Search results

Correct, the Son's consubstantiality with the Father was declared at Nicea, in a vain attempt to put an end to the long-raging debate over the Son's true nature.

I don't know that I would say "changed" here. Maybe "declared" would be better. There was no official consensus on the doctrine to be "changed," as best I can tell.

Quite a controversial verse. Was the text of Matthew 28:19 changed?

Not sure why it matters whether those who come to Jesus got a little nudge from the Father without knowing it, or were drawn to Jesus on his own merits with no further nudging at all -- but either way, the issue we have been discussing, I thought, was about "coming to the Father" by means of...

Well, sure, but that doesn't get us very far in answering the question posed by the OP. Can't Jesus decide whom he will allow to "cometh unto the Father," and under what circumstances? What prevents him from deciding that those who forgive others will be forgiven their own sins and be allowed...

So, are you modifying your comment "There is no way to the Father but through the son" into "Except for someone who has never heard of Christ and therefore cannot reject him, there is no way to the Father but through the son"?

If you are willing to grant that one who hasn't rejected Christ (perhaps because he hasn't heard of him and had the opportunity to accept or reject) can still be saved, then perhaps we can frame the question this way: Given that the sacrifice of Christ was a requirement of our forgiveness, is...

Everybody has a heavenly Father, whether they "receive him" and "believe in his name" or not.

I imagine that many gathered at the Mount hadn't yet made up their minds on accepting or rejecting Jesus, but you are surely right that Jesus was speaking to people who follow God, namely Jews. And perhaps that is the context we need to focus on in interpreting the verse so that we don't fall...

Fair point. But I am sure you would agree that the verse appears to announce a sufficient condition (as opposed to merely a necessary one) for God’s forgiveness of our offenses.

Well, it is my post, so I don't think it's being derailed. I'm simply suggesting that if Matt. 6:14 is true, then someone "who rejects Christ can enter heaven" by forgiving others because there is no such qualification found in the verse -- nor in its context.

Yup. But that fact doesn't exclude the possibility that a NON-Christian's righteousness can come about in another manner. Perhaps Matt. 6:14 is suggesting one.

I would say that God is Father of all, believers and unbelievers alike. (And he has many prodigal sons these days, sad to say . . .)

So, let's posit someone who hears of Christ and rejects coming to him -- but who nevertheless forgives everyone all of their transgressions, all his life. Doesn't Matt. 6:14 tell us that he will be forgiven his sins by God?

Yup. And maybe this helps answer stephen64's question above, about whether we should forgive others before or after they request it.

My vote is for "before," but I'm no expert on forgiving people. So, by answering "No" may I assume you are in the "Matt. 6:14 is literally untrue" camp?

Someone who never knows Jesus can forgive everyone who does him wrong, all his life. Are his sins forgiven or not?

And if we DO forgive others, what then?

In the Sermon on the Mount, right at the end of the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus is quoted as saying “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you” (Matt. 6:14). Taken literally, Matt. 6:14 is unconditional, absolute, in the form “If X, then Y,” i.e., if we...

I don't see the context as restricting the disciples' forgiveness of sins to sinners who already believe. Maybe you can identify that contextual limitation for us. Shifting from the forgiver to the forgivee for a moment -- Would you say the same about Matt. 6:14? Is forgiving others, without...