Church Touts Homosexuality as a Gift, Not a Sin

Christian Post ^ | 4/27/11 | Eryn Sun

[Natural Law]

"So then all the world is saved? Every one is going to heaven?"

I'm not playing your simplistic Sunday School word games. That stuff only works on the very young and feeble minded. I stated earlier that Limited Atonement is clap-trap. Although there exists a plan for Salvation for everyone, not everyone is going to heaven because God created free will. Grace is a gift freely give, it is not imposed. I know this diminishes how very special Calvinists feel about themselves for having won the Spiritual Lottery at the beginning of time through no merit of their own, but don't fret. It isn't too late for you.

John 14:15 - "If you love Me, keep My commandments.

John 15:7 - "If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you.

John 7:17 - "If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own."

James 4:7-8- "Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded."

1 John 5:1 – “Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.”

Romans 2:10 - “but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.”

[sauropod]

Just clarifying.

I twisted nothing. You came across as an absolutist. IOW, once someone accepts Christ, they better never sin again.

I certainly fail at that, and I bet you do also.

[RnMomof7]

So if Jesus paid for the sin of all men.. then no one goes to hell right? So NL are you a universalist?

[Natural Law]

"So NL are you a universalist?"

No, I am a Catholic.

If it were God's will that all men go to heaven then He would have skipped this whole earthly charade and created us in heaven. There was a reason God created free will and that reason was that He has reserved heaven for those who have accepted the gift of Grace and obeyed* Him.

*CCC - 144 To obey (from the Latin ob-audire, to "hear or listen to") in faith is to submit freely to the word that has been heard, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself. Abraham is the model of such obedience offered us by Sacred Scripture. The Virgin Mary is its most perfect embodiment.

[RnMomof7]

So then Jesus did not die for the sin of all men? That a limited atonement there .

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Amen. As your links illustrate, you have his number. 8~)

[Natural Law]

"So then Jesus did not die for the sin of all men?"

I already told you, those gotcha word games are not going to work here. Jesus died for the sins of all men a plan for Salvation was made available to all who exercise their free will and choose it.

[MarkBsnr]

If the first, I understand it is at odds with orthodox Christianity. If the second, you are skating on thin “Christian” ice. :-)

Both, I'm afraid. That is why I side with the Magisterium.

[RnMomof7]

No word games..if as you assert Jesus died for the sins of all men then all men are saved..

The minute one says Jesus made salvation available for some men.. then he did not die for the sins of all men did he? He only died for the sins of He men that choose it?

It seems to me that you limit salvation according to Catholic standards so Catholics actually have a limited atonement ..it is available to men that want to be saved by Catholic standards .

Is that somehow better than having God limit the atonement?

Jhn 6:37 — All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Does God have a free will?

[Natural Law]

"No word games..if as you assert Jesus died for the sins of all men then all men are saved.."

I'm buying into a limited construct as a premise for this discussion in which only two alternatives are considered. I've made the teachings of the Church known to you. Reject them at your own peril.

[daniel1212]

And there are lots of them.

[Cronos]

RM — here are links to arguments from another thread. This is carrying an argument from one thread to another

[Cronos]

A mantra is a word or syllable (like om)

On the contrary, I've shown that there are numerous core doctrines that Dr. Eck's group disagrees with yours, the pentecostals -- note: core doctrines:

1. The OPC believes that God pre-damns people to hell. Pentecostals do not believe in this double predestination
2. The OPC believes that miracles, talking in tongues, prophecy etc. ceased to exist since the time of the Apostles -- pentecostals of course, disagree
3. The OPC doctrine says that belief in the rapture is the result of faulty misreading of scripture -- pentecostals....
4. The OPC doctrine says that Pentecostals and Methodists are damnable heretics
5. RNMom's group's doctrine also says that these "follow the gospel of satan"
6. This group of RNmomof7 has the doctrine that Jesus Christ is not the Savior of the world but that His sacrifice, His coming, was only for a few
7. This group's doctrine is that we cannot love God (as we have no will to do so, but are robots), we are either forced to do so (in our programming) or not. This is not pentecostal belief!

These are not minor issues about Benny Hinn wearing white or OPC ministers wearing black suits, but core fundamental differences.

Furthermore, this same group goes on to condemn your pentecostal fundamental beliefs as misreading, damnable heresy and "satanic gospel", note, as core doctrine. They don't stand side by side with you when secularists attack Christian Churches either.

The problem is that you don't believe the same thing, not the core fundamentals of God in any way.

[Cronos]

Let's see, you say Those who were saved on Pentecost, and in Acts, in the same hour they heard the Word

And yet, Dr. Eck's group rejects your pentecostal belief that this is possible today. On the contrary, her group points out that miracles, talking in tongues, prophecy etc. ceased to exist since the time of the Apostles

[Cronos]

Let's talk about these fundamental differences (the reason why Dr. Eck;s OrthodoPresyterian C says that your beliefs are a damnable heresy):

1. Pentecostals believe that the present Pentecostal movement, which features the speaking in tongues, is in fulfillment of Bible promise. They maintain that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and during the first century did not exhaust the miraculous visible manifestations of the Spirit.
   The OPC says this wrong and "the result of faulty misreading of scripture"

2. Pentecostals believe that speaking in tongues always accompanies the baptism with the Holy Spirit. All persons have this tongues experience as evidence of baptism. The OPC says this is heresy and faulty reading (that's a euphemism of what they actually say)

3. Pentecostal churches do not believe in the security of the believer (once saved, always saved). Pentecostals do believe that Salvation can be lost -- the opposing OPC on the contrary believes it's members are a Brahmin elite who are predestined by karma and think your position is utterly wrong and biblically false

4. Pentecostals have a daily necessity of commitment -- the OPC thinks this is heretically false and "the gospel of satan"

5. Now this one, I'm a bit unsure of -- can you confirm if this is correct? Pentecostals believe that Christ's death does not save you from eternal destruction, but restores the relationship to that before the fall at Eden -- is this correct?

These are core, fundamental differences in believing the nature of Christianity.

[Religion Moderator]

Do not carry arguments from one thread to another. Argue them on the original threads to prevent spreading flame wars.

If the same or similar issues arise on a new thread, argue them anew.

[Cronos]

rn: Jesus died for the sins of all men then all men are saved.

Your logic is faultly. Jesus died for the sins of all men

1. John 4:42 42And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

   1 John 2:2 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

   Now if you want to deny 1 John 2:2 which says so clear that Christ is the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world and if you want to deny 1 Timothy 4:10 that Jesus Christ is "the Savior of all men," go ahead....

[Cronos]

Rn, you quote John 6:37 out of context of the entire book of John. Do you not read John 15:1-6

1I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.
2Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
3Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
4Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
6If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

"If a man abide not in me, his is cast forth..."

[Cronos]

rn: So if Jesus paid for the sin of all men.. then no one goes to hell right?

faulty logic

Jesus died for the sins of all men

1. John 4:42 42And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

   1 John 2:2 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

   Now if you want to deny 1 John 2:2 which says so clear that Christ is the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world and if you want to deny 1 Timothy 4:10 that Jesus Christ is "the Savior of all men," ...

   Christ's sacrifice is a freely given gift of grace that one can accept or reject.

   The problem is that you believe in zero free will, that God pre-programs people to accept or reject Him. The problem with pre-programming (as opposed to omniscience) is that this negates the idea that God loves, that God came to save us etc.

[daniel1212]

Mantra can also be understood as “a formula,” such as “an utterance of conventional notions or beliefs.” Your simple repetition is a a kind of mantra, which accomplishes little. A fringe group neither represents all of Calvinism or the church (many basic Calvinists reject some of TULIP, and even believe in the perpetuity of” sign gifts”), and as the often fervent debate in R. Catholicism about the role of free will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregatio_de_Auxiliis), evidences which some of your points are about, this is a difficult area.

Nor are these different beliefs a real problem for me in upholding of the supremacy of Scripture, over undue allegiance to a man or office, which was a problem in the early church as well, but not bringing souls to be convicted and converted as i prior described, and maintaining a poor and contrite heart, yet rejoicing in Him (my failures), is.