Continuing: "Questioning online Apologetics"

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]"It is a central debate concerning salvation by works versus salavtion by grace. It's also about forgiveness/acceptance versus judgementalism."


For the record once again, I do not believe in "salvation by works" as it is commonly used and what it commonly entails. I believe that Jesus teaches one must BE righteous and not merely ACT righteous ...[text shortened]... Christianity'. It results in 'Christians' remaining so unlike your Christ."[/b]

Like usual KM distorts my position. Though I have corrected him a number of times, he resorts to using distortions, half-truths and even outright lies. The truth is not in him. -----------ToO----------------

The fact is that you do not logically think about the true implications of your position so when it's presented back to you you see it as a "lie". You believe in salvation outside of the grace of God . This is a grave error.

It seems to me the two of you have just transferred your ongoing debate from the other thread to here! PULEEEEZE!

If the above two posts accurately describe your relative positions, then, again, I have to say I cannot see what all the fuss and heat is all about!

Just for the sake of humoring me, could both of you please succinctly write down the following:
1 What you think the other guys position is, and
2 What your own position is and how IN ESSENCE it differs from the other one?

But VERY BRIEFLY please, no scriptures and no argument, just clarification!

Once we have this, and both of you can say: Yes, you have understood my point and described it correctly, THEN we can perhaps see if there are any matters of concern that are different.

How about that, heh?

Originally posted by CalJust
It ....But VERY BRIEFLY please, no scriptures and no argument, just clarification!...

You asking Jaywill to be brief ? LOL .

Originally posted by Rajk999
You asking Jaywill to be brief ? LOL .

Hey! No more cracks about my long windedness !

Originally posted by CalJust
It seems to me the two of you have just transferred your ongoing debate from the other thread to here! PULEEEEZE!

If the above two posts accurately describe your relative positions, then, again, I have to say I cannot see what all the fuss and heat is all about!

Just for the sake of humoring me, could both of you please succinctly write down the follow ...[text shortened]... can perhaps see if there are any matters of concern that are different.

How about that, heh?

ToO's position - instantanious sinless perfection in character upon being born again.


You said brief.

Originally posted by CalJust
It seems to me the two of you have just transferred your ongoing debate from the other thread to here! PULEEEEZE!

If the above two posts accurately describe your relative positions, then, again, I have to say I cannot see what all the fuss and heat is all about!

Just for the sake of humoring me, could both of you please succinctly write down the follow ...[text shortened]... can perhaps see if there are any matters of concern that are different.

How about that, heh?

I have no intention of hijacking your thread, however KM has a habit of telling everyone what I believe as if it were a statement of fact. No matter how many times I try to correct him (it must number in the dozens), he continues to present a distortion of what I believe. He not only follows me around from thread to thread with his distortions, he posts them on other threads such as this one. I have asked him numerous times to stop doing this, yet he persists. I feel compelled to try to set the record straight from time to time.

Originally posted by jaywill
ToO's position - instantanious sinless perfection in character upon being born again.


You said brief.

And evidently jaywill has also now taken to doing the same.

It's not difficult to understand what Ghandi was saying.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I have no intention of hijacking your thread, however KM has a habit of telling everyone what I believe as if it were a statement of fact. No matter how many times I try to correct him (it must number in the dozens), he continues to present a distortion of what I believe. He not only follows me around from thread to thread with his distortions, he posts t ...[text shortened]... ing this, yet he persists. I feel compelled to try to set the record straight from time to time.

ToO,

Some of this you may bring on yourself. When asked questions in order to get a rounder picture of your belief, you strenuosly avoid answering.

So some of that you have to take responsibility for.

Am I wrong?

The original intention of epi's thread was to point out how online Christian apologists make a mess of things.

And he's right. So there wasn't much else to say.

Originally posted by jaywill
ToO,

Some of this you may bring on yourself. When asked questions in order to get a rounder picture of your belief, you strenuosly avoid answering.

So some of that you have to take responsibility for.

Am I wrong?

Yes, you're wrong.

If you don't think you know enough to understand my position, what are you doing stating what it is as if you do?

Face it. You made this unsolicited post only to take a shot:
"ToO's position - instantanious sinless perfection in character upon being born again."

Not only that, the way you chose to phrase it was in order to make it sound preposterous.

Then you compound it by saying that "you may bring it on yourself."

You're really something.

Ghandi understood some things.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Yes, you're wrong.

If you don't think you know enough to understand my position, what are you doing stating what it is as if you do?

Face it. You made this unsolicited post only to take a shot:
"ToO's position - instantanious sinless perfection in character upon being born again."

Not only that, the way you chose to phrase it was in order to m ay bring it on yourself."

You're really something.

Ghandi understood some things.

=============================
Yes, you're wrong.

If you don't think you know enough to understand my position, what are you doing stating what it is as if you do?
=================================

Because I am obviously going by what you said.

====================================
Face it. You made this unsolicited post only to take a shot:
"ToO's position - instantanious sinless perfection in character upon being born again."
====================================

Based upon all that I have read from you, that appears to be your position.

I did however notice that this is not the first time you have had this discussion. You had another discussion on "born again". I read some of that. I thought I could get more of your ideas if I did.

However, the matter of the New Testament which you base your beliefs on seems to be a matter that you have evaded.

I still don't know what constitutes the New Testament Document in your eyes. Apparently you discard a huge portion of it. But getting you to admit it in detail is like pulling teeth.

===========================
Not only that, the way you chose to phrase it was in order to make it sound preposterous.
===========================

No I did not. I did it to make it CONCISE.

====================================
Then you compound it by saying that "you may bring it on yourself."

You're really something.
======================================

That is right IMO. You like to conceal your real position about a few things so that people are kept guessing where you stand.

So why complain? You're getting what you want - mystery man.

You see in debating, an unstated position is the easiest to defend.

Watch this.

ToO - ARE YOU BORN AGAIN ?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=============================
Yes, you're wrong.

If you don't think you know enough to understand my position, what are you doing stating what it is as if you do?
=================================

Because I am obviously going by what you said.

====================================
Face it. You made this unsolicited post only to ta ed position is the easiest to defend.

Watch this.

ToO - ARE YOU BORN AGAIN ?

[/b]I'll try to explain it again, since you're a little slow picking up concepts.

In one post you emphatically state my position as if you understand it and in the next you blame me because you feel I haven't said enough for you to understand my position.

You're a walking contradiction, jaywill.

Seems like Ghandi would have no trouble recognizing you as a Christian.

I posted this earlier in this very thread. It is very different from what you posted. Please stop pretending like I've never stated what I believe. It's dishonest. It's unfortunate that this seems to be a concept that remains beyond your comprehension.

"For the record once again, I do not believe in "salvation by works" as it is commonly used and what it commonly entails. I believe that Jesus teaches one must BE righteous and not merely ACT righteous for "salvation"/"eternal life"/"heaven". This is not about "judgementalism", but about becoming one with truth, love, compassion, justice, etc., i.e. the will of God."

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I'll try to explain it again, since you're a little slow picking up concepts.

In one post you emphatically state my position as if you understand it and in the next you blame me because you feel I haven't said enough for you to understand my position.

You're a walking contradiction, jaywill.

Seems like Ghandi would have no trouble recognizin oming one with truth, love, compassion, justice, etc., i.e. the will of God."[/b]

======================================
"For the record once again, I do not believe in "salvation by works" as it is commonly used and what it commonly entails.
========================================

OK. I believe you. But I only asked you a yes or no question.

Are you born again?

Does a Christian have the right to answer such a question with a yes or a no? That question one can answer with a yes or a no.

I will prove it to you.

Peter writes: "Having been regenerated not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible through the living and abiding word of God. "(1 Peter 1:23)

The believers receiving Peter's letter should be able to say, "Yes, we have BEEN regenerated. We have been born again by the living and abiding word of God the incorruptible seed of divine life."

A Christian has the right to say "I know that I have been born again. I know that I have been regenerated."

It is best that he not be wishy washy about it. He certainly should not be hesitating because he yet feels his imperfection in character.

Your commitment to want to uplift the standard of Christian living is admiarable. And since I have been speaking with you I have been proclaiming more 1 John 5:18. (Not that I never did before).

I commend you that you feel strongly to stand upon the tremendous significance of the new birth. But it is not a matter of fad or trend that a disciple should be able to state from the moment s/he has received Christ into their spirit that they have been born again.

Do you think that a Christian has no clear right to say "I have been born again" if he still has sins to overcome ? I think you do.

But Peter was talking to people like you and I. He was not talking to angels. And tells them that they were regenerated (born of God).

See www.regenerated.net


=====================================
I believe that Jesus teaches one must BE righteous and not merely ACT righteous for "salvation"/"eternal life"/"heaven".
========================================

We who have been regenerated shall be like Him. We shall be presented before Him without spot or wrinkle or any such thing - blameless. Perfected because the heavenly Father is perfect.

That should not stop a Christian from being able to proclaim that he or she is born again. There is no need to apologize. We must be bold.

======================================
This is not about "judgementalism", but about becoming one with truth, love, compassion, justice, etc., i.e. the will of God."
======================================

I agree.

I have been born again. I know this. And I would be willing to die to confess it to anyone (by His mercy, not on my own power).

No one can hinder me from professing that I have received Christ and because of this I have been given authority to become one of the childen of God.

" But as many as received Him, to them He gave authority to become children of God, to those who believe into His name,

Who were BEGOTTEN not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12,13)

( I am now writing from the attitude that I was too hard on you yesterday. ) We will see. Maybe Epi has been groaning and praying for us.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I believe that Jesus teaches one must BE righteous and not merely ACT righteous for "salvation"/"eternal life"/"heaven". This is not about "judgementalism", but about becoming one with truth, love, compassion, justice, etc., i.e. the will of God. -----------ToO-------------

Any truly righteous act comes from a centre within that is righteous. BE and ...[text shortened]... very weak if you think God cannot forgive a follower who stumbles along the way.

Like usual you go off and start explaining what I do and don't believe based on INFERENCES YOU MAKE and state them as fact. Of course it doesn't help to point this out to you (even in painstaking detail), because you ignore it and keep making misleading statement after misleading statement. It seems that you believe that if you say something often enough it'll become true. Nor does it do any good to ask you to stop doing so. You're a pathetic little man.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Like usual you go off and start explaining what I do and don't believe based on INFERENCES YOU MAKE and state them as fact. Of course it doesn't help to point this out to you (even in painstaking detail), because you ignore it and keep making misleading statement after misleading statement. It seems that you believe that if you say something often enough ome true. Nor does it do any good to ask you to stop doing so. You're a pathetic little man.

You're a pathetic little man.

Consider this:

"Whoever speaks contemptuously and insultingly to his brother shall be liable to and unable to escape the punishment imposed by the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, You cursed fool! [You empty-headed idiot!] shall be liable to and unable to escape the hell (Gehenna) of fire" (Matthew 5:22, AMP).

Here's something not arrived at based on inference: you broke God's law just now by insulting knightmeister. What I can infer from the fact that you broke God's law is this:

"Whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10, NKJV).

Because you insulted knightmeister, according to Jesus you are guilty of breaking the whole of God's law.

I can further infer, because you are guilty of sin, that you are also a slave to sin (John 8:34).

Therefore, you are in need of God's grace:

"Jesus said to them, "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day" (John 6:37-40).

Have you come to Jesus? Are you born again?

If not, then you better ask the Lord to give you the power to believe in His only-begotten Son, because your insult of knightmeister alone is enough to bring you into condemnation.

If you are born again, then you ought to repent, because your behavior is unbecoming of one born of God: "If [you] confess [your] sins, he is faithful and just to forgive [you your] sins and to cleanse [you] from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9).