UnDFed:
I apologise for leaving this thread for so long. I misplaced it in my memory, and just saw it bumped today..
THE SIMPLE GOSPEL
I'm going to cut to the chase with a few comments:
You quote Gal1:9 "As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."
To which I would counter, what was the message that Paul took to the congregations, if not the following?
1Cor. 2:2 "For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified."
You then continue on to invoke John's words about apostate teachings:
2John 1:9-11 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
But is John attacking genuine debate or the questions that come from lambs, here? Rather isn't he warning against those that intentionally subvert the faith of others, when they have previously held a clear view of the doctrine of Christ? You seem to be quick to raise the ante by infering that those who disagree with you are [truly] apostate, leaving yourself open the opportunity to shun them. Whether this is your intent or not, I caution you that this angle triggers all the worst things of a JW upbringing in me (and likely many others). Kindly leave it out!
DOCTRINE OF CHRIST
In your latest exchange you erroneously suggest that I merely see such debates as "irrelevant". I wouldn't still be discussing it if I felt that way.
That aside, I need to ask you some probing questions:
- Did the Old Testament Saints know the name "Jesus"?
- Did they even have a clear understanding of the "Cross"?
- Were they putting their faith in anything supplemental to "God"?
- While I accept that we are now in an age where it is easy to access a better understanding of Christ, do you believe it possible (in some circumstances) to come to faith without a clear understanding of the "Doctrine of Christ"?
And to address some of your further points:
Jesus sure made a BIG DEAL out His true identity.
I disagree. He didn't. He downplayed his position. While he assumed the title "Son of Man", he only openly acknowledged that he was the Christ to those whom the Spirit had already revealed it to.
Jesus taught that Unitarians are going to Hell...
No he CERTAINLY didn't - you overstep yourself mightily!!! He taught that he was the way to life. He taught that he was the light that had entered the world. He taught that he came to save not to judge.
...you are teaching "lambs" in the faith that it is not important, basically, you said it doesn't matter whether you believe that Jesus is God -- you can still be saved.
To which I kindly say "p*ss off! Don't put words into my mouth!"
I have clearly stated over and over again that the focus is Christ. Whether or not an individual has a clear perception of Jesus' Divinity does not appear to impede the Spirit from regenerating those whom he will.
LittleToe, I challenge you to show me any verses of the New Testament that teach that you can be saved while believing that Jesus is NOT God.
You're asking me to argue a negative. Its akin to asking an Atheist to prove there isn't a God, period. There are several instances of Roman soldiers (including Cornelius) where it isn't clear whether or not they knew about Jesus Divinity, and yet they were clearly putting faith in something and were saved.
According to the Bible, should Christians desire to have "unity" with those who deny the truth about Jesus Christ?
You certainly seem very keen to write people off, wherever possible. Have you learnt nothing from the JWs? I highlight again that intentionally or not you are hitting triggers that you REALLY don't want to go near!
Since I hold that the Doctrine of Christ includes salvation by "Grace through faith" (Eph.2) am I to repudiate and shun my Armenian brethren?
Can you "know" someone without knowing WHO they are or WHAT they have done?
Yes.
I'm going to leave my reply as stark as that.
So, in your opinion, calling the Bible "the Truth" is blasphemy? Was Jesus a blasphemer?
Every last one of those verses refered to himself, rather than crumbling papyrus. I would suggest that Barth may have been right in highlighting that some have made an idol of paper. I'm not attempting to undermine its place as the "only rule", the essence of which is written on the heart, but neither will I place paper on the throne alongside the lamb. Or do you neglect John's words in the last verse of his Gospel?
As I said before, the reality is that Jesus is God. But how does that reality alone save anyone? The reality also is that Jesus died for sins on the cross, but does that reality save us if we do not come to Jesus for salvation?
Now we're finally getting somewhere.
You now appear to confess that [knowledge of] the reality that Jesus is God does not save anyone - coming to him for salvation does. Please tell me that I've picked you up correctly and that you're not presenting another gospel?
Jesus made it EXTREMELY clear that no one can be saved without BELIEVING THE TRUTH about Him, about WHO He is, and WHAT He has done for us:
And there ya go raising a sequence of barriers again to initial regeneration. No, no, no, no, NO!
Believing in HIM as the source of an individuals salvation was the only requirement.
UNITARIANISMYou then run off on a diatribe against Unitarians, which [albeit interesting] I'll condense into the following short comments:
Can a person be converted WHILE still believing in the Unitarian version of Jesus?
Yes.
Can a person be saved without coming to Jesus and calling on His Name and praying to Him?
What did CS Lewis suggest in "Mere Christianity"?
But, wouldn't it be considered stumbling a "little one" if they ended up believing in Unitarianism and denying the Deity of Christ because they believed in some teaching like the one where you said it's not very important whether someone believes in Unitarianism or not?
You appear to have sincere difficulty separating out the difference between the milky things of the first steps of salvation and; the deeper things of correct doctrine. I thank God that, while I met many people like you on their doorsteps, it was the gentle leadings of the Spirit that taught me good Calvinist doctrine after I came to faith in Christ; and this before I ever put foot inside a church.
I am very passionate about my Savior, and that is why I cannot stand to see someone claim that it makes no difference if you are a Unitarian or not.
I never said that.
Unitarians (including JW's) are on the road to Hell.
You overstep your authority, brother.
Paul said you can be saved by believing in the truth of what you HEAR about the Gospel -- you don't have to READ the Gospel.
I agree.
Peter said that he and the disciples had come to believe that Jesus was The Holy One of God, The Christ, The Son of the Living God. However, it appears that they did not yet truly put faith in Jesus, because look what Jesus told them later in the Gospel of John:
Interesting. So Peter follows Christ, confesses him from his own lips, and yet you would place his conversion at a much later date, simply because they came to a better understanding of some of the deeper things of God...
...please stop raising hurdles even against the Apostles...
However, once again, it appears that at least one of the Apostles did not truly believe yet, because Thomas did not truly believe Jesus to be God until He appeared to him after His Resurrection. (John 20:27-29)
My favourite passage of Scripture. Thanks for quoting it.
So if a Christian has a period of faith-shaking doubt, would you place him back at square one again? I apologise, I got off on the wrong foot with this whole discussion - I didn't realise you were an Armenian...
