Are Your Beliefs Absolute Truths?

[bbyrd009]

Is the reletive or objective truth?

"objective truth" is just another name for "absolute truth," iow what they say they are seeking in a courtroom.
but any lawyer can tell you what place "truth" has in a courtroom, right.

but most notably the law came and then was abolished.

the law has not been abolished, FHII; we have been freed from the law of sin and death. When the NT was written one could get caught in a lie, and the punishment was stoning, death. For telling a lie.

But the covenant of grace wouldn't work in the age of law.

yet we have several examples where it worked just fine, i guess

Nor does the law work in the age of grace.

? the law works great, why do you say this? The law establishes minimums that are insufficient to those operating in grace, who should have higher laws that supercede them, sure, but there is no law says ppl have to believe in grace or God, and for either one of these the law establishes a line that we can all agree is sinful to cross; the law establishes sin, what is a sin iow.

 

[bbyrd009]

Indeed. Praise Jesus Christ, Lord above all lords, King above all kings, name above all names, the one and only true God. Jesus Christ is 100% truth

@bbyrd009 In PJ's defence, If you were to ask the Holy Spirit, you would find out PJ is a true born again, spirit-filled Christian, full of the Holy Spirit and believes in the Word of God. I have sensed this in the Holy Spirit, ever since PJ joined.

ha not disagreeing, but that does not mean he gets to define Absolute Truth.
i posed questions to him that he is free to keep ignoring, too, i don't mind

 

[bbyrd009]

With the light and understanding that we have

ah, here it is.

So, who is this "we?" As soon as you join a "we" (camp) you put yourself at odds with whoever the "they" that is implied.
So iow we seek peers to verify our beliefs, so that "we" can then call them Absolute Truths without anyone objecting too much, essentially.
Come out of her my people
leave the camp
etc

see, none of them "we's" is gonna be with you come judgement time; "but the pope said" is not going to cut it, etc.
"We" is going to let you down iow. "We" is a wolf pack

 

[LC627]

ah, here it is.

So, who is this "we?" As soon as you join a "we" (camp) you put yourself at odds with whoever the "they" that is implied.
So iow we seek peers to verify our beliefs, so that "we" can then call them Absolute Truths without anyone objecting too much, essentially.
Come out of her my people
leave the camp
etc

see, none of them "we's" is gonna be with you come judgement time; "but the pope said" is not going to cut it, etc.
"We" is going to let you down iow. "We" is a wolf pack

By "we" I mean believers in Christ (body of Christ - church) As Christians serving God. Each individual believer must search the scriptures and rely on the Holy Spirit to guide them. And to be honest, philosophy type discussions seem to be a waste of time. I was glad when my one and only philosophy class at college was finished. The Bible is Absolute Truth and "we" as Christians must search the scriptures for ourselves and rely on the Holy Spirit to direct us. That's it.

 

[bbyrd009]

The Bible is Absolute Truth

so you say, but wouldn't that be the "Book of Truth," in that case?

 

[bbyrd009]

The Bible is Absolute Truth and "we" as Christians must search the scriptures for ourselves and rely on the Holy Spirit to direct us. That's it.

so, the Book is AT, yet "we" as Christians cannot even come together on what a proper ritual baptism is, see.

So if you would state some other "Absolute Truth" from the Book, and we will test your theory.

bc IRL i could make a pretty good case--strictly from the statements made on this thread by other "we's"--that we as Christians do pretty much the opposite of what you are implying.

in fact, we most often do not verify AT for ourselves, but have no probs telling others what AT is, regardless of whether it agrees with the definition of it or not, see.

And to be honest, philosophy type discussions seem to be a waste of time. I was glad when my one and only philosophy class at college was finished. The Bible is Absolute Truth

philosophy, who is talking philosophy here, see, philosophy didn't get introduced until you said "the Bible is Absolute Truth."

 

[bbyrd009]

"we" as Christians

...by definition exclude anyone who does not ID as Christian, for instance.
so right away it is only someone who IDs as a Christian that can even be considered as a "we."
everyone else is a 'they' right. And we aren't too sure about ________, whoever, JWs, Mormons, Catholics, insert your own qualifiers.

 

[FHII]

"objective truth" is just another name for "absolute truth," iow what they say they are seeking in a courtroom.

Ok, thanks. I saw the term on this thread and didn't know what it meant...

yet we have several examples where it worked just fine, i gues

I did mention that... I talked about Hebrews 11. In that chapter the author list several under the law who acted in faith.

As for the law... Its not the topic of this thread; I was using it as an example. Therefore I don't want the discussion to turn in that direction.

 

[bbyrd009]

As for the law... Its not the topic of this thread

hopefully it becomes apparent that a law would suffice just fine for any AT that anyone can name.

another way to put that is that if one perceives an AT, then they also believe that a Law would or should be made to encompass it, and whether they might agree with this statement or not they nonetheless have no probs telling you when you might be "wrong."

So they make a Law--even if they might not want to admit as much--that will not be sufficient, as anyone who has for instance read a "baptism" thread can witness. You usually get 2, 3 ppl in one all arguing for their version of AT, no one changing anyone's mind, right, ever, bc they all hold their "beliefs" as "absolute truths," and what they are really doing is attempting to reiterate or enforce a law

 

[Josho]

@bbyrd009 I know you are just playing mind games with some around here, but if you fear God some of the statements you're making are absolutely dangerous

 

[bbyrd009]

@bbyrd009 I know you are just playing mind games with some around here, but if you fear God some of the statements you're making are absolutely dangerous

really, no mind games, at least not from me. I know that my beliefs are not AT.
Now regardless of whether i fear God or not, the statements i am making are either dangerous or not on their own.
So bam quote one and we'll see i guess, bc wadr "you have the same authority as the pope" might be considered absolutely dangerous to some ppl here.
@LC627 don't be shy either k, i won't get offended

 

[FHII]

@bbyrd009 I just wish you'd stop using so many acronyms. I had to read your post 4 times before figuring out what AT was. I was reading it as "at" and was pretty confused!

 

[bbyrd009]

@bbyrd009 I just wish you'd stop using so many acronyms. I had to read your post 4 times before figuring out what AT was. I was reading it as "at" and was pretty confused!

ah, my apologies. i've gotten into a bad habit there i guess

 

[Philip James]

We don't fear the Fire, for our God is a consuming Fire

Amen to that sister!

Thanks be to God, that we have such a merciful Judge, who will purge us with the fire of His love!

May He bless and keep you!

Peace

 

[Philip James]

So if/when you are prepared to admit that you have as much authority as the pope, then we can debate more ok.

Tempting.. isn't it? To say that 'we all of us are holy, a royal priesthood.. Prophets , priests and kings'

'who then are Francis and James' that they should Lord it over me...?

Rebellion is never the answer

 

[Josho]

really, no mind games, at least not from me. I know that my beliefs are not AT.
Now regardless of whether i fear God or not, the statements i am making are either dangerous or not on their own.
So bam quote one and we'll see i guess, bc wadr "you have the same authority as the pope" might be considered absolutely dangerous to some ppl here.
@LC627 don't be shy either k, i won't get offended

Whatever..... in post 11 you basically just denied Jesus with the 1st few words, and on about every other post in this thread you have been judgemental on other Christian members beliefs in Jesus, and those aren't clean tactics to use in questioning others about their faith in Jesus, some atheists use those tactics against Christians. If you are telling others that they aren't with Jesus or for Jesus, when they really have Jesus in their life, are born again and baptised in the Holy Spirit and then going ahead to question these Christian members like an atheist trying to separate them from Jesus with using deception, you may be in a bit of trouble.

It's time someone stood up for the other Christian voices on these forums.

And you gotta make the decision are you going to be a wolf in sheep's clothing or become a sheep in the pure shining truth of Jesus, I hope you put some consideration into this, it ain't too late to change. But be careful man.... You have been warned, it's time you started fearing God and respecting Him more often, it's time you started respecting the power of the Holy Spirit more often, it's time like never before for believers to stay strong in their belief of Jesus, to grow close to Jesus, and live in the 100% accurate truth of Jesus, do not try to bend that out of others, do not preach deception when you know the truth, there are spiritual consequences.

Josho
in Christ Jesus

And the last part of this post was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and I am on fire for the Holy Spirit right now as this post comes to a conclusion, the power is flowing through me.

Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Hallelujah, praise Jesus the one and only true God. Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Praise Jesus for the Holy Spirit, Woohoooo!! Jesus is Lord, He is mighty, great and wonderful, Glory to God.

 

[bbyrd009]

Tempting.. isn't it? To say that 'we all of us are holy, a royal priesthood.. Prophets , priests and kings'

'who then are Francis and James' that they should Lord it over me...?

Rebellion is never the answer

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession, so that you may proclaim the praises of the One who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

listen to them, and give them a king

so, bc i don't recognize an earthly mediator i am judged a rebel of some sort, i can live with that.
if i have wronged anyone let them speak now

 

[bbyrd009]

Whatever..... in post 11 you basically just denied Jesus with the 1st few words

Post #11...

no, that is not an Absolute Truth, sorry. We won't even get into the fact that Jesus cannot be Quoted saying that; in fact He deems Himself "Son of Man" right, so you're basically Arguing with Jesus i guess. Plus we won't even get into Him giving His glory to us...

see, all kinds of valid argument keeping your AT a belief, regardless of whether i happen to believe the same or not

that is what you want to believe, but that does not make it truth wadr. That is why we call them "beliefs." You are just using another common assumption to assert your belief as AT; "even if i didn't believe it, it would still be true" is not an argument, see, it is a justification

you would have to point out how, sorry. My point here is that if you hold the beliefs you have right now as AT, then when some real truth comes along what will you label that? You won't, bc you won't even be able to see it, imo, bc it is going to challenge what you are already convinced is AT.

and on about every other post in this thread you have been judgemental on other Christian members beliefs in Jesus, and those aren't clean tactics to use in questioning others about their faith in Jesus, some atheists use those tactics against Christians. If you are telling others that they aren't with Jesus or for Jesus, when they really have Jesus in their life, are born again and baptised in the Holy Spirit and then going ahead to question these Christian members like an atheist trying to separate them from Jesus with using deception, you may be in a bit of trouble.

you say i am being judgemental about others' beliefs, when what i am trying to do is encourage belief, over determinism.

Because something is seriously wrong with a system that must redefine "beliefs" as "absolute truths," and this should be self-evident imo Josho.

now i can admit that i've been playing a little trick--we are using a secular definition of AT after all--but it is for a good purpose.
By all means be convicted of your beliefs, ok, but this also means being willing to change your beliefs when you find that you are not convicted of them. And you cannot change beliefs that are defined as Absolute Truths, that would be an oxymoron right?

so yes i am def hoping to instill some doubt here about ppls beliefs in Jesus that are not AT, so that conviction might be found ok.

 

[bbyrd009]

to put this another way, you cannot break up Nehushtan if you believe him to be your god

 

[Philip James]

But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession, so that you may proclaim the praises of the One who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

listen to them, and give them a king

so, bc i don't recognize an earthly mediator i am judged a rebel of some sort, i can live with that.
if i have wronged anyone let them speak now

Was i judging you a rebel?
No, i was saying that for me to claim the authority of the pope (Francis) or my bishop (James) would make me a rebel..

What do you think Jude is talking about when he warns of falling into the rebellion of Korah?

Woe to them! They followed the way of Cain, abandoned themselves to Balaam's error for the sake of gain, and perished in the rebellion of Korah