Waywardness is here

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@Nikolaki817 @se7ensinz_ @needGod_net John is not talking about something after the Last Judgement. In John only Christ’ sheep can hear his voice. The rest are too stupid and blind. That’s why we see in that Gospel the constant misunderstanding of Jesus’ words by certain Jews in the most crude literal and dumb sense

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@korrathetaymi The Samaritans have different beliefs than general Jews so their Torah reflects that difference. Whether the Samaritans or the Jews changed the Torah is not directly knowable. Just like you can’t directly prove the Kaaba was build by Ibrahim and that pagans appropriated it

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@Jondaphemp @cbankston7 @britterm Well, the author of the Gospel of John was also definitely a hellenistic Jew influenced primarily by Platonism and dealing with Philo’s, another Hellenstic Jew primarily influenced by Platonism, logos philosophy. So let’s include him in this list too, okay?

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm And Augustine’s views on predestination and free will were prob more inspired by Manichaeism and stoicism. Neoplatonists were not explicit determinists, even if their system might seem consistent with it

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm There is no point in pinning this on Augustine. All Church Fathers before Augustine were influenced by Platonism, especially Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Origen of Alexandria, the Cappadocians, Ambrose etc etc.

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@bushnak313 @enesovat22 Warning/threats don’t work if you do not agree on that which the warning is based upon. Obviously he believes Islam is false so what he will imagine is how Muslims will be send to Hell and not himself. Warning people about something they don’t believe in is irrational

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm And I am not sure what you are expecting here. By the time of Jesus all Jews had already accepted God as atemporal. Anybody who would have read John’s Gospel, that deals with Philo’s Logos philosophy, would have understood God to be atemporal. Your reading is anachronistic

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm You can say ‘was’ or ‘were’ and still be in the present moment too. Like any of us…. “I was yesterday” doesn’t mean I am not now too

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm And in John God IS love. Christ IS the resurrection, Christ IS life etc. That’s not accidental language. It’s teaching a metaphysical doctrine and it’s not compatible with yours, I am sorry to say. John, or whoever wrote that Gospel, God IS, i.e. atemporal. Not was or will become

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@korrathetaymi The Mosaic Law was never meant for Gentiles obviously. Only the Noahide Law is for non-Jews. So I find it a bit silly when a Muslim criticizes Paul when Islam just as much abrogates as Paul does, since Islam universalizes parts of the Law while Paul negates parts

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm This is not merely an opinion. The Gospel of John locates itself quite neatly in the realm of Greek philosophy, especially Platonism, and Hellenistic Judaism. Do you think ‘before Abraham was I am’ is a grammatical mistake?

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@StepsToMercy @needGod_net I am not a Christian so I don’t partake in it. But what’s your point? Evangelicals are generally offspring of Calvinists who became baptists (who hold to a spiritual presence), yet many started to deny that and only affirm the Lord’s Supper as Symbolic

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@StepsToMercy @HumanBeingAlpha @needGod_net What’s your definition of works based salvation?

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@StepsToMercy @needGod_net Most evangelicals hold to sola fide in the sense I’ve explained. And just because say ‘just believe in Jesus’ doesn’t mean they deny what I said. Some might, but then they have a different theology than what the reformation preached and the five solas are about the reformation

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@StepsToMercy @HumanBeingAlpha @needGod_net Sure, let’s pretend ‘Sola Fide’ is not a theological term coined by Protestants with a particular meaning to it. What a ridiculous hill to die on

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@StepsToMercy @needGod_net Faith in the imputation of sin on Christ on the cross and the imputation of Christ’ alien righteousness on us is the only faith that serves as instrument to the grace of Justification. No serious protestant ever claimed it’s merely a generic ‘faith in Jesus’ that justifies

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@HumanBeingAlpha @StepsToMercy @needGod_net What kind of ridiculous comment is this? You are not the one who defines what a theological term, coined by protestants, means. Justification by faith has a particular understanding. Nobody is saying you are merely justified by a ‘belief in Jesus’

[Waywardness is here @All_IsAntinomy]

@britterm (2) Also, there prob were early disagreements even in pre-Hellenistic Judaism on this. For instance, many passages seem to fully admit God can changed his mind, but in 1 Samuel 15 and in Numbers it seems there is clumsily added God doesn’t change his mind (coz he is not a man)