(10-13-2025 04:52 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  In my estimation, anyone who votes to elect a Democrat into office and says they are Christian is a liar. You cannot support a vile and sinful platform like theirs and say that you don't agree with their platform but yet are really voting to continue putting them into office.

Ridiculous.

(10-14-2025 07:56 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  The Evangelical doctrine of salvation doesn't match that of other Christian religions. The Catholic/Orthodox/Lutheran/Calvinist/Anglican traditions that fed into Evangelicalism all differed from them. While they all agree Christ was needed for salvation and Christ died for salvation, they went further than Evangelicals. While Evangelicals quote Paul's "Confess with your mouth ... believe in your heart" as the way to salvation, the other traditions quote other scripture and require more.

You absolutely right, it matches with THE BIBLE. It matches up with the doctrines spoken by Jesus and written by the Apostles themselves and practiced by the ealry church fathers of the 1st and 2nd century according to the church fathers writings.

And no, its not some cherry picked thing quoted by a couple of verses, this is the single most repeated doctrine in the NT and its given over and over and over and over again. If I was to start quoting all the verse that say faith alone we are going to be here the rest of they day.

The idea of a works or "earned" salvation did not exist in the ealry church, but its did begin to become part of Catholic and orthodox tradition in the 3rd and 4th centuries.

There is only one place in the entire NT that a person could actually argue faith plus works is written and its in the book of James (which is written to the Jews in Christ, not the Gentiles). But to make that argument you have to drop almost the entire context of James letter, who it was written to and why. And the context is all about how some people proclaim faith but show no signs, have no fruits and have no works to speak of in their lives. Much like a modern "liberal" Christian who continues to live openly in sin and rejects most universal doctrines. That is a dead faith because the person has deceived themselves. Genuine saving faith ALWAYS has works and fruits that follow it because its not a mental exercise, its a transformation of the heart and spirit. When a person is genuinely born again, it literally pours out of them and throughout their entire lives.

Its not something that can be hidden, everyone around them knows something DRAMATIC has changed within this person. Those fruits, works and dramatic changes in the person are going to be obvious for all to see.

But those fruits and works are a byproduct that happens AFTER salvation and being born again. They are not a path to it.

(10-14-2025 08:35 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 07:56 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  The Evangelical doctrine of salvation doesn't match that of other Christian religions. The Catholic/Orthodox/Lutheran/Calvinist/Anglican traditions that fed into Evangelicalism all differed from them. While they all agree Christ was needed for salvation and Christ died for salvation, they went further than Evangelicals. While Evangelicals quote Paul's "Confess with your mouth ... believe in your heart" as the way to salvation, the other traditions quote other scripture and require more.

...
And no, its not some cherry picked thing quoted by a couple of verses, this is the single most repeated doctrine in the NT and its given over and over and over and over again. If I was to start quoting all the verse that say faith alone we are going to be here the rest of they day.

...

James is a historically more significant witness of Christ and his teachings than Paul. It is not even close. Same with Peter and John.

Those three were all there during His ministry - Paul wasn't. If there is a difference of opinion, going with the earlier, closer sources is more accurate.

Thus, one of the core parts of your assertion is completely gone. If Paul's epistles disagree with James, than it is likely Paul that is wrong, and not James.

You could also argue the other way. Note that Jesus in the famous John 3:16 leaves out the "confess with the mouth" part. So using a primary source, all you have to do is believe in Jesus and you have everlasting life. However, believing is clearly a work, even if just a mental one, so once again you have to perform a work to be saved.

"But those fruits and works are a byproduct that happens AFTER salvation and being born again. They are not a path to it." Eric

There are many philantropists who say that they don't believe in God but still perform good works. They do so because in their mind they know that there is a God and don't want to take chances if they're wrong. Stubborness can be a real bad asset. (see the Jews reluctance to accept Christ as their savior even if their Tanakh shows it plainly and clearly in Isaiah 53 and in Daniel 9.) They won't admit it but inside their hearts they know that God and His Son do exist, but are too proud to say it publicly. These people are missing the boat because their works will be in vain because it's said too many times in the Bible that we have to accept the Son of God in order to be saved.

Then there are others who claim to be Christians but still retain the Democratic mindset and thus all their beliefs are in vain too. You cannot claim to know God and then go against His teachings. Even satan believes there's a God and he ain't going to heaven, not now and no how.

I love how the Pope said that Christians need to re-read the Bible. He was giving a lot of people a lot of credit for having actually read it the first time.

(10-14-2025 09:26 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  James is a historically more significant witness of Christ and his teachings than Paul. It is not even close. Same with Peter and John.

Those three were all there during His ministry - Paul wasn't. If there is a difference of opinion, going with the earlier, closer sources is more accurate.

Thus, one of the core parts of your assertion is completely gone. If Paul's epistles disagree with James, than it is likely Paul that is wrong, and not James.

You could also argue the other way. Note that Jesus in the famous John 3:16 leaves out the "confess with the mouth" part. So using a primary source, all you have to do is believe in Jesus and you have everlasting life. However, believing is clearly a work, even if just a mental one, so once again you have to perform a work to be saved.

What an incredibly dangerous and twisted comment that basically argues to toss out over 80% of the NT.

You left out the fact that Jesus hand picked Paul to write more than half the NT and be the Apostle of the Gentiles. Peter Himself affirmed Pauls Epistles as scripture. So you basically just said Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and Luke are not reliable on this and thus you can just ignore 99% of the NT on this topic and just focus on one chapter of one book (dropping all context completely) and base your entire doctrine of salvation on it.

The Epistles of Paul are the earliest books of the NT and were universally accepted as inspired scripture from the very beginning. But of course its not just Paul that taught salvation by faith alone. Jesus, Peter, Luke and John all very clearly taught this doctrine as well.

The Word of God is not a buffet where you can just toss out all the stuff that is a OBVIOUS problem for your denominations radical view but pocket the one verse that you think makes it work. You literally just argued to ignore virtually the entire NT, and drop all context and cross references from the entire book and instead just focus on one passage in a complete vacuum.

Your comment is downright heretical.

(10-13-2025 07:09 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

Wrong mythology, but that is pretty on brand for you and yours.

(10-14-2025 10:23 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(10-13-2025 07:09 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

Wrong mythology, but that is pretty on brand for you and yours.

Yes, yes it is.

(10-14-2025 10:18 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(10-14-2025 09:26 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  James is a historically more significant witness of Christ and his teachings than Paul. It is not even close. Same with Peter and John.

Those three were all there during His ministry - Paul wasn't. If there is a difference of opinion, going with the earlier, closer sources is more accurate.

Thus, one of the core parts of your assertion is completely gone. If Paul's epistles disagree with James, than it is likely Paul that is wrong, and not James.

...

What an incredibly dangerous and twisted comment that basically argues to toss out over 80% of the NT.

You left out the fact that Jesus hand picked Paul to write more than half the NT and be the Apostle of the Gentiles. Peter Himself affirmed Pauls Epistles as scripture. So you basically just said Jesus, Peter, Paul, John and Luke are not reliable on this and thus you can just ignore 99% of the NT on this topic and just focus on one chapter of one book (dropping all context completely) and base your entire doctrine of salvation on it.

The Epistles of Paul are the earliest books of the NT and were universally accepted as inspired scripture from the very beginning. But of course its not just Paul that taught salvation by faith alone. Jesus, Peter, Luke and John all very clearly taught this doctrine as well.

The Word of God is not a buffet where you can just toss out all the stuff that is a OBVIOUS problem for your denominations radical view but pocket the one verse that you think makes it work. You literally just argued to ignore virtually the entire NT, and drop all context and cross references from the entire book and instead just focus on one passage in a complete vacuum.

Your comment is downright heretical.

Your comments are downright heretical.

Quote me the scriptures that say "Jesus hand picked Paul to write more than half of the NT." Also, Peter received the revelation on taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and was there when Jesus taught gentiles, healed them, and was there on the Day of Pentacost when they talked in gentile tongues. It's pretty clear that Peter took the lead in opening up the work to the Gentiles, along with the other apostles and early church members, and well before Paul was a Christian.

Now, remind me who went with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration? Remind me who went with Jesus when He raised the daughter of Jairus? Whose Mother-in-Law did Jesus heal? Who walked on water? Who saw the empty tomb, the appearance in the closed room, and the ascension into Heaven? Could you remind me, because I don't think it was Paul.

While you are at it, show me where Peter affirms Paul's epistles were scripture. Which epistles did he affirm? Only the ones we have, or also the ones that are missing? How about Hebrews where Bible scholars think it wasn't written by Paul? It is pretty likely that Paul died after Peter, casting even more doubt on your thesis.

John also was a first hand witness of the ministry of Christ, and I am sure the martyrdom of his brother had a significant effect on him. James was the earthly brother of Jesus, so would also be a first-hand witness of his teachings and ministry. Not to mentioned John the Baptist, who was more than a prophet.

If the writings of James requires "context" why wouldn't the writings of Paul?

Finally, note how Paul gets into arguments with the other apostles. Are you saying that Paul was always right and other church members were always wrong?

(10-14-2025 11:55 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  Your comments are downright heretical.

Quote me the scriptures that say "Jesus hand picked Paul to write more than half of the NT." Also, Peter received the revelation on taking the gospel to the Gentiles, and was there when Jesus taught gentiles, healed them, and was there on the Day of Pentacost when they talked in gentile tongues. It's pretty clear that Peter took the lead in opening up the work to the Gentiles, along with the other apostles and early church members, and well before Paul was a Christian.

Ask and you shall receive:

15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Paul wrote half the books of the NT and his books were confirmed by Peter and have been universally accepted as scripture form the beginning of the church and by all the church fathers of the first 3 centuries.

YES, your arguments to discount Paul and half the NT are 100% heretical.


Romans 11:13:
"For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office"

Galatians 2:7-8:
"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was to Peter;


Yes, Peter first opened the Gospel to the Gentiles, but if you had continued reading Jesus then hand picked Paul to be the Apostle to the Gentiles. Anyone who has actually READ THE BOOK knows this. You are illustrating you have not read any of this.


2 Peter 3:15-16
and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him by God, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

People like you apparently, who reject the Words of Jesus, Peter, James and Luke concerning Paul to discount half your NT to prop up your heretical doctrines.

You don't have a scriptural argument and you don't get to tear out half of your NT to pretend you have one.

What is most amazing about your post is you are totally unaware that JAMES HIMSELF affirmed Paul's ministry to the Gentiles at the Jerusalem Council, where he, along with Peter and John, recognized the validity of Paul's mission. While James is often seen as emphasizing good works as a result of faith, his writings are complementary, not contradictory, to Paul's teachings on justification by faith. James addressed issues in different contexts, and his message that works are the evidence of genuine faith ultimately aligns with Paul's message that true faith is never alone.

In the book of Galatians, Paul recounts how James, Peter, and John gave him and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, affirming their work with the Gentiles. They agreed that Gentiles could be saved by faith in Jesus without being circumcised or following the Jewish law, while James's group would focus on the Jewish community.

They formally agreed that Paul and Barnabas would focus on ministering to the Gentiles, while they would continue their work among the Jewish people.


The supposed contradiction between James's emphasis on "works" and Paul's emphasis on "faith alone" is resolved by understanding their different contexts and the nuanced meaning of the words they used. These are complementary teachings on faith and works:

Paul argues that salvation is a gift from God, received by faith, and not earned through works.

James argues that if faith is genuine, it will be accompanied by works that demonstrate its authenticity, calling faith without works "dead".

Respectfully, you are clealry out of your depth on this and should not be arguing with anyone about it. Particularly in a public setting. Its painfully obvious you have simply not read most of the NT and were not even aware of the most basic facts on this in the text.

(10-14-2025 10:23 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(10-13-2025 07:09 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

Wrong mythology, but that is pretty on brand for you and yours.

My gosh you're stupid.

eric is right.

James is referring to the people who say they're saved but they live like the world, act like the world, talk like the world, laugh at the same jokes at the world, may attend church but behind closed doors mock it. Paul says the same stuff. The Bible does not contradict & one writer is not 'better' or 'more right' then the others.

The work is largely what's he doing inside you.There's evidence of that work. That evidence shows it is by God. The work is a result of the salvation. I don't think it's completely right to say 'there's no work'. There is definitely "a work" being done as a result of salvation, & it is not the Catholic's understanding of sacraments + charity + 10 of whatever they can think of.

(10-14-2025 12:44 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Respectfully, you are clealry out of your depth on this and should not be arguing with anyone about it. Particularly in a public setting. Its painfully obvious you have simply not read most of the NT and were not even aware of the most basic facts on this in the text.

And now he uses personal insults.

Since you have cast me as Simplicio, it should be very easy for a learned scholar such as yourself to answer my questions instead of dodging or attacking straw men.

I find it useful to "argue" about things as I learn something from it. I argue sports and politics on here, so arguing scriptures is par for the course. Since I am Simplicio, it should be trivial to address facts and questions directly.

You quoted very clearly in red, so I am guessing it is your point of emphasis:

Quote:Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

Very impressive. You really convinced Simplicio, but there are a few lingering questions.

I have friends of Indian descent, both here and in the United States, who are Christian. I don't recall Paul ever serving a mission to India. Could you tell me how the Gospel got to India, and the many Gentiles there? How about Egypt, Persia or Ethiopia? Who was the first apostle to the Gentiles in Spain and who may be buried in Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela? How about the noted Christian nations of France and England - who taught and established churches among the Gentiles there?

Surely the scriptural master "ericsrevenge76" can answer such simple questions.

Perhaps the erudite sage can provide "context" to the scripture he quoted about the calling of Paul, and how Paul was called to preach to the Gentiles. Was Paul the only one called to preach to the Gentiles, or was that "great commission" given to the apostles and all Christians?

Of course, this all is a significant deviation to my original point in this thread, that Christians have different ideas about the path to salvation. Evangelicalism is a small part of the larger and historical Christian movement, and there are different beliefs on how to obtain salvation. This also gets back to the original top post of Trumps beliefs about his personal salvation, which may be more complex than the simple method promoted by Evangelicals. Since the "Lord looks on the heart" it would obviously be impossible for any of us to tell if Trump or anyone else is going to heaven since we can't see their heart. I can look at his actions, and be grateful we have someone with courage and vision leading our country.

Another very disjointed response that purposely ignores virtually all the scripture I pointed to and instead tries to prented I said things I never said. Why? Because you already know you don't have a scripture case at all.

I think I have said enough already and my point and the scripture I posted speaks for itself.

I cast my vote for Eric in this debate. Hawkeye went off topic.

That was a good debate from two sides.

I bet Trump can make a deal.