Attack Against Christendom

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Kyklos, Sep 14, 2018.

  1. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Christianity is based on the teachings of Jesus - Sola fide was not one of them - hence why the majority of Christianity does not accept Sola fide - which proves your claim false.

    I did give back up in my previous posts - upon which you went into a delusional demonization rant - and then accused me of being delusional.
     
  2. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So Christianity is works based? How good do you have to be? What if God's standard is just a little bit higher than yours? Why did Christ die on the cross if we can earn our salvation?

    Which post?
     
  3. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to the majority of Christianity - and the teachings of Jesus - Christianity has a works component. Asking dumb "what if" question is not going to change this reality.

    The post you responded to not that far back - the one with numerous quotes from Jesus such as the teaching about not praying aloud in public for all to see like Falwell/ Swaggart and these other clowns.
     
  4. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not according to what He said in John 3:16. What works did the thief on the cross do, the one Jesus said would be with Him in paradise that day?

    I don't disagree, our works prove our faith is genuine, but works do not save us. The Bible says our best efforts are as filthy rags, literally menstrual rags.

    Dodge noted.

    Answered here: https://www.gotquestions.org/public-prayer.html
     
  5. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First off - one passage does not a case make. I will address this passage - because I do not ignore reams of the teachings of Jesus because it doesn't happen to fit my perspective - but the problem with you is that you do. Even if this passage did have Jesus saving someone on the basis of something other than works - this does not change the fact that Jesus gives a works based salvation formulation in other places - and it not just one passage that could have other interpretations. He does a whole sermon on how "the will of the Father" is works and only those that do the will of the Father get through the pearly gates.

    The reason you bring up other passages is because you can't deal with the fact that Jesus contradicts you in other places - so you run to the playground and stick head deep in the sandbox of denial - just like the "got questions" site does. That site is a ministry - it is not rational thought.

    OK - so now to your passage - I don't think you understand the teachings of Jesus with respect to works. I have said this to you previously - the rock on which Jesus bases his teachings is the Golden Rule - Matt 7:12 - "the rule that sums up the law and the prophets" - treat others as you would be treated - don't do to others what you don't want done to you. That is 'works" - living a good life

    Forgiveness is another theme that Jesus harps on. That is works.

    So why did Jesus save this fellow ?
    The thief gives an example of the Golden Rule = works. It is the understanding of this rule that part of the story being told. This could be why Jesus chooses to save. Jesus says - to those who are merciful - mercy will be given. He also says that we will be judges in the same way we judge others.

    Forgiveness is given to those who make a real apology - this does not consist of the mere words "I'm Sorry" a real apology is understanding what you did wrong. This is part of works and the thief understands this.

    Perhaps it is because he expressed belief in that Jesus was divine as well - we simply don't know - what is also clear is that works are part of the story so perhaps it was that.

    You are grasping at straws and ignoring the teachings of Jesus.
     
  6. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    they were little girls and little boys, so guess it's a Christian heterosexual issue too
     
  7. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree, not all Christians are good, just forgiven if they believe.... does that include the preachers that molested children in the church?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jul 31, 2019
  8. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mainly boys. This stuff happens in public schools just as much.
     
  9. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We don't know their spiritual state at their end. I'm sure the thief on the cross was guilty of serious stuff, St. Paul certainly was before his conversion.
     
  10. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We didn't even address Ephesians 2:8:

    "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God." Again, why would Christ have to die on the cross if we could earn our way to heaven? How good do you have to be? What if God's standards are just a bit higher than yours? You never answered those questions.

    You have it backwards.

    I reject your premise that a ministry isn't rational, or that your posts aren't some kind of ministry for your views.

    So how did the thief on the cross do those works? The Jewish leadership fulfilled the law and then some, yet it was to the very religious Jew Nicodemus that Jesus said, "You must be born again". That isn't done by works, although our works prove the genuineness of our conversion experience.

    We disagree, and I don't see how you think most Christians agree with you. From a RCC site, the Catholics don't: https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-does-the-church-teach-that-works-can-obtain-salvation

    600,000,000 global evangelicals don't agree with you, the 70,000,000 Anglican communion doesn't, this is from the 39 Articles:

    "We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome Doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification."

    What you advocate is the Pelagianism heresy.
     
  11. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ephesians is not the words of Jesus

    Catholicism is a mixture of faith and works .. you probably did not understand what you were reading. Orthodox as well.

    You are correct that most Protestants abide by the doctrine of Sola Fide ... which was denounced as heresy at the council of Trent by the Catholics.

    I did answer these questions - you just were not listening or were engaged in some kind of thought avoidance response. I spent a number of posts showing you quotes from Jesus that show that perfection is not the bar.

    What ministry isn't ration ? This comment makes no sense in relation to the teachings of Jesus that I posted. I realize that your views are not rational with respect to the teachings of Jesus but, this has nothing to do with me or my perspective. If you want to live in denial of the teachings of Jesus - that is your choice.
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  12. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    more girls then boys, but nice try, regardless the point is, both boys and girls are molested by preachers
     
  13. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    but would you be ok with child molesting priests being let into heaven?
     
  14. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We were talking about the RCC scandals, which mainly involve male perps and victims.
     
  15. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If they sincerely repented, yes. The Son of Sam and Jeffrey Dahmer repented and became believers, not to mention the Apostle Paul.
     
  16. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes is is, inspired by the Holy Spirit like the rest of Scripture. Paul several times said his teachings were from the Lord.

    Either that or you didn't.

    Why do you imagine I care what the RCC says? And you are wrong if you think they believe salvation isn't by grace, yes with works proving our faith. "Faith without works is dead."

    Pot, meet kettle.
     
  17. Pro_Line_FL

    Pro_Line_FL Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    25,632
    Likes Received:
    13,926
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  18. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yeah, I don't want to be anywhere Jeffrey Dahmer is
     
  19. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,185
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    we are just talking about preachers in general, i have a family member abused by a preacher when she was like 8 years old, so sadly pedophiles come in all shapes, sizes, colors and religions
     
  20. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have not denied the teachings of Jesus. It is you that refuses to acknowledge what Jesus said. All you are doing is projecting your issues on to me.

    You completely failed to defend your claim that the Bible is 100% inspired/inerrant and yet you persist. Ephesian's was not even written by Paul = its a Pauline forgery - never mind being the inspired words of Jesus.

    What is laughable is you then quote James 2 - where James is claims that those who believe in "faith alone" are foolish. Luther was so offended by James 2 - because it contradicted his Sola Fide doctrine - that he wanted it removed from the Bible.
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  21. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You've got that backwards.

    Not the topic of this thread, how would I prove that? Why don't you prove it isn't?

    Nonsense, from an article by Peter Williamson:

    "The “external evidence” in favor of Paul’s authorship of Ephesians—that is, the testimony of the manuscript tradition and of ancient authors—is as strong as that of any of Paul’s undisputed letters. Ephesians appears in all the ancient collections of Paul’s writings, including those that omit the Apostle’s letters to individuals (1–2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon). It is true that the Letter to the Hebrews, an anonymous work, is often also included in these collections, but from Origen on, many ancient authorities challenged the view that Hebrews was authored by Paul, while the Pauline authorship of Ephesians was never questioned. The use of Ephesians in early Christian writings points to the first-century Church’s belief that it was written by the apostle named in the text. Ephesians is the first New Testament book referenced in early Church writings that have come down to us. St. Clement’s letter to the Corinthians around AD 96 contains a few phrases that seem to be drawn from Ephesians, including a prayer to “open the eyes of our heart that we might know you” (alluding to 1:1 and an exhortation to “let each be subject to his neighbor” (alluding to 5:21).4 St. Ignatius of Antioch (AD 35–10, writing to the church in Ephesus, addresses his readers as “imitators of God” (see Eph 5:1), and in his letter to St. Polycarp of Smyrna he refers to the armor of God (see Eph 6:11–17). Polycarp (AD 65–135), in his letter to the Philippian church, quotes Eph 4:26 and refers to it as Scripture. St. Irenaeus (130–200) cites Ephesians numerous times, naming Paul as the author, as does Tertullian (160–220) and St. Clement of Alexandria (150–215). The heretic Marcion (d. 160) regarded Paul as the author of Ephesians, as did some of the gnostic authors of the late second century and the orthodox Muratorian Canon (late second century). The clear external evidence pointing to Paul as the author of Ephesians places the burden of proof on contrary hypotheses."

    I'll go with the Church Fathers living close to its time of writing over SOME living 2,000 years later. THAT would be a laughable idea, as is your forgery thesis, with no evidence.

    I can't speak for Luther, but I have no problem with James 2, good works are a fruit of salvation. Here are some more on salvation by faith:

    John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

    A bunch more: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Saved-By-Faith

    John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

    Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2019
  22. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1) No idea who Peter Williamson is and you gave no link - Kummel on the other hand is someone who matters.

    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ephesians.html

    You spent the entire rest of your post avoiding the teachings of Jesus under discussion - as usual
     
  23. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Never heard of him. What facts stated in the Williamson quote are false?

    You must be speaking a different language, many of the verses I posted were by Jesus.
     
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,710
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are many many websites "got questions" for example - whose bread and butter is to put out propaganda and nonsense in an attempt to apologize for the dogma of the day that the site adheres to.

    1) You have not stated who this Williamson person is or why he should be taken as credible
    2) You have provided no link
    3) You completely ignored my post citing Kummel - a recognized expert in the field - who contradicts what Williamson is saying. And I provided a link ... a link that cites other experts - all who support the position that Ephesians was not penned by the Apostle Paul.

    Conclusion - Either Kummel (and the rest of serious Theologians and Biblical Scholars) or Williamson is wrong.

    One piece of misinformation is Williamson's claim that Clement cited Ephesians - from the link provided "it is not the case that 1 Clement is familiar with Ephesians"

    Another piece of disingenuous deception and falsehood is Williamson's statement "Ephesians appears in all the ancient collections of Paul’s writings, including those that omit the Apostle’s letters to individuals (1–2 Timothy, Titus,). As per the link provided - critical scholarship does not regard 1/2 Timothy and Titus as being written by Paul.

    It is one thing for Williamson to have a different position than scholarly consensus. It is quite another to state defacto that Timothy and Titus are Paul's writings - and not mention the scholarly consensus. This is academic fraud.


    I know you posted verses from Jesus - and I did not ignore those verses - we discussed them. What you have done however is to ignore and avoid discussion of the verses of Jesus that I posted - verses which contradict your Sola Fide claim.

    You also ran to the playground to stick head deep in the sandbox of denial by avoiding discussion of James 2 - when your conclusions based on a quotation from James 2 was proven wrong.
     
    FreshAir likes this.
  25. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    15,854
    Likes Received:
    11,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow, a whole lot of pejorative terms there. Is that what your're doing, apologizing for your dogma?

    So what, we decide based on facts presented, not a bio.

    I disagree with him. Now what?

    More people apologizing for their dogma. See how that works? What do they know that the early church fathers didn't?

    We agree on that, although I reject your premise that 'serious' belongs only to people who agree with you.


    That is a view nobody had prior to 1,400, and that even today isn't a majority opinion. Here are some similarities between a letter of 1 Clement and Ephesians:

    First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians:

    (1)
    Clement 36
    “By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms up anew towards His marvelous light.”<

    Ephesians 1:18
    “I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints.” (NASB)

    Ephesians 4:17-18
    “This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind,having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart”

    (2)
    Clement 38
    “Let our whole body, then, be preserved in Christ Jesus; and let every one be subject to his neighbor, according to the special gift bestowed upon him.”

    Ephesians 5:21
    “…be subject to one another in the fear of Christ.” (NASB)

    (3)
    Clement 46
    “Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ?”

    Ephesians 4:4-6
    “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”


    CRITICAL scholarship, i.e. people who agree with you and who begin with an anti-supernatural bias. On Timothy from Wikipedia:

    "The authenticity of Pauline authorship was accepted by Church orthodoxy as early as c. AD 180, as evidenced by the surviving testimony of Irenaeus and the author of the Muratorian. Possible allusions are found in the letters from Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians (c. 110) and Polycarp to the Philippians (c. 130),[6][7] though it is difficult to determine the nature of any such literary relationships. Modern scholars who support Pauline authorship nevertheless stress their importance regarding the question of authenticity: I. H. Marshall and P. H. Towner wrote that "the key witness is Polycarp, where there is a high probability that 1 and 2 Tim were known to him".[8] Similarly M. W. Holmes argued that it is "virtually certain or highly probable" that Polycarp used 1 and 2 Timothy.[6]

    Late in the 2nd century there are a number of quotations from all three Pastoral Epistles in Irenaeus' work Against Heresies. The Muratorian Canon (c. 170–180) lists the books of the NT and ascribes all three Pastoral Epistles to Paul. Eusebius (c. 330) calls it, along with the other thirteen canonical Pauline Epistles, "undisputed".[9] Exceptions to this positive witness include Tatian,[10] a disciple of Justin Martyr turned heretic, as well as the Gnostic Basilides."

    We can go back and forth, but is someone other that Paul wrote the epistles it does not follow that they are therefore not divinely inspired.

    So is it academic fraud when your guys don't mention the traditional view?

    Be specific, which posts are you talking about? And while you're at it, in which posts did you ever answer my questions:

    1. How good do you have to be?
    2. What if God's standard is just a little bit higher than yours?
    3. Why did Christ have to die on the cross if we can earn our way to heaven?

    Try to keep up, I did discuss that, and you didn't prove anything, you gave my your opinion, which I reject.

    Here is NT Wright on Pauline authorship of these disputed books, one of many scholars who would agree with me:

    "Arguments from style are clearly important in principle. But they are hard to make in practice. We have such a tiny sample of Paul’s writing, hardly an adequate database for definite conclusions about authorship. Those who have done computer analyses of Paul’s style come up with more ‘conservative’ results than we might have expected. In fact, if it’s stylistic differences we want, the most striking are, in my opinion, the radical differences between 1 and 2 Corinthians. The second letter to Corinth is much jerkier; its sentences are dense and convoluted, bending back on themselves, twisting to and fro with language about God, Jesus Christ, and Paul’s ministry. The organization of the material is much less crisp. There is a far greater difference between those two Corinthian letters that there is between Galatians and Romans on the one hand and Ephesians and Colossians on the other; yet nobody for that reason cast doubt on 2 Corinthians. As John A.T. Robinson pointed out from personal experience a generation ago, a busy church leader may well write in very different styles for different occasions and audiences. The same person can be working simultaneously on a large academic project with careful, ponderous sentences and a short, snappy talk for Sunday school. It has not be unknown for senior biblical scholars to write children’s fiction [in fn.135 ...Among NT scholars who have written children's fiction we might mention C.H. Dodd and R.J. Bauckham]. More directly to the point, it has recently been argued strikingly that Ephesians and Colossians show evidence of a deliberate ‘Asiatic’ style which Paul could easily have adopted for readers in Western Turkey. I regard the possibility of significant variation in Paul’s own style as much higher than the possibility that someone else, a companion or co-worker could achieve such a measure of similarity. Other historical examples of that genre do not encourage us to suppose they would have been so successful." –Paul and the Faithfulness of God, Vol. 1, pg. 60

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._T._Wright

    Is Wright not a serious scholar?
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.

Share This Page