Maybe I'm not sure how uncertainty is being used here.
But I would argue awareness of the fact that there is always uncertainty makes one aware of the infinite.
A lack of the infinite means any god is finite, and therefore can be ultimately understood, and made unnecessary.
“Maybe I'm not sure how uncertainty is being used here” now that is really funny all by itself !
“But I would argue awareness of the fact that there is always uncertainty makes one aware of the infinite” and I think you have something there – maybe that’s why I lean toward a Christian agnosticism – I like to remain open-minded about things unknown since dare be a whole lotta dat out dare.
Aside from attributing the originality of it to different men, I would agree that the conditions (requirement, if you prefer) for salvation appear to be different at certain times or places in scripture, and forcing them (or trying to push them) all through the same mold simply doesn't work.
"The conditions for salvation appear to be different at certain times..."
This is really a roundabout way of saying "the contradictions are so glaring that the only way to resolve them is to assert that they are not talking to or about the same people."
Paul and Hebrews are talking about the same people. Jesus was talking about the same people they were talking about. You really need to design a Rube-Goldberg contraption out of the scripture to get them to pretend to be addressing different things.
Paul and Hebrews are talking about the same people. Jesus was talking about the same people they were talking about. You really need to design a Rube-Goldberg contraption out of the scripture to get them to pretend to be addressing different things.
No need to design any such contraptions, or pretend anything. However, what does need to be done (or understood) is the identification and recognition of the differences between them.
Jesus Christ was a minister to the circumcision. Period. (see Romans 15:8.)
Paul, on the other hand, spoke at a different time, under different circumstances, for a different purpose, and (aside from Hebrews) to a different people. (Romans 11:13.)
And as for the 12, exactly when or where is it presumed the commandment given them in Matthew 10:5 was ever rescinded and/or replaced? Or, perhaps more to the point, when did the 12 ever see it as being rescinded or replaced? Okay, I'm aware of the situation with Peter and the house of Cornelius... for which Peter was evidently "called out on the carpet for" by the others once he was back in Jerusalem. When was the next time any of them stepped inside the house of a Gentile (much less eat with any of these that were typically referred to as dogs)? Seems not again, at least up through to Acts 11:19, not like anytime again up through to the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, nor anytime after that, if they really meant what they said in Gal.2:9.
But, fail to see or make any distinction in who various passages are addressed (or refer) to... and yeah, seems it becomes impossible to make good sense out it.
None of this addresses that "Jesus" said one thing about salvation, Paul implied quite another and the writer of Hebrews a third. These people just flat out didn't agree with each other, and it's not because they were talking about changes in administrations or audiences. The distinction is in the writers, not the audience. The writers of the gospels did not agree with Paul. The Occam's razor approach to this adequately addresses the issue without creating an unnecessary framework of different audiences.
"Can you lose your salvation."
This is a yes or no question. "Depends on who 'you' are" is an interesting approach, but it's only necessary because different writers provided (what appear to be) different answers to a fairly straightforward question.
Shall we call it an impasse? Take the last word...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
24
5
4
13
Popular Days
Feb 8
11
Feb 25
5
Jul 7
4
Feb 6
3
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 24 posts
T-Bone 5 posts
waysider 4 posts
TLC 13 posts
Popular Days
Feb 8 2016
11 posts
Feb 25 2017
5 posts
Jul 7 2016
4 posts
Feb 6 2016
3 posts
Popular Posts
Allan
I guess that's why you eat, drink and are merry ??
Tom Geiger
You have given me a little more incentive to dig back into the OT now, so I won't comment re: soul in the OT until I do. But I will say that pumpkin pasties probably do exist. But maybe we are think
Raf
From Another STFI split I know that Vince Finnegan reached the same conclusion [that salvation could be lost] after I dropped out of his offshoot in the late 1990s. It seems to me that th
T-Bone
“Maybe I'm not sure how uncertainty is being used here” now that is really funny all by itself !
“But I would argue awareness of the fact that there is always uncertainty makes one aware of the infinite” and I think you have something there – maybe that’s why I lean toward a Christian agnosticism – I like to remain open-minded about things unknown since dare be a whole lotta dat out dare.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
"The conditions for salvation appear to be different at certain times..."
This is really a roundabout way of saying "the contradictions are so glaring that the only way to resolve them is to assert that they are not talking to or about the same people."
Paul and Hebrews are talking about the same people. Jesus was talking about the same people they were talking about. You really need to design a Rube-Goldberg contraption out of the scripture to get them to pretend to be addressing different things.
Again, my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TLC
No need to design any such contraptions, or pretend anything. However, what does need to be done (or understood) is the identification and recognition of the differences between them.
Jesus Christ was a minister to the circumcision. Period. (see Romans 15:8.)
Paul, on the other hand, spoke at a different time, under different circumstances, for a different purpose, and (aside from Hebrews) to a different people. (Romans 11:13.)
And as for the 12, exactly when or where is it presumed the commandment given them in Matthew 10:5 was ever rescinded and/or replaced? Or, perhaps more to the point, when did the 12 ever see it as being rescinded or replaced? Okay, I'm aware of the situation with Peter and the house of Cornelius... for which Peter was evidently "called out on the carpet for" by the others once he was back in Jerusalem. When was the next time any of them stepped inside the house of a Gentile (much less eat with any of these that were typically referred to as dogs)? Seems not again, at least up through to Acts 11:19, not like anytime again up through to the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, nor anytime after that, if they really meant what they said in Gal.2:9.
But, fail to see or make any distinction in who various passages are addressed (or refer) to... and yeah, seems it becomes impossible to make good sense out it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
None of this addresses that "Jesus" said one thing about salvation, Paul implied quite another and the writer of Hebrews a third. These people just flat out didn't agree with each other, and it's not because they were talking about changes in administrations or audiences. The distinction is in the writers, not the audience. The writers of the gospels did not agree with Paul. The Occam's razor approach to this adequately addresses the issue without creating an unnecessary framework of different audiences.
"Can you lose your salvation."
This is a yes or no question. "Depends on who 'you' are" is an interesting approach, but it's only necessary because different writers provided (what appear to be) different answers to a fairly straightforward question.
Shall we call it an impasse? Take the last word...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Maybe this is why Wowmobile bumper-stickers say "All Roads Lead to The Rock"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.