In Reference To CyBs Statement of Faith - Christian Forum

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

BjornFree

Member
Jun 25, 2010
65
7
8
89
North Norfolk, UK.
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
OzSpen said:
One does not make a determination 'for oneself' as to what is in the canon of Scripture. The church has already made that decision in the early centuries. Or, are you reading the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of the Hebrews, and the Gospel of the Laodiceans as equal with the books of the canon of the NT?

If 'for oneself' determines canonicity, it leads to anything goes. Why place any limit on the canon? Is that your view?
My view is that it was not God's intention that, centuries after 'Christ', post apostolic men should extend the OT scriptures to form a new Religious Text Book.
The New Covenant moves us up a rung from 'Religion' to 'Faith' and Paul battled hard and long to prevent a reversion (see "who hath bewitched you etc.) in his letter to the Galations.
My view is that ALL of the apostolic writings should have been separately preserved, and differently regarded.
I refer to them, and quote from them, with regularity.
 

BjornFree

Member
Jun 25, 2010
65
7
8
89
North Norfolk, UK.
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
OzSpen said:
Could you also be one of them?
That is consistent with your need to 'box and marginalise' me.
Being opposed to dogmatic theology places me at the opposite end of the spectrum to yourself (as distinct from being yet another "I am right and you are wrong" merchant).
Good heavens I even 'allow' for the possibility that the likes of you MIGHT be 'right'.
 
B

brakelite

Guest
Oneoff said:
Depends on what is meant by the use of the word "Hell".
Strictly speaking that particular word didn't exist at the time when the apostolic writings were penned.
It was originated by pagans in the middle ages, and only found its way into the bible when the King James' translators lazily applied it to each of the three completely different words 'Gehenna', 'Hades' and 'Tratarus. Young's Literal translation only uses each of the three proper words. But I agree with you in rejecting the common notion that there is a "hell" that comprises eternal torment in a 'Lake of Fire' intended only for such purpose for "the Devil, The Beast, and the False Prophet" (whoever they might be). Otherwise, in respect of mankind, the 'Lake of Fire' (according to Revelation) is merely the place where those who do not inherit eternal life simply perish (be no more) as per John 3:16. But there again it all depends on how you regard the book of Revelation in terms of literal meaning.
In agreement with the above.
 
B

brakelite

Guest
Oneoff said:
Being opposed to dogmatic theology.....
I can agree with this also. Creeds and councils have, and are, quite frequently become the worst enemies to truth, for both stifle objective Bible study, stifle growth, stifle learning, stifle growth, stifle new revelation, and inevitably lead to ...
1. Making the creed the basis for faith and practice
2. Making the creed the standard for fellowship.
3. Invoking penalties for dissenters.
4. And because such creeds fail in their intended work for the supposed salvation of souls, and God not giving them His support, secular powers are sought to invoke civil penalties and civil authority to bring the "heretics" into line.

The result being persecution. And it is always "Christian brother" against "Christian brother." Like Cain and Abel. Like Antichrist and they who keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus.
 
B

brakelite

Guest
OzSpen said:
brakelite,

I refute that view in Is hell fair? and the accompanying links at the conclusion of the article. The Greek language does not allow me to come to the conclusions which you endorse.

Oz
I read your post, and have read similar posts before. First, to use Bertrand Russel as an example of the opposite camp is somewhat misleading. There are a great many leading Bible scholars who reject eternal torment, such as N T Wright. Nor is it a good argument to claim the eternal torment is just, because God is just. If eternal torment is not what God has decreed as the punishment for the wicked, then to argue about the justice or injustice of it is irrelevant.

I have a challenge. Please read carefully the following, and then answer the concluding questions using Scripture only as the basis for your answers.

1 Peter 1:18,19 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot....
....2:24,25 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls....
.....3:18 ¶ For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.

1 Cor. 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures

In light of the above scriptures, and many more such besides,(Rom. 3:25,26. 5:8,9. 6:10. Colossians 1:20-22. Heb. 9:15,16,22.) my question is…..

When Jesus died upon the cross of Calvary, was this act a full and final settlement of the debt we owe due to our sin? In other words, has the full redemption price been paid, and what was that price?
Okay, that the full and final redemption price has been paid on behalf of a lost race would be disputed by few who know their Bibles. That Jesus paid the price, taking upon Himself the full punishment that was rightly due sinful man, is the great central theme of the gospel, in fact, all of scripture. It is called by many names. Redemption. Atonement. Salvation. Vicarius sacrifice. Propitiation. They all mean one and the same thing. That the just died for the unjust. The sinless for the sinner. Christ died in our place. The punishment and full penalty that belonged justly and rightly to us, was laid upon Christ. He died that we might live. Very few would dare to argue with this most profound and fundamental of Biblical truths. And there are scores of scriptures that verify and support this most wonderful doctrine.

Romans 3:25,26; 5:8,9; 6:10.
Colossians 1:20-22.
Hebrews 9:15,22.
1 Peter 1:18,19; 2:24; 3:18.
Revelation 5:9

These are but a small selection but enough to deduce the following basic principles inherent in the atonement.

1 Because death is the due and just penalty for sin (Rom. 6:23), death therefore was the redemptive price.
2 Jesus, through the shedding of His own blood and His vicarius death upon the cross, paid that price in full.
3 Those who for whatever reason reject the offer of forgiveness inherent in the atonement, and thus are not included in the number of the redeemed, must pay the price themselves.

If the above be true, I have a number of questions.

a Why is it that the majority of Christian churches today teach that men who die in their sins do not die, but live for all eternity being tortured in hell?
b If it be true that eternal torment is the just penalty for sin, then why did Jesus not pay it?
c If the reward for those who do accept the gospel is eternal life (John 3:16,36; Rom. 6:23) and no churches deny this, why do those same churches insist that the wicked also receive eternal life, which is denied by the very same scriptures?(John 3:16,36; Rom. 6:23)
d And finally, if eternal torment is the just penalty for sin as most contend, we must logically conclude that because Jesus did not pay that price, then the gospel is a sham and we all, both Christian and pagan alike, are doomed to spend eternity suffering together.
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Oneoff said:
My view is that it was not God's intention that, centuries after 'Christ', post apostolic men should extend the OT scriptures to form a new Religious Text Book.
The New Covenant moves us up a rung from 'Religion' to 'Faith' and Paul battled hard and long to prevent a reversion (see "who hath bewitched you etc.) in his letter to the Galations.
My view is that ALL of the apostolic writings should have been separately preserved, and differently regarded.
I refer to them, and quote from them, with regularity.
So is it OK with you that Christians should be reading, imbibing and treating as sacred writings, the Gospel of Peter which states:
And so those soldiers, having seen, awakened the centurion and the elders (for they too were present, safeguarding). [39] And while they were relating what they had seen, again they see three males who have come out from they sepulcher, with the two supporting the other one, and a cross following them, [40] and the head of the two reaching unto heaven, but that of the one being led out by a hand by them going beyond the heavens. [41] And they were hearing a voice from the heavens saying, 'Have you made proclamation to the fallen-asleep?' [42] And an obeisance was heard from the cross, 'Yes.' [43]
So a talking cross is suitable for you as the norm for biblical Christianity?

Oz
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia

BjornFree

Member
Jun 25, 2010
65
7
8
89
North Norfolk, UK.
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
OzSpen said:
So is it OK with you that Christians should be reading, imbibing and treating as sacred writings, the Gospel of Peter which states:
"And so those soldiers, having seen, awakened the centurion and the elders (for they too were present, safeguarding). [39] And while they were relating what they had seen, again they see three males who have come out from they sepulcher, with the two supporting the other one, and a cross following them, [40] and the head of the two reaching unto heaven, but that of the one being led out by a hand by them going beyond the heavens. [41] And they were hearing a voice from the heavens saying, 'Have you made proclamation to the fallen-asleep?' [42] And an obeisance was heard from the cross, 'Yes.' [43]
A darned sight more palatable than the following, which doubtless you endorse.

"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; and he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
And Lot pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, and said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known a man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing."
 
B

brakelite

Guest
OzSpen said:
Because N T Wright believes something doesn't make it biblical. See 'N T Wright on Rob Bell and the Reality of Hell'. N T Wright supports in women in ministry. Do you support his view?
OzSpen said:
Because N T Wright believes something doesn't make it biblical. See 'N T Wright on Rob Bell and the Reality of Hell'. N T Wright supports in women in ministry. Do you support his view?
If you only accept that which comes from people who have everything correct, then what are you doing in a forum such as this where no-one,myself, and you included, do not have everything right? Clearly, because you don't accept anything from anyone who may be wrong in other things, why are we having this conversation? I admit, I do not have everything correct,(who does?) so I am wasting my time believing you may be giving me a fair hearing. Yet ironically you used Bertrand Russel's objection of all people as a support for your contention that God torments people forever. 'Sigh'.
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
The only one who has teh truth is Christ, whose council so many refuse. who would rather lean on there own understaing of teh "scriptures", even teh Koran itself can be considered :scripture", than they rebuke those whom do as Christ said" My sheep hear my voice", and say "we hear voices in our heads", well i wonder which part of there anatomony God speaks to. I suppose according to them, the prophets must of being crazy " for they too heard voices in their heads". How do you think God speaks to man..." teh still small voice".
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Oneoff said:
A darned sight more palatable than the following, which doubtless you endorse.

"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; and he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.
And Lot pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.
But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.
And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, and said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.
Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known a man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing."
Your response demonstrates you can't discern the difference between the fantasy of the Gospel of Peter and the sinful reality that is expressed in Genesis 19.
 

OzSpen

Well-Known Member
Mar 30, 2015
3,728
795
113
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
spencer.gear.dyndns.org
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
brakelite said:
If you only accept that which comes from people who have everything correct, then what are you doing in a forum such as this where no-one,myself, and you included, do not have everything right? Clearly, because you don't accept anything from anyone who may be wrong in other things, why are we having this conversation? I admit, I do not have everything correct,(who does?) so I am wasting my time believing you may be giving me a fair hearing. Yet ironically you used Bertrand Russel's objection of all people as a support for your contention that God torments people forever. 'Sigh'.
In your response, you have not addressed what I wrote: 'Because N T Wright believes something doesn't make it biblical. See 'N T Wright on Rob Bell and the Reality of Hell'. N T Wright supports in women in ministry. Do you support his view?'.

Thus, you have committed a red herring logical fallacy. See: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
mjrhealth said:
The only one who has teh truth is Christ, whose council so many refuse. who would rather lean on there own understaing of teh "scriptures", even teh Koran itself can be considered :scripture", than they rebuke those whom do as Christ said" My sheep hear my voice", and say "we hear voices in our heads", well i wonder which part of there anatomony God speaks to. I suppose according to them, the prophets must of being crazy " for they too heard voices in their heads". How do you think God speaks to man..." teh still small voice".
What still Small Voice are you referring to?
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
What still Small Voice are you referring to?
1Ki_19:12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

Would have though you would have known that one.

1Ki 19:13 And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?

And that is why His heep hear His voice and strangers voice they do not know and will not follow.

or as God put it,

Luk_9:35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.

Why are people so afraid of listening to God voice??? is it becuase they are afraid of what men might think, now that is a problem.
 

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,597
6,855
113
Faith
Christian
I would like to add something to the current discussion but we are straying far from the OP.
 

StanJ

Lifelong student of God's Word.
May 13, 2014
4,798
111
63
70
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
mjrhealth said:
1Ki_19:12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

Would have though you would have known that one.

1Ki 19:13 And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?

And that is why His heep hear His voice and strangers voice they do not know and will not follow.

or as God put it,

Luk_9:35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.

Why are people so afraid of listening to God voice??? is it becuase they are afraid of what men might think, now that is a problem.
Your problems mjr, is that you don't study the Bible you study the KJV and as such you make erroneous conclusions based on erroneous translations. The Hebrew doesn't say still small voice. It says a gentle whisper or calming breeze in 1 Kings 19:12, and it was unique to Elijah.
Nobody is afraid to listen to God's voice, but we should all be wary about people who purport to hear God's voice and yet don't think anyone else can. God's voice is not for our personal use to admonish others, God's voice is from His written word for our personal use to admonish ourselves. John the Baptist is long gone and there is nobody else being called to fulfill that kind of role or any kind of role that has someone calling out of the wilderness. Jesus's work was completed when he was here. There is nothing that God will reveal to man today that has anything to add to that work. The only ones today yelling in the wilderness and trying to force others to listen to God's voice are false prophets.
John 20:30-31
Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
 

BjornFree

Member
Jun 25, 2010
65
7
8
89
North Norfolk, UK.
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
brakelite said:
If you only accept that which comes from people who have everything correct, then what are you doing in a forum such as this where no-one,myself, and you included, do not have everything right? Clearly, because you don't accept anything from anyone who may be wrong in other things, why are we having this conversation? I admit, I do not have everything correct,(who does?) so I am wasting my time believing you may be giving me a fair hearing. Yet ironically you used Bertrand Russel's objection of all people as a support for your contention that God torments people forever. 'Sigh'.
Many thanks Brendan,
To varying degrees we are almost all in desperate need of the reminder that we all are fallible mortals, seeing but "as through a glass darkly" in respect of our perception of the 'things of God' (but you wouldn't think so from the posts by our worst examples).
 

BjornFree

Member
Jun 25, 2010
65
7
8
89
North Norfolk, UK.
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
StanJ said:
I have been actually thinking that for a few days now.
For members such as myself, who do not accept the infallibility of any post apostolic, man made, Creeds/Statements of Faith, the refutation of such conviction puts our posts very much 'on topic'.