Know the truth - a short lived enlightenment.

[MoreCoffee]

Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." They answered him, "We are descendants of Abraham, and have never been in bondage to any one. How is it that you say, 'You will be made free'?" Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father." John 8:31-38

 

[Lamb]

Is this thread about today's Jews who still refuse to follow the Savior?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Is this thread about today's Jews who still refuse to follow the Savior?

no

 

[Cassia]

Is it about the continued thought of God progressively from Abrahams faith plus grace because it's common place in Christianity to revert to what was instead of what is which differs from what is to be.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Consider how people react in the thread called Antihistamines for works.

 

[Brighten04]

Will you be frank? What is this thread about? Stop dropping hints.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Will you be frank? What is this thread about? Stop dropping hints.

The title and the first post explains it.

 

[Rens]

https://youtu.be/P6Fo3BN1m7M

 

[MoreCoffee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWThaAkdxpA

 

[JSales]

Don't you love secret threads where only the OP is enlightened? In your posted video Jesus tells the crowd I AM and they become enraged, does that have anything to do with what this thread is about?

 

[atpollard]

Consider how people react in the thread called Antihistamines for works.

You mean disliking having their beliefs misrepresented?

 

[MoreCoffee]

You mean disliking having their beliefs misrepresented?

Yes, if their beliefs were misrepresented. But more to the point verses that speak contrary to their stated theology or appear to do so can be quite frustrating when encountered. My reference in the post you quoted was to several posts that I made that were passage of scripture with some underlining in them. The reactions are illustrative of what I said.

 

[Lamb]

Communicating what is inside one's head is often difficult on forums as we've all discovered at some point in our lives.

I had a friend who sincerely believed that it was the duty of the reader to interpret what was written. I corrected him saying that it was the responsibility of the author to communicate effectively or the failure is upon him for not being able to convey his thoughts.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Communicating what is inside one's head is often difficult on forums as we've all discovered at some point in our lives.

I had a friend who sincerely believed that it was the duty of the reader to interpret what was written. I corrected him saying that it was the responsibility of the author to communicate effectively or the failure is upon him for not being able to convey his thoughts.

When the author does communicate clearly and precisely yet the reader misconstrues either by erroneous reading or by ill will the author is not at fault. The reader is at fault.

 

[Josiah]

Consider how people react in the thread called Antihistamines for works.

Because no Christian is allergic to works, no Christian believes that good works are bad - the whole premise of that thread was/is absurd.

Friend, if we CONTINUE in something then we ALREADY are that. This verse is about sanctification, discipleship, the life/faith of CHRISTIANS.

The "problem" comes when it is stated or implied that it applies in any sense to justification (narrow) making Christ a joke, an irrelevant joke, NOT the Savior because self saves self by the works of self.... the soteriological doctrine as I was taught in my Catholic days, "Jesus makes salvation POSSIBLE but you save yourself by what you do." "Jesus opened the gate to heaven but you got to get yourself through it." "God helps those who help themselves." As you know, my Catholic friend, anytime something is said, written, posted that even remotely implies that Jesus is a worthless joke, nothing more than a possibility-maker or helper, then Protestants are going to react strongly. IF you were to post things and make it CLEAR you are speaking not of justification but rather, instead, sanctification (narrow), the LIFE of a CHRISTIAN (one who IS justified), our DISCIPLESHIP as a CHRISTIAN - then you get only agreement. Protestants are rather passionate about the chief article of the Christian faith: Jesus is the Savior. I know your denomination excommunicated Luther and split itself over this and no one here expects you, as a Catholic, to agree with it BUT as you know, when you even imply the opposite, Protestants ARE going to passionately react, passionately embrace Jesus as the ONE and only and sufficient Savior (and thus not self - in whole or in part, now or ever). Protestants will agree with you IF you clearly state that our works matter in SANCTIFICATION (in the life of a Christian), they will passionately disagree with you if you even imply that Jesus is not the Savior, His works are a joke, what really matters is how self saves self (even if entirely empowered by God and your denomination).



Pax


- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

Because no Christian is allergic to works...

The thread never asserts that Christians of any stripe are allergic to works. It is specifically stated to be about soteriology and that was stated in the original post and in a number of subsequent posts. You're building a straw man to knock down and that never helps with civil discussion or debate.

Antihistamines for works are a necessity in theological discussions because some folk appear to be allergic to good works in any theological discussion.

James says "faith without works is dead" and folk say "he really means that mere intellectual assent not faith". Or when he says "see, we are justified by works and not by faith alone" they say "he doesn't mean justification before God he really means justification before men". They say these things because they are dead scared of works playing any role in salvation and/or justification. In effect their theology made them allergic to good works [in theological discussions].

I ought to have added the words in square brackets to avoid giving anybody occasion for leaping to an incorrect conclusion about the topic. The topic is however clearly indicated and defined in the leading paragraph.

 

[Rens]

Communicating what is inside one's head is often difficult on forums as we've all discovered at some point in our lives.

I had a friend who sincerely believed that it was the duty of the reader to interpret what was written. I corrected him saying that it was the responsibility of the author to communicate effectively or the failure is upon him for not being able to convey his thoughts.

If people don't understand me it's entirely their fault. They could have taken a course Dutch.
Lol I've had it a few times that someone said: what on earth are you talking about? That one time on cf when autocorrect changed the words into Dutch words was the most hilarious. That guy was like: What????

 

[MoreCoffee]

If people don't understand me it's entirely their fault. They could have taken a course Dutch.
Lol I've had it a few times that someone said: what on earth are you talking about? That one time on cf when autocorrect changed the words into Dutch words was the most hilarious. That guy was like: What????

Maybe I ought to use Swedish auto correction

 

[Lamb]

When the author does communicate clearly and precisely yet the reader misconstrues either by erroneous reading or by ill will the author is not at fault. The reader is at fault.

When more than one person questions it, then the author obviously didn't make it as clear as he thought

 

[MoreCoffee]

When more than one person questions it, then the author obviously didn't make it as clear as he thought

If more than one person independently does so maybe your statement has substance but not when one makes public accusation and others (for whatever reasons) follow.