|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Importance of Original Sin | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
They did:
If that's what Jesus meant, that ALL of us are to give it all away, the entire Church would have known it and preached it from the beginning.quote: And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
NOBODY has suggested salvation by works alone. There are some pretty solid arguments denouncing salvation by works alone. Salvation is by faith. That much is plain. But faith is NOT just mouthing, "Lord! Lord!" The way God measures faith is by what you do for the least of His brethren. The branch that does not produce fruit is thrown into the fire. The arguments against works are entirely self-serving. Edited by ringo, : Clarification.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Again, if that was to be a rule for all believers it would have been preached to all of us all these centuries and practiced by all and it wasn't. That's because you are pointing to particular specific events in the history of the Church that were not meant to be rules or commands, and imposing a false interpretation on them.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
You keep missing the point. Works are essential confirmations of faith but they HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SAVING US.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
The fact is that they did practice it. Again, if that was to be a rule for all believers it would have been preached to all of us all these centuries and practiced by all and it wasn't. Of course there's an easy copout for those who would rather grab all they can for themselves. That doesn't negate the principle.
Faith writes:
You make claims about what was "meant to be" but you don't back up your claims. Your denial is just self-serving. That's because you are pointing to particular specific events in the history of the Church that were not meant to be rules or commands, and imposing a false interpretation on them.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
You keep missing the point. Nobody has said that works have anything to do with saving us. But the works are the only measure of real faith. Without the works, you don't have real faith. If you hold back, like Ananias and Sapphira, you don't have real faith. Professions of faith mean nothing. Works are essential confirmations of faith but they HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SAVING US.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
If you hold back, like Ananias and Sapphira, you don't have real faith. Professions of faith mean nothing. OK, Mr.Smartie Pants. Have you sold your house yet?
quote:The Apostles were to be trusted and were directly in charge of the distribution. The people were as one, in communion. Whose feet would you lay it down in front of today? And dont give me that song and dance about socialists being a larger brotherhood of kum-ba-yah. Nor that any government can substitute for the Apostles. I'll take my chances with Jesus scolding me rather than fall for that Marxist utopian ideology. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Phat writes:
Well, the city is threatening to take it for back taxes. But I'm not the one who claims to be a follower of Jesus, am I? I don't need to practice what YOU should be preaching.
OK, Mr.Smartie Pants. Have you sold your house yet? Phat writes:
Not Ananias and Sapphira. They had your attitude and they were struck dead for it.
The people were as one, in communion. Phat writes:
Stop it. I have told you many times that I do NOT have a Utopian ideology. I'll take my chances with Jesus scolding me rather than fall for that Marxist utopian ideology. I'm just pointing out what YOUR religion says.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
Yes works validate faith, nobody has denied that; if there are no good works there is no genuine faith.
But just as you miss the point of the communal sharing among the believers and the story of the young man Jesus advised to sell all he owned and give it to the poor, you now as usual completely miss the point of the story of Ananias and Sapphira. I think I must have explained it at least half a dozen times by now. But here goes another: as the apostles explain, they were not at fault for holding back part of the sale money, since they had it within their power to decide to give whatever portion they wanted to give; their sin was lying about it to create the impression they were giving it all when they weren't. Lying to the Holy Spirit yet, as if He didn't know the truth no matter what they said. This is well understood and taught by all the preachers and theologians I've ever read on the subject, as is also the case with the other examples mentioned. As I said, if the Bible teaches that we are all to give away everything, that would have been taught and practiced down the centuries, but it has not. You misread these things. The testimony of the Church's leaders for two millennia is against you on all these examples. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
There would have been no reason to lie if they hadn't been doing wrong in the first place. They did wrong and they knew they did wrong. You can't erase the wrong that they did. their sin was lying about it to create the impression they were giving it all when they weren't.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
Act 5:4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. Here's a typical commentary on this:
Guzik commentary writes: "While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control?" Peter freely acknowledged that the land and its value belonged to Ananias alone; he was completely free to do with it what he wanted. His crime was not in withholding the money, but in deceptively implying that he gave it all. i. Of course, his sin was greed (in keeping the money); but his greater sin was pride, in wanting everyone to consider him so spiritual that he gave it all — when he had not. So here greed is considered to be part of his sin, but there is no implication even in that fact that he was obligated to give all the money. He was free to choose to give whatever portion he wished. Greed he was guilty of, but not failing to give all since that was not required. But I'll simply repeat for the umjpteenth time: All these passages you interpret as requiring all believers to give up everything we own have never ever ever been understood that way by the teachers of the Church, and they certainly would have been if that's what they meant. Yes we know that you as an unbeliever who rejected your own Christian upbringing, think you know better than the millions who have been faithful to it for two millennia, but your credibility is just a teensy bit lacking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
I have never said that it's a requirement. I've said that it's a principle. All these passages you interpret as requiring all believers to give up everything we own.... If you give less than 100% you can never be sure that you've given enough. And the principle doesn't apply only to money.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
It's not even a principle, but if their crime deserved instantaneous death why quibble: that makes it a requirement, not a principle anyway.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Phat writes:
It's a principle illustrated by Elijah and the widow, Jesus and the widow with two mites, Jesus and the rich man, Ananias and Sapphira and possibly some other examples that are not on the top of my head. Acts 4 even uses the exact same phraseology as socialism: "and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." It's not even a principle, but if their crime deserved instantaneous death why quibble: that makes it a requirement, not a principle anyway. You can try all you like to justify individual greed but it ain't scriptural.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I am not justifying greed for pete's sake: we should always give generously, and yes often faith is involved. I'm arguing with your claim that any of this is REQUIRED, or even that there is a principle involved beyond being generous. Go back and read through this discussion.; You aren't talking about the obvious fact that greed is a sin, you are claiming there is a definite requirement involved. Soi now you seem to be changing your argument. But nobody has been arguing that greed isn't a sin.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024