Thanks for entering the conversation. I will wait for Pacifist to reply.

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Feel free to read Pacifists past posts, claims, and personal "theology" to come to your own determination on where Pacifist stands. Absolute truth or not???

---

All I know is that Pacifist loves and knows the Lord.

And to me that is really the only salvific issue.

What is your theology?

What do you believe is necessary for salvation?

---

I believe I know what this poster is getting at but I don't think your statement does anyone justice. One's response to Christ is a salvific issue is it not? It is not merely confession of belief. We change and conform to Him, else one could rightly question that we love Him.

---

Fair enough. But one's theology on heaven and hell are not salvific issues imho. And that seems to be the trigger point. And if beliefs on heaven and hell are salvific then there are some saints who are damned as there has been countless views on those subjects.

And frankly, the video was just giving the Orthodox view on heaven and hell.

But I believe we all know what the real issue is.

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Feel free to read Pacifists past posts, claims, and personal "theology" to come to your own determination on where Pacifist stands. Absolute truth or not???

---

All I know is that Pacifist loves and knows the Lord.

And to me that is really the only salvific issue.

What is your theology?

What do you believe is necessary for salvation?

---

I believe I know what this poster is getting at but I don't think your statement does anyone justice. One's response to Christ is a salvific issue is it not? It is not merely confession of belief. We change and conform to Him, else one could rightly question that we love Him.

---

Fair enough. But one's theology on heaven and hell are not salvific issues imho. And that seems to be the trigger point.

And frankly, the video was just giving the Orthodox view on heaven and hell.

But I believe we all know what the real issue is.

---

The irony is yes, I think we do, but not in the way you think. I think the issue is when RA embraces orthodox beliefs; is it consistent or does it overlap in places it doesn't challenge other beliefs, a buffet of sorts? That's what I believe it to be. But I have no confirmation yet.

AGC said:

---

ifeelold said:

---

Quote:

---

You won't answer a simple question that I posed. But you're quickly back to your claim of someone being condescending to you and acting the martyr. I only expected as much

---

Are you acting christ like? Jesus washed the feet of people in this situation. Nothing you are saying or doing represents Jesus. Think about that.

---

Hark, what yonder sock on forum breaks!

Surely this is a serious inquiry!!

---

Do you have any argument against what I have said? Is there something I have said you disagree with? I welcome debate if you are capable of having one.

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

AGC said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

Feel free to read Pacifists past posts, claims, and personal "theology" to come to your own determination on where Pacifist stands. Absolute truth or not???

---

All I know is that Pacifist loves and knows the Lord.

And to me that is really the only salvific issue.

What is your theology?

What do you believe is necessary for salvation?

---

I believe I know what this poster is getting at but I don't think your statement does anyone justice. One's response to Christ is a salvific issue is it not? It is not merely confession of belief. We change and conform to Him, else one could rightly question that we love Him.

---

Fair enough. But one's theology on heaven and hell are not salvific issues imho. And that seems to be the trigger point.

And frankly, the video was just giving the Orthodox view on heaven and hell.

But I believe we all know what the real issue is.

---

The irony is yes, I think we do, but not in the way you think. I think the issue is when RA embraces orthodox beliefs; is it consistent or does it overlap in places it doesn't challenge other beliefs, a buffet of sorts? That's what I believe it to be. But I have no confirmation yet.

---

Maybe so. In my own walk, my views have changed from more prayerful study and a lot more reading. But I can only speak for myself.

What is the real issue you allude to Derm?


Regarding the idea that only salvific issues are really the only things that are of importance is off base. If you don't hold to an absolute truth, a belief in the scriptures and what they say is truth, on what Jesus taught while He was on earth, then your salvific issue might not be the same as others. It may be wrong or watered down and cause people to miss the mark.

Too many today hold to a theology that they have created, with bits and pieces of scripture and creeds thrown in. It has been watered down and served up as a cheap theology of God, has cheapened the cross, has minimized sin and the consequences of sin.

The Bible reaches of a narrow gate and a narrow way to follow Christ. Too many are making it a broad and easy way couched in the word love.

True, Jesus and God are perfect love. But in this love they are also Holy (set apart in every way) and we are called to be Holy too. Seeing how someone treats clear scripture and how they treat sin are markers of where they stand. It's important to know where people stand if they are speaking theologically.

Agilaw said:

---

What is the real issue you allude to Derm?


Regarding the idea that only salvific issues are really the only things that are of importance is off base. If you don't hold to an absolute truth, a belief in the scriptures and what they say is truth, on what Jesus taught while He was on earth, then your salvific issue might not be the same as others. It may be wrong or watered down and cause people to miss the mark.

Too many today hold to a theology that they have created, with bits and pieces of scripture and creeds thrown in. It has been watered down and served up as a cheap theology of God, has cheapened the cross, has minimized sin and the consequences of sin.

The Bible reaches of a narrow gate and a narrow way to follow Christ. Too many are making it a broad and easy way couched in the word love.

True, Jesus and God are perfect love. But in this love they are also Holy (set apart in every way) and we are called to be Holy too. Seeing how someone treats clear scripture and how they treat sin are markers of where they stand. It's important to know where people stand if they are speaking theologically.

---

Jesus took care of my sins. Once and for all. Sometimes it seems folks cannot rest in the finished work of Christ. And understand how He did all the work.

I do not believe I can treat my sins, much less anyone else's. Only Jesus can.

I have read the Bible all the way through numerous times and I do not believe in eternal conscious torment hell.

There are many other church fathers and even saints who agree with me. And numerous ones agree with you.

Has nothing to do with God's holiness or sovereignty. Or my salvation imho.

You may think differently and think I am damned.

But I know I am not.

God loves you, me, and all of us.

Now on to my evening prayers.

God bless.

And edited to add that since every Scripture has been interpreted different ways, "clear scripture" means it aligns with your interpretation imho.

Do you really believe the Orthodox Church does not think they are interpreting Scripture clearly? As it comes to their concept of heaven, hell, salvation, etc.?

And may I ask what denomination you attend?

Here is a fun video on Orthodox eschatology.
This channel is really fun, I really enjoy these guys. They are pretty good for a bunch of schismatic heretics,

Agilaw said:

---

Seriously off base Derm.

Who in the world said you were damned?

And I haven't even weighed in on the question I posed to Pacifist, but you are making a statement about what you think I believe? And you make statement about what you think the real issue is without saying it. Quit alluding to things and say what you mean.

It seems like you don't like being pushed/questioned in your theology either. Rather you jump to being a martyr as well.

---

Yep, you got me pegged.

Have a great night.

dermdoc said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

The two questions I have asked a couple of times are the only ones I've posed in response to your video. Is heaven a real place? Is hell a real place?

The answer is either yes or no to each question. I don't understand why you can't answer with a yes or no.

In any event, safe travels.

---

A question if I may.

Were you aware before watching that video what the Orthodox theology on heaven and hell were?

And what the video was saying is that we all end up in the presence of the Lord. For those who reject Him, it is "hell". For those who love Him, it is heaven.

Now I am done. Have a great night.

---

Just touched down and saw this. It's a great explanation and why I've been confused. I thought the video was clear, but when you rip statements out of context, and try to pretend complex theological issues are "simple", then you get what agilaw has been doing.

Since agilaw wants it simple, heaven and hell are the same "place". They're both in the presence of the unsurpassable love and beauty of God. If we flawed human loving our enemies is like heaping burning coals on their heads, imagine what it's like to be in the presence of Love Himself!

But also as zobel stated, one needs to define "place" before demanding an answer to it.

Agilaw said:

---

What is the real issue you allude to Derm?


Regarding the idea that only salvific issues are really the only things that are of importance is off base. If you don't hold to an absolute truth, a belief in the scriptures and what they say is truth, on what Jesus taught while He was on earth, then your salvific issue might not be the same as others. It may be wrong or watered down and cause people to miss the mark.

Too many today hold to a theology that they have created, with bits and pieces of scripture and creeds thrown in. It has been watered down and served up as a cheap theology of God, has cheapened the cross, has minimized sin and the consequences of sin.

The Bible reaches of a narrow gate and a narrow way to follow Christ. Too many are making it a broad and easy way couched in the word love.

True, Jesus and God are perfect love. But in this love they are also Holy (set apart in every way) and we are called to be Holy too. Seeing how someone treats clear scripture and how they treat sin are markers of where they stand. It's important to know where people stand if they are speaking theologically.

---

I find this view of Christianity to be cheap and unsubstantial. Jesus washed the feet of prostitutes and hung out with the lessers of society and made every effort to bring himself to those who were the dregs of society.

Agilaw has a cheap and shallow theology that most of all values them feeling like they have special truth and are above others. It's not an humble faith but a presumptuous one based in a deep need to feel superior. Notice how in every bit of conversation they feel superior and lecture others even of their own faith with far more experience but they offer no substance as they have no deep background in the faith. They are just proud and ignorant wannabe conquers flexing their own silly view of the world that makes them feel special. These people are the most evil and the most pathetic.

ifeelold said:

---

Agilaw said:

---

What is the real issue you allude to Derm?


Regarding the idea that only salvific issues are really the only things that are of importance is off base. If you don't hold to an absolute truth, a belief in the scriptures and what they say is truth, on what Jesus taught while He was on earth, then your salvific issue might not be the same as others. It may be wrong or watered down and cause people to miss the mark.

Too many today hold to a theology that they have created, with bits and pieces of scripture and creeds thrown in. It has been watered down and served up as a cheap theology of God, has cheapened the cross, has minimized sin and the consequences of sin.

The Bible reaches of a narrow gate and a narrow way to follow Christ. Too many are making it a broad and easy way couched in the word love.

True, Jesus and God are perfect love. But in this love they are also Holy (set apart in every way) and we are called to be Holy too. Seeing how someone treats clear scripture and how they treat sin are markers of where they stand. It's important to know where people stand if they are speaking theologically.

---

I find this view of Christianity to be cheap and unsubstantial. Jesus washed the feet of prostitutes and hung out with the lessers of society and made every effort to bring himself to those who were the dregs of society.

Agilaw has a cheap and shallow theology that most of all values them feeling like they have special truth and are above others. It's not an humble faith but a presumptuous one based in a deep need to feel superior. Notice how in every bit of conversation they feel superior and lecture others even of their own faith with far more experience but they offer no substance as they have no deep background in the faith. They are just proud and ignorant wannabe conquers flexing their own silly view of the world that makes them feel special. These people are the most evil and the most pathetic.

---

No need for that kind of post on here imho.

This is a complicated subject which has been debated for centuries. And always generates emotional responses.

Remember we are all united in our love for Christ.

And I am going to refrain from further comments on this thread because I do not see it turning into an edifying discussion.

God bless.

Agreed. I was thinking about some of the hostility on this thread last night, and it struck me as so ironic that we have a tendency to become hostile and insulting when discussing our understanding of the One who is Love. Answering hostility and judgement with hostility and judgement is not the right course.