A final presentation of the Indifferent Contradiction

Ben9275375@aol.com Ben9275375@aol.com
Mon, 29 Sep 1997 19:43:28 -0400 (EDT) (00875598208, 970929194107_-1832715238@emout03.mail.aol.com) 

In a message dated 97-09-29 13:22:11 EDT, you write:

<< TILL
  Let's just put this issue into focus with a question that Matt should be
  able to answer.  ARE THERE ANY PEOPLE NOW LIVING ANYWHERE ON EARTH WHOSE
  ATTITUDE TOWARD JESUS COULD ACCURATELY BE REPRESENTED WITH THE WORD
  "INDIFFERENT"?
  
  MATT
  Yes there would be, but this must be qualified by stating that from a
  Scriptural perspective indifference=against and never for.
  
 
 BEN
 But there is a conflicting scriptural perspective.  What Till is trying
 to tell you is that there is a contradiction.  You admit that there are
 people who are indifferent to Christ.  One passage says that those who are
 not for him (which the indifferent would qualify) are against him.  On the
 other hand, the other passage they have been showing you is that those who
 are not against him (the indifferent would qualify here, too) are for him.
  So on passage is saying the indifferent are for him, and the other is
 saying
 they are against him.  And you admitted (it is quoted earlier in this
 paper)
 that there are indifferent people.  So the contradiction is valid.
 
 MATT
 You argument falls down when you say 'the indifferent would qualify here
 too'. The indifferent are, through original sin, effectively against Jesus
 and the Gospel. So the contradiction is invalid. >>


BEN 
   But Matt, they do qualify.  They are not against Jesus.  I am not against
Jesus.  Therefore I would qualify under the latter passage as well as the
first.  No mention of origional sin is present.  And okay, let's say you are
right.  Origional sin is a concept developed by the Catholic church.  I was
raised Catholic.  I was forgiven of my origional sin through infantile
baptism.  I am indifferent, now.  So am I for or against Christ?  The two
passages contradict each other with me as evidence!