Christian faith: Calvinism is back

[-Cp]

Christ accepted those who came to Him on His terms, not their own. Big difference.

Really? Can you please give me some examples of that in scripture?

[BoogyMan]

Really? Can you please give me some examples of that in scripture?

Certainly. I would recommend that you read the book of Acts in the New Testament and consider the cases of conversion listed there.

Those on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 had to change.
Those in Samaria in Acts 8 had to change.
The Eunuch in Acts 8 had to change.
Saul in Acts 9 had to change.
Cornelius in Acts 10 had to change.

You could also read about Lydia (Acts 16) and the Jailor (Acts 6) and those in Corinth (Acts 18), etc.

Christ NEVER told anyone that they could simply stay in sin and be acceptable to Him.

[-Cp]

Certainly. I would recommend that you read the book of Acts in the New Testament and consider the cases of conversion listed there.

Those on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 had to change.
Those in Samaria in Acts 8 had to change.
The Eunuch in Acts 8 had to change.
Saul in Acts 9 had to change.
Cornelius in Acts 10 had to change.

You could also read about Lydia (Acts 16) and the Jailor (Acts 6) and those in Corinth (Acts 18), etc.

Christ NEVER told anyone that they could simply stay in sin and be acceptable to Him.

We're not talking about sin or not.. we're talking about Christ showing love to everyone..

[BoogyMan]

We're not talking about sin or not.. we're talking about Christ showing love to everyone..

We were talking about Christ accepting people. Acceptance is found in salvation which is on Christ's terms, not the terms of man.

[-Cp]

We were talking about Christ accepting people. Acceptance is found in salvation which is on Christ's terms, not the terms of man.

Sorry.. this is what sux about having discussions via text...

This started off talking about PmP's lack of loving spiriting coming thru in some of his posts.

I contend that if we claim to KNOW LOVE (God) - then that love will ooze out of us and not be telling folks to "f-off" etc.. You know.. talking to people the way Christ would..

[Abbey Marie]

Point of order...Christ embraced those before they made even ONE STEP towards him. Christ threw his love towards people...without any demands.

I just had to say, I love this turn of phrase.

[BoogyMan]

Sorry.. this is what sux about having discussions via text...

This started off talking about PmP's lack of loving spiriting coming thru in some of his posts.

I contend that if we claim to KNOW LOVE (God) - then that love will ooze out of us and not be telling folks to "f-off" etc.. You know.. talking to people the way Christ would..

I have never said any such thing?!?! Are you claiming that I have?

Which love are you speaking of in the New Testament, there are several kinds.

Point of order...Christ embraced those before they made even ONE STEP towards him. Christ threw his love towards people...without any demands.

Christ gave himself up for Man as was the plan of His Father, that does not mean that man does not have a part to play as well. Salvation isn't like a disease, you don't catch it and you don't get it on you like a stain. You have to want it.

[darin]

Christ went to people in their condition and showed them Love. (note the period). That's the beauty of who He is...and the ultimate illustration of His plan. Our part? Accept his Love.

Adding stipulations to it just cheapens things.

[BoogyMan]

Christ went to people in their condition and showed them Love. (note the period). That's the beauty of who He is...and the ultimate illustration of His plan. Our part? Accept his Love.

Adding stipulations to it just cheapens things.

Christ showed his love for a reason. That is to make a way of salvation for man. There is no addition being made, just a repeating of what the Bible already teaches.

Man is not saved against his will, he has to desire salvation.

[SassyLady]

Christ went to people in their condition and showed them Love. (note the period). That's the beauty of who He is...and the ultimate illustration of His plan. Our part? Accept his Love.

Adding stipulations to it just cheapens things.

Very well said dmp!

[PostmodernProphet]

Did Christ not embrace EVERYONE? Even those who killed him? How can you call yourself a "christian" (Christ-like) if you don't show love those whom you even despise?

no....I distinctly remember him telling the disciples that when they found a place where they were rejected they were to wipe the dust from their feet and leave.....he didn't embrace those who refused him.....as for calling myself a Christian, I do so because I believe in Jesus as the Christ.....if those who sin cannot be called Christians, there are no Christians in the world.....

That would be like me saying that if you refuse to read Conversations With God, then you are refusing to accept God....

I would certainly be rejecting the God described in Conversations With God if I refused to read about him.....I wouldn't (and don't) know who he is.....how could I be said to accept him?.....

Yes .... because God has never rejected them to begin with, therefore, there is no rejection.

that may be true about the God described in CWG.....it is not true about the God described in the Bible....that God has stated the only way to him is through Jesus Christ....thus it would appear he rejects those who choose to make their own pathway that doesn't include Jesus Christ...

In whose eyes? For a time it was working for some people and not working for others .... eventually it was eradicated and the majority of the world would say it didn't work, which is why it is no longer in existence. What is your point?

the point should be obvious.....Auschwitz was immoral, yet it accomplished exactly what the people who built it, built it for....it "worked", by your definition, it was moral....

Does always turning the other cheek "work", or does it sometimes lead to demise of the human body, even though it is considered a good thing to do? Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

if the obverse of your statement is true then that which didn't work would be immoral.....if turning the other cheek doesn't work, it would be immoral?.....

[SassyLady]

I would certainly be rejecting the God described in Conversations With God if I refused to read about him.....I wouldn't (and don't) know who he is.....how could I be said to accept him?.....

Perhaps you should read the book..just as you would like others to read the Bible.

that may be true about the God described in CWG.....it is not true about the God described in the Bible....that God has stated the only way to him is through Jesus Christ....thus it would appear he rejects those who choose to make their own pathway that doesn't include Jesus Christ...

Yes ... this is what a very human person said that God said --- maybe he heard wrong? All I know is that I was taught from the Bible and I read CWG and I intuitively believe CWG .... hard to explain .... other than it just feels right that the creator loves all of us.

the point should be obvious.....Auschwitz was immoral, yet it accomplished exactly what the people who built it, built it for....it "worked", by your definition, it was moral....

Nope .... never said it was moral .... this is what I referenced:

"There is no such thing as Right and Wrong. There is only What Works and What Does Not Work, depending upon what it is that you seek to be, do or have."

if the obverse of your statement is true then that which didn't work would be immoral.....if turning the other cheek doesn't work, it would be immoral?.....

No; turning your cheek either "Works or Doesn't Work" - depending upon what one is seeking.

[PostmodernProphet]

other than it just feels right that the creator loves all of us.

/shrugs, and it feels wrong that some of us don't love the creator....

"There is no such thing as Right and Wrong. There is only What Works and What Does Not Work, depending upon what it is that you seek to be, do or have."

perhaps I made an assumption......does "what works" equal right and "what does not work" equal wrong?.....if so, then from what you have said, killing people in mass at Auschwitz was "right", because that was what Hitler sought to do.....

look, I'm not trying to make you look like a Nazi, I'm trying to show you why your definition sucks.......

[SassyLady]

perhaps I made an assumption......does "what works" equal right and "what does not work" equal wrong?.....if so, then from what you have said, killing people in mass at Auschwitz was "right", because that was what Hitler sought to do.....

look, I'm not trying to make you look like a Nazi, I'm trying to show you why your definition sucks.......

It may suck, but it is true..........things work for some and not for others. What works for some (right) doesn't work for others (wrong).....so according to the God of CWG - there is no right or wrong .....just humans trying to work out for themselves what works and what doesn't.

For some turning their cheek works and for others it doesn't work......do we classify "turning your cheek" as right or wrong? Is it right all the time or just when it works? What about the time one turns their cheek and are killed anyway .... were they right or wrong .......... because it didn't work.

Nothing equals right or wrong - there is only what works and what doesn't work. Takes the charge of judgement off the action.....and allows the action to be defined as an action that is furthering the cause or hindering it. Not using the words, right/wrong, moral/immoral takes the emotional charge away and gives a chance to look at the action itself to see if it is gaining the desired results.

/shrugs, and it feels wrong that some of us don't love the creator....

That is true - some don't love the creator but the creator is not vindictive or vengeful and doesn't need our love to be complete or to love us. It truly is unconditional love.

[BoogyMan]

That is true - some don't love the creator but the creator is not vindictive or vengeful and doesn't need our love to be complete or to love us. It truly is unconditional love.

God loves all, but He expects us to come to Him on His terms, not our own.

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Man has something to do in the scenario above, "come to repentance."

I would not speak to freely about God not being vengeful either, as He has a righteous vengeance on those who deny Him.

For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.