CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: General Religious Discussion...

[GodFearinGunTotin]

First, guys, I feel like we've played this soundtrack before.


That is one thing He chose. He can certainly choose to do other things, too.



Christ can absolutely reveal Himself to a muslim, even in the context of the Koran, and the muslim can listen to Him and follow Him while still being a muslim. (Particularly for certain groups of muslims for whom Christ is a real figure.)

"Christ" has many names. Some of them we may not even know.

This whole "If it isn't the way I think it is then Christianity is a lie" is a non-Biblical absolutist emotional appeal. That there may be a misunderstanding does not make something a lie.

What you're saying is the Bible cannot be trusted?

 

[indiucky]

Also LDS...their early leadership seemed far too interested in sex with little girls for me to take their “message” seriously.

I am in the film The Prophet of the Restoration, that was put out by the LDS Church.....Many of the film crew were BYU students....I portrayed an officer in the Missouri Militia that was looking to lynch Joseph Smith...In the scene I am in you can seem me screaming for his scalp....

When in makeup I noticed the young lady added stringy hair extensions to me and piled "dirt" make up on my face, clothes etc....While this was taking place I noticed the actor playing Joseph Smith and the actor playing Joseph's brother were in the chair getting made up and it was literally primping....No dirt...No stringy hair...Just a little powder to hide the sweat...

I said, "Hey darlin'. How come I'm getting all dirtied up for the scene and Joseph is getting dolled up?"

She grinned and replied..."It's our movie...."

Honest folks....

Bad guys.....

Good guys....

I have a couple of good friends that are LDS....Good and industrious folk....I worked for some one time...Didn't like that and they didn't much care for me....

 

[T.Lex]

What you're saying is the Bible cannot be trusted?

No - that's the logical result of your position.

What I'm saying is that ALL of the Bible can be trusted, not just the parts that you like.

 

[JettaKnight]

What you're saying is the Bible cannot be trusted?

It depends on the what the Pope says.



Sorry, just wanted to stir things up - too much work today for real conversation.

 

[Woobie]

No - that's the logical result of your position.

What I'm saying is that ALL of the Bible can be trusted, not just the parts that you like.

Well what parts of the Bible point to other versions or manifestations of Christ? And what is the context of each of those, and the whole of the Bible?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No - that's the logical result of your position.

What I'm saying is that ALL of the Bible can be trusted, not just the parts that you like.

Well what parts of the Bible point to other versions or manifestations of Christ? And what is the context of each of those, and the whole of the Bible?

Yeah...I'd like to know where in the bible Jesus is the brother of satan, or he was Micheal the angel, or that he is a dead prophet that was never resurrected. Because to believe that other religions that claim these things are correct and would get God's stamp of approval would require these things be biblical.

 

[T.Lex]

Well what parts of the Bible point to other versions or manifestations of Christ? And what is the context of each of those, and the whole of the Bible?

Isaiah 55, most specifically 6-9, certainly allows for it.

But, there's alot the Bible doesn't talk about. Where does it say in the Bible that Christ cannot reveal Himself in whatever way He wants?

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah...I'd like to know where in the bible Jesus is the brother of satan, or he was Micheal the angel, or that he is a dead prophet that was never resurrected. Because to believe that other religions that claim these things are correct and would get God's stamp of approval would require these things be biblical.

You're changing the question - the one I specifically said I wasn't addressing - about "correctness."

The Bible does explain that Jesus was not the brother of Satan, was not Michael the archangel, and was resurrected.

Those truths do not mean that the Trinity is incapable of revealing Himself to someone who believes those falsehoods.

Christ spent much time ministering to those who did not believe in His identity.

 

[Woobie]

Isaiah 55, most specifically 6-9, certainly allows for it.

But, there's alot the Bible doesn't talk about. Where does it say in the Bible that Christ cannot reveal Himself in whatever way He wants?

Great verses, but it doesn't really answer the question. Christ is shown drawing people through all manner of things in scripture. That isn't really up for debate. I just want to know where is the Biblical support for someone gaining salvation through something other than Christ. Or something that says it isn't Christ, but actually is. Or something that says it is against Christ, but actually is just Christ.

I can point to any to any number of verses where Christ or His Apostles state that redemption is through Him alone.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You're changing the question - the one I specifically said I wasn't addressing - about "correctness."

The Bible does explain that Jesus was not the brother of Satan, was not Michael the archangel, and was resurrected.

Those truths do not mean that the Trinity is incapable of revealing Himself to someone who believes those falsehoods.

Christ spent much time ministering to those who did not believe in His identity.

Ok...so maybe I'm reading you all wrong. To keep this manageable, let's consider the muslims. You're not saying muslims, who believe and hold to all the teachings of that religion and believe Jesus is just another dead prophet but believe he existed are on a path for redemption. You're saying there may be muslims that are "born again", that may hold to some of the traditions and cultural practices of those that are muslim but have come to believe Jesus is their savior and only through his death on the cross, they will be forgiven of their sins and be justified on to God. If that's what you're saying, I might be able to agree with you.

 

[T.Lex]

Great verses, but it doesn't really answer the question. Christ is shown drawing people through all manner of things in scripture. That isn't really up for debate. I just want to know where is the Biblical support for someone gaining salvation through something other than Christ. Or something that says it isn't Christ, but actually is. Or something that says it is against Christ, but actually is just Christ.

I can point to any to any number of verses where Christ or His Apostles state that redemption is through Him alone.

So where is the passage that says Christ is tied to only being that which is depicted in the Bible?

I can point to any number of verses where God is omnipotent.

I have not argued against the proposition that Christ is the path. I am saying your expectations are no limitation on Him.

 

[T.Lex]

Ok...so maybe I'm reading you all wrong. To keep this manageable, let's consider the muslims. You're not saying muslims, who believe and hold to all the teachings of that religion and believe Jesus is just another dead prophet but believe he existed are on a path for redemption. You're saying there may be muslims that are "born again", that may hold to some of the traditions and cultural practices of those that are muslim but have come to believe Jesus is their savior and only through his death on the cross, they will be forgiven of their sins and be justified on to God. If that's what you're saying, I might be able to agree with you.

I would be pleased if we could agree on this.

In that formulation, my only tweak would be that they may not know Jesus by the same name you and I associate with Him. That is, He could influence them in the same way He can influence us to follow his Him and his teachings. He doesn't appear to any of us (that I know of) in a... human perceptible (<--- that isn't really an articulate formulation of what I'm trying to say; I may revisit that, but I hope you get the drift of it) way.

Rather, the divine connection of our soul allows us to connect to Him. That piece of divinity within all of us, in His image, is a conduit, although imperfect one on our end.

The justified/ratified/redeemed/saved language is something I'm not comfortable committing to, purely because in these threads I've come to know that there are meanings and ramifications of those words that I'm ignorant of. That's an admission, not an attempt to dodge.

At some point, perhaps at death in the moment of judgment, the veil is pulled aside and we each confront the Truth. I do not pretend to know all that will be revealed in that moment.

 

[Woobie]

So where is the passage that says Christ is tied to only being that which is depicted in the Bible?

I can point to any number of verses where God is omnipotent.

I have not argued against the proposition that Christ is the path. I am saying your expectations are no limitation on Him.

Paul leaves little wiggle room:

Galatians 1:7-9
[7] Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [9] As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.




The first verse here could be encouraging toward a more broad method of receiving Christ, but then, once again, we are drawn to the essential nature of God's Word:

Romans 10:13-17
[13] For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. [14] How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? [15] And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! [16] But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? [17] So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.





I make no attempt to constrain God. What constraints exist have been placed upon Him by Himself in His Word. My belief is that it fulfills His purpose of presenting a simple Gospel and thwarting pride:

1 Corinthians 1:18-24
[18] For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. [19] For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. [20] Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? [21] For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. [22] For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: [23] But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; [24] But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

 

[Woobie]

I know people are drawn to Christ through any number of channels. But though drawn in our own errors, we do acknowledge the name of Christ (Acts 4:12). Furthermore, based on scriptures I posted above, as well as others, God is not in works claiming to be additions or replacements to the Gospel. Those are deceptions.

Now then. There are people who acknowledge Christ through visions they have received prior to receiving the Gospel. And Romans 1 shows us that we can believe in God by taking a look around us. But if the ignorance of those pre-Gospel beliefs does not immediately give way to the truth of Scripture, how can we say that belief was in Christ, and not something else?

 

[T.Lex]

...how can we say that belief was in Christ, and not something else?

That isn't for us to say.

I mean, there are certain big things that would be obvious to us. But, in the little things, we should (IMHO) trust God to lead us on our individual paths to Him.

Matthew 11

[FONT=&quot]25 At that time Jesus said, “I thank[i] you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants; [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]26 yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.[j] [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]27 All things have been handed over to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.[/FONT]

 

[Benp]

People can think they are on the right track, but be wrong.
Matthew 25:11-12 (NKJV)
Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, ‘Lord, Lord, open to us!’ But he answered and said, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you.’

God didn't reveal everything to us, but He revealed enough. He says not to add or take away anything in the bible. People like to pick and choose what is in the bible to follow.

 

[T.Lex]

God didn't reveal everything to us, but He revealed enough.

I agree with this.

And, for purposes of a General Religion thread (as opposed to the Christianity Thread) may be sufficient.

 

[Woobie]

That isn't for us to say.

I mean, there are certain big things that would be obvious to us. But, in the little things, we should (IMHO) trust God to lead us on our individual paths to Him.

Matthew 11

It was a rhetorical question. The fact is the Bible tells us. We don't have to say.

1 John 4:1-3
[1] … Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. [2] Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: [3] And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

To use your term of something obvious, denying the basic tenants of scripture once coming into contact with them would be a pretty obvious sign of faith in something besides Christ.

 

[foszoe]

Since redemption is through Christ Alone, I guess the Bible teaches that the Father and the Holy Spirit are not necessary for redemption

 

[T.Lex]

It was a rhetorical question. The fact is the Bible tells us. We don't have to say.

1 John 4:1-3
[1] … Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. [2] Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: [3] And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

To use your term of something obvious, denying the basic tenants of scripture once coming into contact with them would be a pretty obvious sign of faith in something besides Christ.

Indeed, from further in that same chapter.

So we have known and believe the love that God has for us.God is love, and those who abide in love abide in God, and God abides in them.

God is love. That seems pretty basic. Pretty simple. Biblical. Reflects Jesus' expression of the second most important thing.

Again, in the general context of this thread, rather than have us both pincite Christian biblical references, perhaps we can agree that this entire subject is more complex than can adequately be covered on INGO? (Again.)