The Blended Gospel

[FHII]

This coming from the person who could not articulate their own theory AND couldn't even quote me on what I allegedly said?

Hmmmm..... :wub:

Yea sure... If it makes you feel better.

 

[kerwin]

If one is set free from a single sin they can no longer sin? An interesting and dangerous theory that is not based on scripture.

Theory: an idea that is suggested or presented as possibly true but that is not known or proven to be true


Inductive reasoning: reasoning in which the premises are viewed as supplying strong evidence for the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based upon the evidence given.

The evidence YOU gave supports YOUR theory. You did not give all the evidence and if you were to give all the evidence it would destroy your theory.

It would be like me saying that Peter was in fact satan and that I can prove it with scripture: But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's."

Someone that does not know scripture would agree with my above statement based on those few words in Scripture. You have done the same thing. Taken a few words from scripture to support your theory and ignored the evidence that destroys your theory.

A conclusion of an inductive argument is never an opinion as it either appears true of false. There is the possibility the appear is deceptive thus individuals sometime look for evidence that contradicts the conclusion or proves one or all or all of the premises unsound. The later solution is better while the earlier introduces merely a possibility of one or more premises being unsound.

That is a poor definition of theory; at least as far as scientists use the word. According them theory is a hypothesis that has been tested repeatedly and has not been proved false. It is often assumed to be fact until proved otherwise.

The definition you cite sounds like the definition of an opinion and theory is only loosely used as a synonym of opinion.

A satan was in Peter working through the desires of his fallen human nature. 1 King 22:22 reveals a satan (spirit) doing the same to a number of false prophets. Jesus saw it by Peter's fruit but and sadly Peter did not until Jesus rebuked him. Jesus was also saying no to temptation at the same time since the satan was using Peter to tempt him to do evil. It is not the first the person to speak to the demon that was influencing their actions.

 

[kerwin]

Every Christian tradition disagrees with you because Scripture disagrees with you. That should your first clue to you that you are wrong when "just about every Christian tradition disagrees" with you.

I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought.
....

Christian tradition disagree with me because Christianity has evolved from heretic traditions. It also influence from Gnosticism, Emperor cult and a whole lot of other influences.

Its teachers then take their teachings and force them into Scripture. It is fairly common behavior for humans to do such things as judges and lawyers are well known to do it with human laws as well. Scientists also do it with observed facts. I am sure you can find other fields if human endeavor where it is done as well.

Once again I will point out that I used 1) inductive reasoning and 2) a literal interpretation of Jesus' words.

John teaches us that Jesus said those who love evil will not come out into the light. (John 3:19-20)

Such people do not want to believe that Jesus will set them truly free from being a servant (slave) to sin because it would either deny them of the evil they love or of the hope of age-long life and so they invent another way into the sheep fold; a way will not succeed. In this many will try to enter the narrow gate but few will succeed. (Luke 13:24).

 

[kerwin]

...

Another hole in your theory is what if I was raised a Christian from birth and have been a believer of Jesus since I could speak? Does that mean I can never sin since I have been a believer all my life?

I look forward to your response!

As I pointed out it is not a theory but rather an argument.

Neither your personal practices nor convictions bear upon whether the argument I made is true and you should know that as many have believed they are Christians from the youth and yet the RCC disagrees with them to some degree.

On the other hand it depends on what you mean by the word "Christian" and "believer" since there is conclusive evidence that the prophets of old were believers and Christians even thought the gospel would not be preached until Jesus' mortality. It is obedience to the gospel the sets one free from slavery to sin. Even then the gospel Jesus preached was speaking of the coming of the new covenant and did not fully apply until the later was in force.

In short just searching for the truth makes you a believer and a Christian if you persevere in striving hard to do all you are taught and do not continue to reject any teaching you learn that you have the power to follow. The gospel after all is a gift to those that believe.

 

[tom55]

As I pointed out it is not a theory but rather an argument.

Neither your personal practices nor convictions bear upon whether the argument I made is true and you should know that as many have believed they are Christians from the youth and yet the RCC disagrees with them to some degree.

On the other hand it depends on what you mean by the word "Christian" and "believer" since there is conclusive evidence that the prophets of old were believers and Christians even thought the gospel would not be preached until Jesus' mortality. It is obedience to the gospel the sets one free from slavery to sin. Even then the gospel Jesus preached was speaking of the coming of the new covenant and did not fully apply until the later was in force.

In short just searching for the truth makes you a believer and a Christian if you persevere in striving hard to do all you are taught and do not continue to reject any teaching you learn that you have the power to follow. The gospel after all is a gift to those that believe.

I am "searching for the truth". I believe I have found that truth in the RCC. I have also strived hard to do all that the RCC has taught me and I have not rejected any of the teachings that I have learned and have the power to follow. Am I a Christian?

There are others who are "searching for the truth". They believe they have found that truth in the Mormon Church. We can presume they have also strived hard like you and I have to do all that the Mormon Church has taught them. We can presume they have not rejected any of the teachings that they have learned and have the power to follow. Are they Christian also?

 

[tom55]

Christian tradition disagree with me because Christianity has evolved from heretic traditions. It also influence from Gnosticism, Emperor cult and a whole lot of other influences.

Its teachers then take their teachings and force them into Scripture. It is fairly common behavior for humans to do such things as judges and lawyers are well known to do it with human laws as well. Scientists also do it with observed facts. I am sure you can find other fields if human endeavor where it is done as well.

Once again I will point out that I used 1) inductive reasoning and 2) a literal interpretation of Jesus' words.

John teaches us that Jesus said those who love evil will not come out into the light. (John 3:19-20)

Such people do not want to believe that Jesus will set them truly free from being a servant (slave) to sin because it would either deny them of the evil they love or of the hope of age-long life and so they invent another way into the sheep fold; a way will not succeed. In this many will try to enter the narrow gate but few will succeed. (Luke 13:24).

I get it now. YOU got it right...everybody else got it wrong. opcorn:

Thank you for your time....Respectfully...Tom

 

[tom55]

A conclusion of an inductive argument is never an opinion as it either appears true of false. There is the possibility the appear is deceptive thus individuals sometime look for evidence that contradicts the conclusion or proves one or all or all of the premises unsound. The later solution is better while the earlier introduces merely a possibility of one or more premises being unsound.

That is a poor definition of theory; at least as far as scientists use the word. According them theory is a hypothesis that has been tested repeatedly and has not been proved false. It is often assumed to be fact until proved otherwise.

The definition you cite sounds like the definition of an opinion and theory is only loosely used as a synonym of opinion.

A satan was in Peter working through the desires of his fallen human nature. 1 King 22:22 reveals a satan (spirit) doing the same to a number of false prophets. Jesus saw it by Peter's fruit but and sadly Peter did not until Jesus rebuked him. Jesus was also saying no to temptation at the same time since the satan was using Peter to tempt him to do evil. It is not the first the person to speak to the demon that was influencing their actions.

That definition is cut and pasted from the Merriam-Webster dictionary. Take your disagreement up with them.

We are not "scientists" so the definition I gave does define exactly what we are talking about: An Idea
I don't understand the rest of your post so I can't respond to it.

 

[kerwin]

I get it now. YOU got it right...everybody else got it wrong. opcorn:

Thank you for your time....Respectfully...Tom

That is not what I claimed. Instead I claim that there are many that try get it wrong and few that get it right.

In this case the few seem to be a remnant of a remnant of human beings but hopefully I am wrong. I will keep looking.

 

[tom55]

That is not what I claimed. Instead I claim that there are many that try get it wrong and few that get it right.

In this case the few seem to be a remnant of a remnant of human beings but hopefully I am wrong. I will keep looking.

If you know that "MANY.... get it wrong" and there are only a "few that get it right" then thru deductive reasoning you must KNOW who is right and who is wrong. Therefor my statement is factual and that is what you are claiming:

YOU got it right...everybody else got it wrong.

Why can't you stand by your own statements? (lack of confidence in them?)

 

[kerwin]

If you know that "MANY.... get it wrong" and there are only a "few that get it right" then thru deductive reasoning you must KNOW who is right and who is wrong. Therefor my statement is factual and that is what you are claiming:

YOU got it right...everybody else got it wrong.

Why can't you stand by your own statements? (lack of confidence in them?)

It is a lot easier to determine when someone gets it wrong that who gets it right because there are those that get can so wrong that is obvious to even the less knowledgeable.

Determining who gets it right depends on listening to the Spirit and not to the flesh. I still listen to the flesh at times and so stumble.