Anonymous writes of The Passion of the Christ: Yes, somebody didn’t want this film to be made – God. But since He is gracious and slow to anger he lets man “get away” with enough sin until the cup is full and then the judgement follows.
Yes, I can see where telling millions of people about Jesus Christ and the good news of his death and resurrection is something that the Christian God would wish to prevent. What god do you worship anyhow – besides your own dogma? I’m seriously beginning to wonder if these angry devotees of predestination are Satan worshippers or something. They sure seem to hate Christianity and Christians, especially those who dare to be open about their faith.
Arminian theology is sub-Christian because it denies God of His sovereign right. It places the autonomous man in a position of ultimacy. It basicially believes the autonomus will of man decides for himself if he will be saved or damned. But those take all of the Scriptures into account know that it is God who makes men to differ. This blog is a case in point of how corrupt the church has become. Those who willfully propogate wrong theology will have more to answer for on that day.
This is totally absurd. Elevating theological correctness above Jesus Christ, baptism and the great commandments strikes me as nothing but the actions of a modern-day Pharisee. To say that because an individual doesn’t buy into a specific human interpretation – often an illogical and unimaginative interpretation at that – of the Bible, they are sub- non- or anti-Christian is ridiculous. Jesus Christ told his disciples to follow him, to share the good news, feed the poor, heal the sick and raise the dead. I don’t recall him saying anything about being theologically correct, though perhaps I missed the bit where Jesus said that unless you believe with your heart and confess with your tongue that his Father murdered a young father of three with cancer, you will not be saved. It’s intriguing to see how these champions of dogma are now openly opposing a) a movie preaching the Gospel, b) a columnist who occasionally preaches the Gospel, c) honest intellectual inquiry.
Paul wrote that he didn’t care if a man was preaching the Gospel solely out of greed and ambition, so long as the Gospel was preached. But what was good enough for the Apostle is apparently not good enough for these men.
It is said that by their fruits you shall know them. And what fruits, exactly, come from encouraging Christians to sit on their butts doing nothing, believing that they have no free will, no individual responsibility for their decisions and that they are helpless before the evil of the world, which is all inflicted by God anyhow? Dogmatic predestinationers like to talk about God hardening men’s hearts; I wonder if they ever consider that the hearts being hardened might be theirs?