Religious Knowledge

Roman has rambled throughout the night about his superior religious knowledge (over an atheist) 'purely' on the grounds of being a theist. (Study of the subject apparently isn't a factor, as clearly he is deficient in this regard).

Roman apparently treats knowledge the same way that he does salvation, that it comes to him without any effort on his part.

I on the other hand believe true knowledge comes through objective study.


'The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out.' (Proverbs 18:15)

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Roman has rambled throughout the night about his superior religious knowledge (over an atheist) 'purely' on the grounds of being a theist. (Study of the subject apparently isn't a factor, as clearly he is deficient in this regard).

Roman apparently treats knowledge the same way that he does salvation, that it comes to him without any effort on hi ...[text shortened]... rt of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out.' (Proverbs 18:15)

Roman thinks it. I live it.

You cant refute pure evidence

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.



Winston Churchill

Originally posted by @whodey
Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened.



Winston Churchill

A perfect quote for the OSAS Christian ... like you for example

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke

I do not know of the conversation.
I do know that there is a knowledge of God which is experiencial, subjective, intimate and can be mutually shared by many people corporately.

People like myself utilize both kinds of knowledge to help people to come to know God. One has to know how to read to get something from reading the Bible.

But one also should know what it is like to be drawn close to God and to know how to allow God to enter into their hearts subjectively.

Knowing something about history to counter some argument is important. But also knowing Christ by receiving Him, knowing of His faithfulness and the sinner's need is vital also.

There are even two Greek words for know in the New Testament - Ginosko and Oido. The latter word translated "know" is deeper and more subjective.

Pioneering Paul's life's aspiration was to KNOW Christ in the must intimate way. I want to be the same. I encourage others that it is the best.

"But moreover I also count all things to be loss on account of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, on account of who I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as refuse that I may know Christ.

And be found in Him, not having my own righteousness which is out of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is out of God and based on faith,

To KNOW Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, etc. etc. " (Phil 3:89)

The riches and most valuable knowledge Paul knew was to to Christ intimately, experiencially. Compared to this he counted all his other attainments refuse. And he was a very educated person.

Paul also spoke of the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge. That is something wonderful from God to us which transcends objective information gathering of man's knowledge.

"And to know the knowledge surpassing love of Christ, that you may be filled unto all the fullness of God." (Eph. 3:19)

He is speaking to a collective group saying this knowledge surpassing love of Christ will cause them to be filled unto all the fullness of God.

And again:

"And the peace of God, which surpasses every man's understanding, will guard your hearts and you thoughts in Christ Jesus." (Phil 4:7)

We evangelist try by all means to help others enter into this knowledge of the Person of God as a living One. We try.
We ourselves were brought forward to this Person. We just believe that others can be brought forward as we were.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Roman has rambled throughout the night about his superior religious knowledge (over an atheist) 'purely' on the grounds of being a theist. (Study of the subject apparently isn't a factor, as clearly he is deficient in this regard).

Roman apparently treats knowledge the same way that he does salvation, that it comes to him without any effort on hi ...[text shortened]... rt of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out.' (Proverbs 18:15)

I think we already established that the Chrsitians in general do not need knowledge.
They just need to profess their faith and they are saved.
The teaching that they cannot be cast out of Gods Kingdom, not even by God himself is both blasphemous and self-destructive.
They do not need to educate themselves on what Jesus said.
Paul said it and they are happy.. like a pig in the mud they do not care to know anything else.

I think we already established that the Chrsitians in general do not need knowledge

- Rajk999

The New Testament establishes that Christians should grow in knowledge and in the grace of the Lord Jesus.

" But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

To Him be the glory both now and unto the day of eternity. Amen." (2 Peter 3:18)

Originally posted by @sonship

I think we already established that the Chrsitians in general do not need knowledge

- Rajk999

The New Testament establishes that Christians should grow in knowledge and in the grace of the Lord Jesus.

[b] " But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

To Him be the glory both now and unto the day of eternity. Amen." (2 Peter 3:18)

[/b]

Should ... but false teachers like yourself tell them that they dont need to do the commandments, its legalistic, its trying to earn ones salvation.

You tell them they are saved adn not even God can revoke it.

You tell them they are regenerated and they already have eternal life.

You tell them that they can sin and it will be forgiven.

Why would they continue to learn when they are overcome by false teachers

Originally posted by @sonship
I do not know of the conversation.
I do know that there is a knowledge of God which is experiencial, subjective, intimate and can be mutually shared by many people corporately.

People like myself utilize both kinds of knowledge to help people to come to know God. One has to know how to read to get something from reading the Bible.

But one also should ...[text shortened]... e brought forward to this Person. We just believe that others can be brought forward as we were.

So you are at odds with Roman who apparently treats religious knowledge the same way that he does salvation, that it comes to him without any effort on his part?

I'm happy to concede that only by becoming a Christian will anybody truly understand what it means to be a Christian. But to equate Christian knowledge with spiritual knowledge is arrogant in the extreme. Does a Christian understand what it truly means to be a Buddhist or a Hindu? I also reject Roman's presumption that being a Christian somehow makes him a better interpreter of the Bible than an atheist or non-Christian.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I'm happy to concede that only by becoming a Christian will anybody truly understand what it means to be a Christian. But to equate Christian knowledge with spiritual knowledge is arrogant in the extreme. Does a Christian understand what it truly means to be a Buddhist or a Hindu? I also reject Roman's presumption that being a Christian somehow makes him a better interpreter of the Bible than an atheist or non-Christian.

Do you really think that an atheist or a Christian is a "better interpreter" of the Qu'ran than a Muslim? Same logic here.

The adherent lives the text. Others do not. I think that's really all that needs to be said. I, for one, do not appreciate a non-Christian telling me anything about the Bible or what it means to be a Christian. Not only do they not have a dog in that hunt, their dog doesn't even care about that hunt.

Originally posted by @suzianne
Do you really think that an atheist or a Christian is a "better interpreter" of the Qu'ran than a Muslim? Same logic here.

The adherent lives the text. Others do not. I think that's really all that needs to be said. I, for one, do not appreciate a non-Christian telling me anything about the Bible or what it means to be a Christian. Not only do they not have a dog in that hunt, their dog doesn't even care about that hunt.

You have 'learned' Muslims and you have 'unlearned' Muslims. The former didn't become learned by means of a divine gift. They did so by dedicated study.

An unlearned Christian has no special insight into the Bible.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Roman has rambled throughout the night about his superior religious knowledge (over an atheist) 'purely' on the grounds of being a theist. (Study of the subject apparently isn't a factor, as clearly he is deficient in this regard).

Roman apparently treats knowledge the same way that he does salvation, that it comes to him without any effort on hi ...[text shortened]... rt of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out.' (Proverbs 18:15)

You’re misrepresenting what I said.

I take none of the credit for being able to recall appropriate Bible verses and passages. It’s all the doing of God’s Holy Spirit indwelling me!

“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”

(John 14:26)

And Paul himself in 1 Corinthians said the “natural man” cannot discern spiritual matters, a position that I agree with.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.“

(1 Corinthians 2:14)

Originally posted by @rajk999
I think we already established that the Chrsitians in general do not need knowledge.
They just need to profess their faith and they are saved.
The teaching that they cannot be cast out of Gods Kingdom, not even by God himself is both blasphemous and self-destructive.
They do not need to educate themselves on what Jesus said.
Paul said it and they are happy.. like a pig in the mud they do not care to know anything else.

Wow!

Misrepresent much?

Originally posted by @romans1009
You’re misrepresenting what I said.

I take none of the credit for being able to recall appropriate Bible verses and passages. It’s all the doing of God’s Holy Spirit indwelling me!

“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I ...[text shortened]... him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.“

(1 Corinthians 2:14)

'I take none of the credit for being able to recall appropriate Bible verses and passages. It’s all the doing of God’s Holy Spirit indwelling me!'


That, and Google.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
'I take none of the credit for being able to recall appropriate Bible verses and passages. It’s all the doing of God’s Holy Spirit indwelling me!'


That, and Google.

Romans says he has written out large portions of the Bible. Don't underestimate him.