(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote: Frodo is a God of the bible/Jesus Christ centered Christian, as such has the benfit of attonement to cover any mistakes in Doctrine he may have.
How does that work specifically?
Frodo, I'm assuming, has already done the "accept Jesus" spiel along with whatever correct or incorrect conditions that go with it. But, according to you, he is wrong about the doctrine right now. Does he have to repeat the "atonement" correctly (according to you) at some future date or does his past atonement cover all future mistakes even though it was incorrect?
(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote: Fore the same forgiveness available to the Christian when he willfully sins is their in abundance more when he is ask/seek/knocking while constructing the best picture of God he possible can.
Again, do you have to ask forgiveness every time you sin or does asking it once cover all future sins? For example, if a bank robber steals a lot of money and kills three hostages while trying to escape, is the only difference between him going to heaven or hell is if he has the time to think "Please Jesus, forgive me", before being gunned down by the cops?
(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote: Their is a limit. Christ warns us not to become too comfortable/luke warm in our beliefs. Rather we need to push our understanding of God and have it evolve as we walk and grow in the Spirit. Otherwise it would be better if we never knew of God.
More vague, open-to-interpretation "rules" from your bible?
What is the limit specifically? At what point does a Christian denomination stop being a Christian denomination according to you? What could their beliefs be that cannot be covered by "mistaking the doctrine"?
(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote:Quote: but then you're basically conceding that pretty much of all Christendom has had it wrong. I applaud the boldness of your move.not at all, only those who speak to an endless love that is nowhere to be found in the bible. That is a modern catholic construct, and not a biblical precept.
Are you denying that most of the Christendom speaks of endless unconditional love (which isn't in the bible according to your interpretation) or are you simply unaware of it?
(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote: In it I say the doctrines of Christ must all have one qualifier in common, in that they must be taught by Christ. Well, here is a prime example of an empty Christian platitude that is not taught by Christ.
So, what position do you take on subjects that your Christ never spoke about, supposedly?
(September 15, 2014 at 12:21 am)Drich Wrote: The only way someone who believes God is Omni benevolent is any less of a believer than, someone who recognizes what the bible actually says about God's love, is when That person believes because that is what they were told in Sunday school, and no other source. In short when their belief starts and ends there. Meaning they do not grow in What they know. They do not read the bible or seek God out on His terms, rather they try and make God fit who they think Him to be.
Its interesting that you should argue that - because others would argue the following: You believe only in the bible. Your belief starts and ends there. You do not grow in what you know. You do not apply critical thinking. You do not seek your god on his terms, which encompass the totality of things he created. You are the one who has become comfortable/lukewarm in your beliefs because you limit your god to the things you can find in the bible. Thus, you'd be the one trying to make him fit who you think him to be.
Other Christian theologians and philosophers would argue that in order to "push your understanding" you need to go beyond the bible - something they have been doing for centuries.
