Do Call on Jesus

Originally posted by sonship
To be saved initially, call on the name of the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead.

Now that you are eternally redeemed you need to learn to live another way. That is by further depending on Jesus Christ to be everything you need - the all-sufficient grace. For this calling on the Lord for specifics is very effective.
...[text shortened]... peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart." (See 2 Timothy 4:22) [/quote][/b]

It is only now after many years of you writing the same thing, you are changing your tune and NOW, FOR THE FIRST TIME you are including certain phrases and words in some your posts.
- obey
- follow Christ
- show love for others.

Prior to now these were never in your writings as these things are works. Prior as well you boasted that your faith AUTOMATICALLY MAKES YOU RIGHTEOUS

At least your preaching is improving. Although it would be better if you were man enough to admit your earlier focus was off.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Of course, as you know, Jesus had something to say about that as well:

[quote]John 14
21“He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
23...“If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come ...[text shortened]... "relationship" with Him even though they do not "keep [His] words", i.e., they continue to sin.

Ahem, Mr. Holier-than-thou, how do you KNOW that he doesn't "keep His words"?

This is the problem with this kind of sermon. You assume, and this assumption is your own sin, and that makes you a hypocrite. You aren't the only one here to fall into this trap, though.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Thats correct. It is a very stupid human that can be fooled with empty words. We can spot lying spouses and fake friends but yet some believe they can fool God with deceitful words.

You, like the JWs you despise, are really a piece of work. An unfinished piece of work.

Originally posted by Suzianne to Rajk999
You, like the JWs you despise, are really a piece of work. An unfinished piece of work.

I don't see how calling Rajk999 "a piece of work" addresses the doctrinal dispute he has with sonship that has given rise to the accusation of "empty words". It seems like you avoid at all costs discussing what is being discussed and just bark at people you dislike from the sidelines regardless of what is being talked about. Is Ghost of a Duke right to cite the story of Cornelius?

Originally posted by Suzianne to ThinkOfOne
Ahem, Mr. Holier-than-thou, how do you KNOW that he doesn't "keep His words"? This is the problem with this kind of sermon. You assume, and this assumption is your own sin, and that makes you a hypocrite. You aren't the only one here to fall into this trap, though.

Your words above are in reply to ThinkOfOne saying this about some Christians:

...many insist that Jesus / God / the Holy Spirit abides in them, that they have a "relationship" with Him even though they do not "keep [His] words", i.e., they continue to sin.

Do you disagree with it?

Presumably, no, you don't. It seems a pretty straightforward observation.

So if you don't actually disagree with ThinkOfOne, how is he being a "hypocrite"?

What definition of the word "hypocrite" are you using?

Originally posted by FMF
I don't see how calling Rajk999 "a piece of work" addresses the doctrinal dispute he has with sonship that has given rise to the accusation of "empty words". It seems like you avoid at all costs discussing what is being discussed and just bark at people you dislike from the sidelines regardless of what is being talked about. Is Ghost of a Duke right to cite the story of Cornelius?

The best the woman can do is bark. Maybe God did not bless her with the required ability to discuss these things.

Of greater importance I notice that sonship is sneakily trying to include in his posts stuff which was never before mentioned by him ... like obedience, following Christ etc.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The best the woman can do is bark. Maybe God did not bless her with the required ability to discuss these things.

Of greater importance I notice that sonship is sneakily trying to include in his posts stuff which was never before mentioned by him ... like obedience, following Christ etc.

When I noticed that you were more careful to not give any wrong impression about certain things, I did not accuse you of being "sneaky".

Don't think that I didn't notice that you sought not to totally disregard some points before not stressed that much by you.

And why on earth do you seek such support from a fellow who is trying his best to convince everyone of his atheism ?

But since you harp that I now am being "sneaky" for mentioning obedience - let me make it clear that I am talking about, in all respects - "the obedience of FAITH".

Romans 1:5

"Through whom we have received grace and apostleship unto THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH ..."

Romans 16:26

"But has now been manifested, and through the prophetic writings, according to the command of the eternal God, has been made known to all the Gentiles for THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH."

Sure, I mention something more about obedience in this thread - "the obedience of faith".

Originally posted by sonship
And why on earth do you seek such support from a fellow who is trying his best to convince everyone of his atheism ?

If by "a fellow who is trying his best to convince everyone of his atheism" you mean Ghost of a Duke, well, bear in mind he did study theology - and the Bible - and does not have any ideological motivation to cherry pick scripture in the same way as many Christians do. It doesn't matter who presents you with inconvenient scripture - whether they be believers or non-believers - you tap dance to the music of our own ideology regardless.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The best the woman can do is bark. Maybe God did not bless her with the required ability to discuss these things.

Of greater importance I notice that sonship is sneakily trying to include in his posts stuff which was never before mentioned by him ... like obedience, following Christ etc.

What sheer hypocrisy.

Even though FMF can't get a grip on what I'm saying, I'm sure that you DO.

You're just even more concerned about 'covering your ass' than he is, if that's possible.

Originally posted by FMF
Your words above are in reply to ThinkOfOne saying this about some Christians:

[b]...many insist that Jesus / God / the Holy Spirit abides in them, that they have a "relationship" with Him even though they do not "keep [His] words", i.e., they continue to sin.

Do you disagree with it?

Presumably, no, you don't. It seems a pretty straightforward obse ...[text shortened]... kOfOne, how is he being a "hypocrite"?

What definition of the word "hypocrite" are you using?[/b]

Feel free to start talking to me anytime you actually understand what I'm saying, and not before.

And, no, I don't want to buy a used car from you.

Originally posted by Suzianne
What sheer hypocrisy.

Even though FMF can't get a grip on what I'm saying, I'm sure that you DO.

What you are 'saying' is a whole series of discussion-avoiding ad hominems. It's not difficult to "get" what you are all about, Suzianne. And it's certainly not at all difficult to "get" how you don't want to address the doctrinal issue that's being discussed. I haven't heard Rajk999 made a single claim about his own behaviour or his deeds. So how can he be guilty of "hypocrisy"? Are you using some non-conventional definition?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Feel free to start talking to me anytime you actually understand what I'm saying, and not before.

And, no, I don't want to buy a used car from you.

This is just a dodge. You either agree with the statement ThinkOfOne made ~ which presumably you do ~ or you don't, in which case just say so. Why do you seem to dodge any and every point of debate that ever arises?

Originally posted by FMF
I don't see how calling Rajk999 "a piece of work" addresses the doctrinal dispute he has with sonship that has given rise to the accusation of "empty words". It seems like you avoid at all costs discussing what is being discussed and just bark at people you dislike from the sidelines regardless of what is being talked about. Is Ghost of a Duke right to cite the story of Cornelius?

You STILL do not 'grok' my argument, do you? Somehow I'm not surprised. You're not the first Neandertal whose first overt reaction to me is a swinging fist. Calm yourself, Bubba.

I have no argument with Rajk concerning 'doctrine'. My reaction to him concerns the way he treats his fellow Christian brothers, no doubt learned at the hands of posters like you, whose raison d'etre is to attack Christians.

But you give the impression (another of your tiresome 'tricks' ) that you don't 'get it' just so you can get in more swings at me. Sorry to burst your bubble, but such behavior doesn't scare me.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I have no argument with Rajk concerning 'doctrine'. My reaction to him concerns the way he treats his fellow Christian brothers, no doubt learned at the hands of posters like you, whose raison d'etre is to attack Christians.

How do you treat Christian brothers like Rajk999 and divegeester, or whodey and Eladar for that matter?

Originally posted by Suzianne
I have no argument with Rajk concerning 'doctrine'.

Are you sure?