Salvation

Originally posted by sonship

Dogma of any kind is a dangerous thing. Dogma that serves as the foundation for ones core beliefs (like church dogma) is especially dangerous. They are extremely protective of it even to the point of delusion. As such, it in effect "blinds" people to the truth. Think Jesus understood this?

Do you think the insistence of many Christians (a ...[text shortened]... s thing. [/quote]

Maybe you mean "Dogma that I personally don't like are a dangerous thing."

Maybe you mean "Dogma that I personally don't like are a dangerous thing."

Not at all.

Let's look at the following definition from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

That is close to what I had in mind when I wrote that.

One should always be willing to shine the light of truth upon any and all of ones beliefs and be willing to alter them if they don't hold up to scrutiny.

For an example of dogma at work, I'll refer to a discussion you and I had some years back. I had pointed out a contradiction in the Bible from two verses in 1st John if memory serves me correctly. We went back and forth for quite a while before you finally conceded that they did contradict each other. But you also added the caveat that you still believed both to be equally true.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yes to that . Truth in Jesus Christ is what I was after. In my twenties I did not really care for parents and siblings to agree... so it was not that hard. I think Christ said that if you give up family and friends to be with Him then you will get back more in return... 🙂

I think Christ said that if you give up family and friends to be with Him then you will get back more in return.

As a matter of curiosity, what did you have in mind here? Do you know the passage(s) that pertain to this?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b] I think Christ said that if you give up family and friends to be with Him then you will get back more in return.

As a matter of curiosity, what did you have in mind here? Do you know the passage(s) that pertain to this?[/b]

Mat 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

For an example of dogma at work, I'll refer to a discussion you and I had some years back. I had pointed out a contradiction in the Bible from two verses in 1st John if memory serves me correctly. We went back and forth for quite a while before you finally conceded that they did contradict each other. But you also added the caveat that you still believed both to be equally true.

What is the discussion that you are asking me to take your word for it that we "went back and forth" on a dogma and I conceded something ?

What discussion was it ?
I'd like to check your recollection.


I have always said on this Forum that there are some paradoxes in the Bible. And one of my favorite articles by a perceptive Christian writer is Robert Govette's "The Twofoldedness of Divine Truth".

I have also said a number of times that I do not think the Bible's revelation can be systematized 100%.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

Let's look at the following definition from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma
------------------------------------------------

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

That is close to what I had in mind when I wrote that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The definition I supplied was:

Dogma is a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. The term can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]

My bolding

Don't you think the above phrase about principles "laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true" contains what you wanted to say in your Webster's definition ? Its the same thing as being without question or doubted.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

You favored the definition of dogma as -

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

As I supplied:

" ... principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true ... and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. "

So do you think the so called "Golden Rule" as a dogmatic summary of the Christian religion is "a dangerous thing" ?

I'm just asking.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
For someone who seems to think he has the Holy Spirit directing him, you certainly don't seem to have any reservations about being deceitful.

I'm not going to bother to point out your latest deceits since your previous deceits are well documented and you don't seem to have any sense of shame whatsoever.

I've known for some time that you're extreme ...[text shortened]... at I am surprised at your propensity for tacking deceit upon deceit. Live and learn as they say.

You know at worst we are miscommunicating, what you are accusing me of is lying.
If you continue this we can end all conversations from this point forward up to you.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
For someone who seems to think he has the Holy Spirit directing him, you certainly don't seem to have any reservations about being deceitful.

I'm not going to bother to point out your latest deceits since your previous deceits are well documented and you don't seem to have any sense of shame whatsoever.

I've known for some time that you're extreme ...[text shortened]... at I am surprised at your propensity for tacking deceit upon deceit. Live and learn as they say.

Let's tally up the unwarranted personal comments:

1. Deceitful x 5
2. No sense of shame
3. Prideful.
4. Dishonest x 2.

Remind the world again why you resort to these tactics? Does it only occur when you feel you are losing an argument?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]Maybe you mean "Dogma that I personally don't like are a dangerous thing."

Not at all.

Let's look at the following definition from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

That is close to what I had in mind wh ...[text shortened]... adict each other. But you also added the caveat that you still believed both to be equally true.[/b]

Dogma of any kind is a dangerous thing. Dogma that serves as the foundation for ones core beliefs (like church dogma) is especially dangerous. They are extremely protective of it even to the point of delusion. As such, it in effect "blinds" people to the truth. Think Jesus understood this?

ThinkIfOne,

I would still like to know if you consider "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" as popularly called "The Golden Rule" is to some people a dangerous dogma. You did say dogma of ANY kind is a dangerous thing.

Now I agree with some things in your observations about being dogmatic.

I did notice that you appeared mostly to fault THEY like a church group. I wonder if INDIVIDUALLY held dogma holds the same danger for you.

You see, some posters here are not difficult to catagorize as being members of some faith group or church. But others like to hold their personal affiliations close to the vest, like they are independent of all group associations.

Do you think those who very individualistically take on an independent "free" posture, never admitting to group association can have dogmas as well? You say:

Dogma of any kind is a dangerous thing. Dogma that serves as the foundation for ones core beliefs (like church dogma) is especially dangerous.

[My Bolding]

A person difficult to pinpoint as to who they associatw with as a group can also, as you say, have dangerous dogmas.

Dogma of ANY KIND you do not restrict to church groups, Right ? Do you also mean dogma " of any kind " held by a free lance person wary of group think who perhaps keeps his associations secretive, is also implicated in this danger ?

Or are all such independent free lance thinkers without dangerous dogma ?

Originally posted by Rajk999
Mat 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Okay thanks. I'll have to poke around a bit and see what kind of consistency I find elsewhere.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] For an example of dogma at work, I'll refer to a discussion you and I had some years back. I had pointed out a contradiction in the Bible from two verses in 1st John if memory serves me correctly. We went back and forth for quite a while before you finally conceded that they did contradict each other. But you also added the caveat that you still bel ...[text shortened]... lso said a number of times that I do not think the Bible's revelation can be systematized 100%.

I thought that maybe you'd have remembered it. It's not big deal if you don't. If this site had a proper search facility maybe I could find it.

Originally posted by sonship
[b] Let's look at the following definition from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dogma
------------------------------------------------

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

That is close to what I had in mind when I wrote that.
------------- ...[text shortened]... d to say in your Webster's definition ? Its the same thing as being without question or doubted.[/b]

They're close though it is slightly different. I chose a definition that was closer to what I had in mind.

I added the following to better show what I was getting at:
"One should always be willing to shine the light of truth upon any and all of ones beliefs and be willing to alter them if they don't hold up to scrutiny."

Originally posted by sonship
You favored the definition of dogma as -

: a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted

As I supplied:

[quote] " ... principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true ... and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or ...[text shortened]... " as a dogmatic summary of the Christian religion is "a dangerous thing" ?

I'm just asking.

Dogma, as I had in mind, also has to do with the holder of the belief, rather than just as an intrinsic property of the belief.

Like I said:
"One should always be willing to shine the light of truth upon any and all of ones beliefs and be willing to alter them if they don't hold up to scrutiny."

As such, if the holder of the belief is unwilling to shine the light of truth upon it and alter the belief when warranted, then it's dangerous.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You know at worst we are miscommunicating, what you are accusing me of is lying.
If you continue this we can end all conversations from this point forward up to you.

Was there some "miscommunication"? Perhaps. But there's no denying your propensity for deceit.

If you continue this we can end all conversations from this point forward up to you.

Hope you can find a way to be honest with yourself, so that you can also be honest with others. Until that time, that's fine with me.

Toward that end, I suggest you read through our discussion that begins with my first post on page 10 and follow the thread of that discussion through to as least my third post on page 12.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Let's tally up the unwarranted personal comments:

1. Deceitful x 5
2. No sense of shame
3. Prideful.
4. Dishonest x 2.

Remind the world again why you resort to these tactics? Does it only occur when you feel you are losing an argument?

Says the guy who posted the following to Dasa on page 15 of this very thread:

Sir, you are dishonest in your accusations of dishonesty.

Honest.

Your toll-like behavior has been well documented on the "Ephesians 2:8-9" thread. Shouldn't take long for most to understand what you're about.

From what I've seen, you've only made three posts on this thread and each of them to 'stir the pot'. It's what trolls do.