Christian Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Christian Forum aspires to be an online community where Christians can come together in fellowship with the purpose to encourage, inspire and build up our faith in Christ Jesus. John 13:34-35
  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

Tasted Death for every Man !

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
17,499
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Hi Wondering,

I bolded two parts of your post above. You said they believe He's a special Son. Then you said We say He is begotten which means special. How is that not the same thing?

Can you show me where Scripture says that one must believe that Jesus is part of a Trinity which is one God consisting of three persons? I'm pretty familiar with Scripture and I don't remember seeing anything like that. From what I see the primary thing that needed to be believed, according to Jesus and the apostles, what that Jesus was the Christ.

We really should start a different thread for this. A discussion of the Trinity will surely get this tread derailed and shut down.
There's a thread on the Trinity going on right now with a member that we believe to be a JW.
It's here:

An Open Debate on the Trinity with JLB​

It's in the THEOLOGY Forum.

As to the word special...I'm sorry I used the same word...didn't mean to cause confusion.
The JW say we're all sons of God, but Jesus is a SPECIAL son.

I was trying to get to the meaning of BEGOTTEN but it's not easy to do.
Jesus was not CREATED...He was begotten...a PART of God Father.
 
Messages
2,612
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
I didnt say anything about the Deity of Christ. You said that what JW said was outside of Chrisitianity and was another religion because it wasn't orthodox. I simply pointed out that much of what is taught today was not orthodox in the beginning. Orthodox just means the majority believes something. Thus, something being orthodox doesn't make it correct. His doctrine isn't another religion simply because it's not orthodox. If you disagree with his position lay out your argument and show where his position is wrong. Simply dismissing it because it's not the majority opinion is fallacious.
When I say orthodox, I am referring to the belief in Christ as God and not the tertiary teachings/beliefs/doctrines that denominations differ on. Without getting it right on Christ, the rest means little to nothing.
 

Butch5

Member
From
Homer Georgia
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Messages
4,370
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
There's a thread on the Trinity going on right now with a member that we believe to be a JW.
It's here:

An Open Debate on the Trinity with JLB​

It's in the THEOLOGY Forum.

As to the word special...I'm sorry I used the same word...didn't mean to cause confusion.
The JW say we're all sons of God, but Jesus is a SPECIAL son.

I was trying to get to the meaning of BEGOTTEN but it's not easy to do.
Jesus was not CREATED...He was begotten...a PART of God Father.
Yes, I saw that thread. However, begotten also causes problems for the Trinity doctrine. Again, we should do this in another thread.
 

Butch5

Member
From
Homer Georgia
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
Messages
4,370
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
When I say orthodox, I am referring to the belief in Christ as God and not the tertiary teachings/beliefs/doctrines that denominations differ on. Without getting it right on Christ, the rest means little to nothing.
But orthodox just means the majority believes the same thing. That doesn't mean what they believe is correct. As far as I've found in Scripture the requirement is to believe that Jesus is the Christ. I don't recall the requirements being about the Deity of Christ. I know many Christians today make that a sticking point, but, I don't see where Scripture does. We should take this to a new thread though.
 

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
17,499
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
OK, but in the original Greek all letters are capital. There was no God and god. It was God and God. Capitalizing the word God in English just means it refers to a person.
Even your car could be your god.
It just means something that you worship that is NOT God. It could even be a false god...(like Zeus).
Only God is to be worshipped.
 
Messages
2,612
Joined
Oct 20, 2016
But orthodox just means the majority believes the same thing. That doesn't mean what they believe is correct. As far as I've found in Scripture the requirement is to believe that Jesus is the Christ. I don't recall the requirements being about the Deity of Christ. I know many Christians today make that a sticking point, but, I don't see where Scripture does. We should take this to a new thread though.
Agreed. We can follow over to the discussion debate of the Trinity.
 

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
17,499
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
But orthodox just means the majority believes the same thing. That doesn't mean what they believe is correct. As far as I've found in Scripture the requirement is to believe that Jesus is the Christ. I don't recall the requirements being about the Deity of Christ. I know many Christians today make that a sticking point, but, I don't see where Scripture does. We should take this to a new thread though.
You bring up good points Butch5.
I know that just because a majority believes something, it does not make it right.
But in Christianity it does. I like to refer to some odd ideas as not being mainline Christianity.
Most theologians agree as to what a Christian is...most agree what doctrines are correct.
Every denomination might have a different idea on a doctrine, but all Christian denominations must believe what I listed previously.
If a person does not believe this, he cannot consider himself to be a Christian. He might be saved and love God more than any of us here, but he cannot call himself a Christian.

Here's the problem:
Jesus is the Christ just means that Jesus is the Messiah...the annointed one of God.
The One sent to be a messenger for God,,,in person,,,to give to everyone a clear message of what God expects from us.

Is this what Jesus was?
Was He a prophet sent by God with God's annointing and blessings?

If so, He was a crazy prophet because He thought He was God.
He went to the cross thinking God could send 1,000 angels if He just would have wanted Him to.
He resurrected, proving that He was more than a prophet, but was God incarnate.

The N.T. teaches that Jesus is God....come to earth as a human.

John 1:14
14and the Word became flesh....

1 John 1:1-2
1What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life—
2and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us—

1 Timothy 3:16
16By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness:
He who was revealed in the flesh,

Luke 1:35
35The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.


and many more....
 

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
17,499
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
Catholic Church

Since we have different sources between us which we consider spiritual authorities, it would be very difficult if not impossible, to come to agreement. As I recall, the Catholic Church has multiple sources of divine revelation/authority. Most other Christian religions just one: the Bible. So, any discussion we might engage in would probably turn into a "he said, she, said" type of thing.




"Persons" didn't "put together the Bible", God wrote it. Were it a work of man, we would all be in a lot of trouble indeed,
Which person am I "trusting my soul to?" No person, just God through the Holy Spirit -- they are all that's necessary.


lol -- good one.


Actually, I've never read any book written by Calvin, nor attended any church that features his teaching. If you were to ask me what his doctrines are I don't think I would be able to answer with any precision.
However, it is possible that we have both come to the same conclusions on things spiritual because we both read the same Bible and we have learned the same spiritual lessons from it (they're pretty obvious biblically speaking).
If I've quoted Calvin (which I haven't) then it was 100% coincidental -- trust me on that.
I do not need Calvin's or anyone else's instruction for that matter - the Bible is abundantly
clear in-and-of itself, and thankfully, I am able to fathom most of what it teaches on my own.
How do you think I was able to supply all of the verses I did along with explanations, had I first needed to
consult with Calvin's writings ? I've come to understand the Bible messages on my own along with the verses that support it.
If I said otherwise, I'd be lying.



Really? Which one's are "odd"? I ALWAYS supply supporting verses with conclusions and rational for any
point I try to make. And anyway, what make "mainline Christianity", the final arbiter of what is right and correct ?




These ?

[Eph 2:7-10 KJV]
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in [his] kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

I could be wrong, but I don't think I used Eph 2:8 to justify that we are saved by Christ's faith (though we are). What I think I would have said was only that the "gift of God", is God. Please cut and paste my comment.
Wait - are you saying 2:8 confirms we're saved by our faith? I don't think so. Please see Gal 2:16:

[Gal 2:16 KJV] 16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

But verse Eph 2:10 is pretty interesting in that regard, don't you think?

"BUT BY THE FAITH Of JESUS CHRIST, EVEN WE HAVE BELIEVED IN JESUS CHRIST" -- Christ's faith, not ours
That is, Christ gave His faith to the true believes.

How would you interpret Gal 2:16?
Hi Roger,,,
I have only one source of authority...the bible.

As I said,,,I'm interested in this idea that we are saved by Christ's faith.
I used Ephesians 2:8 to show that we are saved by our own faith.

You brought up Galatians 2:16
Here it is in two different versions:

Galatians 2:16 KJV
16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.


Galatians 2:16 NASB
16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified


It's plain to see that the wording does lead one to believe in a different soteriological method. (a different way to achieve salvation).
How can we know which one is right in your opinion?
 

rogerg

Member
From
Monterey Park, Ca
Gender
Male
Messages
177
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
As I said,,,I'm interested in this idea that we are saved by Christ's faith.
I used Ephesians 2:8 to show that we are saved by our own faith.

t's plain to see that the wording does lead one to believe in a different soteriological method. (a different way to achieve salvation).
How can we know which one is right in your opinion?

Hi wondering,
I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "a different way to achieve salvation"? Salvation can only be achieved one way through/by Christ.
To me there is absolutely no question about it: Christ must impart His faith to those He chooses to salvation at some point during the salvation process - probably when born again. However, I think a true believer's faith continues to grow throughout their entire life.
We can know we are saved by Christ's faith because He is the Savior. Were it by our faith, or by anything that we might do (initiated through our actions or work), then we would have saved ourselves. Here are some verses that I hope illustrates that (there is a lot more to say about this doctrine, and I am not sure the ones I provided are the best so I'll
find others and post them if I do). Any questions, please let me know

[Rom 4:9 KJV] 9 [Cometh] this blessedness then upon the circumcision [only], or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

[Rom 4:22-24 KJV]
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

In Romans 4:9, we can see that faith itself was reckoned to Abraham.4:22, 4:23, 4:23 continues the explanation of the doctrine raised in 4:9
These verses show two things: 1) that faith was given (reckoned) to Abraham for the purpose (God's purpose) of deeming him righteous. We know that the righteousness of Christ is the only one of significance in God's eyes, and therefore the only one that imparts righteousness, and 2) that God used Abraham in his role as father of all true believers to demonstrate to mankind how righteousness is imputed by God.

[Gal 3:8-9 KJV]
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

In Gal 3:8 - 3:9 we can see that God's plan is the "heathen" (the Elect, throughout time) would be justified by the same faith that was imparted to Abraham and he was justified by.

We can also see the the role of Christ in our receiving of true faith:

[Heb 12:2 KJV] 2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

We can see in Heb 12:2 that Christ alone is the "author and finisher of (our) faith:"

[Rev 19:11 KJV]
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war
.
In Rev 10:11, we can see that one of the names of Christ (God) is Faithful and True.
 

rogerg

Member
From
Monterey Park, Ca
Gender
Male
Messages
177
Joined
Nov 9, 2020
Galatians 2:16 KJV
16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
It also just occurred to me that if we read this verse closely enough, we can deduce that it also lumps any self-generated faith as being from law, and as such, can not justify us. That is, if our faith isn't from Christ, then it is from law - it can't be from both.
Hope that makes sense.
 
Last edited:
Top