Leaderboard

Right. No need to apologize (to me anyway). No I don't presume to know what God thinks. That includes what he thinks about all the people who don't keep the Sabbath on Saturday but do instead on Sunday. I understand that there's a lot of paradox in Christian scriptures and that it is presumptuous of us to judge based on our limited understanding of the complexities of those paradoxes.

Why are you apparently so intent on judging them? Do you know what's in their hearts?

I apologise if i have offended you. I am apologising because the bible says that if your bro/sis has been offended- go and make peace first I didnt mean to offend you as I have explained- you have totally, totally misread and misunderstood me Dont know if you read my earlier reply Regards Waxit

You might ask if God ever changed his mind about this - because originally when the Israelite nation was founded, it was itself supposed to be a beacon of God's love, to show the nations and thus draw all peoples from all nations to Him. And this group of people was only chosen because God's pre-Israelite plan for all to know Him had failed due to people's egocentricity and hardheartedness. Genesis 11: 1Now the whole world had one language and a common form of speech. 2And as people journeyed eastward,a they found a plain in the land of Shinarb and settled there. 3And they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” So they used brick instead of stone, and tar instead of mortar. 4“Come,” they said, “let us build for ourselves a city with a tower that reaches to the heavens, that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of all the earth.” 5Then the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the sons of men were building. 6And the LORD said, “If they have begun to do this as one people speaking the same language, then nothing they devise will be beyond them. 7Come, let Us go down and confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.” 8So the LORD scattered them from there over the face of all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9That is why it is called Babel,c for there the LORD confused the language of the whole world, and from that place the LORD scattered them over the face of all the earth. God's plan had been for all to know him, as in the beginning with Adam and Eve. But people's egos got in the way, right from the beginning, and going forward even to today. You could say, He changed his mind and scattered the tower-builders (and thus, the nations); then (maybe) changed His mind back (Plan C, D, or whatever) - resumed the original plan - when establishing Israel. But Israel was itself only a "temporary measure" because God's plan (1 Tim 2:4) has always been for "all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."

It’s possible “the scripture cannot be broken” in John 10:35 refers to something other than inerrancy...Barnes’ notes on the Bible says of that phrase - the authority of scripture is final - it cannot be set aside...it appears Jesus was defending himself against the charge of blasphemy by appealing to the Old Testament - Psalm 82:6... look at other places where “broken” is used in reference to breaking the law of scripture : John 5:18 - “not only was he breaking the Sabbath “ and John 7:23 “circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken”...it I could be wrong but I take the phrase to mean something similar to how we view our country’s laws...no one is above the law - it is the final authority- no one can set it aside...can laws be broken ? Yes people do it all the time. Sorry for this aside on another interpretation of “scripture cannot be broken” that does not equate it with inerrancy - but like a lot of other interesting points on this thread, maybe it warrants a whole new thread... == == == now getting back to the topic - I would like to ask a few questions - which have been stated earlier by others as well: What is the biblical definition of “salvation “? What does it mean for the Christian? How does one know whether or not they are saved? Is salvation something that can be lost?

Dispensationalism is a rationalization. It's a way of explaining away the very real contradictions that exist in the scriptures. It's a way of deluding yourself into believing the scriptures are inerrant.

In sorting through this salvation topic (permanent/not) - it seems like one thing missing is a "glossary of terms" of sorts. I think the dictor in his "research" liberally misapplied the mathematical transitive property of equality to several things which are most likely quite different in reality and definitely nuanced in terminology in scripture. Born again Born from above Saved ... Defining all terms to the point where we all agree with everything is a tall order. However, defining these terms probably is going to be a barrier before we can proceed much further along this topic we are discussing IMO. What other phrases belong in this glossary? Any start to definitions? What commentaries or materials cover this? Thoughts?

Most modern scholars believe the first gospel written was Mark and that it was written in about 70 CE. Paul's death is placed at 64 CE. Obviously, he would have written the epistles before the date of his death.

I would have thought it was to have the life of Jesus presented before the life of Paul, since that was the actual sequence.

That is a really great catch - I didn't see it. Thank you!

And i really appreciate you for your perspective. Its cool for us to have different perspectives on a topic. We are covering so many aspects of salvation that it would behoove us to not derail salvation being lost or not. Ive spent a decade unraveling twi in my own heart that nothing is off limits for me to discuss and enjoy various points of view. I enjoy the process and find myself appreciating others to a greater degree, even if i disagree, or am disagreed with. Cheers!

Wow. You're equating yourself with Jesus Christ? That is seriously arrogant.

I personally believe that God as my Father is just enough to cover scenarios like unbelievers living a better life morally than professing Christians along with the ability to sort things out. This section of Corinthians is a major part of that. For better or for worse, what actually is supposed to occur in the end times is not something that is clearly revealed in scripture. It is something where like so many other "word studies" we did, you find a verse in jeremiah, piece it together with Ephesians, lace in a concept in Revelation, and presto you have a faith that explains the future. Thus we come up with certain verses in Revelation that are supposed to be an Abrams tank, a helicopter, and several other known things in our day and age according to some. I think mostly in the Way we have a "Strong's concordance faith" or a "Bible software faith" - one that is built upon stringing endless series of unrelated verses together to come up with a Sunday teaching, philosophy, or moral outlook in life.

This thread was spawned from another based on a discussion of Dan's paper, which brings up his point that salvation isn't an absolute guarantee. So, that's really what this topic is about. No one has called Dan's paper a standard of anything. Actually, I find this "exegetical commentary" very interesting, and obviously you have high regard for it. But for me it didn't clarify anything. And I'm guessing by the highlighted words from you that you have not actually read Dan's paper. You don't have to yell. To me, it only means the seed is incorruptible. It may mean more than that, but I don't actually know that for sure. And I have no idea why God would choose that analogy. Do you? And I don't appreciate your sarcasm.

Sorry, that's NOT an underlying issue, it's a potential ramification. But can't anything be twisted to ultimately and exclusively result in oppressive cults? I don't think there's a way to prevent that from happening.

Actually, it did, by way if implication. VPW led the students into drawing an unspoken conclusion and then said, "I didn't say it, you did.". It's a backhanded way of making a statement... the "nudge, nudge- wink, wink" approach. This tied in nicely with the appeal of speaking in tongues. "It's proof in the senses realm, etc."

I didn't, and that's why I am still looking at this topic, why it is still a question in my mind. It may have been settled for you, but it isn't settled for me.

You are probably right waysider. I would be more into the music than burning wooden art work.

FreeAtLast--------Yes, I have heard some pretty wild first-hand accounts of Burning Man. I think SXSW(South By Southwest) in Austin might be more to your liking. Hundreds of bands come together to show off their "wares" for music industry reps. The reps, of course, are there looking for fresh "product". There is also a very large film component to the event. I think it lasts about a week. OK-------back to ROA now.