01 Feb 10
Experience should teach him that lesson! He will not answer if he indeed sins still. One wrathful answer by him will prove that he is indeed a sinner like the rest of us. Paul said Should we sin all the more that grace may abound all the more? May it never be He said. I was thinking Paul eventually became a martyr for the sake and will of Christ. Not a cheap Gospel at all!!
Manny
02 Feb 10
Originally posted by knightmeisterHowever, because he talks with a form of pseudo-intellectual forumspeak we hang on naively to the idea that he just, just might listen to some reason.
Where, in scripture, do you think Paul taught "cheap salvation"?
It doesn't. It's not there. But ToOne will conjure it up somewhere in his rigid mind like a desperate mirage of water to quench his thirst for Paul bashing. He'll find the one verse somewhere that he thinks he can grind his axe on. It's not even a bet.
It's entir ...[text shortened]... ther any more?)
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz[/b]
I have no illusions of being able to convince ThinkOfOne that he's wrong. I just want to hear his argument.
02 Feb 10
Originally posted by epiphinehasAn enlightened man.
[b]However, because he talks with a form of pseudo-intellectual forumspeak we hang on naively to the idea that he just, just might listen to some reason.
I have no illusions of being able to convince ThinkOfOne that he's wrong. I just want to hear his argument.[/b]
Trying to get him to think that maybe there are some tiny cracks in his argument would be a start.
But even that seems impossible.
02 Feb 10
It is a "cheap" salvation because it relieves people of the obligation of having to do anything. If faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must merely believe in the efficacy of Jesus' death and alleged resurrection. This profound shift in emphasis made for a "cheap" salvation.
This shift, I think, was brought about by the fact that Jesus proclaimed that the kingdom was imminent. That it would happen in their lifetime. When it became increasingly apparent that this was not going to happen the early Christians had to come to grips with that realization. Paul was there to fill the void and project the coming of the kingdom from being an imminent occasion in this world to being one in the indeterminate future. It is clear that Paul had many opponents within the early Christian communities who disagreed with him, but his interpretation, for better or for worse, is the one that won out in the end.
02 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettIf faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must merely believe in the efficacy of Jesus' death and alleged resurrection.
It is a "cheap" salvation because it relieves people of the obligation of having to do anything. If faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must mer h him, but his interpretation, for better or for worse, is the one that won out in the end.
It would help if you understood Christianity before you began to speak authoritatively about it. Paul did not teach what you ascribe to him, i.e., cheap grace. And neither does the church which Paul helped establish teach cheap grace. What Paul did teach was that grace is opposed to earning, but not opposed to effort.
He said, “We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (Eph. 2:10). That is, we are born again, through faith in Christ, in order to do the good works established by God's providence. This proclamation is the other side of the same coin from James 2:17, “Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."
Paul's teaching reinforces this: "You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ" (Rom. 8:9).
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
02 Feb 10
Originally posted by rwingettIt is a "cheap" salvation because it relieves people of the obligation of having to do anything. If faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must merely believe in the efficacy of Jesus' death and alleged resurrection. This profound shift in emphasis made for a "cheap" salvation.
It is a "cheap" salvation because it relieves people of the obligation of having to do anything. If faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must mer ...[text shortened]... h him, but his interpretation, for better or for worse, is the one that won out in the end.
This is simply wrong. Paul does teach that belief in Christ will lead to salvation and that Christ's death and resurrection were salvific; he does not, however, teach that a Christian need not exert any effort. He frequently cautions against the dangers of immorality and predicts the imminence of divine wrath which will follow those believers who do wrong. For Paul, belief in Christ is not merely an isolated cognitive act; it engages the whole person. So a person does not merely grant an intellectual assent to Christian doctrine in order to be saved. A person does not sit on his couch and say 'yeah, I believe that' and is saved. True belief, in Pauline theology, should impel the person into righteousness and it should be grounded in the theological virtues, faith, hope and love.
02 Feb 10
Originally posted by rwingettPaul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself.
It is a "cheap" salvation because it relieves people of the obligation of having to do anything. If faith alone is sufficient, then no effort on their part is required. Paul transformed proto-christianity from being a religion about what Jesus said to being a religion about Jesus himself. One need not act in a manner prescribed by Jesus, but must mer ...[text shortened]... h him, but his interpretation, for better or for worse, is the one that won out in the end.
---------ringwett----------------
Er...no...I think Jesus did a pretty good job of drawing attention to himself without Paul's help. LOL
03 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by epiphinehasWell, I suggested you start another thread if you wanted to have a discussion. From the title of this thread and this comment, this seems unlikely.
[b]However, because he talks with a form of pseudo-intellectual forumspeak we hang on naively to the idea that he just, just might listen to some reason.
I have no illusions of being able to convince ThinkOfOne that he's wrong. I just want to hear his argument.[/b]
However, let's see if we can get a discussion going. Let's ask for two things from everyone who wants to participate.
1) What do you believe is the absolute minimum requirement for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation"?
2) If you believe Paul's views on salvation supports this belief, provide the verses by him.
I'll go first.
1) One must become righteous, i.e., one must become one with God, one must follow the will of God, one cannot continue to commit sin, etc. Anything that falls short of this is "cheap salvation".
2) From what I can tell, Paul's views on salvation don't support this.
03 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNice try hijacking this thread. I asked you specifically, where do you think Paul contradicts Jesus? Give some scriptural examples.
Well, I suggested you start another thread if you wanted to have a discussion. From the title of this thread and this comment, this seems unlikely.
However, let's see if we can get a discussion going. Let's ask for two things from everyone who wants to participate.
1) What do you believe is the absolute minimum requirement for "eternal life" / "heav ...[text shortened]... tion".
2) From what I can tell, Paul's views on salvation don't support this.
03 Feb 10
Originally posted by epiphinehasI know what you asked specifically. However, I'm interested in having a discussion. If you're not, then fine.
Nice try hijacking this thread. I asked you specifically, where do you think Paul contradicts Jesus? Give some scriptural examples.
I posted my belief on the absolute minimum requirement for salvation which I take from the teachings of Jesus. The vast majority of Christians seem to have beliefs that fall short of this. Many seem to point to Paul as a source, if not THE source, of this belief and there seem to be quite a number of different beliefs on what Paul taught. From my point of view all of the beliefs that fall short of what I posted earlier are contrary to the teachings of Jesus. So let's see what they are.
IF your belief on the absolute minimum requirement is the same as mine, then we probably don't have anything to discuss. If it differs and you believe Paul's views support your belief, then provide the verses by him.
BTW, seems unlikely that I can "hijack" a thread that presumably asks for MY thoughts.
03 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnedear think of one, its not a great matter to get out ones bible, peruse its contents, find the appropriate verse and post it on the forum. We are interested specifically in this idea, that Paul contradicts the teachings of Christ. Is this your assertion or not? if it is, then you shall be pleased to quote the verses that substantiate the assertion, that we too may make an evaluation for ourselves, but this feigning this and feigning that is no good. Do you want the born againers to torch you as a heretic, no, then cough up the verses so that we may also come to an understanding of what it is you are saying, thus, even if we do not agree we may be able to understand your position The verses are better for they provide a convenient point of reference.
I know what you asked specifically. However, I'm interested in having a discussion. If you're not, then fine.
I posted my belief on the absolute minimum requirement for salvation which I take from the teachings of Jesus. The vast majority of Christians seem to have beliefs that fall short of this. Many seem to point to Paul as a source, if not THE sou
BTW, seems unlikely that I can "hijack" a thread that presumably asks for MY thoughts.
03 Feb 10
Originally posted by knightmeisterIt's been tried by many so he'll be sticking to his guns. But he will not be convienced as he is apparently perfect as he does not sin...
An enlightened man.
Trying to get him to think that maybe there are some tiny cracks in his argument would be a start.
But even that seems impossible.
03 Feb 10
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRead my posts again. I thought what I wrote clearly defined "what it is [I am] saying". If you need clarification on any of it just ask.
dear think of one, its not a great matter to get out ones bible, peruse its contents, find the appropriate verse and post it on the forum. We are interested specifically in this idea, that Paul contradicts the teachings of Christ. Is this your assertion or not? if it is, then you shall be pleased to quote the verses that substantiate the assertion ...[text shortened]... nderstand your position The verses are better for they provide a convenient point of reference.
Maybe you just glossed over the following:
I posted my belief on the absolute minimum requirement for salvation which I take from the teachings of Jesus. The vast majority of Christians seem to have beliefs that fall short of this. Many seem to point to Paul as a source, if not THE source, of this belief and there seem to be quite a number of different beliefs on what Paul taught. From my point of view all of the beliefs that fall short of what I posted earlier are contrary to the teachings of Jesus. So let's see what they are.
03 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne[/b]so its simply your position, not what the Bible actually states, well ok, i understand that now, thanks for clarification 🙂
Read my posts again. I thought what I wrote clearly defined "what it is [I am] saying". If you need clarification on any of it just ask.
Maybe you just glossed over the following:I posted my belief on the absolute minimum requirement for salvation which I take from the teachings of Jesus. The vast majority of Christians seem to have beliefs th ...[text shortened]... sted earlier are contrary to the teachings of Jesus.So let's see what they are.
03 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFrom discussions I've had with you, it's evident that you really don't care what the Bible actually states. You just go into denial mode if it is contrary to your beliefs. Take where Jesus contradicts verses from Leviticus in the Sermon on the Mount for example.
so its simply your position, not what the Bible actually states, well ok, i understand that now, thanks for clarification 🙂