Christian thread in the Christian forum

[mikedsjr]

I thought I would start this controversial thread to hash out some scriptural issues. I am not a greek scholar, however since buying the NET bible with notes I have a greater understanding of why there are many disagreements. There are more notes than there are scripture in this bible. There are a lot of notes regarding the greek and then the different ways it can be read in some of the verses and what the main agreement is and why. Also, i've talked to some of my friends who have been to seminary and they both agree that seminary basically deconstructs the bible, which causes me to understand why there are so many beliefs within Christianity. Some people could easily leave seminary and decide for themselves what greek means. They also both agreed that they don't even listen to pastors who begin quoting the greek to explain what it means to their listeners and only have the minimum requirement for greek in seminary because they have not been trained to reconstruct the greek NT.

Just saying that to say, I understand why we disagree. We have pastors with varying degrees of understanding and we come from different backgrounds.

Mitch, What do you mean by open system vs closed system?

[mitchellmckain]

I thought I would start this controversial thread to hash out some scriptural issues. I am not a greek scholar, however since buying the NET bible with notes I have a greater understanding of why there are many disagreements. There are more notes than there are scripture in this bible. There are a lot of notes regarding the greek and then the different ways it can be read in some of the verses and what the main agreement is and why. Also, i've talked to some of my friends who have been to seminary and they both agree that seminary basically deconstructs the bible, which causes me to understand why there are so many beliefs within Christianity. Some people could easily leave seminary and decide for themselves what greek means. They also both agreed that they don't even listen to pastors who begin quoting the greek to explain what it means to their listeners and only have the minimum requirement for greek in seminary because they have not been trained to reconstruct the greek NT.

Yes I don't think that a seminary education is the most important qualification for the work of a pastor. It is a real calling from God that is important. Now that is not something that people are likely to be good at measuring and so it may not be all that effective for a resume or a job interview, but that is not always how pastors get to be where they are - I am talking about those who plant and build a church themselves.

Mitch, What do you mean by open system vs closed system?

No I am not talking about "open system vs closed sytem" which is terminology in physics, I am talking about the open set model of ministry versus the closed set model of ministry. The closed set model of ministry is all about getting people into the group of people who are saved. The closed set model not only creates this division between people which may be more superficial than substantial, but it tends to be a lot like selling used cars, where all you care about is whether they buy your product.

The open set model of ministry is about bringing all people closer to Jesus, from helping atheists to understand more about the Bible and Christianity to helping those who are really serious about it to study the scriptures in greater detail and equip them for a minsitry of their own. So the open set model tries to disolve this artificial division between people to basically treat all people according where they are at and what they need or want.

[Pseudonym]

I thought I would start this controversial thread to hash out some scriptural issues.

Sounds like fun. Count me in.

I am not a greek scholar, [...]

Nor am I. I used to hang around a Biblical Greek mailing list where they used to affectionately refer to people in this position as "little Greeks", the implication being that a little Greek is a dangerous thing.

I'm curious to know who has actually studied Greek formally.

[...] however since buying the NET bible with notes I have a greater understanding of why there are many disagreements. There are more notes than there are scripture in this bible. There are a lot of notes regarding the greek and then the different ways it can be read in some of the verses and what the main agreement is and why.

I think the NET is a fabulous translation (though, like all translations, it has a bias; it does try very hard to be fair nonetheless), and I completely agree with you about the notes.

I used to tutor at a university college which doubled as a theology faculty. The professor of New Testament was (and still is) a very good friend of mine. I once asked her what her favourite translation was, and she said (to my surprise) that it was the RSV. Not even the NRSV. The reason why the RSV is tricky to read is that you really can "hear" the Greek.

I am talking about the open set model of ministry versus the closed set model of ministry.

This is interesting. I've never experienced a church with this "closed set model". I've always thought that a church should be a place where anyone is welcomed. (Though there was one experience with an individual with a severe mental illness who gave off a "potential danger to others" vibe that made a lot of people quite uncomfortable. That issue required a lot of soul-searching on the part of the congregation. I think in the end, the individual did stop turning up, which probably saved us from a difficult decision.)

[mikedsjr]

Maybe i need to back the train up a bit more. I just want to make sure we are on the same page a bit more before going deeper.

We are all on the same page about only Christians go to heaven? I know mitchell has been a little relunctant to say that because of Romans 2:14. I have to admit i used to think that, but since Romans was written to the Jewish and Gentile Christians, I'm having to rethink that. For one, to assume that the mind of man is a legitimate moral compass to lead a person to God is foolishness. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I would say that the number are astronomically low. And i believed that back when I thought it did mean the gentiles could be saved apart from knowing Christ. My ESV study bible says that the "existence of the testimony [written on their hearts] is sufficient to render people accountable to God". But this isn't an issue i'm going to bunker down on and stop the movement of the thread. I'm not as concerned about that as just a basic agreement about only Christians go to heaven.

[mitchellmckain]

Maybe i need to back the train up a bit more. I just want to make sure we are on the same page a bit more before going deeper.

We are all on the same page about only Christians go to heaven? I know mitchell has been a little relunctant to say that because of Romans 2:14. I have to admit i used to think that, but since Romans was written to the Jewish and Gentile Christians, I'm having to rethink that. For one, to assume that the mind of man is a legitimate moral compass to lead a person to God is foolishness.

The biggest problem isn't Romans 2:14, the problem is Romans 10:5-7, which says it is not our business to say who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, and in fact doing so is contrary to the kind of faith in God that we need. I certainly think that Romans 2:14 means that we cannot put trust in superficial labels that people slap on themselves and others. God does the work and what we need to do is act in faith. But it is not acting in faith to think that it is something you do, say, or believe that make the difference, and that is EXACTLY what you are doing if you start saying who goes to heaven and who goes to hell.

That the mind of man is not a legitimate moral compass to lead a person to God is the whole point, for when you decide what it is that you have to believe or do in order to be a Christian and then say that it is the Christians that are saved then you are making your mind the compass that leads to God/salvation and that is completely WRONG. When Romans 2:14 says that there are Gentiles that are doers of the law by following their conscience, this does not mean that men can find their way without God because this is a work of God not of men. It is when people say what you have to do and think and believe as I do in order to be saved, THAT is the work of men and not of God.

I'm not as concerned about that as just a basic agreement about only Christians go to heaven.

So you can count me out on that one, because however much that kind of thinking may be compatable with some Christian ideology and belief system, it just isn't compatable with Christian faith.

[mikedsjr]

Maybe i need to back the train up a bit more. I just want to make sure we are on the same page a bit more before going deeper.

We are all on the same page about only Christians go to heaven? I know mitchell has been a little relunctant to say that because of Romans 2:14. I have to admit i used to think that, but since Romans was written to the Jewish and Gentile Christians, I'm having to rethink that. For one, to assume that the mind of man is a legitimate moral compass to lead a person to God is foolishness.

The biggest problem isn't Romans 2:14, the problem is Romans 10:5-7, which says it is not our business to say who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, and in fact doing so is contrary to the kind of faith in God that we need. I certainly think that Romans 2:14 means that we cannot put trust in superficial labels that people slap on themselves and others. God does the work and what we need to do is act in faith. But it is not acting in faith to think that it is something you do, say, or believe that make the difference, and that is EXACTLY what you are doing if you start saying who goes to heaven and who goes to hell.

That the mind of man is not a legitimate moral compass to lead a person to God is the whole point, for when you decide what it is that you have to believe or do in order to be a Christian and then say that it is the Christians that are saved then you are making your mind the compass that leads to God/salvation and that is completely WRONG. When Romans 2:14 says that there are Gentiles that are doers of the law by following their conscience, this does not mean that men can find their way without God because this is a work of God not of men. It is when people say what you have to do and think and believe as I do in order to be saved, THAT is the work of men and not of God.

I'm not as concerned about that as just a basic agreement about only Christians go to heaven.

So you can count me out on that one, because however much that kind of thinking may be compatable with some Christian ideology and belief system, it just isn't compatable with Christian faith.

I'm not following you're problem with Romans 10:5-7. Especially if you go one verse up to 4

For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes.

Believes in what? Christ. Who He is, who we are before God, what Christ did for us and what Christ is to be for us.

Then a couple verses down from this in 9 reads

if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God [including Himself] raised Him from the dead, you will be saved

That's not all you ought to know, but it is quick synopsis to what is a start to know.

So this takes me back to your verses you mentioned. It says nothing about that it is not our business to say who goes to heaven. Let's read it.

6. .... Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend to heaven?" (that is to bring Christ down)

Why? Because God raised Him physically from the dead.

We know from the first 3 chapters that all have sinned, no one seeks after God and the wages of sin is death.

[wondersforoyarsa]

Mike, the trouble here comes from going to the text for answers to questions the text itself is not asking. I'm not saying we don't have to do this, but we have to do it carefully, and we need to make such efforts quite secondary to the questions the text is asking.

When we talk of "who goes to Heaven", we are asking questions the Bible isn't addressing. The Bible says almost nothing about going to Heaven - though a little more about the resurrection of the dead in the new Heavens and new Earth. The Bible is fairly clear about the means of the overthrow of sin and death - that would be Jesus death and resurrection. The normal means of individual salvation we are given is to be united to Christ by faith and baptism in the communion of his Church. But we also have to be careful to have a biblical understanding of election - that God elects a chosen community not so that they can be the only ones saved from sin and death, but rather so that they can be the means of the salvation of the world. Thus Israel saw themselves as the elect few, and wanted to keep the lamp under a bushel. Christ saw their vocation as an elect through which the many would be blessed. And thus we are told that those who gave "one of the least of these my brothers" something to eat when hungry, will find that they have done it unto Christ and be beckoned to enter into glory.

I really do not think it is safe to take a smattering of verses, which are discussing other topics, and combine them into a theology of universal non-Christian assurance of damnation - any more than it would be safe to do so and come up with universalism. We should pray for the salvation of all. We should humbly ask God to search our own hearts, to be sure that we are really right with him and not just fooling ourselves into thinking we are on "the inside" due to boundary markers. We should open wide the invitation to the wedding feast of the lamb, and be prepared for surprises when we sit down to that feast itself.

Basically, I'm against trusting in any trite formula of who is saved and who is damned. Anyone who is saved, is saved by Christ. So, by all means, urge all to come to him! But don't suppose you know the extent of his salvation, because you've "connected the dots" between a few verses in the epistles.

[mitchellmckain]

I'm not following you're problem with Romans 10:5-7. Especially if you go one verse up to 4

For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes.

Believes in what? Christ. Who He is, who we are before God, what Christ did for us and what Christ is to be for us.

Then a couple verses down from this in 9 reads

if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God [including Himself] raised Him from the dead, you will be saved

That's not all you ought to know, but it is quick synopsis to what is a start to know.

I know the context very well. The context is Paul's comparison of salvation based on faith with salvation based on the law from Romans 9:30. In Romans 10:3, he explains that the former is the righteousness that comes from God and the latter is an attempt to establish ones own righteousness. Then in Romans 10:4 he explains that Christ is the end of the law and therefore we must seek our righteousness and justification in faith not in the law. Then in Romans 10:5-7 Paul contrast the righteousness based on the law with the righteousness based on faith, which Paul explains is that you do not ask who goes to heaven or who goes to hell. Therefore the verses that follow CANNOT be taken as a formula for salvation but is only an example of how Christians might express their faith, for as a formula, things like Romans 10:13 is directly contradicted elsewhere in the Bible, such as Matt 7:21-23.

It says nothing about that it is not our business to say who goes to heaven. Let's read it.

6. .... Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend to heaven?" (that is to bring Christ down)

Why? Because God raised Him physically from the dead.

It says that the righteousness which is based on faith does not even ask such questions, let alone answer them, and not even in your heart, let alone aloud. And the reason is because salvation is God's work NOT man's, and so it is for God alone to say when, how and in what way His work is done. To ask and answer such questions is to make youself the savior and thus to say that you have no need of God or the work of Christ at all, and thus it is to undo the resurrection and "bring Christ down" or act like it is you who can raise Christ up from the dead. Since we cannot do what salvation requires it is not our place to ask or answer such questions.

We know from the first 3 chapters that all have sinned, no one seeks after God and the wages of sin is death.

Yes all have sinned. Romans 3:10-3:18 are quotations from Psalms and Isaiha to support Paul's claim that all both Jew and Greek are under the power of sin, and so no Jews, for all their advantages, are no better than anyone else. Through the Jews comes the knowledge of the law, but righteousness does not come through the law, because however much we may understand what God requires, understanding is not doing. So Paul cries out in Romans 7:15-24, that "I will what is right, but I cannot do it... who will deliver me from this body of death!"

We should pray for the salvation of all. We should humbly ask God to search our own hearts, to be sure that we are really right with him and not just fooling ourselves into thinking we are on "the inside" due to boundary markers.

Yes that is Christian faith -- which is assurance of the goodness of God and not any assurance of ourselves that we have made the grade. We can say the sinners prayer always as an open vessel ready to receive what God has to give and NEVER acting like salvation is one of your accomplishments in life. There is no room in Christian faith for thinking that you are in any way better than other people.

[ScottBarger]

I thought I would start this controversial thread to hash out some scriptural issues. I am not a greek scholar, however since buying the NET bible with notes I have a greater understanding of why there are many disagreements. There are more notes than there are scripture in this bible. There are a lot of notes regarding the greek and then the different ways it can be read in some of the verses and what the main agreement is and why. Also, i've talked to some of my friends who have been to seminary and they both agree that seminary basically deconstructs the bible, which causes me to understand why there are so many beliefs within Christianity. Some people could easily leave seminary and decide for themselves what greek means. They also both agreed that they don't even listen to pastors who begin quoting the greek to explain what it means to their listeners and only have the minimum requirement for greek in seminary because they have not been trained to reconstruct the greek NT.

Just saying that to say, I understand why we disagree. We have pastors with varying degrees of understanding and we come from different backgrounds.

Regarding the value of Greek within pastoral ministry, I would have to say that it HAS been beneficial to me, but only to a point. I studied Greek for four years, dabbled in Text Criticism and endured a mind-numbing amount of syntax. Throughout a typical semester I was spending somewhere in the neighborhood of 10-20 hours a week in Greek, and another 10-15 in Hebrew. After a couple of years I came to realize that I could spend that much time with the languages every week for the next 10 years and I still wouldn't grasp it to the level that the "pros" do. From that point on I was content to learn the languages to the extent that would enable me to follow a discussion between "pros"...I gave up on the idea that I was going to be a Biblical language scholar.

I concur that any study of the NT that delves beyond the superficial reading will reveal a BUNCH of challenging issues with which to wrestle and plenty of opportunity for well informed and well intentioned believers to absolutely disagree. This forum is a case in point.

[mikedsjr]

I know the context very well. The context is Paul's comparison of salvation based on faith with salvation based on the law from Romans 9:30. In Romans 10:3, he explains that the former is the righteousness that comes from God and the latter is an attempt to establish ones own righteousness. Then in Romans 10:4 he explains that Christ is the end of the law and therefore we must seek our righteousness and justification in faith not in the law. Then in Romans 10:5-7 Paul contrast the righteousness based on the law with the righteousness based on faith, which Paul explains is that you do not ask who goes to heaven or who goes to hell. Therefore the verses that follow CANNOT be taken as a formula for salvation but is only an example of how Christians might express their faith, for as a formula, things like Romans 10:13 is directly contradicted elsewhere in the Bible, such as Matt 7:21-23. It says that the righteousness which is based on faith does not even ask such questions, let alone answer them, and not even in your heart, let alone aloud. And the reason is because salvation is God's work NOT man's, and so it is for God alone to say when, how and in what way His work is done. To ask and answer such questions is to make youself the savior and thus to say that you have no need of God or the work of Christ at all, and thus it is to undo the resurrection and "bring Christ down" or act like it is you who can raise Christ up from the dead. Since we cannot do what salvation requires it is not our place to ask or answer such questions.

He's talking about the unbelieving Jews when he says "them" in verse 1.
Verse 5 (ESV) says

For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them.

He is already proven earlier in chapters 1-3 that nobody can try to hold to the law and be saved. And was quick and concise on this point in Galatians 3:11 (ESV) when he says

Now it is clear no one is justified before God by the law because the righteous one will live by faith

Verse 6 & 7(ESV) says,

But the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) or “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).

Paul is quoting Deuteronomy 30. Why? The study bible note i have for Deut 30:12 says, "Paul quotes from these verses in Romans 10:6-8 to show that the Jews already had the message of faith through the scriptures". In other words, They had no right to say they couldn't see Christ's coming.as foretold. The mere fact that they choose to misread the scriptures is no excuse. They are still condemned.

Paul continues in verse 8-9 (ESV)

But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

POW! There's the hit. This is what people must do. No if, ands or buts. And to say otherwise is heresy.

[Rian]

Yes, those that do this will be saved, but I don't think that's saying that if you DON'T do this you CAN'T be saved (it doesn't go backwards - e.g., "if you jump into a pool you will get wet" doesn't mean that if you're wet, you jumped into a pool).

I think that we need to be careful of formulas - I'd say that Abraham was saved (well, in fact, the Bible says he was), and I doubt that he said those things or got baptized. I think that Jesus is definitely the one and only way to God, but it might sometimes look different than the standard Christian thing. I think it boils down to this: God desires all to be saved; God provided the means for salvation; God is just.

(and don't say "just what?" like some youngster did on another board! It's "just" as in "perfectly fair".)

[mikedsjr]

That's fine, but i think you will have a hard time finding scripture to support your stance on that. Those saved before Christ were saved because of their trust in the promise to come found in Christ. This is what Paul is saying. They didn't have excuse for rejecting Christ. God foretold about Christ long ago....that's what Paul is saying.

[tony.n]

Nobody will be saved by a pristine doctrine.

Neither a Weslyan nor a Calvinist nor a Catholic can know precisely how they came to be saved, if they are. But they love to make theologies on it, don't we.

It can only be told in hindsight that they truly are born again. Even if the Catholic still believes he must keep on going forward for salvation (like they did at full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship dinners every month), then he still may well have been saved the fvery irst time of making a commitment to Christ. Or even before that. God knows who are his and we know we are because the spirit of God bears witness with our spirit that we are God's children and finally, by constant discerning we build up a way to know who else is a Christian.

When some go away from God we think we know why, but actually its mostly guesswork. Were they ever a Christian at all or have they gone so far away as to apostacise? But is there no middle ground whose basis we don't understand? For example, Christian burnout! Is being not weary in well doing conditional upon waiting upon the Lord until we receive new strength. Is there legitimacy to the dark night of the soul. Do Christians just get depressed like normal mortals?
Psalm 107
23Some went down to the sea in ships,
doing business on the mighty waters;
24they saw the deeds of the Lord,
his wondrous works in the deep.
25For he commanded and raised the stormy wind,
which lifted up the waves of the sea.
26They mounted up to heaven, they went down to the depths;
their courage melted away in their calamity;
27they reeled and staggered like drunkards,
and were at their wits’ end.
28Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he brought them out from their distress;
29he made the storm be still,
and the waves of the sea were hushed.
30Then they were glad because they had quiet,
and he brought them to their desired haven.

Through 2000 years of terrible doctrine, many people were saved by the spirit of God and through grace. They had no teaching to lead them, but that of their church. So they continued to think that their church or its doctrine had saved them. God is gracious. Those who were called Saints, were exactly that, ordinary Christians, saved by God to do extraordinary feats of kindness' bravery and faith. They still had some wierd doctrines, but they were nevertheless saved. Otherwise God would have had no witness for 2,000 years would he?

Have a lost the sense of the thread?

Of course I draw the line somewhere and that is to say that a saved person will be a trinitarian or at least believe that Jesus is God, show deep love to others and love God.

How am I doing?

[tony.n]

Nobody will be saved by a pristine doctrine.

Neither a Weslyan nor a Calvinist nor a Catholic can know precisely how they came to be saved, if they are. But they love to make theologies on it, don't we.

It can only be told in hindsight that they truly are born again. Even if the Catholic still believes he must keep on going forward for salvation (like they did at full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship dinners every month), then he still may well have been saved the fvery irst time of making a commitment to Christ. Or even before that. God knows who are his and we know we are because the spirit of God bears witness with our spirit that we are God's children and finally, by constant discerning we build up a way to know who else is a Christian.

When some go away from God we think we know why, but actually its mostly guesswork. Were they ever a Christian at all or have they gone so far away as to apostacise? But is there no middle ground whose basis we don't understand? For example, Christian burnout! Is being not weary in well doing conditional upon waiting upon the Lord until we receive new strength. Is there legitimacy to the dark night of the soul. Do Christians just get depressed like normal mortals?
Psalm 107
23Some went down to the sea in ships,
doing business on the mighty waters;
24they saw the deeds of the Lord,
his wondrous works in the deep.
25For he commanded and raised the stormy wind,
which lifted up the waves of the sea.
26They mounted up to heaven, they went down to the depths;
their courage melted away in their calamity;
27they reeled and staggered like drunkards,
and were at their wits’ end.
28Then they cried to the Lord in their trouble,
and he brought them out from their distress;
29he made the storm be still,
and the waves of the sea were hushed.
30Then they were glad because they had quiet,
and he brought them to their desired haven.

Through 2000 years of terrible doctrine, many people were saved by the spirit of God and through grace. They had no teaching to lead them, but that of their church. So they continued to think that their church or its doctrine had saved them. God is gracious. Those who were called Saints, were exactly that, ordinary Christians, saved by God to do extraordinary feats of kindness, bravery and faith. They still had some wierd doctrines, but they were nevertheless saved. Otherwise God would have had no witness for 2,000 years would he?

Of course I draw the line somewhere and that is to say that a saved person will be a trinitarian or at least believe that Jesus is God, show deep love to others and love God.

How am I doing?

[mitchellmckain]

Of course I draw the line somewhere and that is to say that a saved person will be a trinitarian or at least believe that Jesus is God, show deep love to others and love God.

How am I doing?

Pretty much in agreement with Mike as far as I can tell. I refuse to draw such lines around God and those that do so seem pretty much the same to me. I certainly stand against any attempt to tell people what they have to do or believe in order to be saved by God. That is the way of the relgion of men, making religion into a tool of manipulation and power over others.

Seems to me that either we are saved by what we do and believe or not. I think not. I believe that we are saved by God's belief in us, not by our belief in God or doctrines. I believe that we are saved by the work of God and not by the works of men or by our own efforts either. However salvation is not a ticket into heaven but transformation. Gods work of salvation is a work in us and thus we are saved unto works and faith without works is dead. Our salvation is a change of heart, a change of character, and a change of habits. These changes are not any requirement or price of salvation, they are instead the fruits of salvation. It is frutless and vain to point to ones works or beliefs and say, "see I am saved". It is the righteousness of faith to instead receive each good work and belief as a gift from God and thus good cause to give thanks for the work of God in you. It is likewise faithless and vain to point at the failings of others and say, "see he is not saved", because you do not know the work of God in him. No man is the author of salvation or the spokesman of God such that show the way that people are saved.