SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : original sin

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
PosterThread
Clutch
Member



Joined: 2003/11/10
Posts: 202
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

 Re:

Sam,
I agree partially with your statement:

"I think the reason of our earthly life is not just to preach the gospel."


I think the reason for our earthly life is to LIVE the gospel, which I believe is more than keeping someone from going to hell. However, the new birth spiritually is square one. Until you do square one, you can't get to whatever you might think square two and beyond is.

Proverbs 11:30 ¶ The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that winneth souls is wise.

The most IMPORTANT thing we do is win folks to Jesus. Unless you go with Ron's thinking. In that case we're doing mankind an injustice by introducing Jesus to them. Leave them ignorant, so they'll go to heaven. So like Reidhead said, the Lord will reap more of the harvest that He alone is worthy to receive.
Ron's gone far out of the way to reason some babies into heaven. I think the Lord probably has it figured out another way, that He has YET to reveal.
Clutch :-)


_________________
Howard McNeill

 2004/2/12 20:34Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Clutch wrote The most IMPORTANT thing we do is win folks to Jesus. Unless you go with Ron's thinking. In that case we're doing mankind an injustice by introducing Jesus to them. Leave them ignorant, so they'll go to heaven. So like Reidhead said, the Lord will reap more of the harvest that He alone is worthy to receive.
Ron's gone far out of the way to reason some babies into heaven. I think the Lord probably has it figured out another way, that He has YET to reveal.

1. You can never be doing mankind an injustice when you obey God. Your thinking is man-centred here. Please quote me a verse where the salvation of a soul is stated to be the reason for preaching the gospel.

2. I am the first to acknowledge that 'we know in part'. But we see clearly from David's words that he expected to meet his child in an afterlife. "I shall go to him". On what 'reasonable' basis could this happen if his child was condemned to eternal separation from God on account of Adam's sin? We are expected to give a reason for the hope... Faith without revelation is superstition; we end up with neo-quakerism, as is sometimes revealed in these posts.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2004/2/12 23:29Profile
Agent001
Member



Joined: 2003/9/30
Posts: 386
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

 Re:

Clutch:

Re: Human's Chief End

Westminster Shorter Catechism --
[i]Q. What is the chief end of man?
A. The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him.[/i]

I have no objection to the Great Commission. I was merely pointing out that our purpose on earth encompasses a wider scope than saving souls. I don't think you would disagree with this either.

But you said, if there is no need to spread the gospel, then [i]"immeadiately after we got saved, God could just take us on to heaven, because we would not be serving much purpose here."[/i]

The logic here assumes the following premises P1 & P2:

[b]P1. The sole purpose for believers on earth before they enter heaven is to spread the gospel.[/b]
P2. The implication of Ron's idea is that there is no need to spread the gospel.
C. Therefore, the implication of Ron's idea is that God could immediately take us away from the earth and into heaven after we are saved.

The conclusion can only be made if you have implicitly assumed P1.

Re: Your Critique of Ron's Idea

Your other premise P2 also does not follow from Ron's idea, because I think you have misunderstood his point. He probably would not agree with your inferred conclusion, [i]"Leave them ignorant, so they'll go to heaven."[/i]

I already mentioned in my previous mail that I think Ron's idea [b]does not assume[/b] those who have not heard of the gospel will go to heaven. If this is true, your critique would be correct. But he only asserted that these people will be judged on the basis of their deeds alone, and not automatically condemned to eternal perdition simply because they did not receive the gospel.

In fact, my problem with this idea is that few, if any, would actually be saved, because man's righteousness is but ragged clothes in the eyes of God.

Phew, every time I have a discussion/debate on this topic, I would remind myself, God is more interested in the destiny of those who are living. Let's continue with the evangelistic fervour that God intended us to have. Let's go out there and save some souls. :)


_________________
Sam

 2004/2/13 4:43Profile
Clutch
Member



Joined: 2003/11/10
Posts: 202
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

 Re:

Ron:
1.
"17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
I Corinthians 1:17-27

2. I agree with your point here. Where I'm in disagreement is in your conclusions based upon assessment of the scriptures that you've used.

Sam,
You said:
"Phew, every time I have a discussion/debate on this topic, I would remind myself, God is more interested in the destiny of those who are living. Let's continue with the evangelistic fervour that God intended us to have. Let's go out there and save some souls. :)"

AGREED! :-)

Ron:
A side note here. I've been sharing this discussion with Kenneth Owens who was with me at the prison a few nights ago. He was the most adamant one of us about your comment, and fussed for about two hours during the trip. I've told him some of your rationale behind your belief, and you MIGHT get a convert out of this. I have printed out our posts so that he can read what you've said, and work out his conclusions, NOT based on what I've said." :-P " Knowing Kenny O. he will not rest until he's thoroughly studied out, and prayed through the issuses in question. Then, perhaps by the power of the Holy Spirit, if he "gets it" like you "gots it" based upon your respected interpretations Perhaps he can 'splain it to me in language that I understand, and then I'll "gets it " too. Anyway, he and I will kick this around some more in private. I think we've thrown enough scripture back and forth between the opinions, and we can let the Holy Spirit work with that.I'll let you know if we get revelation, but I'm basically done on this thread. If someone else wishes to take it up, I'll monitor the progress.

Clutch :-)


_________________
Howard McNeill

 2004/2/13 5:02Profile









 Re: neo-quakers


Philologos apparently has a problem with "neo-quakers." Ron, do you mean people like those at the American Friends Service Committee? www.afsc.org winners of the Nobel peace prize?

He asks the question, is grace earned or is it a gift? and ernestly claims that it is only a gift and cannot be earned. But what then is the point of the following:

"Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You drink? And when did we see You a stranger, and invite you in, or naked and clothe You? And when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?

And the King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

Faith without works is impossible.

I am happily in the company of "neo-quakers."

Jake

 2004/2/13 10:42
Clutch
Member



Joined: 2003/11/10
Posts: 202
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

 Re:

Jake,
I am in shock AND awe. First there was the recent revelation that you had changed from the Methodist to the Vegetarian Church (we also have one of those in Columbus Ga., it takes up a whole city block downtown). Now you say that you've moved your letter to the Neo-Quaker Church. I'm sure the spirit is guiding you through all this, but I must caution you. With all this denomination hopping you may get a reputation for being insincere.

Have a nice day.
Clutch

P.S. Do you know of a government grant that I might get , so that I can market my recipe for squirrel soup? I thought about approaching the Campbell's Corp. on the corporate side. What do you think? :-)


_________________
Howard McNeill

 2004/2/14 5:56Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Hi Jake
you asked Philologos apparently has a problem with "neo-quakers." Ron, do you mean people like those at the American Friends Service Committee? www.afsc.org winners of the Nobel peace prize?

I mean people who adopt Fox/Barclay methodology but abandon their theology.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2004/2/16 2:02Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Hi Clutch
is your long quote from 1 Corinthians your answer for my request to quote me a verse where the salvation of a soul is stated to be the reason for preaching the gospel.?

I have preached the gospel for over 40 years on street corners, in pulpits, bible colleges, schools, night clubs, even prisons. ;-) I have preached the gospel in more than 20 countries. So I don't want you to misunderstand what I am saying. I am only questioning the ultimate motivation, not the absolute necessity of preaching the gospel to every creature.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2004/2/16 2:15Profile









 Re: squirrel soup

Clutch,

Laugh all you want. But, Mankind's aggression was learned through the hunt and the territorialism that comes with it. The tools of war and our reasons for warfare arose from the hunt, as well. By refusing to realize our nature and whence it came, we shut our eyes to the lessons of the past and are condemned to continue in ignorance, (and violence.)

Q: could mankind wage war or contemplate murder if they hadn't first become desensitized to blood and violence through the hunt? Scavenging led to hunting which led to war and all sorts of other sin. This is what Genesis tells us.

Jake

 2004/2/17 4:35
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Jake wrote Mankind's aggression was learned through the hunt and the territorialism that comes with it. The tools of war and our reasons for warfare arose from the hunt, as well. By refusing to realize our nature and whence it came, we shut our eyes to the lessons of the past and are condemned to continue in ignorance, (and violence.)

Q: could mankind wage war or contemplate murder if they hadn't first become desensitized to blood and violence through the hunt? Scavenging led to hunting which led to war and all sorts of other sin. This is what Genesis tells us.

This irrational speculation has dominated your contributions to 'evolution'. It is utterly without biblical endorsement. It is a fantasy of your own mind and clearly becoming an obsession. It derives from your own closed world of 'inspiration' and is not what Genesis tells us; it is 'what Jake tells us Genesis tells us'.

The first sin was independence which quickly hardened into rebellion. It was not the 'sin' of a group but of an individual uniquely placed as the federal head of the human race. Adam was an individual whose behaviour continues to impact the whole race. Jesus Christ is another individual through whom God has made a new creation. In Adam all die, in Christ all will be made alive. We are all in Adam by first birth, and can only be brought into Christ be regeneration.

Man's agression is the result of his union and communion with a Spirit whose nature is to steal, and to kill and and to destroy. [John 10:10] We are under the sway of a cosmic vandal and only regeneration can cure the condition. Our condition cannot be repaired with education or meditation or reincarnation, which is why Christ said, unequivocably, ye must be born again.

To suggest any other cure for man's condition is to preach another gospel, and the anger of God rests on such.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2004/2/17 9:34Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy