Evangelicals, do you consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be preaching a "different Gospel"*?
Jehovah's Witnesses, do you consider Evangelicals to be preaching a "different Gospel*?"
(*A pejorative term, introduced by the apostle Paul)
If so, isn't that a bit silly, considering that you both hold Paul in such high esteem, and consider salvation as being from the "blood of Christ"?
Isn't it silly...
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Isn't it silly...
Post #1 My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3170
- Joined: Sun May 31, 2015 1:18 pm
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #21[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]
It is easy for one to see the theological differences between two groups as trivial when one considers both groups to be substantially wrong: it amounts to saying, "Look, the totality of both your ideologies are trivial, therefore, whatever differences you have between each other must also be trivial; can't you get along?"
However, if God is in fact triune and Jesus in fact God, it will be very difficult to conceive a picture of heaven in which one group denies reality and another accepts it. Would it be trivial for one portion of England to say, "Hey, we are all about England; we just don't recognize any members of the royalty of England, nor of its parliament; nor of its rights to dictate laws which we must obey"; all while the other citizens recognize each branch of government as rightful authorities?
Obviously not. If Christians are right in attributing absolute deity to Jesus, then J.W.'s are wrong: and the error consists in a recognition of ultimate realities.
Please note. I am not here debating the truth of either claims. If Christians are wrong, then the error is equally grave, and the sooner they abandon their distinctively Christian beliefs the better.
I am far more eager to combat what I see as a fatal endemic in progressive societies.
The danger of the view latent in the OP is a kind of relativism: the suggestion that it does not matter whether one's beliefs are true or not; that holding a false view has no more consequence upon one's mental, physical or "spiritual" life than holding a true view.
Of course if anyone takes the line that both ideologies are equally bogus, then it certainly will not matter to him or her on what bogus points the two parties agree.
It is easy for one to see the theological differences between two groups as trivial when one considers both groups to be substantially wrong: it amounts to saying, "Look, the totality of both your ideologies are trivial, therefore, whatever differences you have between each other must also be trivial; can't you get along?"
However, if God is in fact triune and Jesus in fact God, it will be very difficult to conceive a picture of heaven in which one group denies reality and another accepts it. Would it be trivial for one portion of England to say, "Hey, we are all about England; we just don't recognize any members of the royalty of England, nor of its parliament; nor of its rights to dictate laws which we must obey"; all while the other citizens recognize each branch of government as rightful authorities?
Obviously not. If Christians are right in attributing absolute deity to Jesus, then J.W.'s are wrong: and the error consists in a recognition of ultimate realities.
Please note. I am not here debating the truth of either claims. If Christians are wrong, then the error is equally grave, and the sooner they abandon their distinctively Christian beliefs the better.
I am far more eager to combat what I see as a fatal endemic in progressive societies.
The danger of the view latent in the OP is a kind of relativism: the suggestion that it does not matter whether one's beliefs are true or not; that holding a false view has no more consequence upon one's mental, physical or "spiritual" life than holding a true view.
Of course if anyone takes the line that both ideologies are equally bogus, then it certainly will not matter to him or her on what bogus points the two parties agree.
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #22In a trivial sense holding ANY view has consequences. Holding a religious view which is wrong may have no bad consequences at all; people live and die and what they think happens in the Elysian Fields hardly matters.liamconnor wrote:
The danger of the view latent in the OP is a kind of relativism: the suggestion that it does not matter whether one's beliefs are true or not; that holding a false view has no more consequence upon one's mental, physical or "spiritual" life than holding a true view.
I am heartily persuaded that Christianity has some merit but its principal tenets are mistaken. I am absolutely persuaded that Islam is absolutely mistaken. The various sects within Christianity are squabbling over trivia, as far as I see. And yes, squabbling is silly and cures no cancers.
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #23[Replying to post 21 by liamconnor]
"However, if God is in fact triune and Jesus in fact God, it will be very difficult to conceive a picture of heaven in which one group denies reality and another accepts it. Would it be trivial for one portion of England to say, "Hey, we are all about England; we just don't recognize any members of the royalty of England, nor of its parliament; nor of its rights to dictate laws which we must obey"; all while the other citizens recognize each branch of government as rightful authorities?
Obviously not. If Christians are right in attributing absolute deity to Jesus, then J.W.'s are wrong: and the error consists in a recognition of ultimate realities."
I am glad you picked up on that. It is huge. Who is this God of heaven and earth?
I think majority of Christians from many denominations even if they claim doctrine of Trinity will agree that Jesus Christ is and shall be King of Kings and Lord and Lords.
It is not just a lack of belief but forcefully taking away the crown from Christ which He claimed for himself. Totall misrepresentation of NT.
"However, if God is in fact triune and Jesus in fact God, it will be very difficult to conceive a picture of heaven in which one group denies reality and another accepts it. Would it be trivial for one portion of England to say, "Hey, we are all about England; we just don't recognize any members of the royalty of England, nor of its parliament; nor of its rights to dictate laws which we must obey"; all while the other citizens recognize each branch of government as rightful authorities?
Obviously not. If Christians are right in attributing absolute deity to Jesus, then J.W.'s are wrong: and the error consists in a recognition of ultimate realities."
I am glad you picked up on that. It is huge. Who is this God of heaven and earth?
I think majority of Christians from many denominations even if they claim doctrine of Trinity will agree that Jesus Christ is and shall be King of Kings and Lord and Lords.
It is not just a lack of belief but forcefully taking away the crown from Christ which He claimed for himself. Totall misrepresentation of NT.
-
- Savant
- Posts: 12235
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #24How many Heavenly Kings are there? You say most Christians say it is Jesus, but Jesus himself implied it is the Father. "Thy kingdom come." (not my kingdom come.) And "For thine (the Father) is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever amen".Monta wrote:
I am glad you picked up on that. It is huge. Who is this God of heaven and earth?
I think majority of Christians from many denominations even if they claim doctrine of Trinity will agree that Jesus Christ is and shall be King of Kings and Lord and Lords.
It is not just a lack of belief but forcefully taking away the crown from Christ which He claimed for himself. Totall misrepresentation of NT.
My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #25When disciples called him good, He said there is no one good but God.Elijah John wrote:How many Heavenly Kings are there? You say most Christians say it is Jesus, but Jesus himself implied it is the Father. "Thy kingdom come." (not my kingdom come.) And "For thine (the Father) is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever amen".Monta wrote:
I am glad you picked up on that. It is huge. Who is this God of heaven and earth?
I think majority of Christians from many denominations even if they claim doctrine of Trinity will agree that Jesus Christ is and shall be King of Kings and Lord and Lords.
It is not just a lack of belief but forcefully taking away the crown from Christ which He claimed for himself. Totall misrepresentation of NT.
Jesus born of Mary with human nature (soul the Divine of the Father)
also said - I come from the Father.
Father Divine Good/Love is superior to Wisdom/Truth.
Jesus (the Word made flesh) recognized this and acted according to Order.
- ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #26Exactitude is impossible there are too many ways to state this...Elijah John wrote: [Replying to post 19 by ttruscott]
If we are saved by "faith in Christ", what does "faith in Christ" mean, exactly?
Faith, the hope trust and acceptance without proof that the Christ is our saviour from any and all sin by HIS death and resurrection so as to cleans us from evil to become heaven ready.
Faith - an unproven hope
Christ - YHWH's Messiah on earth, one of the Divine Persons of the ONE GOD, YHHWH
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #27[Replying to post 26 by ttruscott]
"Faith, the hope trust and acceptance without proof that the Christ is our saviour from any and all sin by HIS death and resurrection so as to cleans us from evil to become heaven ready.
Faith - an unproven hope."
Wouldn't you say that you also have some inner knowing that it is so?
Faith is not blind belief like i believe that's million dollars hanging on my cherry tree.
Faith is of truth, as our truth is so is our faith.
Jesus said that his words are spirit and they are life. As such they enter our consciusness and we can see it and just know.
"Faith, the hope trust and acceptance without proof that the Christ is our saviour from any and all sin by HIS death and resurrection so as to cleans us from evil to become heaven ready.
Faith - an unproven hope."
Wouldn't you say that you also have some inner knowing that it is so?
Faith is not blind belief like i believe that's million dollars hanging on my cherry tree.
Faith is of truth, as our truth is so is our faith.
Jesus said that his words are spirit and they are life. As such they enter our consciusness and we can see it and just know.
- ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #28Yes I agree but rather than an 'inner knowing' I'd suggest a gift of certainty Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the assurance / certainty of things not seen.:Monta wrote:Wouldn't you say that you also have some inner knowing that it is so?ttruscott wrote: "Faith, the hope trust and acceptance without proof that the Christ is our saviour from any and all sin by HIS death and resurrection so as to cleans us from evil to become heaven ready.
Faith - an unproven hope."
Faith is not blind belief like i believe that's million dollars hanging on my cherry tree.
Faith is of truth, as our truth is so is our faith.
Jesus said that his words are spirit and they are life. As such they enter our consciusness and we can see it and just know.
But also Rom 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope [the assurance / certainty of things not seen] we were saved; but hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he can already see? Faith and hope will end with proof but it is faith, an unproven hope, that saves.
What do you think?
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
-
- Prodigy
- Posts: 4069
- Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:07 pm
- Has thanked: 105 times
- Been thanked: 63 times
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #29I think like Paul puts it in 2 Corinthians:ttruscott wrote:Yes I agree but rather than an 'inner knowing' I'd suggest a gift of certainty Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the assurance / certainty of things not seen.:Monta wrote:Wouldn't you say that you also have some inner knowing that it is so?ttruscott wrote: "Faith, the hope trust and acceptance without proof that the Christ is our saviour from any and all sin by HIS death and resurrection so as to cleans us from evil to become heaven ready.
Faith - an unproven hope."
Faith is not blind belief like i believe that's million dollars hanging on my cherry tree.
Faith is of truth, as our truth is so is our faith.
Jesus said that his words are spirit and they are life. As such they enter our consciusness and we can see it and just know.
But also Rom 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope [the assurance / certainty of things not seen] we were saved; but hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he can already see? Faith and hope will end with proof but it is faith, an unproven hope, that saves.
What do you think?
4:13 It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.� Since we have that same spirit of faith, we also believe and therefore speak.
18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.
5:7 For we walk by faith, not by sight.
Re: Isn't it silly...
Post #30[Replying to post 28 by ttruscott]
"But also Rom 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope [the assurance / certainty of things not seen] we were saved; but hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he can already see? Faith and hope will end with proof but it is faith, an unproven hope, that saves. "
Does that differ from blind faith and how.
"But also Rom 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope [the assurance / certainty of things not seen] we were saved; but hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he can already see? Faith and hope will end with proof but it is faith, an unproven hope, that saves. "
Does that differ from blind faith and how.