Calling out Blakbuzzrd

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
I have arrived. I have a thread calling me out by name now!

Now to bidness:

An evangelical xian maintains that if someone actually falls away from the faith, then that person wasn't really of the faith, since Christ promises to protect his own and that no one will take them from his hand (cf. John 10:27-29).

It's a catch-22 of Christianity. If yo ...[text shortened]... tward professions or inward convictions -- an idea which terrorized early American Puritans.

So you left the faith, what did you leave? Did you actually have a
relationship with God through Jesus Christ, or did you go through the
motions and later decided the games you saw being played around
you was not real? I'm asking you what you left, your views on what
the evangelical maintain as interesting as that is, doesn't matter.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
So you left the faith, what did you leave? Did you actually have a
relationship with God through Jesus Christ, or did you go through the
motions and later decided the games you saw being played around
you was not real? I'm asking you what you left, your views on what
the evangelical maintain as interesting as that is, doesn't matter.
Kelly

I answered you in the "Food for Thought" thread, before I saw this one. For simplicity's sake, I copy my response from that thread into this one:

Yeah, I had the full-bore saved by faith in Jesus thang.

In good faith, I started looking into the origins of xianity and the bible, and historicizing xianity (placing the practices and beliefs in the context of the times and culture in which they arose). I started looking at the history of the church through the lens of the historical method.

After all, as Augustine maintained, all truth is God's truth, right?

I found out that whether or not all truth was God's truth, not all fact was Christian fact. I didn't want it to happen, and in fact spent six years fighting it in earnest, but in the end I discovered that an evangelical faith in xianity itself was, historically speaking, a house built on sand. Personally, I was unable to disentangle theological truth-claims from historical factuality, mainly because I'm a child of the 20th-century, rather than a 1st-century believer. It was not enough to say that Jesus was the kind of person who would do and say certain things (as a 1st-century believer would have done), as illustrated by examples in the gospels; I needed to know that he actually did say and do those things, exactly as they were written and copied. As it became increasingly obvious that the latter was an untenable idea, the whole basis for faith was thrown into question.

And when the rains of logic came, and the waters of probability rose, well, you know how the parable ends.

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
I haven't forgotten -- I'm traveling on vacation this week. I picked the wrong week to argue!

Okay, enjoy your vacation, I'm going to be out for a couple of weeks
on one too.

If we are both willing we can pick this up again later.
Kelly

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
I answered you in the "Food for Thought" thread, before I saw this one. For simplicity's sake, I copy my response from that thread into this one:

Yeah, I had the full-bore saved by faith in Jesus thang.

In good faith, I started looking into the origins of xianity and the bible, and historicizing xianity (placing the practices and beliefs in the cont ...[text shortened]... s of logic came, and the waters of probability rose, well, you know how the parable ends.

Sorry I was pestering you on your vacation we can pick this up later.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Sorry I was pestering you on your vacation we can pick this up later.
Kelly

No prob. I'm checking fairly regularly, so fire away.

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
I answered you in the "Food for Thought" thread, before I saw this one. For simplicity's sake, I copy my response from that thread into this one:

Yeah, I had the full-bore saved by faith in Jesus thang.

In good faith, I started looking into the origins of xianity and the bible, and historicizing xianity (placing the practices and beliefs in the cont ...[text shortened]... s of logic came, and the waters of probability rose, well, you know how the parable ends.

Explain what you mean by how historically speaking the Christian faith is built on sand. What specifically?

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
I have arrived. I have a thread calling me out by name now!

Now to bidness:

An evangelical xian maintains that if someone actually falls away from the faith, then that person wasn't really of the faith, since Christ promises to protect his own and that no one will take them from his hand (cf. John 10:27-29).

It's a catch-22 of Christianity. If yo tward professions or inward convictions -- an idea which terrorized early American Puritans.

The bottom line is, those who put to death the deeds of the flesh are being led by the Spirit of God, and those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. If a person is not progressively overcoming the flesh, then that person is living according to the flesh. Salvation is a gift extended to us in the crucified Christ, but we are his disciples only so far as we let His Spirit lead us (just because one receives the Holy Spirit, doesn't mean one has to obey Him). Furthermore, the Spirit does bear witness in the believer's spirit that he or she is a child of God, when we cry out to the Lord, "Abba, Father!" with love. Those led by the Spirit are willing to be persecuted and killed for Jesus. There is no Catch-22 here. One either is led by the Spirit or not; if not, repentance is always an option. God's children, his elect, are not set in stone.

"So then, brothers and sisters, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received a spirit of adoption. When we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’ it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ—if, in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him" (Romans 8:12-17).

Originally posted by whodey
Explain what you mean by how historically speaking the Christian faith is built on sand. What specifically?

I did not say that. What I said was that an evangelical faith in xianity is a house built on sand. By that, I mean two things:

1. Evangelical xianity holds as a primary tenet to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy: that not only is the bible completely true and useful in all matters of faith and practice, but also is completely accurate with respect to historical and scientific details. The former is a matter of debate; the latter is demonstrably false.

2. Evangelical xianity includes as a chief principle the notion of sola scriptura; that not only is the bible infallible and useful in all matters of faith in practice, but that it is the highest authority for such questions. The bible is the yardstick for God's truth, and it is the primary means by which evangelical xians are to interpret spiritual ideas and life itself. For me, once I realized that I could no longer subscribe to #1 above, I couldn't in good faith buy sola scriptura either. If the bible is not perfect, then what makes it any more the method by which god communicates than, say, a great sermon? Or a performance of Handel's Messiah? Or a painting by Michaelangelo? Or Bach's Brandenburg Concertos? Or Muhammad Ali in the ring? Or Kasparov on the chess board? Or Bells Brewery's Two Hearted Ale?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
The bottom line is, those who put to death the deeds of the flesh are being led by the Spirit of God, and those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. If a person is not progressively overcoming the flesh, then that person is living according to the flesh. Salvation is a gift extended to us in the crucified Christ, but we are his discipl ...[text shortened]... in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him" (Romans 8:12-17).

Hmm. Why this passage? It sounds a lot like salvation through honest good work. Plenty of folks have indulged in self-mortification without confessing Jesus as their savior.

Part of this is that Paul is a really not a very good writer. How does what was he trying to say in this passage relate to the central doctrine of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus?

So, epiphinehas, are you saying that a person can lose his or her salvation, once it has been gained? That sounds fairly charismatic church-ish. The folks I know who subscribe to that viewpoint tend to come from Assembly of God or Vineyard-type denominations. It's not really the thing in say, PCA churches. The line there is much more what you see in Ephesians 1:13-14, 4:30, and also II Corinthians 1:21-22 where the author(s) talk about those who believe having been "sealed in the Spirit."

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
No prob. I'm checking fairly regularly, so fire away.

Okay if you don't mind, I'll ask this again.

You left your Christian faith, is that a fair statement?
If you left it, what was it, was it a relationship with God in Christ, or
something the people you knew taught you, and it beccame
something you could not maintain as true, or something different?
Kelly

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
Hmm. Why this passage? It sounds a lot like salvation through honest good work. Plenty of folks have indulged in self-mortification without confessing Jesus as their savior.

Part of this is that Paul is a really not a very good writer. How does what was he trying to say in this passage relate to the central doctrine of salvation by grace through faith ...[text shortened]... 1:21-22 where the author(s) talk about those who believe having been "sealed in the Spirit."

So, epiphinehas, are you saying that a person can lose his or her salvation, once it has been gained?

Definitely. And that is hardly a charismatic viewpoint. Are you saying that if a former believer denounces Christ, disobeys the Holy Spirit, lives a life of sin and lead others into sin, perhaps even actively leads people astray from God's word, that that person will nevertheless inherit the kingdom?

"For if we go on deliberately and willingly sinning after once acquiring the knowledge of the Truth, there is no longer any sacrifice left to atone for our sins; no further offering to which to look forward. There is nothing left for us then but a kind of awful and fearful prospect and expectation of divine judgment and the fury of burning wrath and indignation which will consume those who put themselves in opposition to God" (Hebrews 10:26-27).

"Remember that it is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you. You will say, ‘Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.’ That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, perhaps he will not spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity towards those who have fallen, but God’s kindness towards you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off" (Romans 11:18-22).

"‘Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able. When once the owner of the house has got up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, “Lord, open to us”, then in reply he will say to you, “I do not know where you come from"" (Luke 13:24-25).

These warnings are legitimate. God's way of salvation never allows us the opportunity to cease fearing the Lord. On the one hand we are able, through faith, to come boldly before the throne of grace; and on the other hand, we are able to reject God's salvation after receiving it: "how can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?" (Hebrews 2:3). The fear of the Lord keeps us in line with him and growing in discipline, instead of becoming lukewarm: "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:15-17).

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]So, epiphinehas, are you saying that a person can lose his or her salvation, once it has been gained?

Definitely. And that is hardly a charismatic viewpoint. Are you saying that if a former believer denounces Christ, disobeys the Holy Spirit, lives a life of sin and lead others into sin, perhaps even actively leads people astray from God's wo ...[text shortened]... either cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:15-17).[/b]

These warnings are legitimate. God's way of salvation never allows us the opportunity to cease fearing the Lord. On the one hand we are able, through faith, to come boldly before the throne of grace; and on the other hand, we are able to reject God's salvation after receiving it: "how can we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?" (Hebrews 2:3). The fear of the Lord keeps us in line with him and growing in discipline, instead of becoming lukewarm: "So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:15-17).

I've always been of the opinion that those that are hot are not hard
to see those are the people that are going all out to follow God, but
those that are cold are those fighting hard against God. Correct me
if you think otherwise, it seems it is better to be engaged one way or
another than running around with a 'who cares' attitude.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I've always been of the opinion that those that are hot are not hard
to see those are the people that are going all out to follow God, but
those that are cold are those fighting hard against God. Correct me
if you think otherwise, it seems it is better to be engaged one way or
another than running around with a 'who cares' attitude.[/b]

A 'cold' Christian blends in with the world and nobody recognizes him as a Christian (and therefore is not a threat to God's kingdom). A 'hot' Christian is on fire for the Lord and leads people into the kingdom. A 'lukewarm' Christian is a blend of both hot and cold, and therefore lives according to the world, yet claims to be a Christian. A lukewarm Christian tries to obey two masters (God and money), and in the process leads himself and others astray. A lukewarm Christian is someone who has lost touch with his own wretchedness, and, therefore, his urgent need of the Lord; the riches of this world have decieved him into complacency. Such people don't live in the fullness of the living God because they have forgotten to boast in their weaknesses and submit to the Holy Spirit. The danger of being rejected is real, but there is always hope for everyone:

"I reprove and discipline those whom I love. Be earnest, therefore, and repent. Listen! I am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to you and eat with you, and you with me. To the one who conquers I will give a place with me on my throne, just as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne" (Revelation 3:19-21).

Originally posted by blakbuzzrd
[b]I did not say that. What I said was that an evangelical faith in xianity is a house built on sand. By that, I mean two things:

1. Evangelical xianity holds as a primary tenet to the doctrine of biblical inerrancy: that not only is the bible completely true and useful in all matters of faith and practice, but also is completely accurate with respect to ...[text shortened]... storical and scientific details. The former is a matter of debate; the latter is demonstrably false.

Give me an example of the Bible not being accurate in terms of scientific details, or in short, give me the passages you have had trouble with and that have caused you to loose your faith.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]So, epiphinehas, are you saying that a person can lose his or her salvation, once it has been gained?

Definitely. And that is hardly a charismatic viewpoint. Are you saying that if a former believer denounces Christ, disobeys the Holy Spirit, lives a life of sin and lead others into sin, perhaps even actively leads people astray from God's wo ...[text shortened]... either cold nor hot, I am about to spit you out of my mouth" (Revelation 3:15-17).[/b]

Sorry, ep, but you'll eventually be adjusting your view on this one at some point, as well.

Man can do nothing to gain the approbation of God. No work, no deed, no amount of penance. Faith alone in Christ alone is the only source of salvation. There is nothing meritorious about faith. If we can do nothing to gain said salvation---once gained--- we can do nothing to lose it, either.

We cannot undo faith, any more than we can undo being born. While we can certainly attempt to end the life given us by God, once born there is no undoing it. Anyone who accepts the gift of salvation by belief in the Lord Jesus Christ is sealed forever, regardless of the life they live afterward. Your interpretations of the verses quoted otherwise are in error.