Why don't we all just face up to facts.
We all know perfectly well (from the vast number of 'thus says the Word of God' denominations) that the 'Bible' says different things to different people.
On my forum a member has just said (with reference to Christian Universal Reconciliation) that she has been labelled as 'CUR' yet has never read a thing about the subject from its 'Apologetics'......she simply believes what she believes.
And she didn't resort to a string of text proofing in order to support "what she simply believes".
Now that's 'faith' for you......"the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"......to which one could well include "not written" as being part of "things not seen". (oh dear, I've just resorted to text proofing.
)
Read the 'Bible' by all means, but if only we could desist from such constant text proofing of 'what we believe' from verses that mean different things to different people.
I doubt, after 65 years of Christian commitment, that many ppl have spent more time than myself immersed in the Bible.
Yet I have as much boldness as is consistent with the 'darkened glass' in proclaiming that I do not believe in OSAS, Eternal Torture of ppl in Hellfire, a literal interpretation of a six 24hr day creation, the flood, etc. without recourse to text proofing.
I join with our member in admitting with honesty that I simply believe what I believe.
In fact I will go so far as saying that all who believe one or the the other of the dual text proofed theological ambiguities (such as OSAS) also believe "what they simply believe" even if they won't recognise the fact.
Contentions like 'those that lose their salvation never had it in the first place' is nowt but a contradiction of terminological 'fudge' which results from a refusal to accept that the Bible says different things to different ppl.
God is not a God of confusion??...... (I've recently said so myself and shame upon me)
God most certainly is a God of confusion..... where he deems it necessary thus to be in order to prevent man from building towers of heavenward reaching theologically assertive dogma.
Biblical ambiguity is there by virtue of God's Divine intent.
We can do either of two things with it.
On the one hand we can use it to decimate the Body of Christ.
On the other hand we can use it to generate a spirit of circumspect Christian deference (I know of a forum that is based on that second alternative.... and that precludes membership of those who perpetuate the first.)
Mike.
We all know perfectly well (from the vast number of 'thus says the Word of God' denominations) that the 'Bible' says different things to different people.
On my forum a member has just said (with reference to Christian Universal Reconciliation) that she has been labelled as 'CUR' yet has never read a thing about the subject from its 'Apologetics'......she simply believes what she believes.
And she didn't resort to a string of text proofing in order to support "what she simply believes".
Now that's 'faith' for you......"the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"......to which one could well include "not written" as being part of "things not seen". (oh dear, I've just resorted to text proofing.
)Read the 'Bible' by all means, but if only we could desist from such constant text proofing of 'what we believe' from verses that mean different things to different people.
I doubt, after 65 years of Christian commitment, that many ppl have spent more time than myself immersed in the Bible.
Yet I have as much boldness as is consistent with the 'darkened glass' in proclaiming that I do not believe in OSAS, Eternal Torture of ppl in Hellfire, a literal interpretation of a six 24hr day creation, the flood, etc. without recourse to text proofing.
I join with our member in admitting with honesty that I simply believe what I believe.
In fact I will go so far as saying that all who believe one or the the other of the dual text proofed theological ambiguities (such as OSAS) also believe "what they simply believe" even if they won't recognise the fact.
Contentions like 'those that lose their salvation never had it in the first place' is nowt but a contradiction of terminological 'fudge' which results from a refusal to accept that the Bible says different things to different ppl.
God is not a God of confusion??...... (I've recently said so myself and shame upon me)
God most certainly is a God of confusion..... where he deems it necessary thus to be in order to prevent man from building towers of heavenward reaching theologically assertive dogma.
Biblical ambiguity is there by virtue of God's Divine intent.
We can do either of two things with it.
On the one hand we can use it to decimate the Body of Christ.
On the other hand we can use it to generate a spirit of circumspect Christian deference (I know of a forum that is based on that second alternative.... and that precludes membership of those who perpetuate the first.
)Mike.
