Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   WHAT GOD THINKS OF FUNDAMENTALISM
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 76 of 222 (115556)
06-15-2004 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Cold Foreign Object
06-15-2004 2:00 PM


Dogmatic
Example
quote:
Its by interpretation and implication and of course word meanings. When "life" is promised/spoken of in the O.T. it means in this life and the next one - eternally. The same goes for "death"; in this life and the next one - eternally.
You have yet to show proof of this statement in the OT.
Message 34 of New Covenant Thread

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-15-2004 2:00 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 2:44 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 222 (115566)
06-16-2004 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by purpledawn
06-15-2004 8:00 AM


PD, take a breather from the thread a moment and place a piece of paper over your avitar cat's chin or simply scroll up so as to cover everything from there up. It appears then that you have a person looking in, doesn't it?
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 06-15-2004 11:02 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by purpledawn, posted 06-15-2004 8:00 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by purpledawn, posted 06-16-2004 8:11 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 222 (115578)
06-16-2004 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Cold Foreign Object
06-15-2004 3:00 PM


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How so am I hiding behind my good mother? You and Scott are implicating all Biblical fundamentalist's of modern times to be "God damned......mother fuckers" are you not?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God, in Galatians, via Paul the Apostle is.
Dr. Scott pointed this out and I agree.
Hogwash!
1. Where does it address bedding one's mother?
2. How can you possibly know what all of us Biblical fundamentalists believe about keeping the law for salvation and how can you judge all fundies in one fell swoop as you and your nutty friend are doing?
3. I'll tell you one NT commandment that Jesus and said you better well keep if you don't want God's heavy hand down on you, WT. Matthew 7:1,2 Jesus said, "Judge not that you be not judged. For with what judgement you judge you shall be judged. And with what measure you mete, it shall be measured again." Now, you've judged me to be excommunicated from Christ and his church as if you were God almighty himself. Please show me what Biblical reference gives the likes of you power to judge and attempt to curse me by excommunicating me from Jesus and to excommunicate me from his church. You do not own the keys of Heaven and Hell, WT and some day God's gona get you for this devil duty you're doing accusing and condemning God's children. That's the devil's job. Let him handle it himself. He's doing quite a thourough job of it without your and your buddy Scott's help and whoever else, likely fellow Mormons as I believe they're the only ones who think they can practice this nonsense. I see you never answered my question as to whether you're what we would consider to be a Mormon. Are you ashamed to answer that or what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-15-2004 3:00 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 2:01 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 79 of 222 (115592)
06-16-2004 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Buzsaw
06-16-2004 12:43 AM


Buzsaw:
It is you who have completely avoided the pointy points of my previous posts.
You are still in a state of rant and your posts are semi-incoherent. I have answered all your questions - its just that you don't like my answers. One question I haven't answered is the one about Mormons.
I am not a Mormon.
I am a Protestant Evangelical Paulinist.
This means the Apostle sent to we Gentiles has authority over all issues in the Bible per Jesus Christ per Acts 9 and 15. (not to mention the fact that he wrote two thirds of the N.T. as you know)
Once again, the OP is a shoe, if it fits (and it does) wear it. This fact has you steamed. If what I say is error/heresy then your reaction betrays you. You have judged yourself. The interpretation of Galatians 4 indicts and sentences the heresy of Fundementalism. That sentence is the same as Hagar's/Ishmael's - ejection, thus saith God in Galatians.
You and your kind just don't get it. The gospel is being perverted and you are worried about preserving the traditions which are responsible for the voiding. You've spent your whole life in the established religious community of fundementalism and finally somebody has put you in your place.
"Buzsaw"......the irony of your name and its synonymous relation to the perversion of circumcision (cutting) - the symbol of the established church/Hagar/Sinai/Fundementalism which Paul says to cast out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Buzsaw, posted 06-16-2004 12:43 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Buzsaw, posted 06-16-2004 11:05 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 80 of 222 (115660)
06-16-2004 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Buzsaw
06-16-2004 12:00 AM


It took a minute, but I think I see it.
Eyes at the bottom of the photo?
I guess you never know when you are being watched.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Buzsaw, posted 06-16-2004 12:00 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 81 of 222 (115787)
06-16-2004 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by purpledawn
06-15-2004 10:58 PM


Re: Dogmatic
The last word in the O.T. is the word "curse".
This means NOBODY ever kept "all the words of the law"(Deut.27:26), therefore everyone is under the curse of the penalty of the law which is death.
Death is everywhere in the O.T.
The only persons to escape the penalty of death are persons who related to God via the Abrahamic covenant of righteousness by faith. (Genesis 15:6) Persons in the O.T. whom the Bible singles out as having a good ending to their life are thus believed to have "been saved". What happened to these people after dying can only be discovered by reading Hebrews.
Once again, when "life" is mentioned in the O.T. it means "eternal life" and when "death" is spoken of it means eternal death. Go check me out in any O.T. hebrew dictionary/commentary.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-16-2004 01:48 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by purpledawn, posted 06-15-2004 10:58 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Abshalom, posted 06-16-2004 4:22 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 85 by purpledawn, posted 06-16-2004 5:34 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
wmscott
Member (Idle past 6247 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 82 of 222 (115807)
06-16-2004 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Cold Foreign Object
06-15-2004 7:18 PM


Dear Willowtree;
quote:
I defined fundementalism to be ANY established church entity that requires ANY external conformity to Mosaic law as proof of salvation. This is what the church at Jerusalem did with circumcision. The Jehovah Witnesses do the same with their unique pet list of laws that identify a true christian.
My point was is that you can't redefine words, it is like you saying that the sky is red because you have redefined red as the color of the sky, people are not going to agree with you. But even under your definition, Jehovah's Witnesses are not sine fundamentalists since they don't preach conformity to the Mosaic law. You have been confusing the law of the Christ with the law of Moses. You review my earlier post on that if you want. The law of the Christ is the biblical requirements for Christians, the righteous standards we are to live by, like not murdering or committing fornication, or do you think that Christians can practice such things?
quote:
Listen closely: IF you can agree with the following statement without any qualifications or buts attached I will retract my characterization of you as a fundementalist:
Christ and the benefits of His atonement are initially received by an act of faith. To continue to receive Christ and His benefits is dependant upon a continuing act of faith. To finish your journey with Christ depends on an act of faith. To forsake faith jeopardizes salvation and disconnects you from Christ. Any adherence to Mosaic law with the INTENT to gain or maintain standing with Christ is a departure from the gospel/way of faith and is condemned by Paul in Romans, Hebrews, and Galatians.
Yes of course I agree. John 3:16 tells us "that everyone exercising faith" would be saved, but do you know what that means? To save us, our faith needs to be an active living faith which means it changes how we think and act, it can't be a mere acknowledgement of fact or acceptance. (1 Timothy 6:10-12) "For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things, and by reaching out for this love some have been led astray from the faith and have stabbed themselves all over with many pains. However, you, O man of God, flee from these things. But pursue righteousness, godly devotion, faith, love, endurance, mildness of temper. Fight the fine fight of the faith," Those who had been lead astray did not stop believing Jesus was the Christ, they stopped pursuing Christian activities and were instead pursuing wealth, which was enough to cause them to lose the fine fight of the faith. (Hebrews 6:10-12) "For God is not unrighteous so as to forget YOUR work and the love YOU showed for his name, in that YOU have ministered to the holy ones and continue ministering. But we desire each one of YOU to show the same industriousness so as to have the full assurance of the hope down to the end, in order that YOU may not become sluggish, but be imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises." We are not saved by works, but our faith is expected to produce works, a dead faith that doesn't cause us to live by it, can't save us, our faith has to motivate us to follow Christ's example in our lives to be of any benefit. So contrary to what many think, just believing is not enough, we need to 'exercise faith' which would include activity pursuing christian activities and living by the righteous standards found in the scriptures as Paul wrote to the congregations. That is probably the whole reason for this disagreement, you need to see the relationship between faith and actions.
quote:
Galatians 2:12 Before certain men came from James Paul is reporting that Judaizers from James came to the Galatians and poisoned their innocent knowledge of the gospel/way of faith with this circumcision nonsense. In Acts 15 James lied. He agreed to a Levitical list of law but went on to poison the Galatians with circumcision ALSO. Paul wrote two thirds of the N.T. and nowhere does he affirm what James said in Acts 15. This means what James said in Acts 15 is not the will of God, as the Galatian letter was written to counter this Mosaic decision by James.
Go to Galatians 2:12 and look back three verses; (Galatians 2:9) "James and Cephas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of sharing together, that we should go to the nations, but they to those who are circumcised." Paul in the book of Galatians stated that he viewed James as a pillar in the congregation, a major supporter, not a subverter of the faith. If you read verse 12 carefully, you will see that James didn't send the men to teach circumcision, they did that on their own. James preached mainly to the Jews, and it was the Jewish Christians who as a group favored keeping the law as a requirement, not James. Paul also wrote that (2 Timothy 3:16) "All Scripture is inspired of God" which would include the portions written by James. The Bible writers all wrote under the influence of the holy spirit, which is why it is called the word of God, it is not the word of man, or even a man named James. Don't reject portions of god's word because of silly man-made theories.
What James stated in Acts was; (Acts 15:28-29) "we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication." and what Paul wrote the Galatians; (Galatians 5:19-21) "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, and they are fornication, uncleanness, loose conduct, idolatry, practice of spiritism, enmities, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, contentions, divisions, sects, envies, drunken bouts, revelries, and things like these. As to these things I am forewarning YOU, the same way as I did forewarn YOU, that those who practice such things will not inherit God's kingdom." the two are speaking in agreement. There is no contradictions or conflict in what the Bible teaches, such things only exist in the minds of those who have yet to come to a better understanding of God's word.
Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-15-2004 7:18 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 6:53 PM wmscott has replied
 Message 89 by purpledawn, posted 06-16-2004 8:49 PM wmscott has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 222 (115813)
06-16-2004 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Cold Foreign Object
06-16-2004 2:44 PM


Re: Dogmatic
Boy, talk about taking a word out of context!
Look at the last verse of the Hebrew Bible as canonized by the Christian church. The verse is upbeat, and not anything remotely related to Willow's take on it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 2:44 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 4:59 PM Abshalom has replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 84 of 222 (115828)
06-16-2004 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Abshalom
06-16-2004 4:22 PM


Re: Dogmatic
quote:
Look at the last verse of the Hebrew Bible as canonized by the Christian church. The verse is upbeat, and not anything remotely related to Willow's take on it.
The word we are talking about is "curse".
There is nothing "upbeat" as you say about the verse or the word.
The LXX wasn't produced by christians. It was produced by Jews from 300 to 100 BC. This means that this source cannot have any christian influence. The only source with a christian influence is the anti-christian intent of the MT.
What does Deuteronomy 27:15-26 say to be the person who does not perform/obey the law ?
The entire O.T. is a record of man failing miserably under law which repeats its penalty of the curse of death as the very last thought of God via His prophet Malachi.
The very next thought of God comes in the Gospels and that "thought" is the only way to escape the curse - the gospel/way of faith via Jesus Christ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Abshalom, posted 06-16-2004 4:22 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Trixie, posted 06-16-2004 5:43 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied
 Message 97 by Abshalom, posted 06-17-2004 2:56 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 85 of 222 (115835)
06-16-2004 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Cold Foreign Object
06-16-2004 2:44 PM


Re: Dogmatic
At least you finally gave me something to work with.
quote:
The last word in the O.T. is the word "curse".
Malachi 4:5-6
See, I will send you the prophet Elijah before that great and dreadful day of the Lord comes. He will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers; else I will come and strike the land with a curse.
It has nothing to do with eternal life, death or the law.
quote:
This means NOBODY ever kept "all the words of the law"(Deut.27:26), therefore everyone is under the curse of the penalty of the law which is death.
The KJV has the word all, but it is in italics.
NIV Deut 27:26 Cursed is he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them. And all the people shall say, Amen.
Read Deut 28:20-57 and you see that curses don't necessarily end in death.
Did the Hebrews suffer all of these afflictions as stated in Deut 28:58-62? They should have if no one could keep all the words.
BTW, did you notice that 27:15-26 are directed at men?
These have the word "all" in them.
Deut 28:1
"Now it shall be, if you diligently obey the LORD your God, being careful to do all His commandments which I command you today, the LORD your God will set you high above all the nations of the earth.
Deut 28:58-59 If you do not carefully follow all the words of this law, which are written in this book, and do not revere this glorious and awesome name--The Lord your God--the Lord will send fearful plagues on you and your descendants, harsh and prolonged disaster, and severe and lingering illnesses.
This one has plagues and disasaters if they didn't follow all the words.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 2:44 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3705 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 86 of 222 (115840)
06-16-2004 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Cold Foreign Object
06-16-2004 4:59 PM


Re: Dogmatic
Going back and re-reading the title of this thread I realised that I'm no closer to knowing what God thinks of Fundamentalists. I'm now quite knowledgable about what Dr Scott thinks about them, since his opinion is plastered everywhere on this thread, although not by himself, but by his self-appointed mouthpiece. So I'm left wondering if these views are really those of Dr Scott or are just his mouthpiece's opinions of his views, distorted or otherwise.
To be honest, I don't think that God is bothered about whether you take the Bible literally or not, as long as you follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and try to live your life in the way that He instructed. There are all sorts of baubles and bells that can be attached, but if the core teachings are followed then God will not condemn you for the baubles and bells. However, if the baubles and bells come into conflict with the teachings of Jesus Christ then you might be on a sticky wicket.
If I stand on the rooftops and profess my faith in Jesus, in the fact that He died for me and that I will follow His teachings to ensure eternal life AND AT THE SAME TIME drop great pointy rocks on innocent passers by, all the while proclaiming "Thou shalt not kill", then no matter how loudly I profess my faith, I expect God would turn his back on me. That's a very convoluted way of saying that people should practice what they preach.
Willowtree, you've managed to alienate everyone on this forum. In this strand you haven't got a single voice of support. Now, why would that be? You know I don't have much truck with fundamentalism, but if that's what floats someone's boat, then fine by me, as long as they don't force me to do the same. So why do you think that someone with opinions like mine can't even support you? I'll tell you why I can't. It's because you've been spiteful, vindictive and hateful. Your attempt to "excommunicate" someone made me laugh out loud at your sheer stupidity and arrogance. Are you God's Messenger? Did a big finger point down from the sky and a voice cry "Its You"? The way you are going on here anyone would think that you were the embodiment of the Second Coming of Christ or a raving lunatic.
You can carry out all the intellectual theologising you like, but that doesn't make your nastiness right. What you called fundamentalists was an obscenity and totally uncalled for. I'm not surprised that buzsaw is angry and offended. To be honest, I'm suprprised that Admin haven't stepped in. This thread is nothing but bile and hatred, a spouting of poisonous views from a self-styled Christian who couldn't get further from the real message of Christianity if he sold his soul to the Devil.
I have decided that from now on I am boycotting any of your threads as I resent wasting my valuable time in discussion with a person who hasn't the first ideas of how to behave in a sociable way and who thinks it acceptable to throw obscenities at people who don't believe in exactly the same way as they do. You have done so much damage to the reputation of your precious Dr Scott that I think you owe the guy an apology. The way you have misrepresented and misinterpretted Paul has done nothing to enlighten anyone except to the fact that your ignorance and hate knows no bounds. If I had only your views to go on, I would run away from Christianity faster than greased weasel droppings. Luckily, my faith rests on more than just partisan distortions of the Bible.
Lastly I apologise to Admin for this diatribe. Willowtree has been getting away with this sort of obnoxious behaviour for as long as I've been around. This just happens to be about the worst I've seen. In my haze of painkillers, something snapped and the little fireworks went off in my head. I'm now off for a well-earned lie down and another handful of Happy tablets.
Oh, and Willowtree, you can see this as so much handwaving with no argument of substance, you can see this as a shouted list of insults from someone who "knows they've lost the argument", as you're bound to claim, you can see this as vindication of your opinions. It's none of the above. Take it from the writer, this is my way of saying "Bugger off Willowtree and take your vindictive hatred as far away from me as possible. Now!!!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-16-2004 4:59 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by jar, posted 06-16-2004 5:50 PM Trixie has not replied
 Message 93 by purpledawn, posted 06-17-2004 6:45 AM Trixie has not replied
 Message 96 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-17-2004 2:55 PM Trixie has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 87 of 222 (115844)
06-16-2004 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Trixie
06-16-2004 5:43 PM


Trixie...
I think I love you.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Trixie, posted 06-16-2004 5:43 PM Trixie has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 88 of 222 (115855)
06-16-2004 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by wmscott
06-16-2004 4:14 PM


quote:
My point was is that you can't redefine words
Yes I can.
But I didn't.
Anyone can STIPULATE a meaning to any word.
Word meanings are three-fold: Actual, Reportive, and Emotive.
Fundies can define themselves and they have. Whatever "Fundemenatlist" actually means is irrelevant BECAUSE they REPRESENT a/the established religious community of OUR day.
Reportively and emotively "fundementalism" means "crusaders for Mosaic law". The church at Jerusalem merely grafted Christ onto Moses. The Fundementalists do the same. Luther, in Table Talk, speaking to the "fundies" of his day said "they got Jesus on their lips but Moses in their heart."
So do you Anderson.
quote:
Jehovah's Witnesses are not fundamentalists since they don't preach conformity to the Mosaic law.
Yes you are, and yes you do.
You call it "requirements".....here is your crafty doublespeak:
quote:
You have been confusing the law of the Christ with the law of Moses. You review my earlier post on that if you want. The law of the Christ is the biblical requirements for Christians, the righteous standards we are to live by, like not murdering or committing fornication, or do you think that Christians can practice such things?
The only "law" of Christ is the never ending and exclusive way of relating to Him called the "law" of faith.
All you are doing is using different words and phrases for Mosaic law. Like; "requirements"/"righteous standards"
These "righteous standards" as you phrase it ORIGINATE from the O.T.
They are a spin-off from Mosaic law.
This is your error:
Because the N.T. reinforces a righteous standard - these standards become goals to conform to via willpower effort.
Absolute heresy.
These righteous standards ARE the goal, the issue is HOW to conform.
The Holy Spirit indwelt is the ONLY thing that makes a christian a christian. The N.T. is crystal clear. The Holy Spirit only comes to dwell inside of a person by a continual act of faith toward Christ via His promises. This indwelling of Spirit results in the famous born-again experience conversion. This miracle of indwelt Spirit is the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead AND when we continue to relate to Christ by faith that indwelt Spirit causes us to miraculously conform to the "righteous standards" reiterated in the N.T.
Your error is the same error of every established religious movement. You interfere with Christ by presumptuously poisoning new converts with false information as to HOW the righteous standard is to be complied with. Your method is self-propelled disciplined willpower conformity. The way of the gospel taught in the N.T. is to KEEP DOING WHAT STARTED YOU (faith).
The only issue is HOW to walk with God.
To disconnect from the way you start and pursue the righteous standard apart from faith is departing from the only term of the New Covenant - faith.
You fundies do not give God a chance to change people by faith. Instead you preempt the work of the Spirit by getting people to pursue the righteous standard the way it had been since Moses brought it down from Mt.Sinai - physical willpower. This is the perversion of the gospel spoken of in Galatians. "If you be circumcised Christ will profit you nothing" says Paul. Do ANY requirement or law or righteous standard with the intent of gaining or maintaining standing with God you are under the curse of the law and a god-damn pervert.
Christianity starts with a miracle - the Resurrection - and that miracle is duplicated in us IF we continue how we started and not by pursuing God through the "righteous standard".
Sinning is not an option. Of course we cannot murder and steal and lie. The issue is HOW to be DELIVERED from even wanting to do such things. Only the indwelt Spirit accomplishes this, this indwelt Spirit does not operate when a person goes back to the old way of relating to God by law/requirements/or righteous standard.
Faith is an action based upon belief sustained by confidence. It is absence of fear and doubt. When our life's energy and focus - ALL of it is laser beamed upon acting in faith on a promise of God then the miracle indwelling of Spirit promises to make us "walk in newness of life".
The issue is the focus of our attention and energy: Faith or willpower conformity to Moses/righteous standard. The latter the N.T. condemns as the perversion of the gospel.
Your continued exaltation of James to be in the same authority of Paul defies the N.T.
Galatians 2:9 has Paul insulting those persons by saying "they seem" to be pillars. This implies that they aint.
Every evangelical scholar agrees that Paul wrote Galatians to rip the perversion of James.
James represents a Godly man misrepresenting the way a person is ALWAYS to relate to God - faith.
Galatians 3:1,2 asks the Galatians a RHETORICAL question. "How did you receive the Spirit and miracles.....by works/requirements OR the hearing of faith."
This directly implies what I have been saying: The "rules" of relating to God do not change after conversion, even if an angel from heaven says so (chp. 1) we start by faith, continue by faith, and finish by faith. Galatians was written to condemn the decision of James in Acts 15, and Romans and Hebrews say the exact same thing just a little differently.
Your view and respect for James is not what was intended by God. The Book of James, who was never an apostle, was included by God into His eternal word for the single purpose of exhibiting what heresy looks like dressed in a righteous robe.
James perfectly typifies the Fundies of today. We are all addicted to sin and are all condemned by God's righteous standard/the Law, the issue is how to escape that addiction and curse: The Gospel/way of faith to faith (Romans 1:16,17) is the only escape hatch - the narrow road to life.
Anderson:
Even though we disagree and I know you are wrong I thank you for your quality participation in my topic.
WT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by wmscott, posted 06-16-2004 4:14 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by wmscott, posted 06-18-2004 6:35 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 89 of 222 (115871)
06-16-2004 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by wmscott
06-16-2004 4:14 PM


quote:
My point was is that you can't redefine words
Maybe since he is spelling fundamentalism with an "e" (fundementalism) it becomes a new word with a new meaning.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by wmscott, posted 06-16-2004 4:14 PM wmscott has not replied

  
Unseul
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 222 (115885)
06-16-2004 9:41 PM


Thank god i..
dont believe in god. This arguement from the view of an atheist is absolutely laughable, one because of nonbelief, and two because the supposedly most christian of you (WT) is acting the least christian, and the rest of you (if his opinion is right) are also really bad people.
Can i suggest that WT is not going to change his opinion no matter what, and that the rest of you, whilst feeling you are doing the right thing (and i agree with you here), should probably just let him have his opinion and ignore it.
Rejoicing in my lack of beliefs,
Unseul
edit for spelling etc
This message has been edited by Unseul, 06-16-2004 08:42 PM

Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life....
Do unto others before they do unto you.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024