Posted on 03/06/2008 12:25:16 PM PST by NormsRevenge
ll, lol
It seems to me that you are moving the goal post because you said "...but this doesn’t rule out the possibility that there are different methods of believing in Christ. In changing "methods" to "interpretation" you will have to make sense out your use of "possibility". I don't think there is a person here that would say it is only possible that there are differing interpretations.
Either way truth itself is not subject to interpretation, therefore the onus is on each of us to carefully handle the word of truth.
Thank you for providing that scripture (1 Corinthians 15). I understand why you cited it. I don’t agree, however, that it is without ambiguity.
For instance, have you ever wondered why here, as elsewhere in scripture, the words “fallen asleep” are used (verse 6) where we would expect to see “dead” or “died”? This possibly lends itself to the further possibility that death and sleep are used interchangably, perhaps because something other than simple physical, anatomical death is implied.
Now, extend this reasoning to Christ’s death. Do we know for sure that physical death is the whole, complete meaning of “death” as used when Christ’s death and resurrection are discussed in these verses?
Just something to think about.
I have felt the presence of the Holy Spirit on many occasions in my years on this earth.....
It’s sad it didn’t do any good.
If it appears that I moved the goalposts, it is because my initial post was somewhat unclear and inarticulate. I couldn’t think of a good way to say it at that point in time.
No.
Then she should be opposed to social gospel and liberation theology as well as to theological liberalism. She should quit quoting the sermon on the mount to support socialism or any earthly political system etc. She needs to remove the mote from her own eyes. Good Grief.
“Reporter: And, do you believe on the salvation issue — and this is controversial too — that belief in Christ is needed for going to heaven?
Senator Clinton: That one I’m a little more open to. I think that it is, as we understand our relationship to God as Christians, it is how we see our way forward, and it is the way. But, ever since I was a little girl, I’ve asked every Sunday school teacher I’ve ever had, I asked every theologian I’ve ever talked with, whether that meant that there was no salvation, there was no heaven for people who did not accept Christ. And, you’re well aware that there are a lot of answers to that.”
Heresy.
No sweat.
Well said!
Well, if she listens....she'll drop out.
The part you quote above isn’t heresy—it doesn’t deny any revealed truth—it rather tap dances around the revealed truth.
Since there is no way to speak a capital letter, I’d guess it’s likely a style convention that the author follows. You might want to take it up with him.
“The whole Bible gives you a glimpse of God and God’s desire for a personal relationship, but we can’t possibly understand every way God is communicating with us.”
Here is where the liar reveals herself.
She believes in a God who wastes His time and is incompetent to boot. I knew this sentence would be in there somwhere; it ALWAYS is. It is the sentence that claims license to go where she damn well pleases.
I guess being placed in tomb in burial cloth and people showing up with air freshner a few days later was all a hoax for a man who was just sleeping. Yep. Sure. Where have I heard this before. Let me think now and it may come to me. The hoax theory huummmmmmm....
Fine.
The only answer a Christian can give to this question: “And, do you believe on the salvation issue...that belief in Christ is needed for going to heaven?” is yes.
Never said anything was hoax. Its a matter of textual interpretation, not whether a historical bodily death was a hoax or not.
“My point is that there is nothing in scripture that says that the accounts of Jesus must be interpreted in the strictly literal, strictly exoteric sense in order for one to be saved through the son. In fact, there is enough ambiguity to raise big questions about this proposition.”
Yes there is; the Scripture ITSELF.
If you’re gonna split the hair as fine as you seem to be doing then you may say there is nothing in Scripture PERIOD.
Actually, it could be that by splitting hairs one uncovers even richer, more Holy meanings.
Remember that the gospel was authored by people living in a time ripe with both the jewish art of textual analysis and greek philosophy. Splitting hairs is what these were all about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.