T
Gospel Confusion...
- Thread starter Musicmaster
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Yes I was asking more for confirmation than for the proof text not just for me but for anybody who had that question an AI is a tricky thing
I can ask it show me proof that you can lose your salvation and it will go about attempting to do just that using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
Likewise if I say show me proof you cannot lose your salvation it will go about doing the same thing using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
In essence AI while clever and fun and useful in a lot of cases really reflects the direction we are going in with the question at hand
Having said all that I was actually directly interested in what somebody coming from Judaism believed about salvation because I don't really see it pronounced very much if at all in the Old Testament
In fact is The Story Goes after Jesus crucifixion he went to hell for 3 Days To presumably preach to the spirits in prison
This is often suggested to be how old testament people were saved as he went to Paradise and Hell the same Paradise he told the thief on the cross he was going to see him in that night. With that paradise being some form of safety zone for the non condemned who died prior to Jesus and could not enter Heaven without him what is your take on that
Reposting with edit my previous response...
Yes I was asking more for confirmation than for the proof text not just for me but for anybody who had that question an AI is a tricky thing
I can ask it show me proof that you can lose your salvation and it will go about attempting to do just that using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
Likewise if I say show me proof you cannot lose your salvation it will go about doing the same thing using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
In essence AI while clever and fun and useful in a lot of cases really reflects the direction we are going in with the question at hand
Having said all that I was actually directly interested in what somebody coming from Judaism believed about salvation because I don't really see it pronounced very much if at all in the Old Testament
In fact is The Story Goes after Jesus crucifixion he went to hell for 3 Days To presumably preach to the spirits in prison
This is often suggested to be how old testament people were saved as he went to Paradise in Hell the same Paradise he told the thief on the cross he was going to see him in that night. With that paradise being some form of safety zone for the non condemned who died prior to Jesus and could not enter Heaven without him what is your take on that.
Also the presumption that I don't know what the Bible is telling me is laughable you should get that idea out of your head because right now I am in a assessment phase of what everybody else knows we can all continuously learn but to point out that we're saved through faith in God can only be understood in the context of what the New Testament teaches. the Old Testament doesn't appear to teach this although it may be true and that being the case what did Jesus do for 3 days aside from defeat death and capture the keys and why would he have to preach to people there.
I guess another way to phrase this question would be were there people that made it to heaven prior to Jesus crucifixion and Resurrection if so how and I already know the reference to Abraham however that didn't Place him in heaven
Yes I was asking more for confirmation than for the proof text not just for me but for anybody who had that question an AI is a tricky thing
I can ask it show me proof that you can lose your salvation and it will go about attempting to do just that using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
Likewise if I say show me proof you cannot lose your salvation it will go about doing the same thing using the common arguments that mankind has come up with
In essence AI while clever and fun and useful in a lot of cases really reflects the direction we are going in with the question at hand
Having said all that I was actually directly interested in what somebody coming from Judaism believed about salvation because I don't really see it pronounced very much if at all in the Old Testament
In fact is The Story Goes after Jesus crucifixion he went to hell for 3 Days To presumably preach to the spirits in prison
This is often suggested to be how old testament people were saved as he went to Paradise in Hell the same Paradise he told the thief on the cross he was going to see him in that night. With that paradise being some form of safety zone for the non condemned who died prior to Jesus and could not enter Heaven without him what is your take on that.
Also the presumption that I don't know what the Bible is telling me is laughable you should get that idea out of your head because right now I am in a assessment phase of what everybody else knows we can all continuously learn but to point out that we're saved through faith in God can only be understood in the context of what the New Testament teaches. the Old Testament doesn't appear to teach this although it may be true and that being the case what did Jesus do for 3 days aside from defeat death and capture the keys and why would he have to preach to people there.
I guess another way to phrase this question would be were there people that made it to heaven prior to Jesus crucifixion and Resurrection if so how and I already know the reference to Abraham however that didn't Place him in heaven
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Yes my point is there are two different paradices I'm aware that one of them is in Hell or in the general vicinity I'm not exactly sure how it's laid out
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Paradises? I’m quite certain that hell is not a paradise. There is only one paradise, this is where God resides.
There are 2 different greek words for paradise used in the new testament.
One is Paul being caught up into the Heavenly paradise and the other....
"Paradise" (or Abraham's Bosom) was considered a temporary, comfortable compartment within Hades/Sheol for the righteous dead, separated by a gulf from the place of torment. This area served as an interim waiting place until Christ’s resurrection, after which believers are believed to go directly into God's presence. After Christ crucifixion it is empty
On his death on the cross he went to hell for 3 days and preached to the spirits there. Presumably the OT faithfull..
When Christ said to the thief on the cross tonight you will be with me in Paradise the reference was Abram's bosom because he had not yet Resurrected and provided passage into heaven
Which would support Jesus's claim that he is the only way
Location: Historically, it was understood to be in the underworld (Hades/Sheol) alongside the compartment of torment for the unrighteous.
Name: Often referred to as "Abraham's Bosom," as seen in the story of Lazarus and the rich man in Luke 16.
Purpose: It was a place of comfort and blessing for Old Testament believers, described as an Eden-like garden or paradise.Separation: A great, impassable barrier separated Paradise from the torment area, though residents could sometimes see across.
I didn't say anything about violation. I simply stated that the hostility in your writing style isn't worth engaging.
I'm saved and filled with Holy Spirit. Christ Jesus is Lord and has come in the flesh.
MM
This is the reason I stated that the conversation with you is deviating from scripture. It's not about dogma on my part. I'm a biblicist, not a Baptist or anything else. When it comes to water baptism, yes, that WAS a matter of salvation to Israel. You can choose to not believe that, but that's on you, not me or anyone else.
MM
Ok. I appreciate you telling me what you believe. As a biblicist, lean in the direction of scripture.
MM
Paul is the primary author regarding Christianity.
Paul wrote 12 letters in the N.T which is a huge segment by any measure.
Paul was effectively writing the doctrine of the church and in detail.
The Lord chose Paul for this precise purpose.
You lean in the direction of scripture?
Peter said that Paul wrote of these things in wisdom and things that were hard to understand.
Christianity was definitely changing over time in the N.T.
T
TruthDefender
Guest
Paul was indeed chosen to establish Christian doctrine for the body of Christ as it applies to us today. That so many today refuse to accept that by pretending their failure to rightly divide the word of truth is somehow virtuous and more correct, that's their problem for sure, and they alone will pay the price for their failures at believing in Paul's apostleship and its difference from the Kingdom Gospel given to Israel.
Good to see that there are others out here who appreciate the integrity of scripture for what it says rather than the contrived biblicality of their homogenizing it all into one lump that they think their lives and beliefs reflect.
MM
What is your opinion on the fact that the traditional churches adopted the law, into their
doctrine?
Given how much Paul spoke against the law and it's curse?
AI agrees with us and that says a lot.
Because AI when restricted to the scripture will only read the scripture.
Which means that Philosophy and Theology are missing in any explanation AI provides.
The inclusion of Philosophy and Theology was the great downfall of traditional Christianity.
I have no issues with any observance of the Law. The Law is good and holy, but it was/is, as Paul declared, inferior in its ability to save anyone to the uttermost.
The REAL problems arise when the Law is taught as a requirement upon anyone for acquiring salvation and/or to retain it.
The groupthink dogs out there, however, then look at what I said and presume to twist my words into an alleged defense of living any way one so chooses with no moral constraints. That is an utter fabrication emanating from evil minds incapable of thinking more critically about the foolishness of their own lack in rational powers and discernment. I've heard far better from juveniles who know nothing about the Bible; speaking of a mindset.
Paul wasn't against the Law, per se. He said it with eloquence what pointing out that we in Christ are dead to the Law, and therefore not under its curse. I've shown to a number of people how that the Law is still in force but with inly the lost, Christ-rejecting world under its curse as the force of indictment against them for their unbelief and sin. Recall also Paul stating that it is by the Law that we know what sin is. Christ also pointed out some things that go beyond the Law to the very heart of man and his desires.
We today are partakers of this:
Romans 13:8
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
We can only love others by way of our being the righteousness of God in Christ Jesus, and Him loving others through us as the only conduit of perfect love expressed through any one fallen human being.
MM
Not so. I have a Th.D, and yet still adhere only to scripture, contrary to many of my colleagues. Not all philosophy is bad and off the rails. Philosophy is simply the pursuit of truth. Because some out there have corrupted that field with their trashy antics in worldliness, that's on them. Nothing they say or do taints my own scholarship in the fields of theology, philosophy and religion in general. Not all of us have sold ourselves out to the world and its creations...like AI.
MM
The law only gives the knowledge of sin and that is a superficial knowledge of our rebellion.
The law is weak and unable to transform anyone from their inherent selfish desires and passions.
In other words, the law is a curse for anyone trying to achieve a righteousness by obedience to the law.
I agree with you that love is the sole intent of all the Lord's work through the history of humanity.
Is to transform us into His own image and that image is that unconditional love for even our enemies.
Love is the goal of all the instruction we have ever received.
God is love. Is there anything more that needs to be said?
Augustine commented that heretics should be punished.
Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD) advocated for the punishment of heretics, specifically shifting to support state coercion against the Donatists, whom he viewed as schismatics. He justified this "righteous persecution" not as cruel vengeance, but as a "benevolent" measure to correct error and save souls from eternal hell.
- Motivation: Initially, Augustine preferred persuasion. However, after Donatist extremists (Circumcelliones) frequently attacked Catholic monks and churches, he deemed legal compulsion necessary to protect the Church and bring the heretics back to the faith.
- Justification: He famously used the phrase "compel them to come in" (coge intrare), interpreting the biblical parable of the banquet as authority to use force, comparing the state to a doctor administering painful but healing medicine to a "raving madman".
- Scope: While he authorized fines and state pressure to combat the violent Donatist movement, this justification later laid the theological groundwork for broader persecution of heresy in Western Christianity.
- Perspective: Augustine argued that the salvation of the heretic’s soul was worth the temporary punishment. (AI)