The Neverending Story (The New Christian Chronicles)

Quote from Hopefulpilgrim

I remember all too well what it was like, and I do *not* know how I could deal with that again. It was horrible. I had no joy, I was depressed, I lost faith, I was afraid, I questioned the love of God, and I was totally focused on myself-----NOT a happy nor productive existence! I hope this answers your question."

From D-fendr

What strikes me here is that when you were focused on the fear of losing it, you were totally focused on yourself -- "not a happy or productive existence!" as you put it.

I appreciate that answer because it infers that when you felt assurance again, you no longer totally focused on yourself. This, in my own experience is a good guide of spiritual condition: how much of our focus is on our well-being vs. that of others?

D-fendr,I believe you are saying that one can not find security in ones own salvation until he forgets his own and becomes more concerned in others, is that what you are saying?

If so, I disagree, because there in no stronger motivating force then saving our own butt, and once you have that secured, then you are ready to help others.

How can a man inspire someone to win a race when he has never finished one in his life?

Like James Carvell said, "It's A Wor brother, It's a wor"

I like Rush's parody, "Trick or Treat at James Carville's house"

Carville: "Here's a Ken Starr is an anti-Christ button for all y'all to wear proudly."

Kid:"What's wrong with Ken Starr, Mr. Carville?"

Carville: "What's wrong with Ken Starr? He hates you kids. He hates you kids so much he wants to wreck y'alls school!"

Carville is a nutcase, but he sure is an amusing nutcase. How Mary Matalin puts up with him is beyond me. Wasn't that marriage foretold as a sign of the end times? :>)

Pray for John Paul II

For me, when I think or observe someone consumed, or focused, on their own personal assurance of eternal salvation, I observe one wrapped up in self and selfish reward – a near certain way to diminish in our conscious relationship with the divine. That is what has often turned me away from "believe and receive" preaching. However, you've given an example of a flip side, and for that I'm very grateful - for your experience and for your relating it to me.

You're welcome, D-fendr. BUT, I don't think I understand what you are saying about assurance of salvation. Would you reword that first paragraph above? I'm interested in what you're saying, especially how it relates to "believe and receive" preaching. Thanks.

"D-fendr,I believe you are saying that one can not find security in ones own salvation until he forgets his own and becomes more concerned in others, is that what you are saying?"

No, sorry, that's not what I'm saying. I was actually asking a question, which is a form of hopefully allowing the responder to gain from questioning. (Sorry for the long form.)

However, in this case, I learned something and reinforced my understanding that I should never assume about another's spiritual condition.

To answer your question: am I saying: "one can not find security in ones own salvation until he forgets his own and becomes more concerned in others…"? Again, no, and again, I can't say for all.

However, it has been mine, and a common experience, that the more one sees his neighbor as his "self" (in other words more conscious of his neighbor's welfare connected, cojoined) the more one realizes union, communion with the divine - through all things. If we call this the various terms used in scripture: enlightenment, salvation, Kingdom of God, etc... then this would further us on that path. If God is love, then what "greater love hath a man than this…"

"How can a man inspire someone to win a race when he has never finished one in his life?"

We never finish it in this life, but I understand your meaning. We are discussing what practices further our growth.

To put it in simpler terms: A man all wrapped up in self makes a mighty small package.

thanks for your response and discussion...

Believe and receive preaching, in carricture, is the appeal to believe in order to receive salvation. It is a simple punishment and reward appeal. An animal responds to the same approach. So, to me, it is among the lesser communication tools for spiritual growth - which I think seeks after something beyond self. (Though again, it is important to me that I don't assume what is certain to me is necessarily the case in another's growth.)

My reply to JH above elaborates a bit more on the point I was discussing; concerning your request "Would you reword that first paragraph above?" I hope you'll accept that the best reply I can think of is a short pair by Rumi:

When one of us gets lost, is not here, He must be inside us.
There's no place like that anywhere in the world.

And we know one thing taught so many ways by Jesus: whatever it is you wish for, give it away to another. If you wish to receive love, give love to another; if you want to be forgiven, forgive another… Again and again, we are guided away from selfish gain and from thought of self to concern for another - and to another paradox: to keep it, we must give it away. Perhaps it is that way with realizing salvation as well.

but then, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

thanks for your courtesy in reply.

Amen! This reply of yours is too long to quote, so if you want to know which one it is, it's #2904 about purgatory. Oh Havoc, I just thought of another reason the devil might like this purgatory sham....it diminishes the seriousness of sin by implying that sin A is real bad and will need a lot of purging, but sin B isn't really so bad, so the punishment for it will be relatively mild.

Catholics accuse protties of licentiousness, saying that they think they can sin all they want because they are so sure of going to heaven...but if you think about it, the same accusation can be made against catholics----they can shrug their shoulders at sin because they know they'll still be able to get to heaven after a little time in purgatory.

I can't believe we are even talking about such a concept as "purgatory." My "purgatory" took place at Calvary when Jesus suffered and died in my place. This is not a license to sin.....no, just the opposite...Calvary gives the followers of Christ the motivation to live for Him. 2 Cor. 5:14,15:

"For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died. And He died for all, that they who live should not longer live for themselves, but *for Him who died and rose again on their behalf*."

Oh Havoc, I just thought of another reason the devil might like this purgatory sham....it diminishes the seriousness of sin by implying that sin A is real bad and will need a lot of purging, but sin B isn't really so bad, so the punishment for it will be relatively mild.

Essentially, you have it. Catholicism turns Sin into a graded system of nearly harmless to mortal. God doesn't rate sin like that. Sin is sin. Doesn't matter if it's a white lie or a murder both are equally disobedience and both will damn a person to hell. Purgatory pulls the teeth of the bumble in the eyes of the unknowing - they can't see the bumble just put blackout on his teeth after sharpening them...

The sad thing is that they all know better. They all have Bibles with at least part of the truth. And It's not like God won't lead them, they just will not listen or follow.

Would you consider this a fair story illustrating Sola Scriptura in action?

It's reasonably fair. The points I would make about it are the following.

1) This guy seems to be incredibly individualistic. Where are his mentors, his friends, his Sunday School teacher, his parents, etc... Obviously, to some Proddies this individualism is an attraction of the "system." But, I would think most Proddies would listen to their church's counsel (in the context of relationships w/ them) and advice on doctrinal matters.

2) I have never come across a person who came up with a doctrinal idea in the manner you proposed. I have had countless experiences with people who hear a message on the radio, or see a preacher on TV, or get a tract or a book from a friend and then suddenly "see the truth in Scripture." I don't think this is a problem inherent in Sola Scriptura, but a problem inherent in the whole Christian media scene. Books and tapes are sold and reputations made on doctrinal "innovations." I can't count the number of times that I've discussed doctrinal issues with people and they counter my scriptural exegesis with, "But Kenneth Copeland-Hagen [insert your least favorite prophet of Tulsa/Baal here] says...." So I don't think that the occurences of something like that happening are very high.

3) I don't know how much time people who come up with new doctrines spend in prayer. But I have grave and deep-seated suspicions. If they really spend that much time in prayer, you think God would actually reveal the truth to them. And I don't think there's a lot of "new truths" out there to be revealed (anymore than there are new Traditions to be developed).

Your scenario has undoubtedly occurred from time to time, but I would think the actual number of times it has occurred is relatively low. Again, I can't stress #2 enough. It's usually not a case of the person reading Scripture and finding something through the Spirit. It's usually a case of hearing something or reading something that "tickles their fancy." So, it's not a case of them not trusting authority, but of them trusting the wrong authority, namely, media-driven professional Christians.

"Catholics accuse protties of licentiousness, saying that they think they can sin all they want because they are so sure of going to heaven"

I think you hit the nail on the head. This is really the issue here with the Catholics, and it is totally false. There will be people who believe, but those who are truly saved struggle with sin and realize that sin hurts their relationship with God. No one who is saved thinks of salvation as a license to sin, or as SD put it, a Get out of hell free card. This is far from the truth.

JM

I hope you don't mind prayers from this Baptist.

Not at all! Thank you. All of us here are, after all, brothers and sisters in Christ.

ALL: Good morning, everybody. Looks like I've got a lot of reading to catch up on. Must've been a busy afternoon/evening here.

Friday, October 26, 2001

First Reading:
Responsorial Psalm:
Gospel:

Romans 7:18-25
Psalms 119:66, 68, 76, 77, 93, 94
Luke 12:54-59

God gave Himself to you: give yourself to God.

-- Blessed Robert Southwell

And once again, The Word Among Us let me down. They have last Friday's meditation instead of today's. Guess I'll drop 'em an email.

Have a great day, everybody.

Good Morning Everyone. I hope today finds you well. I hope you are all prepared for the long weekend coming up.

I wonder what angelo and Steven are doing? Do you think they're itching? They certainly missed some thought provoking dialog yesterday.

Sarah is teething, so if I am unusully short with someone who I am not ususally short with, please forgive me in advance. I will try to control myself, but sometimes certain thigns can set me off.

I would like to bring forward from yesterday for comment a few things.

1. If we haven't exhausted the subject and if we can avoid discussing Calvinism too much, I think opinions on Judas could be interesting from everyone here. That is, was he acting freely or did God "program" him to betray Jesus? In what sense did God need to have a betrayer, or what is the point of this betrayal? Couldn't the Romans have found Him without Judas?

2. How do we know that we are being truly inspired by the Holy Spirit, as opposed to being decived by our own wishes, or even a false spirit(demon)?

3. Do we still all pray wrong? We all petition the Lord for our causes. Is this wrong? Is God on His timetable and unaffected by our prayers? Can we convince Him to change his mind?

Any and all comments are appreciated.

I usually try to avoid your's and Havoc's replies to each other, but it's a slow night and I read this one, and have a question?

I know how you feel. I might start avoiding them too.

Am I misunderstanding, or is it just a dig at Havoc, or do you believe we "protestants" (how I hate that term) are going to be in purgatory?

Becky, if Purgatory is real then it is real for all who are "saved." It's not like just Catholics will go there. Unless you die in a state of perfection, with no desire to sin, no attachment to sin, no selfishness, you know, "perfect as God is perfect" you need to be purified. Stay tuned as I try to address this with hopefulpilgrim.

One day, ya'll will learn to listen to me. I've been saying this since I first saw it introduced. It's nothing more than a red herring with which to beat anyone who points out their wrong. It can be shaped and molded to fit any circumstance and they use it to deny the work of the Holy Spirit without having to directly say it. They just point to their one size fits all constantly changing argument and they can claim ignorance when needed while beating you up over something you do not espouse. All the while making poor 'idiots' who trust God and are yet shallow to doubt both themselves and God. As I've always said, God will have his due.

You are 100% correct. I finally got smart and informed SD that I would no longer discuss the subject with him. I see he is still begging for someone who will debate it on his terms.

I did offer to pronounce my personal definition of "magisterium" and discuss it on my terms. For some reason he didn't take me up on the offer.

WHEN A PROTESTANT ADDUCES THEIR OWN WRITERS AS WITNESSES, HE IS FREQUENTLY TOLD THAT HE IS A MISREPRESENTER OF THEIR CHURCH (Charles Elliott, Delineation of Roman Catholicism, London: John Mason, 1851, p. 23).

Sounds like this guy had a vision of the Neverending Threads way back in 1851 :)

Indeed. Of course Catholics and Protestants have been accusing each other of misrepresenting each other for a lot longer than since 1851.

There are only 2 logical conclusions to Hebrews 6. One is that once you fall away you can never come back. Never be saved again. Which we all know is not true. Even you guys believe that you can restore yourself to salvation. The other logical conclusion is that falling away is impossible and this is why, becuase Christ cannot die again on the Cross. His sacrifice is perfect. If you could fall away, then you are saying that what Christ did on the Cross was insufficient, so why goes through this vicious cycle of falling away and re-sacrificing Christ on the Cross, or as Hebrews so wonderfully puts it "Since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame."

Interesting. I was thinking about this last night and did some reading on this. What you use as proof that we can't fall from God's grace, the Catholic uses as proof that we can. In the footnotes in one of my bibles (NAB) I found this regarding Hb. 6:4-6 ...

4. "... enlightened ant tasted the heavenly gift ..." - This may refer to baptism & the Eucharist, but more probably means our enlightenment by faith and our experience of salvation.

5. "... tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, ..." - The proclamation of the "word of God" was accompanied by signs of the Spirit's power.

And here's the kicker ... 6. "... recrucifying the Son of God, putting Him to shame." - A colorful description of the malice of apostasy which is portrayed as again crucifying and deriding the Son of God.

Taking this approach, this passage is speaking of those that are in apostasy. They have abandoned God and Jesus.

Thoughts?

Question: Do you believe that cults, like JW's and Mormons are closer to the "sola Scriptura" rule of faith or the RC model of Scripture plus "church" authority and traditions? Consider carefully, this test will be graded.

How about both? How about "I'm not sure"? Mormons certainly teach that the whole present Church, including the Catholics and everyone else, fell into apostasy and needed to be "renewed." This certainly isn't a "listen to the Catholic Church" attitude. So it can be said that the founders of Mormonism were exercising their right to interpret Scripture without having a Church tell them what it means. Of course the "new" "Scripture" they found throws a monkey wrench into things.

And now that they are established, they have no problem following the Catholic model of obedience to "God's true church."

I am not real sure about the JW's, being fairly ignorant about them, but I think the same can be said. Sola Scriptura was good when they started as a new faith, it is bad now that the "true" Church is established.

First of all, if the son had died while squandering his inheritance, would that have made him lose his sonship? I mean he still would have been his father's son.

Agreed. No, he would not lose his "sonship" but his inheritance was gone.

If we die while squandering our inheritance (eternal life), where would that leave us? We are still children of God, but would we then lose our inheritance? Yes, unless ... like the prodigal son ... we confess, repent and turn back to a life in Him.

Dave, you misunterstood Havoc. Sometimes it seems like you "misunderstand" on purpose. You confused his whole post. Pay attention and try to understand.

I assure you it is not purposeful. I am sure that I don't understand a majority of what he says and vice versa. I am also sure that I wouldn't bother to even say anything about his posts if he didn't infuriate me with his lies. And vice versa I'm sure.

I know you don't like to think like me, but try this once. He says that the Catholic Church teaches that Mary must have remained a virgin or it would effect Jesus's Incarnation. This is pure BS, but he argues against the point anyway and throws in a few "doctrine of the devils" and inflammatory rhetoric like that.

when asked to provide support for his claims of what Catholics teach, he ignores me.

Then he says that Purgatory is a "work" of the person in Purgatory. I again ask for proof of what he claims is Catholic teaching, proudly tells you all here that it is Catholic teaching. He refers me to the prior 160-some threads.

I see last night that he found some Catholic teaching on Purgatory. It is all well and good, but NONE of it backs up what he said about us teaching it is a work. NONE of it. Then he tells me how we are all following the devil.

I wonder if Havoc realizes that his "twisting" of Catholic teaching is just as maddening as what he considers our "twisting" of Scripture?

I wouldn't mind if an opponent here disagreed with Catholic teaching. the808bass does it all the time. But he also seems to understand what the teaching is. I would give Havoc a kewpie doll if he could shut off his "doctrine of demons" rhetoric for five minutes and actually give a faithful recounting of what Catholics actually teach about anything.

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.