Good works and gratitude...

Originally posted by knightmeister
If I did would you then re-visit my argument and think about what I am saying? Do you really need a verse in order to believe/know God is Love?

I could equally ask you to produce the verses that show that what I am saying is false , you have yet to do so.

I think basically you are stalling for time and looking for any way you can to avoid angaging with the debate.

Say what ????!!!

OK ... wetimd emt d aoengs wojn and that smsow d tgpnw gpjepdf dkldow owlfm sp sp wnorkndo pnwspmgif ejd pnsoi jfoiws mdplg spnso idineonf .... ok ? And thats common sense.

Prove that I am wrong.

Originally posted by josephw
That's easy. The Holy Spirit works through the Word of God.

It, the word of God, is, "The Truth", and as one consumes the truth of God, aided by the Holy Spirit, one can avoid being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.

Look, asking questions as a tool to help an individual come to the knowledge of the truth is useful. But don't you think the on ...[text shortened]... uld have a fundamental grasp of the truth in order to be of use to the one needing guidance?

As I read the Bible, being tossed "to and fro" is often a journey to God and therefore a good thing. But I would agree that you need guidance. 🙂

Originally posted by Rajk999
Say what ????!!!

OK ... wetimd emt d aoengs wojn and that smsow d tgpnw gpjepdf dkldow owlfm sp sp wnorkndo pnwspmgif ejd pnsoi jfoiws mdplg spnso idineonf .... ok ? And thats common sense.

Prove that I am wrong.

Prove that I am wrong.

---------------Rajk---------------

I think you did a far better job than I could ever do. I rest my case.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Prove that I am wrong.

---------------Rajk---------------

I think you did a far better job than I could ever do. I rest my case.

Yep ... I wrote a pile of gibberish, told you it was common sense and produced no Biblical proof. Now thats exactly what you do with your doctrine. Your doctrine is based on what other people tell you.

Sane people look to the clear teachings of Christ and Paul for their basic doctrine.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yep ... I wrote a pile of gibberish, told you it was common sense and produced no Biblical proof. Now thats exactly what you do with your doctrine. Your doctrine is based on what other people tell you.

Sane people look to the clear teachings of Christ and Paul for their basic doctrine.

[b/"Sane people look to the clear teachings of Christ and Paul for their basic doctrine."[/b]

Now we're getting somewhere!

My question is this. Since I get my doctrine from the scriptures, why is it that you have so many disagreements with me? If, as you say, sane people get their doctrine from Christ and Paul, why is it that we aren't in agreement?

Let's pick a doctrine and stay with it. We can both, then, support our position from the scriptures, and see where it is we go apart.

Anything in particular you would like to start with?

Originally posted by josephw
Anything in particular you would like to start with?

How about this thread?
Give KM a hand to get some Biblical support for the first post.
He seems to be having trouble .

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yep ... I wrote a pile of gibberish, told you it was common sense and produced no Biblical proof. Now thats exactly what you do with your doctrine. Your doctrine is based on what other people tell you.

Sane people look to the clear teachings of Christ and Paul for their basic doctrine.

The difference it's self evident that what you wrote was infact gibberish. You have yet to argue how my statements are gibberish.

Personally , I see plenty of Biblical support for the idea of salvation via grace/faith and the assurance of salvation. I don't really see what you problem is.

Could I ask , do you have any personal experience of God's love or the Holy Spirit?

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yep ... I wrote a pile of gibberish, told you it was common sense and produced no Biblical proof. Now thats exactly what you do with your doctrine. Your doctrine is based on what other people tell you.

Sane people look to the clear teachings of Christ and Paul for their basic doctrine.

Did you just call me (an atheist) and my Muslim friends insane?

Many Christians I know claim to have some amount of inspiration directly from God and thus do not need to rely entirely on the Bible for their information. Are they insane?

If Christ and Paul had 'clear teachings' then why are there hundreds of Christian denominations?

What constitutes 'biblical proof'?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Did you just call me (an atheist) and my Muslim friends insane?

Many Christians I know claim to have some amount of inspiration directly from God and thus do not need to rely entirely on the Bible for their information. Are they insane?

If Christ and Paul had 'clear teachings' then why are there hundreds of Christian denominations?

What constitutes 'biblical proof'?

Sane people - I really meant sane Christians.

Inspiration directly from God - some are insane others are not. I wont know which. Jim Jones claimed to have had inspiration from God.

Christ and Paul had very clear BASIC DOCTRINE. Thats different from teachings. Basic doctrine is what leads to salvation, and constitutes belief in Christ, baptism and good works. It also includes understanding the good news of Christ death and resurrection and His coming kingdom. Virtually all Christian denominations agree on these.

There are hundreds of Christian denominations because other issues in the Bible can be interpreted differently. Hell, the devil, soul, whether Christ is God and God is Christ. But these are not matters that impact on ones salvation in my opinion. Why? Christ made it abundantly clear what gives salvation and these issues are not included.

Biblical proof of basic doctrine is stated by Christ or Paul. This thread is about basic doctrine. The matter of good works is basic doctrine because the lack of it can impact on your salvation. I asked Km for biblical proof because he made several statements about works which I cannot seem to find in the bible, and apparently neither can he. Such statements include :

Good works that are performed in order to gain salvation can be said to be faulty in there motivation and origins

It is only through assurance of salvation that good works can be performed as acts of love and gratitude to God.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Did you just call me (an atheist) and my Muslim friends insane?

Many Christians I know claim to have some amount of inspiration directly from God and thus do not need to rely entirely on the Bible for their information. Are they insane?

If Christ and Paul had 'clear teachings' then why are there hundreds of Christian denominations?

What constitutes 'biblical proof'?

KM is confident that "...the idea that love, compassion etc can exist without God's spirit is just a perception"! Needless to add that this "spirit" derives solely from his personal "God".

And of course whenever I point to him that this assumption is at least discriminative, KM tries to "make me understand the concept".
No way out, dead end
😵

Originally posted by Rajk999
Sane people - I really meant sane Christians.

Inspiration directly from God - some are insane others are not. I wont know which. Jim Jones claimed to have had inspiration from God.

Christ and Paul had very clear BASIC DOCTRINE. Thats different from teachings. Basic doctrine is what leads to salvation, and constitutes belief in Christ, baptism and good ...[text shortened]... surance of salvation that good works can be performed as acts of love and gratitude to God. [/i]

Rajk ,

Do you really think that if someone is offering a beggar a piece of bread and their motivation for doing so is in order to gain salvation for themselves then this is anything other than an act of selfishness?

It's a good trade if you think about it - a piece of bread in exchange for eternal joy. How can such an act be called an act of compassion in the sense of how Jesus meant we are to be compassionate?

If you need some book to tell you how to be compassionate then you are truely lost.

Just address the issue and stop stalling.

Truely , selfless acts are done with no thought of salvation for oneself and no ulterior motives. And this is only possible if one is assured of salvation. If one is fearful of God and what he might do one day if you are not compassionate "enough" then love cannot grow within you because you can never know the love of God or love God back this way.

You must have had some bad parenting along the way to not see this truth.

Originally posted by black beetle
KM is confident that "...the idea that love, compassion etc can exist without God's spirit is just a perception"! Needless to add that this "spirit" derives solely from his personal "God".

And of course whenever I point to him that this assumption is at least discriminative, KM tries to "make me understand the concept".
No way out, dead end
😵

What you fail to understand is that ALL perceptions are discriminative in that they make sense of reality in a certain way.

You reduce what I see as the real living God to my "personal God" - that's your perception discriminating over mine. You have absorbed my way of looking at the world INTO your own.

That's Ok I undertand and expect you to do that. What I don't understand is why you think that I am doing something so different. I could equally take offence at your "discrimination" but that would be silly. It's ridiculous to expect either of us to see the world in the same way. You see a world devoid of God's Spirit , I see his Spirit at work.

One of us is wrong. So what? You think I am wrong , I think you are wrong. Who's discriminating against who?

Originally posted by knightmeister
Rajk ,

Do you really think that if someone is offering a beggar a piece of bread and their motivation for doing so is in order to gain salvation for themselves then this is anything other than an act of selfishness?

It's a good trade if you think about it - a piece of bread in exchange for eternal joy. How can such an act be called an act of ...[text shortened]... back this way.

You must have had some bad parenting along the way to not see this truth.

How much of this is clearly written in the Bible ?
Do me 2 favours please.
1. DO NOT PREACH ... (thank you).
2. Just tell me a couple passages. I will look it up. Hold the analysis and if this, then that .. kind of stuff.

Originally posted by Rajk999
How much of this is clearly written in the Bible ?
Do me 2 favours please.
1. DO NOT PREACH ... (thank you).
2. Just tell me a couple passages. I will look it up. Hold the analysis and if this, then that .. kind of stuff.

How much of anything is clearly written in the Bible? It's not some colour by numbers thing you know. You have to think for yourself as well sometimes. Does the Bible clearly tell us how to deal with Climate Change? It doesn't , we have to interpret and think about the messages in the Bible and what they are telling us.

Jesus does teach us about motivations and intentionality. The story of the woman who gives her last mite. He tells us to give to charity secretly with no thought of how it looks to others.

He talks about those who will come to him saying "look at the mighty works we have done in your name" but he will say he doesn't know them . Why? Because those acts (however mighty) were not done in the name of love.

He talks about how good fruit (good works- righteousness) cannot come from bad trees (the inner heart) thus linking actions with motives.

Do you really not see that Jesus is saying that righteousness is very much about your intentions and motivations as well? Or do you think that it doesn't matter why someone gives a beggar some bread?

Try thinking for yourself sometime. You might find it refreshing. And while we are at it , I find your request that I stop "preaching" a little strange given that you have seen fit to rubbish my comments and responded in simplistic childish ways. Maybe you should think about your own responses before you start asking things from me.

Originally posted by knightmeister
What you fail to understand is that ALL perceptions are discriminative in that they make sense of reality in a certain way.

You reduce what I see as the real living God to my "personal God" - that's your perception discriminating over mine. You have absorbed my way of looking at the world INTO your own.

That's Ok I undertand and expect you to d ...[text shortened]... what? You think I am wrong , I think you are wrong. Who's discriminating against who?

At first, KM, when I 'm talking over here about "discrimination" I don't mean the "discrimination of the evil and of the good" but rather I imply the quality of racism -of a racism which it has nothing to do with ethnotic differences but it is associated with the religious differencies.

Surely I have not absorbed your way of looking into my world!
All these months, along with epi, you try constantly to show that solely some specific Christians can be "righteous". You keep up repeating that, these specific Christians (which BTW they have the same denomination and they accept the same religious doctrines as you) are righteous just because they have accepted a specific religious doctrine. This specific docrtine in your opinion is the Ultimate Truth, but unfortunately there is no rational way for you to proove that your opinion is correct -you believe it because you choose to believe it because this is the way You like it, period. And then you try to persuade everybody to bow to Your Ultimate Truth!

You fail to understand that when you discriminate the people to "righteous by your god" and to "non-righteous by your god", then you are a racist, for the "non-believers" can surely be "righteous by god" -they just happen to believe not to your personal "god", or to have a different denomination than yours, or to have a different religion than yours, or they may have no religion at all.

Also you fail to understand that anybody, regardless his religion, can claim exaclty the same as you -he can claim that the righteousness (as you pose it) it derives solely form his personal "god". In such a case, which way would you treat such an interlocutor?

I am indifferent to your "personal god", to every "god" and to every kind of theism, atheism included; but when you claim that "you are a man of virtue and of righteousness thanks to your religion", and when epi claims that "solely a truly born by God Christian is a man of righteousness as known by John" etc, then this is racism and BS big time🙂