S
sonseeker
Guest
No, Mickey, you are. I’ve read the things you have posted on this forum about others, but I guess it’s OK, because you see them as anti-Catholic. Get the log out of your eye.
- Status
D
deb1
Guest
No, of course I am not calling anyone a liar, especially someone that I respect as much as Matt 16-18. I am simply saying that Jesus couldn’t have used a term that hadn’t been invented yet, so it is impossible for you to use the lack of the word Christian in the parable as proof that Jesus was not talking about Christians.
I am curious as to how you interpret the verses. Didn’t I ask you that in my previous post?
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
Traditional Ang:
“Did” being the operative word. ##
- so please don’t think you have. **
**The only “red cape”, is the account some people seem to give of OSAS-believers - there is no reason inherent in it, why it must or should be either antinomian, or, a cause of despair. What I’m arguing against, is that: nothing else - your name merely happened to be attached to a post expressing a view of OSAS which AFAICS is based on a misunderstanding of the thinking behind OSAS. **
**If you were talking, not so much about the theology, as about how some people live it - I wonder how many others on this thread have been looking, some of them at the theology, and some of them at the living of it. It sounds very much as if this thread may have been proceeding in a fog , with different posters understanding different things by OSAS - which is no basis for a *fruitful *discussion **
**Calvary Chapel seeks a position which is neither Calvinist nor Arminian, to judge from what it says on its website. I’m interested in the Calvinist form of OSAS, that being the only one of which I have any understanding. **
OSAS apart - why would one see a post of yours as a “red cape” now, when so many posts have not been any such thing ? I’m interested in (trying to argue for) OSAS - not in baiting posters. ISTM that OSAS is some Catholics what Confession is to some Protestants: a skandalon, a stumbling-block. Without needing to be. If other differences between the CC and Protestants can be composed, despite the animosities & confusions of 450 years - maybe OSAS can as well. ##
## Agreed - I reckon we did
“Did” being the operative word. ##**## You have no reason at all to apologise to me for anything
- so please don’t think you have. ****The only “red cape”, is the account some people seem to give of OSAS-believers
- there is no reason inherent in it, why it must or should be either antinomian, or, a cause of despair. What I’m arguing against, is that: nothing else - your name merely happened to be attached to a post expressing a view of OSAS which AFAICS is based on a misunderstanding of the thinking behind OSAS. ****If you were talking, not so much about the theology, as about how some people live it - I wonder how many others on this thread have been looking, some of them at the theology, and some of them at the living of it. It sounds very much as if this thread may have been proceeding in a fog
, with different posters understanding different things by OSAS - which is no basis for a *fruitful *discussion ****Calvary Chapel seeks a position which is neither Calvinist nor Arminian, to judge from what it says on its website. I’m interested in the Calvinist form of OSAS, that being the only one of which I have any understanding. **
OSAS apart - why would one see a post of yours as a “red cape” now, when so many posts have not been any such thing ? I’m interested in (trying to argue for) OSAS - not in baiting posters. ISTM that OSAS is some Catholics what Confession is to some Protestants: a skandalon, a stumbling-block. Without needing to be. If other differences between the CC and Protestants can be composed, despite the animosities & confusions of 450 years - maybe OSAS can as well. ##
S
sonseeker
Guest
You are so clever. Bob, weave, evade. Explain that to Matt 16_18, will you?
M
Mickey
Guest
I am constantly picking away at that log and I have made great strides since I first came on this forum. Yourself?
S
sonseeker
Guest
We all have them, Mickey, but we don’t have them all the time.
M
Matt16_18
Guest
Jesus never used the word “Christian” in any of the Gospels. So what? Does the fact that Jesus never used the word “Christian” mean that his parables have no meanings that are relevant for Christians? Sheesh!
Jesus explained that the seed is “the word of God”, and that seed sown on the rocky soil represents people who receive the word of God in their hearts with joy, but believe the word of God only “for a while”.
When Jesus spoke about “the word of God”, did he mean the Koran, the Diamond Sutra, the Upanishads? Who, exactly, are these people that are represented by the rocky soil? Did Jesus give this parable to Muslims, Buddhists, or Hindus?
F
Fiat
Guest
Thank you for your helpful response. I now understand that because we do not have free will, we obviously cannot make our own choices and actions and at the same time we will be held responsible for our own choices and actions that we cannot make for ourselves.
Both your logic and charity are sure convincing…
Fiat
M
Matt16_18
Guest
Gottle of Geer:
No knowledgeable Catholic can believe in the heresy of OSAS. The Catholic Church teaches exactly what Jesus taught - that it is possible for a Christian to be condemned for unrepentant mortal sin. Every version of OSAS denies that a Christian can be condemned for the sin of unrepentant apostasy, and OSAS believers have to twist and distort scriptures into pretzels to overcome this plain teaching of scriptures.
Present your case, if you think that you can come up with a version of OSAS that does not lead to either antinomianism or a brutally inhuman assertion that men are nothing but meat robots without free will.
Are you a Catholic?
No knowledgeable Catholic can believe in the heresy of OSAS. The Catholic Church teaches exactly what Jesus taught - that it is possible for a Christian to be condemned for unrepentant mortal sin. Every version of OSAS denies that a Christian can be condemned for the sin of unrepentant apostasy, and OSAS believers have to twist and distort scriptures into pretzels to overcome this plain teaching of scriptures.
Present your case, if you think that you can come up with a version of OSAS that does not lead to either antinomianism or a brutally inhuman assertion that men are nothing but meat robots without free will.
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
Due to the rising heat and the falling charity of this discussion this thread is now closed.
ALL of you must learn that when you have made your point to the best of your ability and begin to get frustrated that the other party “just doesn’t get it”, that the fact may well be that they DO get it and still honestly disagree. That is not a reason for ad hominem or condemnation or sarcasm.
The peace of the Lord be with you all.
Michael Francis
ALL of you must learn that when you have made your point to the best of your ability and begin to get frustrated that the other party “just doesn’t get it”, that the fact may well be that they DO get it and still honestly disagree. That is not a reason for ad hominem or condemnation or sarcasm.
The peace of the Lord be with you all.
Michael Francis
- Status