Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Straw man. What is being "rejected" is not scripture, but your way of interpreting scripture.
If I've said this once on this forum, I've said it a thousand times. To so many of the posters here, though, if you interpret scripture differently than they do, you are "rejecting" scripture. And then you get accused of "calling God a liar."
wow - that verse sure seems to blow the whole 'once saved always saved' theory!
Wow! I wasn't even aware of that passage. Yeah, it totally hoses the "once saved, always saved" idea, doesn't it? (Although I'm sure there will be some kind of backpedaling coming right up.)
The passage in Jude refers to the Israelites' scouting of Cannan and their deliberation about whether to invade (see Num 13-14). Moses thought that God approved the invasion, but many rank-and-file Israelites doubted it and complained about the plan. As punishment, God kept the complainers out of the promised land, and caused the Cannanites to successfully repel the first invasion.
Why Jude uses the name Jesus for God in his reference I do not know. Some translations say "The Lord" rather than "Jesus".
No, Jesus is not reported to have destroyed anybody, apart from a misreading of Jude.
Wow! I wasn't even aware of that passage. Yeah, it totally hoses the "once saved, always saved" idea, doesn't it? (Although I'm sure there will be some kind of backpedaling coming right up.)
Hi Katz. I disagree. What is the context? Is it referring to eternal punishment or to temporal punishment as in, well, call it capital punishment in which God took disobedient believers out of this life under the 'sin unto death' but they were still eternally saved?
On the other hand, it could have been that those who the Lord destroyed, and I go with the manuscripts that say Jesus, had never trusted the promises of God and never had been 'saved.' In which case eternal punishment would be in view.
There are eternal security passages in the NT which I see as being very clear and I don't think that the biblical writers contradicted each other on this issue.
Last edited by Michael Way; 11-19-2021 at 03:08 PM..
BF's heart seems to be far away from Jesus because he interprets scripture from a heart of wrath and vengeance and not agape love and forgiveness, IMO.
I tend to think it is fear. Fear not only of the consequences of disobeying a wrathful and vengeful god, but fear of another kind, too.
I don't know what your religious upbringing was, Brother Mystic, but for me the Bible was literally true. I think that is how most of us understood it at first. It is terrifying when we get a little older, almost too threatening to consider, that it might not be the plain-text guide we thought it was, where everything we need to know is spelled out in plain language. It's hard to give up that strict literalist way. One feels at first lost, tumbling on a sea of uncertainty - and that is too fearsome for some.
I've asked this before...but its an honest question. Why bother even giving lip service to Christianity if one rejects the Scriptures?
I don't know because I don't reject the Scriptures nor do I give "lip service" to Christianity, an answer I've given to you time and time again. I reject the idea that the Scriptures are meant to be taken literally and without error and that Scripture = God.
You already know this, so no, it's not an honest question. It's a question designed to make other readers think something of me that is not true.
The Protestant method is to first figure out what you want to believe, and then interpret Scripture according to your beliefs .
And your method is to pick and choose whatever Scripture you can use to support your view. If a Scripture disagrees with your beliefs, you say it isn’t God breathed.
And your method is to pick and choose whatever Scripture you can use to support your view. If a Scripture disagrees with your beliefs, you say it isn’t God breathed.
NatesDude is not a practicing Christian.
Are you conceding that he is correct about the Protestant method?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow! I wasn't even aware of that passage. Yeah, it totally hoses the "once saved, always saved" idea, doesn't it? (Although I'm sure there will be some kind of backpedaling coming right up.)
