From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
So, all are without excuse. It is not necessary that one has heard the gospel to face the judgement, or to be redeemed, for that matter. It appears that ALL have had the opportunity to know and worship God, either through the gospel, or for Paul's stated reasons.
DAVEH: From my reading of Paul's address to the Christians of Rome, it seems that /ALL /Christians would be without excuse. To assume otherwise seems to me putting words in Paul's mouth.
The Holy Spirit put the words in Paul's mouth...I just read them. Are you calling me the Holy Spirit? :-)
DAVEH: That's what I find interesting about learning what you think, Perry. The Lord's servants were divinely inspired, but I wonder if you have received the same message as was sent. ;-)
Dave, that is quite a statement to make by someone who comes from a religeous system that is a cult, is based on plaigerized works and false prophecies of a stone peeper and philanderer of other men's wives, which same system has a different god and different jesus than those of the Bible. How can any real Christian take what you say regarding the Bible seriously?
One might argue that since Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and that no one comes to the Father except by Him, one must hear the gospel and accept it to be redeemed. That apparently is not so.
DAVEH: Why do you think such? Simply because of Paul's chapter in Romans? Are there any other Biblical references that support that theory?
Yes, but I am work and don't have time to track them down.
DAVEH: I'll appreciate you sending them as you have time.
I do not plan to make time to do this.
And it may be theory in your LDS perspective, but I think not.
Jesus is the means by which the path to the Father was established. There is no other path. However, it is because he established that path that those who have not heard the gospel, yet acknowledged and worshipped God because of the two reasons Paul states, that they can be redeemed.
I suspect that at some point after a person who has not heard the gospel dies, he or she will become aware of Christ and His role in redemption. But, their decision with respect to what was made manifest in them and what they could see through God's creation will determine their fate, not their post-mortem knowledge of Jesus.
DAVEH: I'm not sure I understand, Perry......Why do you think a /post-mortem knowledge of Jesus/ is invalid?
I do not think a post motem knowledge of Jesus is invlaid...those are your words...I think a post-mortem opportunity to change one's mind is invalid.
DAVEH: That is the focal point of my interest in what you believe, Perry. As you know.....I think the Bible indicates otherwise, so I'm curious why you seemingly (to me LDS biased eyes) disagree with the Bible on this.
I do not disagree with the BIble. That is your self-admitted biased assumption.
I indicated that I suppose those who die without a knowledge of Jesus may indeed gain knowledge of his role in redemption after the fact, but that their fate is cast by that time. Like the young man that was seeking just a drop of water...why didn't he just listen to Jesus, repent, move over to the other side, and have all of the water he wanted? Maybe that option was not available to him.
DAVEH: Of course it wasn't an available option! First, don't you suppose it might have been a symbolic story to illustrate a point....in effect, a parable? Since Jesus had not yet atoned for sin, and been resurrected.....there could be no respite for Lazarus.
Yes, but parables, while they may be fabricated stories, were told to present some truth, not some LDS fantasy.
I realize that a lot of Christians feel this way, but I'm not sure why they think death is a cut-off point. To me, the passages in 1Pet 3:18-19 & 4:6 pretty much validate the preaching of the gospel in the post mortal realm to those who die without having received it. Yet you apparently disagree......why??? How do you interpret those verses?
1 Peter 3:18-19 refers to those who preceded the flood (v20), and I am not sure why these people are preached to,
DAVEH: What is so hard to imagine on this, Perry?
Because rather than "imagine" what some biblical writer may have intended, I try to discover the truth of what he intended.
Would they not be preached to because they had not been previously preached the gospel? If they had previously heard the gospel and rejected it, then would not hearing it a second time mean they would be getting a second chance?......which is something many TTers want to keep reminding me is impossible. It seems to me that your question is answered by Peter in the 6th vs of ch 4......
/For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, *that they might be judged *according to men in the flesh,* *but live according to God in the spirit./
........Is not Peter explaining that in order to be judged, one must first know the gospel? If you don't understand Peter's comments as such, what do you think he is trying to convey, Perry?
I have commented on this already, and I have not changed my opinoin since then.
but I do know that this case does not cover those between the flood and the resurrection, or those post-resurrection that do not hear the gospel. In Peter 4:6, I believe that the 'dead' are those who are physically alive, but spiritually dead, not those who are physically dead.
DAVEH: Above you mentioned 3:18-19 as pertaining to physically dead folks (from the time before the flood). Yet now you think 4:6 pertains to somebody other than those dead mentioned in 18-19.....is that correct, Perry?
You word it in a devious way, as though I once beleived otherwise, but have changed my mind ("now you think..."). But, I have not changed my mind. I have always thought that the 1 Peter 4:6 verse refers to the spiritually dead, but physically alive.
That seems to be quite a stretch to me. Is that your own theorizing, or do the reference manuals you've been using support this?
What a sly way to debase my beleifs. It does not merit further comment.
David, I know that you must believe that everyone must hear the gospel,
DAVEH: As I read it......That is what Peter taught. I find it very interesting that you do not feel the import of what Peter is preaching here.
Peter did not teach that. That is your misconception. He mentions it with respect to pre-flood people, but extending it beyond that period, especially when he went out of his way to specifically identify that group of people, is sloppy interpretation, at best.
whether before they die or after, in order to not make JS look like a liar. But, the LDS view of things is often wrong, being based in the musings and ramblings of a self-proclaimed prophet, shown to be a false prophet to all but the blind. Wake up and smell the postum.
DAVEH: Why do you feel the need to attach JS and LDS theology on this, Perry? Other than admitting my biases, I have not brought LDS material to this discussion. I am merely reading my Bible and your Bible. Peter's comments support my beliefs, and I find it curious that you don't see the connection between Jesus preaching to the spirits in prison (3:19) and the reason he preached to those dead folks (4:6) as explained so that they can be judged. Seems to me Perry, you have preconceived notions that prevent you from accepting Peter's comments at face value.
Ah, do we have the pot calling the kettle black here? You admit that your LDS biases cause you to see the scripture in a different way than I. Why not drop your LDS bias and read the scripture for what it is, what it says? Yet, you insist that I am the one with the bias!
While you do not bring "LDS material" to the discussion, your whole point of view is based, as you admit, on your LDS point of view. So, in effect, you are preaching LDS theology, with which I disagree, knowing it to be a false religion, and seeing the lies it perpetuates.
There is still time David, but once you die there is no second chance...
DAVEH: There it is again, Perry.....That /second chance/ warning. (And, I would still like somebody to provide Biblical passages that say /no second chance/.) Lest you forget, I've accepted Jesus Christ as my Savior.
I do believe that, in spite of the teachings of the LDS church, there are those who find the Real Christ...but first they have to forsake the fictitious christ and god of the LDS church. Have you done that? If it is the LDS christ in whom you have placed your faith, I will pray for your deliverance.
I've put my hand to the plough, and I'm not looking back at lame rationalizations of Bible doctrine. [So you are lead to believe - cpl].
Do you really expect me to reject Peter's plain and simple message in the verses above for your version that doesn't make sense?
No, but miracles happen. The lame walk and the blind see.
If that is your hope, you'd better come up with some scriptural evidence that is far better than you have produced so far.
You dig your own grave, David, not I. I have no obligation to 'better come up with' anything. You are not open to any viewpoint but the corrupt LDS viewpoint. So be it.
by then you have already made your decision!
Dave, we disagree, and that is okay. Can you stop belaboring these points now? I have presented the same material at least twice now, and in some case three times. You do not really want to learn what I believe. You want to convince me that you are right. It isn't going to happen, so give it up. Why would I believe you? The whole LDS system is corrupt from JS' first vision to the present. Putting any faith whatsover in anything coming out of the LDS would be like trying to get relationship advice from watching Jerry Springer.
Perry
---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
