+- User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 96
Latest: sneakydove
New This Month: 2
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 7919
Total Topics: 515
Most Online Today: 423
Most Online Ever: 771
(July 30, 2019, 01:13:39 am)
Users Online
Members: 1
Guests: 410
Total: 411

Author Topic: How did you arrive at your current Theological stance?  (Read 3651 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
  • Karma: +1025/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
are you familiar with Arminianism?  It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.

The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.

My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past  saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior. 

He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.

Hope this helps.

Blade

I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.

I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.

Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)

Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.

Open.  If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.

Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.

Constantly Developing is a better way to word this.  I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.

Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?

Blade
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
Like Like x 1 Winner Winner x 2 View List

joechan82

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
  • Karma: +100/-0
  • Location: Georgia
  • Referrals: 0
I love to Study and Paul most certainly is the Apostle for us gentiles :] I agree, I will look into this deeper.
I am not a mid Acts guy, but I read a little about it on TF. There is a certain logic to it. I'm checking it out too. For now, it is back burner for me. Let me know what you like/dislike about it. Then we can gang up on PJ and drive him mad. (Oops. Poor choice of words.)
Funny Funny x 4 View List

Sasha

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Karma: +17/-0
  • Global Moderator
  • Referrals: 0
are you familiar with Arminianism?  It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.

The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.

My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past  saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior. 

He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.

Hope this helps.

Blade

I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.

I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.

Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)

Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.

Open.  If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.

Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.

Constantly Developing is a better way to word this.  I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.

Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?

Blade


Blade,

For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that.  It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off.  It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.

You nailed it! 

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.
I'm Hot !!!
Like Like x 1 Winner Winner x 1 View List

Sasha

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Karma: +17/-0
  • Global Moderator
  • Referrals: 0

-Quote from Sasha- “Blade,

For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that.  It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off.  It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.

You nailed it! 

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.”

-Quote from Joechan82- “In that case, I'm not what anybody would call Open. I do believe that the Holy Spirit helps us to understand scripture, because He wrote it in the first place. The continuing for me is called sanctification. Many things in the Bible are clear. Anybody can see some things. I do not avoid labels for myself either. Words mean things and help us understand things.  If you know what I am, you can then relate to me. Talk about rambling! What time is it anyway?”

@Joechan82 

Please forgive me.  I think you quoted part of my post in your initial response, but it showed up without quotes, so I didn’t check the end of your post to see that you had added your words to explain the response and I was concerned I had messed something up and somehow posted in a way that quoted to show the post as if it was you.

Anyhow, please forgive me.  I’ve fixed it and quoted your words to retain your post.

If you highlight, copy and past your words, then repost, your post will be restored as you originally had it.

It was a total error on my part.  I won’t let it happen again.  So very sorry!

@Patrick Jane ... please forgive me.  I know what I did wrong and won’t do it again.

I hit the wrong button.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2018, 05:38:32 am by Sasha »
I'm Hot !!!
Like Like x 1 Love Love x 1 View List

patrick jane

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3533
  • Karma: +1010/-0
  • Research Jesus Christ and then Research Flat Earth
  • Location: homeless in God's flat earth
  • Referrals: 35
    • Theology Forums
Quote from: Bladerunner link=topic=22.msg320#msg320 date=

[color=yellow
Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?

Blade[/color]

At least in my understanding of Open Theism and to the understanding of a few others, yes Blade. That’s a great way to put it! In many ways to me, Open Theism is just the way I study through the Bible and through life.
Right Jon. I let the Bible say what it says and I keep a positive and open mind in life.
Hearing, believing and trusting the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; His death, burial and resurrection for the forgiveness of sins, the gospel of our salvation, and repenting, seals us with that Holy Spirit of Promise. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV - Ephesians 1:10-14 KJV - Romans 10:9-10 KJV - Romans 10:13 - Romans 10:17 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Colossians 1:14 KJV -


Copyright Disclaimer: All audio and music belongs to the owner/creator. This is a non-profit. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
Like Like x 2 View List

Jon Wood

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Global Moderator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: +280/-0
  • Referrals: 0
I thought I ended up double posting, so I deleted what I thought was a double. Pj has my last comment quoted in his response though so i’m Okay with it lol.
Funny Funny x 2 View List

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
  • Karma: +1025/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
are you familiar with Arminianism?  It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.

The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.

My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past  saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior. 

He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.

Hope this helps.

Blade

I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.

I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.

Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)

Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.

Open.  If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.

Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.

Constantly Developing is a better way to word this.  I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.

Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?

Blade


Blade,

For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that.  It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off.  It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.

You nailed it! 

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.

I don't think you understood my question?  my fault for not wording it correctly.

We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.

My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?

To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.

Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)

Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.

If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is  outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece


Blade[/color]






1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
Like Like x 2 View List

Sasha

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Karma: +17/-0
  • Global Moderator
  • Referrals: 0
are you familiar with Arminianism?  It is the opposite of Calvinism as they still believe that God allows MAN to have free will to accept or reject HIM. They simply do not believe in predestination The open Theology is a runoff from that. It is a silly argument to me but then that is my opinion. God is not forcing us to accept HIM, but rather has foreseen who will accept him and He does everything He can do to make sure that happens including saving my but many times in those early years.

The free-will people do not believe Rom 8:29-30. This is pretty clearly stated and I feel God will have something to say about their not believing His scripture. Whether it will affect their salvation, I do not know as there is some dispute on this point.

My post shows why I believe in Predestination. God in eons past  saw me, Blade and knew that I would seek Him. He then set my heart right at the right time. I still had the free will at that time to seek HIM or NOT. Bringing this information forward to when we are actually living on earth, Jesus knows everyone, etc. He also knew that on a certain day, I would raise my face to heaven and ask Him to come into my heart and become my savior. 

He also knows those that will not accept him, that have rejected Him (and I am getting close to the line here) during their lifetimes. You have seen some of these people on atheist forums, etc. that simply do not believe in anything except mankind.

Hope this helps.

Blade

I think the main point of open theism is to say that not all outcomes are always predetermined, and that we are followers of Jesus because we want to be, not because He knows that we would. I guess i’m Not a traditional representation of an open theist either, because I can see some of the arguments for Calvinism in a way that I understand and agree with as well.

I think I don’t fully fall into either of the two categories in a traditional sense. To a traditional open theist, Calvinists seem like they are saying that God is just up there playing army men all day. To a traditional Calvinist, an open theist sounds like they are saying that God has no control over anything.

Like many arguments in theology that I’ve run across, most of the points of contention are actually the extremist view on either side and/or a misunderstanding of terminology. If you pay close enough attention, both sides agree with each other more than you would think they do, (except the extremists)

Open Theism also draws forth a term that undermines human lens.

Open.  If taken to the full literal, the “Open” Theist is prone to not posture, but learn, grow and perpetually develop, without “Closing” theology or having a cup so full, that it can no longer be filled.

Ironically, this means “Open” Theist commentary would be mere ponderings along a path of development that would change with “time”.

Constantly Developing is a better way to word this.  I believe someone once said that and I genuinely appreciated their saying it.

Then your saying Open Theology is a progressive living theology?

Blade


Blade,

For me and others along the path, I would absolutely say that.  It’s a rebellious cry to admit that theology in general is meant to be perpetually searched out and never capped off.  It’s the desire to stay sensitive to the Holy Spirit in Scripture till death.

You nailed it! 

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother.

I don't think you understood my question?  my fault for not wording it correctly.

We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.

My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?

To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.

Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)

Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.

If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is  outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece


Blade[/color]

Blade,

God meant what He said, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, through fellow wretched men, with the exception of “God With Us”, who was the Living God speaking and free of wretchedness.

Man is arrogant and exceedingly set on telling God what God said, but 1 John 2:27 tells us that we are to allow no man to teach us.   This parallels with Jesus saying He alone is our teacher.

I am not a biblical relativist.  I am, however, aware that theology contained in “Commentary” is just crayola scribbles and attempts to interpret scripture.  I see God perpetually making Love the standard and mankind being deceived to disobey this simple standard.

All excuses can be made, but the account in John where the woman caught in the throws of adulterous passion was thrown before the only Man ever to sincerely walk the earth the union of God and Man, and the very God that commanded us to stone her, knew the Law better than us and by the law, didn’t stone her... thus showing us that mercy and love trump human frailty. Many claimed to be the SON of God, but God Flat our married to the flesh of mankind and showed us what He meant, with His teachings.

Satan has got the Body divided as Paul warned us not to allow, and was starting his campaign just decades after Christ’s ascension.

Popular theology isn’t spread through truth, but selfish appeal to mankind’s self exalting heart, or at the tip of the sword and the oppression of political force.  No brick and mortar establishment “Has the Truth”, as, and I’m certain you’ll agree, the Truth is at the Right Hand of God and IS GOD, yet to See HIM is to “Have seen the Father”.  He is the very glory of God.  In other words, the WOMAN (Church) was never supposed to speak for the MAN (Christ).

As for the topic you broached, I am a person of peace.  I’ve studied the churches favorite divisional pet at enormous length and I indeed have a personal doctrine that I adhere to, but it is raw scripture that binds to itself so extensively, it typically brings a load of butt hurt, when I biblically exegete it all.

I keep my mouth shut on such matters, because I’m sick of getting drug into discussions that give Satan exactly what he wants.

Jesus is Love and Satan is Hate.  I never forget how the Creator is adversarially opposed by the greatest crafter of twistings of the literal Words of the living WORD.

I sincerely keep a low spiritual profile these days, but God didn’t say by our doctrine shall we be known, but by our Love for one another. 

I believe no human being has it 100% right and I can truly say, the only time theology was embraced correctly by a “man”, was here (John 5:39).

I will sharpen what I’m saying, but I fear you and I might cross blades, and God help me Blade, please allow peace to reign between us.  You may cause me to stumble if you bring me into debate.  I don’t say this to be a jerk, but because I enjoy discussion with you and ache to see the Global Body of Christ ache for the lost and reach to Love one another despite even the most difficult of theological skisms.  The “my way is the true way” approach has destroyed the body of Christ.

I hope this answer finds you well and answers any questions you may have had about my stance.

All Love in Jesus Christ to you, Brother in Him.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2018, 07:58:04 pm by Sasha »
I'm Hot !!!
Like Like x 1 View List

Jon Wood

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Global Moderator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: +280/-0
  • Referrals: 0


I don't think you understood my question?  my fault for not wording it correctly.

We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.

My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?

To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.

Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)

Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.

If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is  outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece


Blade

[/quote]

That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.
Winner Winner x 1 Useful Useful x 1 View List

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
  • Karma: +1025/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0


I don't think you understood my question?  my fault for not wording it correctly.

We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.

My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?

To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.

Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)

Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.

If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is  outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece


Blade


That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.
[/quote]

Yeah, hear you. Even the end times have religion coupled with politics.

Blade
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
Like Like x 1 Agree Agree x 1 Winner Winner x 1 View List

Sasha

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Karma: +17/-0
  • Global Moderator
  • Referrals: 0


I don't think you understood my question?  my fault for not wording it correctly.

We in the U.S. have a constitution that many want to make a living (progressive) piece of paper that would change according to societies wants and needs. We see this everyday. Yet, the forefathers wrote it literally so it would conform to all ages and not be changed.

My question to you was, Do you believe the Bible should change its meaning (progressive) according to societies needs and views?

To be sure, new discoveries of the Bible today are because of computers, science, etc. that DO NOT change the objective(s) of the Bible but rather serve more to ratify the contents.

Every time I read something and mostly while trying to get an answer for someone, I find something hidden away that I had not noticed before. (i.e. Rev 7 happened prior to Rev 6)

Take Homosexuality, mainly because it is on the front burner both in society and various religious organizations today.

If one agrees with the progressive way of interpreting the Word of GOD, then we would be saying the Word of GOD is  outdated and anything goes without GOD's interferece


Blade


That is where I misunderstood you then Blade. Open theism is not solely limited to the “progressive” or “liberal” movements in society or politics no. While the extreme representatives are most likely within that group, not all of us are. I don’t want the Bible to change to keep everyone out of hell. Open theism is not a political agenda.

Quote
Blade- Yeah, hear you. Even the end times have religion coupled with politics.

Blade

Blade, That’s a major BINGO!
I'm Hot !!!
Agree Agree x 1 Funny Funny x 1 View List

guest13

  • Guest
My theological stance .... ?  Not really sure that I have one.  It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty.   While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.

The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind.  I read and listen. 

Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.
Like Like x 1 View List

Jon Wood

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Global Moderator
  • Jr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: +280/-0
  • Referrals: 0
My theological stance .... ?  Not really sure that I have one.  It's rather a heinz 57 mix of my upbringing and uncertainty.   While admittedly, my Biblical knowledge is dusty, it isn't due to the fact that I haven't read and studied the Bible, just more of, it's been awhile.

The one thing I do not have insofar as theology is a closed-mind.  I read and listen. 

Obviously being agnostic, I don't have a lot to offer insofar as theology ... though the one thing is a blessing is the comfort level I have at TF and this forum to inquire and converse without the ridicule or disdain I have witnessed elsewhere.

I’m a fairly young Christian that is not very studied yet. I like being here and TF, I’ve never been to any of the other forums that everybody dislikes and i’m Kinda glad. I like having a bunch of different people around to draw from and talk with.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
22 Replies
3397 Views
Last post October 04, 2019, 09:07:10 am
by patrick jane

+-Recent Topics

Trump 2020 - Winning !!! by patrick jane
October 19, 2019, 09:11:30 pm

Politics Today by patrick jane
October 19, 2019, 09:11:12 pm

Re: Trump 2020 - Winning !!! by patrick jane
October 19, 2019, 09:10:31 pm

Re: Politics Today by patrick jane
October 19, 2019, 09:10:13 pm

Christ's Ways by Olde Tymer
October 19, 2019, 07:42:49 am

Biblical Enclosed Flat Earth and Cosmos by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 06:56:04 pm

Fear and Loathing In The Flat Earth by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 06:55:54 pm

End Times - Tracking The Signs by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 06:55:35 pm

Conspiracy - NWO, NASA and More by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 06:55:20 pm

Aethereal - Battle for Heaven and Earth by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 06:55:00 pm

PJ'S FLAT EARTH LIVE STREAMS ON YOUTUBE !!! by patrick jane
October 18, 2019, 09:52:24 am

Your Favorite Music, Images and Memes by MichaelC
October 17, 2019, 09:16:32 pm

R U Ready To Leave?! by MichaelC
October 17, 2019, 07:43:24 pm

ROMANS 3:28 JUSTIFIED BY FAITH by doug
October 17, 2019, 03:31:07 pm

A Journey Thru Genesis by Olde Tymer
October 17, 2019, 08:19:17 am

James 1:19 are we listening? by Lori Bolinger
October 17, 2019, 07:28:10 am

The Occult Religions by truthjourney
October 17, 2019, 07:26:29 am

Internal Coherence of Christs Divinity by patrick jane
October 17, 2019, 04:40:16 am