tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post7409733436240556383..comments2024-01-24T04:02:06.466-05:00Comments on Why I De-Converted from Evangelical Christianity: The Teachings of Jesus Contradict PSTKen Pulliamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12161943466797514854noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-53674228749664083422014-11-16T17:29:47.308-05:002014-11-16T17:29:47.308-05:00Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence...Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.<br /><br />http://www.momin.com/Books/God+And+His+Attributes-68/The+Development+Of+Beliefs+Through+The+Ages-6758.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-63163344127250039452013-07-10T15:35:51.366-04:002013-07-10T15:35:51.366-04:00Of course it does, because Penal Substitution isn&...Of course it does, because Penal Substitution isn't even Biblical, you need to Repent and believe as Acts says,<br /><br />What did Jesus Christ say?<br /><br />Matthew 7:21 - "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." - Jesus Christ<br /><br />Penal Substitution wasn't even conceived until 1000 years After The Resurrection of Jesus Christ.<br /><br />Being a "fundy" meant one thing according to Matthew 7:21, that you were never a Christian, you've always been secular.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08500409519916002783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-28556342825423078022009-10-26T17:29:09.973-04:002009-10-26T17:29:09.973-04:00**there is a belief in atonement through the death...**there is a belief in atonement through the death of Christ (Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28; 26:28)**<br /><br />But what kind of atonement, though? This post is dedicated to the idea that the teachings of Jesus don't mesh with the standard penal substitution atonement theory. And two of the three verses provided focus on a life as a ransom for many, which is a lot closer to the ransom atonement theory. The other verse talks about blood for the forgiveness of sins and mentions nothing about taking the punishment of another. Based on those three verses, we couldn't come anywhere close to the idea of atonement held by evangelicals today. <br /><br />**So I don't think Hebrews means "Jesus Christ the same" to mean God has to do everything exactly the same way, at all times.**<br /><br />Except this theory is coming from the same group of people who insist that the Bible holds timeless truths, that God does not change, that His standards do not change, and basically hate the idea of moral relativity. Yet the most pivotal aspect of their religion -- the faith/salvation area -- is relative?OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-18787215927669915782009-10-26T11:40:37.764-04:002009-10-26T11:40:37.764-04:00In Matthew and Mark, there is a belief in atonemen...In Matthew and Mark, there is a belief in atonement through the death of Christ (Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28; 26:28). So, even though Jesus forgave sins before his death in those books, there was a belief that his death was necessary to accomplish atonement, in some way, shape, or form.<br /><br />On Jesus being the same yesterday, today, and forever, that occurs in Hebrews, which makes the point that God does different things in different times. Before, there were animal sacrifices. Later, Christ was the sacrifice. So I don't think Hebrews means "Jesus Christ the same" to mean God has to do everything exactly the same way, at all times.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-1947650568014188552009-10-25T21:54:51.333-04:002009-10-25T21:54:51.333-04:00Rover,
**I agree that they did not know completel...Rover,<br /><br />**I agree that they did not know completely who Jesus was but they recongnized that He was a prophet or teacher sent by God.**<br /><br />But then you run into the situation that Steve is highlighting -- different standards of redemption, depending on the person. The people back then only needed one type of faith. The people today need a different kind of faith. That makes the requirements of salvation relative to the situation. And God/Jesus isn't supposed to be a relative type of person. It's the whole the same yesterday, today, and forever. And in talking to any evangelical today, it's not enough to identify Jesus as a teacher or prophet at all. Yet back then, the people had faith in Jesus as a teacher or prophet, which would've meant they believed they had faith in a man to heal them. Or faith that God have given Jesus a particular kind of power. But that faith is so different than the faith outlined today, where having faith in Jesus as the God who saves. Plus, there were people who healed in the Old Testament. People might've had faith in those healers, but that certainly didn't mean they were saved.OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-67732072004828536912009-10-25T20:22:45.539-04:002009-10-25T20:22:45.539-04:00Rover, what you're saying, then, is that some ...Rover, what you're saying, then, is that some people (the ignorant) can be saved without faith in Jesus and some (the knowledgeable) can't be saved without faith in Jesus. Different standards of redemption for different kinds of people. <br /><br />If that's true, do you think it's a good idea for the church to send out missionaries to ignorant people? Making them knowledgeable is only going to switch them into the class that has a narrower salvation requirementSteveJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04525881183798559993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-81595804707523053132009-10-25T19:10:11.223-04:002009-10-25T19:10:11.223-04:00Steve,
I appreciate your time. Thanks for respon...Steve,<br /><br />I appreciate your time. Thanks for responding. But wouldn't a valid Christian response be that this man was responing to the light that he had and in faith. Just as Abraham was saved by faith before Christ died. Faith that God would provide for his salvation. Didn't the writer of Hebrews deal with this, ie, living by faith in the knowledge that one had about God? <br />Onemsallstep:<br />I agree that they did not know completely who Jesus was but they recongnized that He was a prophet or teacher sent by God. Those who repented under John's baptism were probably saved as well due to their faith in God represented by the baptist.JohnDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09435939804640200795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-22745250858510866202009-10-24T22:22:38.090-04:002009-10-24T22:22:38.090-04:00**Couldn't it be that Jesus forgave their sins...**Couldn't it be that Jesus forgave their sins based on their faith in him? **<br /><br />Yes, but which Jesus? Greek Orthodox Christians don't follow the same atonement theory as evangelicals do, and I believe -- though I could be wrong -- that many evangelicals wouldn't consider the Orthodox to be true Christians. Yet both claim to have faith in Jesus. <br /><br />And the people in that time who had faith in Jesus -- which Jesus? Did they understand that Jesus was part of the Triune God? Or that Jesus was God at all?OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-58865104606596238232009-10-23T18:36:22.429-04:002009-10-23T18:36:22.429-04:00Rover, what about Jesus' story of the sinful m...Rover, what about Jesus' story of the sinful man who was in the temple with the proud, self-righteous man? The sinner simply beat his breast and said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner." And he went away justified. No atonement and no faith in Jesus. He was able to get forgiveness straight from God, just by asking.<br /><br />Traditional Christian doctrine will <i>never</i> mesh with the teaching of the Synoptic gospels, because they're two completely different religions. You might as well try to harmonize Mormonism and Islam.SteveJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04525881183798559993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-69835375760186015662009-10-23T18:19:53.425-04:002009-10-23T18:19:53.425-04:00Couldn't it be that Jesus forgave their sins b...Couldn't it be that Jesus forgave their sins based on their faith in him? They came to him for healing so it seems they believed he was the messiah. He did know that he would be crucified, so this doesn't seem like a stretch. People have always been saved by faith. Sins were until until Christ made propitiation for them. Just my thoughtsJohnDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09435939804640200795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-78725382578676935292009-10-23T15:05:11.075-04:002009-10-23T15:05:11.075-04:00Good points, Steve and OneSmallStep.
Furthermore, ...Good points, Steve and OneSmallStep.<br />Furthermore, the different factions of Christendom cannot agree on how a person gets saved anyway. Some say it happens at Baptism. Others say one has to say a "sinners' prayer."<br /><br />If salvation is also dependent on one's personal knowledge of the gospel, what happens if you have an important point wrong? What about someone with impaired cognitive function or a child?Alan Rogershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16165363542877135686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-33339874731097345452009-10-23T09:58:24.232-04:002009-10-23T09:58:24.232-04:00**They argue that Jesus could forgive these people...**They argue that Jesus could forgive these people seemingly freely but that in reality, he could do so only because he knew that he was the “lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev. 13:8)**<br /><br />This behavior just comes across as deceptive, though. For instance, when evangelicals share the Gospel today, it includes the idea that Jesus was punished for our sins, and God forgives us through Jesus accepting that punishment. If you accept Jesus as your Savior without acknowledging the whole punishment aspect, wouldn't evangelicals question your salvation? Wouldn't they say that by leaving the punishment aspect out, one is not accurately portraying the Gospel?<br /><br />Yet Jesus leaves out this huge, key piece of information in regards to the Gospel, and they say it's okay because he knew he would accept the punishment, and that's why he appeared to forgive freely. But wouldn't the people listening to him then not be following the true Gospel? Why wouldn't Jesus -- if PST is the right one -- not be upfront with all the crowds from the get-go, especially if people would be tormented eternally? <br /><br />**they read Jesus’ words through the grid of Pauline theology. They reply that man is not to take revenge on those who do him wrong but rather he is to leave that up to God.**<br /><br />Can this behavior really mesh with forgiveness, though? I've heard this thought quite a few times, that Christians will forgive the perpetrator, and let God dish out the vengeance later. But that always comes across as saying, "I'll forgive you, because God's going to punish you later." <br /><br />If the perpetrator is still getting what s/he deserves, and the only reason why you are to forgive someone is because God handles the punishment, then what exactly is the Christian letting go of anything? How is the Christian releasing the perpetrator from the debt the perpetrator owes?OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-882699495059104312.post-35624569161693288282009-10-23T06:27:57.956-04:002009-10-23T06:27:57.956-04:00I've heard preachers encourage their hearers t...I've heard preachers encourage their hearers to apply the "heaping coals" principle to ensure their detractors will be punished with greater severity in the afterlife. Do all these nice things for your enemies ... not because you wish them well, but so you can compound their damnation. What amazing love!SteveJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04525881183798559993noreply@blogger.com