The Son of God:

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

"

Kamchatka wrote:

Again, start in Matthew, plenty of stuff their to disprove the faith alone doctrine. Romans was not written in isolation, it fits with the rest of the Bible.

*on a historical note, reading Romans in isolation is partly what led Martin Luther to create the faith alone doctrine.

I've noticed you like to do this passive aggressive method of telling me to read the Bible, yet you quote nothing yourself from the scriptures.

Perhaps you want to look into Matthews 25:31-46 which could easily be confused for good works being required for salvation. Here's a nice study on that specific section: https://faithalone.org/magazine/y1988/88march1.html.

Kleronomia: it is given to all believers of Christ. Look it up. :-) It's eternal. From the first translation of the Bible (Greek).


"For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us" - Galatians 3:10-13

A proper study of Salvation according to the Bible requires taking note, in context, of every passage concerning salvation, judgement, statements on going to heaven/hell, forgiveness/repentance ect. After you do that, you need to take every old testament passage referenced (that happens alot) in these new testament passages, again in context.

After you compile all of this information you then need to study it, pray about it, and keep studying, praying, and then finally see how it all fits together. I cannot put that much information in a post.

And since I already stated that connecting a few passages together to create theology is poor theology, I am not going to do that, I assume you are trying to trick me here.

*I will note, to help you out: you really need context on much of Paul's writings. Many of Paul's letters were specific to certain problems (like the Christian Jews trying to force old law on gentiles) and you HAVE to know the context to truly understand them.

"

Kamchatka wrote:

After you do that, you need to take every old testament passage referenced (that happens alot) in these new testament passages, again in context.

No, the New Testament stands on its own. The Old Testament reaffirms everything that comes true in the New Testament, but the two are not dependent upon each other. The "Law" as it was before the books in the New Testament were written, as it is with Judaism, was mentioned in the last bit of scripture I quoted from Galatians.

"

Kamchatka wrote:

And since I already stated that connecting a few passages together to create theology is poor theology, I am not going to do that, I assume you are trying to trick me here.

No trick intended, honestly. I'm just disappointed, but not surprised, that you can't quote scripture to back up the assumption that salvation has a myriad of requirements. It doesn't. I've proved that in large blocks of scripture. All of Romans 10 instantly disproves without any doubt that faith alone is all that's required for salvation. Now, of course there are many more guidelines for Christians beyond just faith, but judgement of our entrance into Heaven and eternal life is done by God alone. Even Wraeclastian, as a non-believer, brought up that topic. So for any human being to add conditions beyond faith is taking away the divine authority of God.

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

We are both sinners, you are correct. The Bible also specifically tells us to judge what is evil, what is sinful. So while your words fit that judgement, your soul I cannot judge. That judgement is for God alone.

There is no God and the bible is bullshit.

I highly recommend for everyone in this thread to watch the episode of "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" on the bible. It is very entertaining and it really makes you worry about the mentally ill people who actually believe in that shit.

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

"

Kamchatka wrote:

After you do that, you need to take every old testament passage referenced (that happens alot) in these new testament passages, again in context.

No, the New Testament stands on its own. The Old Testament reaffirms everything that comes true in the New Testament, but the two are not dependent upon each other. The "Law" as it was before the books in the New Testament were written, as it is with Judaism, was mentioned in the last bit of scripture I quoted from Galatians.

No trick intended, honestly. I'm just disappointed, but not surprised, that you can't quote scripture to back up the assumption that salvation has a myriad of requirements. It doesn't. I've proved that in large blocks of scripture. All of Romans 10 instantly disproves without any doubt that faith alone is all that's required for salvation. Now, of course there are many more guidelines for Christians beyond just faith, but judgement of our entrance into Heaven and eternal life is done by God alone. Even Wraeclastian, as a non-believer, brought up that topic. So for any human being to add conditions beyond faith is taking away the divine authority of God.

First: The old testament is constantly referenced in the new testament, of course they are interconnected and fit together perfectly. Without an old testament, the new testament wouldnt make sense, the new testament constantly references the old

Second: fine Matthew 18 parable about the debtor, Jesus clearly states that if we hold grudges against anyone who seeks our forgiveness, God will withdraw our forgiveness, IE we will go to hell, we have no forgiveness for sins.

There are many more passages contradicting faith alone, but i truly apologize, I do not have time to write a book of theology here.

*You cannot read a scripture passage in a vacuum, without context, to create good theology, that is all you have done in this thread, poorly re-create Luther's bad theology.

"

Wraeclastian wrote:

I highly recommend for everyone in this thread to watch the episode of "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" on the bible. It is very entertaining and it really makes you worry about the mentally ill people who actually believe in that shit.

BTW, I enjoyed that episode. And I love Penn and Teller's Bullshit series. My favorite was their exposure of the recycling/green movement.

That said, Penn has absolutely no faith, nor interest in it. One can easily throw all science and logical reasoning has to offer at the concept of religion to obliterate it. But faith, that's completely different. Science still has yet to explain the unquantifiable number of unknowns within our universe. Until we know *everything* about the universe and everything within in, we take leaps of faith in guessing or trying to understand what we can't explain with science.

"

Kamchatka wrote:

Second: fine Matthew 18 parable about the debtor, Jesus clearly states that if we hold grudges against anyone who seeks our forgiveness, God will withdraw our forgiveness, IE we will go to hell, we have no forgiveness for sins.

I give you entire chapter that proves faith is all that's required for salvation, and you return with a single parable? :-)

Ok, let's take a look at that parable...

"Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, 'Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?'"

Jesus replies with an exponentially higher number as an example. The lesson: there is no limit on how often you should forgive a brother (neighbor, fellow human being, etc.).

And the ending you mention: "Then the master called the servant in. 'You wicked servant,' he said, 'I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn't you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?' In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. 'This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.'"

Notice no mention of denying passage to heaven, no mention of denying eternal life, no mention of eternal damnation either. Just an example of how God will treat those who can't forgive others when they seek it. And what doesn't come into play in this passage: is the "wicked" servant a believer in Christ? Has the servant asked for God's forgiveness so that Christ can take his place? See, no proof in this parable for your argument.

"

Kamchatka wrote:

*You cannot read a scripture passage in a vacuum, without context, to create good theology

That's exactly when you tried to do with one parable from Matthew 18. And you denied Romans 10 completely (you read the parable in a vacuum).

Kamchatka, Cipher_Nemo -- I don't see why you two are arguing. Repent and believe, for the kingdom of God is near--that is what Jesus said when he came, and, because of what he did for us on the cross, and his resurrection, those two things are sufficient in his Grace.

"

bwam wrote:

Kamchatka, Cipher_Nemo -- I don't see why you two are arguing. Repent and believe, for the kingdom of God is near--that is what Jesus said when he came, and, because of what he did for us on the cross, and his resurrection, those two things are sufficient in his Grace.

Indeed, Amen.

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

"

Kamchatka wrote:

*You cannot read a scripture passage in a vacuum, without context, to create good theology

That's exactly when you tried to do with one parable from Matthew 18. And you denied Romans 10 completely (you read the parable in a vacuum).

I specifically said this is why i do not want to quote scripture for this very reason, you begged me to do so, and I did, and you are now attacking me exactly the way i said you would. Quite dishonest of you, but I forgive you anyways.

Last thing I am going to leave you with, in 380 AD the Catholic church put together the official cannon of the new testament that we all use today. Previously many other books/letters were read at mass before this. In 380 AD the Catholic church believed the same truth about salvation as the Catholic and Orthodox churches believe today.

How come it took over a thousand years for someone to come up with the faith alone doctrine?

In 380 AD The Catholic church knew the context of all the books of the new testament, and did not read any passage in a vacuum to create theology, like you are doing, and like Martin Luther did before you.

Read about Martin Luther, he had a mental disorder called scrupulosity, and a severe case at that. Him coming up with faith alone makes perfect sense, in context of the situation.

To believe faith alone doctrine you are clearly stating in 1500 years Christians were all clueless, until Martin Luther came along.

Please, honestly consider this, how can that be anything but absurd?