posted
I don't know how to get the thread out of the downward spiral it seems to be heading in, but I think everyone can agree that this
quote: So I guess I'd say that good works alone are not a guarantee of salvation; they must be accompanied by an acceptance of Christ. That acceptance may come early or late, but must come before a person can be saved.
Sheesh. Save me from your "salvation". We don't believe that people basically suck. So we don't see a need for "salvation". If you do something wrong, you cop to it, regret it, and commit not to do it again. That's what God wants of us.
is where the thread really headed into angry territory.
I think the problem lies in the fact that senoj stated things the way he believed them to absolutely be, which mae Lisa want to make sure that other people saw things as absolutely not being that way. And things got snippy from there.
I understand where you are coming from, Lisa, but you erred by not framing your absolute belief politely, as senoj did, but rather in a snarky fashion.
So, I think it's not the fact that you disagree with senoj. That's expected. It's just the way you framed your disagreement.
It would be interesting in a kind of Jerry Springerish way to see a debate about whether Jesus really died for mankind's sins (the species, not the wrestler), or whether accepting Jesus as your savior really does anything, spiritually, but I honestly don't see how any kind of real proof could be offered that would sway anyone who wasn't already in a particular camp. So, probably the best thing to do is to agree to disagree on the whole Jesus issue, or whose religion is right.
posted
Lisa, This thread was started about a quote from a book intentionally full of Christian symbolism that was written by a Christian author. Coming in and telling people that Jesus never existed and if he did you didn't like what he said is kind of silly considering the first post of the thread and the fact that Aslan represents Him. It also really adds nothing to the discussion and just ends up derailing it . I think that's why your words and manner of posting are being singled out.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, This thread was started about a quote from a book intentionally full of Christian symbolism that was written by a Christian author. Coming in and telling people that Jesus never existed and if he did you didn't like what he said is kind of silly considering the first post of the thread and the fact that Aslan represents Him. It also really adds nothing to the discussion and just ends up derailing it . I think that's why your words and manner of posting are being singled out.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Now, honestly, how is that helping? Do you really need someone to explain why telling someone they are going to hell is offensive even if you don't agree?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: This thread was started about a quote from a book intentionally full of Christian symbolism that was written by a Christian author. Coming in and telling people that Jesus never existed and if he did you didn't like what he said is kind of silly considering the first post of the thread and the fact that Aslan represents Him. It also really adds nothing to the discussion and just ends up derailing it . I think that's why your words and manner of posting are being singled out.
Actually, it seems to me that the whole point of Lewis' quote was that understanding truth/spiritual truth is not a uniquely 'Christian' ability or experience.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: No, rude would be if I were to point out that someone rudely correcting my grammar probably shouldn't misspell words while doing so. It's "sentence". [/qb]
Sorry Lisa. I was trying to point out that I personally found your response abrasive and then attempted to ease the observation with a joke about grammer. I apologize.
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: I was talking about what's necessary to get right with God. I should have added that before you do that, you have to make it right with the person or person's you harmed. Restitution. If you hurt someone and try to just repent to God, God doesn't accept it. No "absolution" can help if you don't make restitution to the victim. [/QB]
But I think it's never possible to make it right with the person without an external force (Savior). I agree you can't be right with God without offering restitution; it's just that any restitution you may offer is insufficient.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
The thread title asked for theists. She had every right to join in the discussion. And every reason, if only to remind some of us that Christians are far from being the only theists around!
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Lisa: how are they relegating you to a horrible damnation you don't believe in?
And how are they hurt by my saying that their deity is fictional and that his "salvation" is swamp water?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BaoQingTian: Lisa, This thread was started about a quote from a book intentionally full of Christian symbolism that was written by a Christian author. Coming in and telling people that Jesus never existed and if he did you didn't like what he said is kind of silly considering the first post of the thread and the fact that Aslan represents Him. It also really adds nothing to the discussion and just ends up derailing it . I think that's why your words and manner of posting are being singled out.
Aslan may have represented him to Lewis, but I read the series as a child (multiple times), and he represented no one but Aslan.
You're basically saying, "Yes, this is a Christian thread, and the word theists in the name of the topic means specifically Christian theists." I don't accept that. If it's true, then it's one more example of Christians claiming that only they are theists. Which is ironic and offensive.
I'm deliberatly returning their serve. Maybe it'll wake them up to the reality of what they're doing.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: Lisa: how are they relegating you to a horrible damnation you don't believe in?
And how are they hurt by my saying that their deity is fictional and that his "salvation" is swamp water?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like it that way, too! I've always thought that it makes more sense and now I can justify it! Woohoo!
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Believing someone is likely going to hell and telling them they are are two different things. I notice a distinct lack of the latter in this thread (or on hatrack in general).
There are always going to be (often extreme) disagreements on morality; you no doubt think many of the beliefs of conservative christians on this board are wrong, much as they likely think some of your beliefs are wrong. Does this give them the right to insult your beliefs, or you theirs?
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. The discussion is over, because you are insulting. 2. You create a hostile envioronment. 3. You violate the user agreement. 4. You make it unsafe for people to share their sincere religious feelings, because your mock and/or slam them for it.
In other words, it's bad for the community. Whatever you think of the afterlife, your actions have immediate, destructive consequences.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: 1. The discussion is over, because you are insulting.
Sorry, but I honestly don't see how any of Lisa's post in this thread have been more hostile or insulting than this. I, for one, do not feel that she has been hostile to me and you have slammed my beliefs more often than she has. And somehow we seem to think it's fine to disregard hers. Or say that they are irrelevant at BQT did.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thread changed from a discussion about Lewis and theology to a discussion about starLisa. I wonder if that wasn't the point.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I locked this thread because at the time there was nothing positive coming from it. Please note that I didn't identify any person or opinion that was causing the problem. Mainly that's because if I do, then the thread simply becomes an argument as to whether or not either the person had the right or the opinion was valid.
To be honest, had the forum not been acting up, I would have written this then, and not locked the thread. But I didn't want ten more replies posted in the same manner before mine showed up.
I'm re-opening the thread, because the topic is well worth discussion, and the more viewpoints that are politely represented the more we all have the opportunity to benefit. If the sniping resumes, I will again lock the thread.
posted
It suddenly occurs to me that "It doesn't do anything--that's the beauty of it!" is a snipe hunt--of the cyberspace variety!
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
With all apologies to Papa Moose, I'm glad, because I can now respond to this
quote:Originally posted by katharina: It was directed at starLisa. I would never, ever call JM dear.
Good. Because if you *had* taken that kind of condescending tone with me I would have had to make a special trip back to Dallas to flip you off to your face. I'm rather tired of giving you the opportunity to come in and use every little ambiguity in what I say on substantive threads to paint me how you like and make little snide insults like the one above.
Pop... I hope you will not lock the thread because of this but I needed to say that. I'm done.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
*Leans on club, looking exasperated* Hatrackers ungrateful lot! Me no can be here all day, youse knows. starLisa try to take up trolling slack, what she get? Bitch, bitch, moan! Plenty poor forums in Africa would be grateful for perfectly good troll like dat one.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dh: It also seems to open the door to "works righteousness," or salvation by works. A person can be a muslim or buddhist or whatever and be very kind and do lots of good things, but it would bring him no closer to salvation. You don't belong to Christ by giving him "service", but by accepting his free gift to you.
<shudder> I honestly don't get how you can accept something like that. The idea that you worship someone who insists, first and foremost, on you joining his club, and only incidentally worries about you being a good person. Think how you'd relate to an earthly group that demanded such a thing.
And, I can respond to this, because it voices a very widespread misunderstanding of the concept of salvation by faith.
It's not about joining a club. Nor does being saved by faith exempt you from doing good works. The point is that, no matter how many good works you do, you will never be good. Whereas, if you are transformed by God's saving grace through faith in Jesus Christ, good works will naturally follow. Not immediately, and slowly at first, but they will gradually increase. As James said in his epistle, faith without works is dead. But a good tree can only produce good fruit.
That is the concept of salvation by grace. Good works do not produce salvation. Rather, salvation produces good works.
Posts: 609 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Read the Cost of Discipleship by Bonhoeffer for the a tremendous explanation of from where the desire to good works flows.
mackillian: My answer may not satisfy you, but the entire book of Romans makes it pretty clear that Christain salvation comes through grace alone, without reference to works.
Posts: 102 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't mean any disrespect by this, but I have a huge backlog of books waiting to be read. Books I sought out because I was interested in them. Do you seriously expect me to seek this book out, or are you just trying to end the conversation? Because I doubt highly that I will ever read this book out.
Can you give a "nutshell" answer?
(Honestly, I have no problem with the belief that you cannot earn salvation through your good works. My Catholic education already taught me this. What I object to is the belief that you must specifically be baptized into one of a limited number of specific Christian denominations, and profess faith in Christ, during your lifetime.)
I have prayed and sought an answer, and the Spirit tells me this belief is mistaken. Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I try and avoid giving nutshell answers regarding theological issues because I am not qualified to do so. However, Bonhoeffer's essential argument is that Grace, while freely given, is "costly" in that those who truly believe and are saved by grace will know of the tremendous gift they have been given. Therefore, they well desire to sacrifice all in order to follow the Lord and party of this sacrifice will be to do good works, though they might be difficult to do and may result in pain rather than pleasure.
The money quote from the book would probably be:
"The only man who has the right to say that he is justified by grace alone is the man who left all to follow Christ. Such a man knows that the call to discipleship is a gift of grace, and that the call is inseparable from grace" Cost, p.55
Thats a very short and simple summary. Somebody else may be able to do better.
On a side note, Bonhoeffer himself is an example of living his idea. He sacrificed much in his time, opposing the Nazis especially.
Posts: 102 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I see how that answers the question "Why would someone who is saved do good works if the good works are not necessary to his salvation?"
I think you may also be answering the question "Why do allegedly saved people sometimes lead evil lives?"
I don't think you have answered the question "Why do allegedly unsaved people sometimes live extremely good lives?"
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My answer to the third question lies in the theory of the natural law, that right and wrong are, in essence, imprinted on the hearts and minds of all people. Somewhere inside everyone, deeply buried/repressed in some people, is the inclination for good that comes from being created in God's image. Our daily lives are merely a battle between that natural law and our sinful nature. Grace of the costly variety is one reason to choose the natural law more often; other people may have other reasons, conscious or unconscious, for doing so.
Posts: 102 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I guess then it's a completely separate issue, but I find highly unsatisfactory the idea that a good person can honestly seek out God, remain unconvinced by His promotional materials, and be condemned to some variation on Hell.
(Someone will likely come along and argue that being unconvinced is, ipso facto, evidence that the search was insincere. It has happened before, both online and in e-mails I have received in response to my posts seeking out God. I find this unbelievably offensive, but these people will not care, since they view me as unsaved anyway. Oh, well.)
posted
In discussions like these, I like to bring good ol' James (2:18-24) into it:
"Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
When discussing which was more important, faith or works, C.S. Lewis said it was akin to asking which blade of the scissor was more important.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, this thread was just above the "Favorite B Movies" thread, and I guess I'm sleepy, and I just looked and parsed it as "Favorite Hatrack Theists."
I just had to click to come in and complain about the blatant popularity thread . . .
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Taalcon: When discussing which was more important, faith or works, C.S. Lewis said it was akin to asking which blade of the scissor was more important.
I really like that.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
>>The idea that you worship someone who insists, first and foremost, on you joining his club, and only incidentally worries about you being a good person.<<
The point is you can't join the club unless you ARE a good person. Alternatively, joining the club will help you become a better person.
Being good isn't incidental to being Christian. It's fundamental. I'm sorry you were ever given a different impression.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
>>Then from whence do good works flow when someone is not "saved"?<<
Good works, whether someone has been saved or not, flow from the person doing them.
I believe that everyone who does good makes the choice to follow God's voice, whether they recognize that voice as God's or not. God, I believe, makes the choice possible, and influences us to choose Good. We choose to ignore, rebel, or explore what good things God wants us to accomplish.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
