What 'makes you' believe?

Originally posted by @fmf
[b]This weekend is gonna be crazy. The Weather Service is saying we'll have an early start to the summer heat with a high temp between 105F-109F on Sunday so we're going to be on the streets in downtown Phoenix, handing out cold water to the homeless, erecting some shade tarps with misters and trying to get more of them signed up for more permanent housing. T ...[text shortened]... ike this is not righteous and mere "dirty rags" if done by someone who doesn't believe in Jesus?

Salvation isn’t by works nor do “good works” make one righteous (in right standing with God.) You can do all the good works under the sun but if you haven’t accepted Christ, you’re not righteous in God’s eyes.

Originally posted by @suzianne
No. Most of [Rajk999's] time is spent berating Christians for "mouth worship", which he's apparently already judged them as being guilty of.

The term "mouth worship", as it is used here on this forum, means preaching that saying-thinking that one believes in Jesus and declaring oneself to be irreversibly "saved" is what Christian doctrine requires - and that proactively obeying and following Jesus' commandments is not actually required [or even to be regarded with suspicion] - but will just somehow happen to some degree vicariously ~ and supernaturally ~ on account of belief in the "Holy Spirit". You surely have been following the debate here?

Originally posted by @suzianne
No. Why in the world would I think that?

Because it's a version of Christian doctrine that is commonly taught here on this forum which you never stand up to or question.

Originally posted by @fmf
The term "mouth worship", as it is used here on this forum, means preaching that saying-thinking that one believes in Jesus and declaring oneself to be irreversibly "saved" is what Christian doctrine requires - and that proactively obeying and following Jesus' commandments is not actually required [or even to be regarded with suspicion] - but will just somehow ...[text shortened]... lly ~ on account of belief in the "Holy Spirit". You surely have been following the debate here?

Apparently you haven’t been following the debate as “saying-thinking” is not at all the same as believing in one’s heart.

You also left out that God’s Holy Spirit indwells and it is through the power of God’s Holy Spirit that one is made righteous (in right standing with God) and one does God’s will.

Originally posted by @fmf
Because it's a version of Christian doctrine that is commonly taught here on this forum which you never stand up to or question.

I think you’ve misunderstood what salvation by faith Christians have said.

Seems odd.

Originally posted by @suzianne
No. Most of his time is spent berating Christians for "mouth worship", which he's apparently already judged them as being guilty of.

The debate is about correct doctrine and whether or not it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus [that will apparently just happen automatically], and then declare themselves "saved", and insist that "God" can't un-save anyone who has declared themselves "saved" because 'that would make God a liar' etc. etc. I kid you not. THAT is the "mouth worship" doctrine that Rajk999 stands up to and you don't.

Originally posted by @fmf
The debate is about correct doctrine and whether or not it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus [that will apparently just happen automatically], and then declare themselves "saved", and insist that "God" can't un-save anyone who has declared thems ...[text shortened]... tc. I kid you not. THAT is the "mouth worship" doctrine that Rajk999 stands up to and you don't.

The most important thing a Christian can do - and what Jesus commanded Christians do - is take part in the Great Commission (i.e. telling people about Jesus and winning souls for Christ.) I asked rajk on another thread if he considered that “mouth worship,” and, not surprisingly, he never answered.

Originally posted by @fmf
Because it's a version of Christian doctrine that is commonly taught here on this forum which you never stand up to or question.

I have absolutely no idea why you think I need to fight your anti-Christian battles for you.

This isn't the first time you (same goes for divegeester, btw) have posted about this, ranting about my refusal to fight your battles for you. You've (as he has) even gone so far as to claim this makes me 'unprincipled'. As if.

You delight in pitting Christian against Christian. I already told you that I'm not playing your reindeer games, sorry.

Originally posted by @fmf
The debate is about correct doctrine and whether or not it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus [that will apparently just happen automatically], and then declare themselves "saved", and insist that "God" can't un-save anyone who has declared thems ...[text shortened]... tc. I kid you not. THAT is the "mouth worship" doctrine that Rajk999 stands up to and you don't.

And people don’t “declare themselves saved.” They either are or they aren’t. Do you actually read posts on here that aren’t written by atheists or Christ deniers or do you just not understand them?

Originally posted by @suzianne
I have absolutely no idea why you think I need to fight your anti-Christian battles for you.

I am responding to a post of yours in which you were pitting yourself against a fellow follower-of-Christ Rajk999 but doing so based on a misconception of what it is he is debating here: doctrine and whether or not Christians are required to obey the commandments of Christ.

Originally posted by @fmf
The debate is about correct doctrine and whether or not it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus [that will apparently just happen automatically], and then declare themselves "saved", and insist that "God" can't un-save anyone who has declared thems ...[text shortened]... tc. I kid you not. THAT is the "mouth worship" doctrine that Rajk999 stands up to and you don't.

I only have one question after this rant of yours:

Why do you even give the tiniest little damn about "correct Christian doctrine"? It's not like you're actually going to start believing it. All you care about is ripping Christians apart like the lions in Nero's Coliseum, and you defend Rajk because he's someone you like because he allows you to do just that.

Originally posted by @fmf
The debate is about correct doctrine and whether or not it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus [that will apparently just happen automatically], and then declare themselves "saved", and insist that "God" can't un-save anyone who has declared thems ...[text shortened]... tc. I kid you not. THAT is the "mouth worship" doctrine that Rajk999 stands up to and you don't.

<<it stipulates that Christians must obey Christ's commandments or whether it is enough for them to talk about their "faith", no need to actively obey Jesus>>

Talking about their faith *is* actively obeying Jesus.

In your view and rajk’s view, God has no place in Christianity. Everyone just runs around doing unidentified and unquantified “good works” with nary a mention of God, the Bible, church or anything related to the sacrifice and Resurrection of Jesus.

It’s a great con the two of you have going. You’re selling Christianity without Christ.

Sick!

Originally posted by @fmf
I am responding to a post of yours in which you were pitting yourself against a fellow follower-of-Christ Rajk999 but doing so based on a misconception of what it is he is debating here: doctrine and whether or not Christians are required to obey the commandments of Christ.

The greatest commandment of Christ is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength. How do you suppose one does that?

Originally posted by @fmf
I am responding to a post of yours in which you were pitting yourself against a fellow follower-of-Christ Rajk999 but doing so based on a misconception of what it is he is debating here: doctrine and whether or not Christians are required to obey the commandments of Christ.

I have said again and again and again and again and AGAIN and AGAIN that my bitch about Rajk is not his "doctrine" but about his hypocrisy.

There's no "misconception", at least on my end.

Originally posted by @suzianne
This isn't the first time you (same goes for divegeester, btw) have posted about this, ranting about my refusal to fight your battles for you. You've (as he has) even gone so far as to claim this makes me 'unprincipled'. As if.

You seem to be locked in some kind of battle with Rajk999. What I have been telling you in my last few posts should help you see the mistake you are making about what the actual debate is. You responded to what Rajk999 has been arguing by telling everybody what 'good works' you are doing. You have the wrong end of the stick if you think Rajk999 thinks he requires that personal information from you. His debate here is about doctrine.