In Reference To CyBs Statement of Faith - Christian Forum

[BjornFree]

Oneoff,

Seems as though you are pointing the finger at yourself as well!

When hats fit they need to be worn (Oz included).

 

[tom55]

The answer to that Tom55 is all of us. We all can readily discern from scripture as to whether a certain group or individual is doctrinally sound. My thought however is that no group or individual has the right to enforce anyone to accept any tenet of religious faith or doctrine against their conscience. Persecution, exile, torture, and death, as meted out by the Roman power in the dark ages against groups such as the Arians/Abgeneses/Waldenses and hundreds of thousands of individuals because Rome claimed "authority" over everyone else was an abomination and a sad and "heretical" reflection on the policies of the Roman church of the time.
Policies I might add that have not been abrogated.

So if everyone is heretical then there is no truth in scripture?

The Apostles had the authority to call someone heretical but that authority died with them?

 

[tom55]

It kicks in when you can't think of anything original to say and just parrot what I say. It's only the first sign.

I owe you an apology. It appears to me I have hurt your feelings because you can't seem to let this go. I did not intend to hurt your feelings. I thought we were just having a "fun" sparing of words back and forth. It seems to me you may have taken this personal and that was not my intent. Love....Tom55

 

[tom55]

Almost everyone is a 'heretic' to someone.
With a few exceptions who (like myself) think outside the 'box', and consequently are occasionally regarded as 'heretics' to almost everyone.
Most 'forumites' belong to one group or another,who regard everyone who believes differently from themselves as 'heretics'.
Generally the worst examples of 'forum' membership know better, but are unable to apply their knowledge.
Such is religion......the seedbed of confrontation, insular bigotry, hatred, persecution, and even torture and murder.
Even Calvin, who so many rever, fell foul to torture and murder of one of his dissidents.
Now ...... how's about another 'biggie' regarding the historical accuracy of my source of information re Calvin.

If you are regarded as such by almost everyone that should be your first clue you are probably wrong about most of the beliefs you espouse.

So if everyone is heretical then there is no truth in scripture?

The Apostles had the authority to call someone heretical. Did that authority die with them?

 

[BjornFree]

If you are regarded as such by almost everyone that should be your first clue you are probably wrong about most of the beliefs you espouse.

So if everyone is heretical then there is no truth in scripture?

The Apostles had the authority to call someone heretical. Did that authority die with them?

If, by scripture, you include the canonised addition of a selection of the apostolic writings then yes, there probably are elements of truth,
and such as Jesus' prophecy regarding apostasy (Matthew 13:2-52) could well be such an example.
And the fulfillment of that prophecy would account for the unreliability of the popular majority opinion as a yardstick for determining 'Heresy'.
And, as for the succession of apostolic authority, either it ended with the death of the last of the original apostles, or it continues to
the present day (as per the claim of Catholicism) or it continued until whenever you wish to claim ..... which is it that you choose?

 

[StanJ]

I owe you an apology. It appears to me I have hurt your feelings because you can't seem to let this go. I did not intend to hurt your feelings. I thought we were just having a "fun" sparing of words back and forth. It seems to me you may have taken this personal and that was not my intent. Love....Tom55

Not me, the board. I don't really know what your intentions are here, except to obviously push your own agenda and that of the RCC. You can sign up all your posts with 'respectfully', but it means nothing when your words contradict you're closing.

 

[tom55]

Not me, the board. I don't really know what your intentions are here, except to obviously push your own agenda and that of the RCC. You can sign up all your posts with 'respectfully', but it means nothing when your words contradict you're closing.

Your still mad. Aren't you?

My intentions are to give you the truth. My agenda is to set you free with the truth. It is your choice to accept it or reject it.

What is your agenda and intentions on this forum???

 

[StanJ]

Your still mad. Aren't you?
My intentions are to give you the truth. My agenda is to set you free with the truth. It is your choice to accept it or reject it.
What is your agenda and intentions on this forum???

If that were so, you wouldn't be arguing with everybody that is telling you the truth.
You're so big on consensus yet when the consensus here is that you are wrong, you refuse to accept it.
Quelle surprise!

 

[OzSpen]

We all can readily discern from scripture as to whether a certain group or individual is doctrinally sound.

brakelite,

If that were the case, there would be no need for Scripture to give us this kind of warning: 'For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.' (2 Tim 4:3-4 ESV).

The facts are that some Christians cannot discern whether a certain group is doctrinally sound or not. We can see this in current movements to deny the doctrine of hell, redefine the teaching on creation, denial of the Trinity, promotion of the 'new hermeneutic' that is associated with postmodernism, health-wealth doctrines, etc.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

If, by scripture, you include the canonised addition of a selection of the apostolic writings then yes, there probably are elements of truth,...

Oneoff,

Are you the one who determines what is truth in the canon of Scripture?

 

[brakelite]

brakelite,

If that were the case, there would be no need for Scripture to give us this kind of warning: 'For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.' (2 Tim 4:3-4 ESV).

The facts are that some Christians cannot discern whether a certain group is doctrinally sound or not. We can see this in current movements to deny the doctrine of hell, redefine the teaching on creation, denial of the Trinity, promotion of the 'new hermeneutic' that is associated with postmodernism, health-wealth doctrines, etc.

Oz

Yes, I deny the doctrine of hell and the Nicean understanding of the trinity....that does not mean necessarily that that being a "current movement" it is error, but I see it as a correction of error necessary before Christ comes. I have explained elsewhere my perspective on the trinity, the following summarizes brilliantly my view on hell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAY4GZU50l0

 

[tom55]

If that were so, you wouldn't be arguing with everybody that is telling you the truth.
You're so big on consensus yet when the consensus here is that you are wrong, you refuse to accept it.
Quelle surprise!

How can everybody be telling me the truth when everyone on here has their own truth?

It is true that the consensus on here is that I am wrong....but everyone calls each other wrong on here. No one is right and no one has the truth on this website. And no one has the authority to decide who is right.

Hardly anyone on here agrees with each other and rarely do I see anyone agree with YOU. So you and I are in the same boat.

 

[OzSpen]

So if everyone is heretical then there is no truth in scripture?

The Apostles had the authority to call someone heretical but that authority died with them?

Tom,

This is not the case regarding heretics.

1 John 4:1-3 (ESV) states: 'Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already'.

John told his audience to test the spirits to discern whether they were from God. That requirement has not changed. Otherwise, it makes the NT irrelevant for future generations if it only applied to what the apostles could do.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Yes, I deny the doctrine of hell and the Nicean understanding of the trinity....that does not mean necessarily that that being a "current movement" it is error, but I see it as a correction of error necessary before Christ comes. I have explained elsewhere my perspective on the trinity, the following summarizes brilliantly my view on hell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAY4GZU50l0

brakelite,

I refute that view in Is hell fair? and the accompanying links at the conclusion of the article. The Greek language does not allow me to come to the conclusions which you endorse.

Oz

 

[StanJ]

How can everybody be telling me the truth when everyone on here has their own truth?
It is true that the consensus on here is that I am wrong....but everyone calls each other wrong on here. No one is right and no one has the truth on this website. And no one has the authority to decide who is right.
Hardly anyone on here agrees with each other and rarely do I see anyone agree with YOU. So you and I are in the same boat.

That of course is your opinion, which again is not the truth.
I'm talking about this thread not the whole forum. The truth is what's right and God has already decided what the truth is. If one rightly divide the word of Truth then one agrees with God and if one does not rightly divide the word of truth then one disagrees with God. You do not rightly divide the word of Truth. Not everybody has to tell each other they agree with them. Sometimes silence speaks volumes. In any event you and I are not in the same boat whatsoever.

 

[BjornFree]

Oneoff,

Are you the one who determines what is truth in the canon of Scripture?

When it comes to making any determination "for oneself" who on earth, other than a mindless wimp, can make such a determination other than oneself?

 

[BjornFree]

I owe you an apology. It appears to me I have hurt your feelings because you can't seem to let this go. I did not intend to hurt your feelings. I thought we were just having a "fun" sparing of words back and forth. It seems to me you may have taken this personal and that was not my intent. Love....Tom55

Might this not be just another variation on the "I must have the last word ....I must be the victor in this verbal encounter".
Forums are awash with people who are tarred with that brush.

 

[BjornFree]

Yes, I deny the doctrine of hell and the Nicean understanding of the trinity....that does not mean necessarily that that being a "current movement" it is error, but I see it as a correction of error necessary before Christ comes. I have explained elsewhere my perspective on the trinity, the following summarizes brilliantly my view on hell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAY4GZU50l0

Depends on what is meant by the use of the word "Hell".
Strictly speaking that particular word didn't exist at the time when the apostolic writings were penned.
It was originated by pagans in the middle ages, and only found its way into the bible when the King James' translators lazily applied it to each of the three completely different words 'Gehenna', 'Hades' and 'Tratarus. Young's Literal translation only uses each of the three proper words. But I agree with you in rejecting the common notion that there is a "hell" that comprises eternal torment in a 'Lake of Fire' intended only for such purpose for "the Devil, The Beast, and the False Prophet" (whoever they might be). Otherwise, in respect of mankind, the 'Lake of Fire' (according to Revelation) is merely the place where those who do not inherit eternal life simply perish (be no more) as per John 3:16. But there again it all depends on how you regard the book of Revelation in terms of literal meaning.

 

[OzSpen]

When it comes to making any determination "for oneself" who on earth, other than a mindless wimp, can make such a determination other than oneself?

One does not make a determination 'for oneself' as to what is in the canon of Scripture. The church has already made that decision in the early centuries. Or, are you reading the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of the Hebrews, and the Gospel of the Laodiceans as equal with the books of the canon of the NT?

If 'for oneself' determines canonicity, it leads to anything goes. Why place any limit on the canon? Is that your view?

 

[OzSpen]

Might this not be just another variation on the "I must have the last word ....I must be the victor in this verbal encounter".
Forums are awash with people who are tarred with that brush.

Could you also be one of them?