What folks have learned via CC discussions:

[GWH]

What makes you the authoritative purveyor of acronyms in this forum?

If the owner of this forum developed acronyms and wanted every member to use them, that would be a different story.

Your private acronyms will not be learned quickly or remembered, since they are used only in your posts. And most people probably do not even know how to find your explanation of them all.

You expect people to jump through hoops just to accommodate your peculiar mode of posting. You assume that if people do not meet your expectations, they must be lazy, stubborn, or dumb. That is arrogant and unfriendly.

So go on doing what you do. It does not matter in the long run.

Nothing, which is why I am no going to purvey as many any more but instead I am jumping through a hoop.
Again, I assume everyone is intelligent and does not have acronymapobia until feedback indicates otherwise.
Why do you keep harping about it? Can't you take "okay" for an answer?!

 

[ZNP]

No, you are being unreasonable, because I am being willing to amend my use of acronyms.
It has nothing to do with anyone being hurt!

Specialized jargon includes acronyms. It is obvious you never served in the military.

I use GW because I love Scripture and feel blessed that my initials are GW, so sue me.

Yes, acronyms can be learned quickly; they are not rocket science formulas.
Rather than being arrogant, I assume everyone on CC is intelligent until proven otherwise.

You discourage, but I will amend my sinful ways per post #116.

There is no rule about not using acronyms on this forum, and there is no rule that anyone needs to read your posts that doesn't want to.

 

[GWH]

There is no rule about not using acronyms on this forum, and there is no rule that anyone needs to read your posts that doesn't want to.

Yes, but I have freely agreed per feedback to reduce my use of acronyms so folks can read my posts better.

 

[Mem]

Thanks for the serious feedback, Mem.
Math lost me at trig.
I am glad you think GW, OT, NT, HS and JC are easily understood. I guess JC is akin to calling God "Daddy" (Abba).
I try not to be supersilly/cheeky.

I'm cheeky , but also, as one dear put it when referring to me, "the quirky one." But then, I don't have any students. When I teach, I'm teaching my peers.

 

[GWH]

I'm cheeky , but also, as one dear put it when referring to me, "the quirky one." But then, I don't have any students. When I teach, I'm teaching my peers.

When the Holy Spirit teaches (John 16:12-15), I am the lead learner (Matt; 11:29);
then I share my insights aka Groovy opinions (1Pet. 3:15).

 

[GWH]

Okay, just to reprise per the OP what folks have learned via discussions on CC, here is that list of posts:

#1 - GWH, re persevering faith
#2 - passion84god, re "meet"
#5 - seoulsearch, re believer's baptism
#12 - Aussie52, re patience with haters
#20 - Chester, re need to value meaning of Scripture over church doctrine
#25- GWH, 1Cor. 2 urges Christians to cooperate with the Holy Spirit
#28 - GWH, need to add #6 re general revelation to my proposed creed
#34 - PaulThompson, arguing is futile
#42 - GWH, Cyrene was a town that traded in silphium, a plant prized for various uses
#52 - ZNP, truths one assumed all Christians believe are challenged
#56 - dkontner, modern day Pharisees and Sadducees exist on CC
#57 - Churchgoer, you cannot convert people by debate, although it can be fun
#99 - GWH, many people hate learning acronyms

TBC...

Okay, now that I have been reproved for my sin of using too many acronyms, let us get this thread back on track.

Although I have called my brand of Christianity "truthseeking" ever since moving beyond my Baptist beginning,
it was after joining CC almost two years ago and encountering tulipism that I learned the importance of 1Tim. 2:3-4
for refuting the tulip dogma, and just recently someone prompted me to see that 2Thes. 2:10 reinforces the view that
loving truth is essential to learning how to interpret/believe Scripture correctly. These verses are the font of saving faith.

Does anyone else have an example of learning something/amending a belief due to discussions on CC?
(I have shared six so far, so feel free to share more than one example.)

 

[ZNP]

Does anyone else have an example of learning something/amending a belief due to discussions on CC?
(I have shared six so far, so feel free to share more than one example.)

Yes, we have been having this discussion about the parable of the ten virgins and the focus has been on the five foolish, are they saved or not? Some have argued very strongly they are not but their argument falls flat. But we can't deny that Jesus said to them "I don't know you" and that is very similar to "I never knew you". So how could they have had their lamps lit and now they have gone out, they go and get more oil but the Lord says "I don't know you"? But then this morning I woke up with this insight which I believe is from the Lord.

Suppose over the last few years we have a bunch of believers who have come to CC to speak the truth, and their posts are like lit torches lighting the way for others. Some are on the thread about the news, connecting current events to the Lord's coming, some are on the thread about Bible discussion, some are on the conspiracy thread talking about the mark of the beast, antichrist, etc. Now half of these Christians are wise, they go to the Lord each morning and get a word. It can be a Psalm, or a teaching, or a revelation, or a prayer, etc. And five are foolish and they also share. They remember their salvation experience. Maybe they remember a couple of other experiences they had. But that quickly runs out. They can't share what their pastor is sharing each week because he is not sharing about the Lord's soon return. But then they get this idea, I can go and get AI to write me a post. So now they can participate, they can go to any thread, see what the discussion is, go to AI, let it fashion a post and poof! There you go, now they have a song, they have a poem, they have a message, and all of them are on the same topics.

We get to the door and the five wise Virgins enter in but when the five foolish arrive and say hey, we also have been helping with our "lit torches" the Lord says "I don't know you". They weren't going to the Lord each morning.

Now you can't say what they were doing was evil, or not evil. What you can say is the Lord doesn't know them, what they were doing did not involve going to the Lord.

 

[GWH]

Yes, we have been having this discussion about the parable of the ten virgins and the focus has been on the five foolish, are they saved or not? Some have argued very strongly they are not but their argument falls flat. But we can't deny that Jesus said to them "I don't know you" and that is very similar to "I never knew you". So how could they have had their lamps lit and now they have gone out, they go and get more oil but the Lord says "I don't know you"? But then this morning I woke up with this insight which I believe is from the Lord.

Suppose over the last few years we have a bunch of believers who have come to CC to speak the truth, and their posts are like lit torches lighting the way for others. Some are on the thread about the news, connecting current events to the Lord's coming, some are on the thread about Bible discussion, some are on the conspiracy thread talking about the mark of the beast, antichrist, etc. Now half of these Christians are wise, they go to the Lord each morning and get a word. It can be a Psalm, or a teaching, or a revelation, or a prayer, etc. And five are foolish and they also share. They remember their salvation experience. Maybe they remember a couple of other experiences they had. But that quickly runs out. They can't share what their pastor is sharing each week because he is not sharing about the Lord's soon return. But then they get this idea, I can go and get AI to write me a post. So now they can participate, they can go to any thread, see what the discussion is, go to AI, let it fashion a post and poof! There you go, now they have a song, they have a poem, they have a message, and all of them are on the same topics.

We get to the door and the five wise Virgins enter in but when the five foolish arrive and say hey, we also have been helping with our "lit torches" the Lord says "I don't know you". They weren't going to the Lord each morning.

Now you can't say what they were doing was evil, or not evil. What you can say is the Lord doesn't know them, what they were doing did not involve going to the Lord.

Thanks for sharing ZNP, and I agree that perseverance is necessary, but note that in Matt. 7:21-23 the Lord says the reason he does not know those who were disqualified from heaven is because they were evildoers.

 

[ZNP]

Thanks for sharing ZNP, and I agree that perseverance is necessary, but note that in Matt. 7:21-23 the Lord says the reason he does not know those who were disqualified from heaven is because they were evildoers.

Yes, but there He tells them "I never knew you" and in Matthew 25 He says "I know you not". He is not saying He never knew them. The fact that the lamps were lit indicates they had some genuine experience of the Lord in the past. They had a real salvation experience. But they never dug down to the rock and instead their house was built on sand.

The more accurate analogy is Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man. Jesus doesn't call them evil, he calls them foolish. They were hearers of the word and not doers of it.

Jesus told us that we are His witnesses and our job is to witness of Him to the uttermost parts of the earth. Every believer has heard this, how many of them are doing it?

 

[GWH]

Yes, but there He tells them "I never knew you" and in Matthew 25 He says "I know you not". He is not saying He never knew them. The fact that the lamps were lit indicates they had some genuine experience of the Lord in the past. They had a real salvation experience. But they never dug down to the rock and instead their house was built on sand.

The more accurate analogy is Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man. Jesus doesn't call them evil, he calls them foolish. They were hearers of the word and not doers of it.

Jesus told us that we are His witnesses and our job is to witness of Him to the uttermost parts of the earth. Every believer has heard this, how many of them are doing it?

So much disagreement regarding the meaning of Scripture arises out of the lack of using both-and logic!

In this case, the harmonization is that Jesus both does not know those who committed apostasy (Matt. 25:10b-13)
and never knew those whose evil doing indicated being pseudo-Christians (Matt. 7:21-23).

Also, "going to the Lord each morning" or daily is a subset of lifelong remaining with the Lord aka perseverance,
and those whose "house was built on sand" must be the foolish virgins.

Right? (Thanks for prompting me to have those insights/connections just now as I replied.)

 

[ZNP]

So much disagreement regarding the meaning of Scripture arises out of the lack of using both-and logic!

In this case, the harmonization is that Jesus both does not know those who committed apostasy (Matt. 25:10b-13)
and never knew those whose evil doing indicated being pseudo-Christians (Matt. 7:21-23).

Also, "going to the Lord each morning" or daily is a subset of lifelong remaining with the Lord aka perseverance,
and those whose "house was built on sand" must be the foolish virgins.

Right? (Thanks for prompting me to have those insights/connections just now as I replied.)

It is the most complex process to have to judge 8 billion people. Thankfully that is not something any believer has to do, the Lord will take care of that job. So if Jesus says they are "foolish" I will not go beyond that. If he says they are "lawless" or "evil" then we can also say that. But I am not going to infer someone is "evil" if the the Lord doesn't say it explicitly.

 

[GWH]

It is the most complex process to have to judge 8 billion people. Thankfully that is not something any believer has to do, the Lord will take care of that job. So if Jesus says they are "foolish" I will not go beyond that. If he says they are "lawless" or "evil" then we can also say that. But I am not going to infer someone is "evil" if the the Lord doesn't say it explicitly.

When something is not explicit is when the gift of both-and harmonizing Scripture can clarify what is meant implicitly.
I have added the points you prompted to my source for the Teachings of Jesus thread as follows:

TOJ #3: Learn God’s Word (LGW). [Matt. 4:4//Luke 4:4] This is the first of three truths Jesus tried to teach the devil during a period of testing in the desert (Mark 1:12-13). Satan first tempted Jesus to perform a miracle; just like he tempts us to want to walk by proof rather than by Faith (Matt. 24:24). However, Jesus indicated that God’s Word is the fuel, food {John 6:26-27} and medicine for souls, so if we do not LGW, then we will run out of gas, fail to grow and be spiritually sick.

Jesus illustrated this truth in another passage. {Matt. 7:24-27//Luke 6:47-49} Those who build on sand are those who do not believe and apply the TOJ, so their house (life/soul) will be destroyed after justice is achieved following Judgment Day. They are comparable to the pseudo-Christians whom Jesus “never knew” per TOJ #48, while the foolish virgins in TOJ #147 might be those who fail to persevere in belief and good deeds, because Jesus told them “I do not know you”.

Thanks again.

 

[ZNP]

When something is not explicit is when the gift of both-and harmonizing Scripture can clarify what is meant implicitly.
I have added the points you prompted to my source for the Teachings of Jesus thread as follows:

TOJ #3: Learn God’s Word (LGW). [Matt. 4:4//Luke 4:4] This is the first of three truths Jesus tried to teach the devil during a period of testing in the desert (Mark 1:12-13). Satan first tempted Jesus to perform a miracle; just like he tempts us to want to walk by proof rather than by Faith (Matt. 24:24). However, Jesus indicated that God’s Word is the fuel, food {John 6:26-27} and medicine for souls, so if we do not LGW, then we will run out of gas, fail to grow and be spiritually sick.

Jesus illustrated this truth in another passage. {Matt. 7:24-27//Luke 6:47-49} Those who build on sand are those who do not believe and apply the TOJ, so their house (life/soul) will be destroyed after justice is achieved following Judgment Day. They are comparable to the pseudo-Christians whom Jesus “never knew” per TOJ #48, while the foolish virgins in TOJ #147 might be those who fail to persevere in belief and good deeds, because Jesus told them “I do not know you”.

Thanks again.

I would liken them to the ones Paul says in 1 Corinthians build with wood, hay and stubble. They suffer loss, but they are saved so as through fire. If you are left behind during the tribulation you will suffer loss, but it doesn't eliminate your chance to be saved, but so as through fire.

 

[GWH]

I would liken them to the ones Paul says in 1 Corinthians build with wood, hay and stubble. They suffer loss, but they are saved so as through fire. If you are left behind during the tribulation you will suffer loss, but it doesn't eliminate your chance to be saved, but so as through fire.

No saint is left behind at the rapture per Paul in 1Thes. 4:13-18.

 

[ZNP]

No saint is left behind at the rapture per Paul in 1Thes. 4:13-18.

You cannot base an interpretation on a single verse. That is the rule Peter gives us. The book of revelation shows us two different groups standing on the glassy sea, one the sea is calm, the other the sea was mingled with fire and they are "those who came out of the tribulation". Then you have to look at multiple verses where Jesus says "one is taken and one is left" with the word "left" being equivalent to "divorced".

The reason people feel the need to say the foolish virgins are not believers is because they hold this doctrine that no Christians get left behind. But you have to do that for 20 verses based on a single verse, instead you should look at the 20 verses as the correct doctrine and align your understanding of this one verse accordingly.

 

[GWH]

You cannot base an interpretation on a single verse. That is the rule Peter gives us. The book of revelation shows us two different groups standing on the glassy sea, one the sea is calm, the other the sea was mingled with fire and they are "those who came out of the tribulation". Then you have to look at multiple verses where Jesus says "one is taken and one is left" with the word "left" being equivalent to "divorced".

The reason people feel the need to say the foolish virgins are not believers is because they hold this doctrine that no Christians get left behind. But you have to do that for 20 verses based on a single verse, instead you should look at the 20 verses as the correct doctrine and align your understanding of this one verse accordingly.

Well, Revelation is notoriously difficult to decipher with any high degree of confidence,
so I will go with the plain teaching of Paul, which makes sense and jibes just fine with
Jesus saying one is taken and one is left--left meaning lost/unsaved, so I will stick with that doctrine.

Okay, thanks for sharing your insight, ZNP, but let us now return to the OP of this thread.

Does anyone else have an example of something new they learned due to discussions on CC?

 

[GWH]

Okay, now that I have been reproved for my sin of using too many acronyms, let us get this thread back on track.

Although I have called my brand of Christianity "truthseeking" ever since moving beyond my Baptist beginning,
it was after joining CC almost two years ago and encountering tulipism that I learned the importance of 1Tim. 2:3-4
for refuting the tulip dogma, and just recently someone prompted me to see that 2Thes. 2:10 reinforces the view that
loving truth is essential to learning how to interpret/believe Scripture correctly. These verses are the font of saving faith.

Does anyone else have an example of learning something/amending a belief due to discussions on CC?
(I have shared six so far, so feel free to share more than one example.)

These threads get buried quickly, so I want to repost the list of what folks have learned via discussions on CC.
If I missed something, please let me know what post it is in.

#1 - GWH, re persevering faith
#2 - passion84god, re "meet"
#5 - seoulsearch, re believer's baptism
#12 - Aussie52, re patience with haters
#20 - Chester, re need to value meaning of Scripture over church doctrine
#25- GWH, 1Cor. 2 urges Christians to cooperate with the Holy Spirit
#28 - GWH, need to add #6 re general revelation to my proposed creed
#34 - PaulThompson, arguing is futile
#42 - GWH, Cyrene was a town that traded in silphium, a plant prized for various uses
#52 - ZNP, truths one assumed all Christians believe are challenged
#56 - dkontner, modern day Pharisees and Sadducees exist on CC
#57 - Churchgoer, you cannot convert people by debate, although it can be fun
#99 - GWH, many people hate learning acronyms

Does anyone have something to share?

 

[Lanolin]

#100 -Lanolin, if people want to learn new acronyms, there's a thread about them called Acronym Game in the Miscellaneous forum.

 

[GWH]

#100 -Lanolin, if people want to learn new acronyms, there's a thread about them called Acronym Game in the Miscellaneous forum.

That doesn't qualify, but I replied to you in the Acronym Game.
Participants on the Calvinism and Kerygma threads should be able to answer it correctly.
(Otherwise, check my Profile :^)

 

[Lanolin]

Oh I already know what OSAS means.