were only repenting of killing Christ and not also repenting of their more general sin as well. But for those who were responsible, it certainly was a sin to kill Christ.

but the passage doesn't indicate that that was all that they repented of

in fact, it says 38Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.

sins plural

@waxeagle The only Greeks I know is one gal who ran a cubby hole hash house on Long island and another fellow that runs a couple of restaurants in Cola. SC.

Besides if knowing Greek enables one to correctly interpret the scripture every Greek ought to be able to do that on the way out the door to lunch, but they can't.

@TheodoreA.Jones 1 it's ancient greek, and 2. I'm not saying it's a requirement, but if you're going to talk affirmatively about singular and plural you should back that up with an understanding of what the original text says.

btw if I manage to send through complete nonsense, I likely haven't switched to typing in tongues, my 15 mo old probably managed to find the enter key on the keyboard.

(he's been sneaking into my office when my back is turned and pounding on the keyboard)

@TheodoreA.Jones Are you trying to suggest you are making a set-up so that you will make a planned response to the set-up?

@waxeagle And I suppose that you have access to an 'original' text and you can verify that it is original, aye?

@TheodoreA.Jones greek and hebrew manuscripts are available online, originality in this case refers to original language, not original books. Those are lost, but we have what we believe to be good original language copies.

What do pastors taste like, anyway?

@TRiG I'd assume chicken. Everything tastes like chicken

@waxeagle Ah yes, of course.

@Anonymous Isn't it written "May their table become a snare and a trap for them"?

And doesn't that table sit right down front center of every so called Christian church house in existence?

@waxeagle You said and I quote "original text" i.e. manuscripts, and you have access to them?

@TheodoreA.Jones try biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+2&version=MOUNCE

@TheodoreA.Jones You do understand that Attic Greek is not Koine Greek is not Dimotiki is not Katharevousa is not Cypriot Greek? And you understand that these varieties are not all mutually intelligible?

@TRiG I think the humor is in the punctuation that is absent in the sign.

@TheodoreA.Jones You mean the altar? IIRC, wax eagle's church does not have an altar. It has a stage for amplified sound.

@Anonymous He's talking about The Lord's Supper, in this case referred to in common church parlance as "The Table"

He holds a heterodox belief the Lord's Table is a propogation of the sin of the crucifixion of Jesus. I'm trying to understand how he's come to this conclusion and he's been rather evasive in explaining how he gets there.

@TheodoreA.Jones that is written but "foolishness everything is foolishness" is also written, you can find just about any verses to take out of context

what support do you have that the table is what you make it to be. The context of that psalm clearly demonstrates it to be talking about those who seek to harm the psalmist eating the table they prepared (ie, they tried to harm him but will harm themselves)

how do you find fault in passages like Luke 22:19?

@waxeagle 1 Cor. 11:29

@TheodoreA.Jones yes, and? It's a precaution against those not fit from taking the Lord's supper

@waxeagle In other words, Theodore believes that the Lord's Supper is sin of the crucifixion of Jesus and therefore is bad? Well, I think there are a few denominations that do not believe in the Lord's Supper as well as baptism.

@Anonymous indeed there are. Though he's not identified himself as any of those groups

@waxeagle Does that mean he has rejected those groups, or does that mean he has not identified himself with those groups yet?

you'd have to ask him

@waxeagle In any case, I think truthfulness all boils down to "Who makes the most babies and raises the young in the faith?" Whatever carries down to the offspring will be the surviving belief.

@TheodoreA.Jones Can you give an explanation instead of citing scripture?

@Anonymous srsly

Scripture is meaningless without interpretative tradition. (You can tell I don't really believe in Sola Scriptura.)

@Anonymous Isn't it your soteriological assumptive that the murder of Jesus Christ is a direct benefit for yourself? Better think again. He was not murdered in anyone's place.

@waxeagle Bluetooth proximity lock for the win.

So few unanswered questions. Great job, community!

@Anonymous No. The display of the evidence on that table is for remembering that the crucifixion of Jesus, God's only begotten son, is a sin.

@TheodoreA.Jones My soteriological assumption is God took his own wrath against me/my sin and measured it out to his own son while at the same time allowing him to be crucified by the so called powers of this world, yes. It's also my assumption that God does not lie nor deceive. When Christ himself celebrated the Supper with his disciples and instructed them on it's celebration I assume he was not leading them into error.

@Caleb interesting.

@TRiG Clever. I thought you might say "well done" because of all the fire and brimstone they preach.

@waxeagle Not very secure, but the bar for keeping a baby out of your system is pretty low. The important part is it's convenient. You do nothing. Walk more than X feet or out of the room and your screen locks, walk back in and it's unlocked waiting by the time you can touch the keyboard.

This is assuming you keep your phone or other trackable device in your pocket.

@Caleb almost always, would have to get a USB bluetooth dongle for the desktop though

@TheodoreA.Jones And you? How do you interpret Christ's commands to his disciples? Was he trying to trick them? Give them a riddle that NONE of them solved? Was he "participating in his own murder" by celebrating the Passover meal himself?

@waxeagle Ya, if you don't have a receiver. A cheap one is a couple dollars. Most modern machines have them already, so it's often a no-investment solution.

There is no evidentiary support from the scriptures in support of your conjecture. The viewpoint you hold has been arrived at by observance of only the written code. It is possible to murder a man in your place, but murdering any man is a sin in and of itself. As you've stated you are expecting a direct benefit for yourself from the disobedience of each item of the written code. This type of expectation is noted in law by the term unjust enrichment.

Reviewer and Steward badges are going to be really hard to get on this site. Going to take a long time. None of them even have over 1500 TOTAL reviews!