All About The Trinity (page 16)

LittleToe

Gumby:Likewise. I used to enjoy it, but after a while it becomes wearing.
I hoped for an opportunity to enjoy it again, but it looks like I've done a "Scooby", only to find diminishing gains, and insults to boot.

hooberus

LT, I don't think that is wrong to question wherter or no someone was truly born again at a certain time that they claim. There are many Catholics who claim that they were born again when they were baptized as a baby. I am concerned that they may not have been, therfore I think that it is good for them to make sure of their salvation.

There are also Mormons who claim to have been "born again" at age 8 or later (if a convert) when they were baptized in water by priesthood holding members of the Mormon Church.

Even though the above persons claim to have been born again at a certain point in time, I still think that it is important to preach to them the true Jesus and gospel of salvation.

Likewise, if someone claims that they were born again while (I believe) believing in a different Jesus than the real one, I don't think that it is wrong to question if they were really born again at that point in time.

Now I certainly do hope that you are saved, and my comments were not intended to insult you, but instead to make sure that you are saved.

Xena

Now I certainly do hope that you are saved, and my comments were not intended to insult you, but instead to make sure that you are saved.

ultimately isn't that between LT & God? Who are you do cast doubts on anothers calling or relationship with God?

hooberus

ultimately isn't that between LT & God? Who are you do cast doubts on anothers calling or relationship with God?

A person that believes the bible, must likewise believe that apart from Jesus Christ persons cannot be reconciled to God. Therefore, biblically speaking, those who reject Jesus Christ (such as wiccans) do not really have a true reconciled relationship with God. Those who accept the bible (to be consistent) cannot accept all ther views as being equally valid.

Likewise, those who truly believe in evolution, cannot (to be consistent) accept all other origins views (such as Genesis) as being equally valid.

Those who hold that a person is born again when they are water baptized and not before (a position that I disagree with) cannot but question the claims of someone (such as many protestants) that claims to have been born again before water baptism.

In the same way a person that holds that people must have the real Jesus in order to be born again, will probably question the claim of someone to have been born again at a time when they had a different Jesus, than that of the scriptures.

In none of the above cases is there necessarily an intent to insult those of another belief, but instead to be consistent with ones views.

If a person here questions that I (hooberus) was truly born again or saved when I claim that I was, then I would hope that out of concern that they would tell me so, and their reasons why.

Xena

I'm glad my God isn't as much of a stickler for details as yours appears to be, nor as judgemental as you appear to be.

ellderwho

Undisfellowshipped,

Ellderwho said:
If I believe in your presentation the I can spend the rest of my life sinning to the enth degree, without worry. Because on my death bed or close to it or maybe 30 years into retirement, I could decide one day "yep I guess Im going to call upon the Lord to get straighten out."
A person who thought that way could blaspheme the Spirit (the unforgivable sin), like some of the Pharisees did.
However, read 2nd Chronicles Chapter 33 and you will see that Manasseh did indeed do that, and repented and was saved.

Did Manasseh really do this on his own? 2Chron.33:10-13

10And the LORD spake to Manasseh, and to his people: but they would not hearken. 11Wherefore the LORD brought upon them the captains of the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh among the thorns, and bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon. 12And when he was in affliction, he besought the LORD his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, 13And prayed unto him: and he was entreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD he was God.

Do you think Manasseh would have sought the LORD if in fact Manasseh was not put into affliction by the LORD?? Free will I think not.

LittleToe

Hoob:The "Jesus" that I met with has remained the same. Only my understanding of Him has deepened.
In the future you might want to look before you shoot...

I don't think that is wrong to question wherter or no...

Surely that is for their kirk session, or equivalent, to judge, before baptism?
For someone to do so over an imperfect media, such as this, without the resource to follow up and assist, is IMHO irresponsible!

Now I certainly do hope that you are saved, and my comments were not intended to insult you, but instead to make sure that you are saved.

So, tell me. How do you intend to "make sure"?

Therefore, biblically speaking, those who reject Jesus Christ (such as wiccans) do not really have a true reconciled relationship with God.

The matter of rejection is a different subject entirely.

Likewise, those who truly believe in evolution, cannot (to be consistent) accept all other origins views (such as Genesis) as being equally valid.

I disagree. They are not mutually exclusive. You have taken an interpretive role and stated it as fact.
Do you call into question the faith of every bible-loving Christian who isn't a Young Earth Creationist?
There are quite a number of evolutionists who are far more reasonable, on this subject, than you would presume.

In none of the above cases is there necessarily an intent to insult those of another belief, but instead to be consistent with ones views.

Consistent, as in "conformed"?
You really don't know all that much about JWs, and exJWs, huh?
Keep on doling out the triggerwords...

Personally I can accept a Unitarian's profession of faith, without question. Otherwise I have to call into question all the Christian's professions prior to 325AD (I had to get back on-topic somehow).
I might personally wonder, at an individual's fruits, once in a while, but it's not for me to judge an individual - especially over an indistinct media such as this!

If a person here questions that I (hooberus) was truly born again or saved when I claim that I was, then I would hope that out of concern that they would tell me so, and their reasons why.

Personally I wouldn't DARE to call into question someone's calling and election. Assurance of faith is such a tentative thing in many people's experience that it would be like dashing the cup from their lips (in a literal sense, in connection with "the table").

hooberus

Members of the some sacred name movements believe that a person in order to be saved must call upon God by a certain name such as "Yahweh" (I disagree with this position). They believe this based upon their beliefs on for example Joel 2:32.

Now if a memeber of a movement such as above, were to hear a Baptists personal testimony of when they believe that they were born again, the sacred namer would probably would ask if the Baptist used the specific name "Yahweh." Upon finding out that the Baptist did not, the sacred namer would probably question whether the Baptist was truely saved at the time that the Baptist claims that he was. This is not because the sacred namer wished to insult or personaly judge the Baptist as a person, but rather due to the fact that the sacred namer really believes that the specific name Yahweh must be used in order to be saved.

In fact for the sacred namer to accept that the Baptist was born again at the time that the Baptist claims, would require the sacred namer to go against his own personal beliefs that the name "Yahweh" must be used for salvation, since he would have to accept that someone who did not use it was saved.

For the Baptist to insist that sacred namer accept (or not question) his testimony, would be the equivalent of the Baptist requiring the sacred namer to no longer believe his sacred namer conviction that the name Yahweh must be used for salvation.

In the above example there was no attempt to insult the Baptist or to judge him as an individual person, but rather an issue of scriptural beliefs regarding salvation.

hooberus

Personally I can accept a Unitarian's profession of faith, without question. Otherwise I have to call into question all the Christian's professions prior to 325AD (I had to get back on-topic somehow).

I think that the early writings show that Christians prior to 325AD believed that Jesus was both God and man.

zen nudist

Your God:

The One God is Eternal (has always existed and always will), Immortal (His Divine Nature cannot die), Omnipotent (All-Powerful), Omniscient (All-Knowing), Omnipresent (He is everywhere at the same time), God is the Only One who can read human hearts and minds, God cannot sin and cannot lie, God does not change His morals or His Nature. The One God is the Only One who has the Power and Authority to Create -- God is the Only Creator. God has Perfect Love, Perfect Justice, Perfect Wisdom, Perfect Mercy, Perfect Grace, Perfect Judgment.

The Bible God:

Omnipotent (All-Powerful)

Jdg 1:19

And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out [the inhabitants of] the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

Omniscient (All-Knowing)

Gen 18:20	And the LORD said, Because the cry of
Gen 18:21	I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not , I will know.

God is the Only One who can read human hearts and minds

Gen 3:11

And he[God] said, Who told thee that thou [wast] naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?

God cannot sin and cannot lie, God does not change His morals or His Nature.

Exd 32:14

And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

All About The Trinity

Share this