There is most certainly evidence for knowing Jesus to be the Lord… and when this evidence is taken together it makes for a strong case.
Peter makes an argument from Scripture that the risen one is the Lord (2:25–31, 34–35), an argument from the testimony of eyewitnesses and the Spirit’s present confirmation that Jesus has risen (2:32–33), with the resulting conclusion that Jesus is the Lord (2:36).
Craig Keener, Exegetical Commentary on Acts
This reminded me of a favorite quote I have from Richard Lovelace’s Dynamics of Spiritual Life,
One group of genuine believers can never remember a conscious conversion to faith in Christ; another insists that a datable experience of being “born again” is essential; a third says that a second distinct experience of “the baptism of the Holy Spirit” is necessary for Christian maturity. When we “test the spirits” in the lives of representatives among these groups, we often find an equal level of spiritual vitality—or deadness!—in each sector.
Yes but…
Too often we extrapolate our own experiences to the process of interpretation of the biclical scriptures. When others do not have the same experiences, there will be points where the differing experiences do not fully fit to our narrow interpretation. Differing use of terms confuses the picture even more. The terms ‘born again’ and ‘the baptism of the Holy Spirit’ are typical cases where the words have differing meanings to different Christians.
I can check/tick these two terms in my own life, even according to the most strict fundamentalist/pentecostal sense. Experience (40 years as a believer) and teaching has made me understand the limitations of my early interpretations about these points, as well as the various problems that rises from the differing use of the words. There have been numerous events where misunderstandings related to these words have caused disagreements. It may have been that both parties would agree about the matter but the colored terms prevent understanding of what the other person is really trying to tell.
On the other hand, there are interpretations that are not dependent on our own experiences. Our ‘colored spectacles’ often make the interpretations partly subjective (we repeat and support interpretations that someone has fed to us) but the interpretation itself is based on something else than extrapolating our own experiences.
Rather than focusing on the narrow definitions and past experiences, it would be better to ask where am I now? What is my state and situation at the moment?
Yes, I couldn’t agree more with this. People should be free to work out their understanding. Religious authoritarianism in the sense of the church bearing the civil sword has plagued us for too long. I am dumbfounded by its total absence from the NT teaching regarding the church.
Somewhat on the side, I had an ironic conversation with a knowledgeable ‘liberal’ Christian about how chiastic literary devices could explain some of the discrepancies we find in Genesis. For this person, chiastic interpretations were too arbitrary 
I actually like that there is a degree of arbitrariness to them
If you had evidence you wouldn’t need to present arguments based on hearsay.
No, but it is his thing. He always goes on about the church and power.
(If you insist i will try, but Mitchell does it better)
Not the same thing.
Says you?
Still doesn’t change anything.
It doesn’t actually say that if we don’t. He won’t
You are being legalistic because of your insistance on relating it to the Jewish Sanctuary. Thay are not the same.You are making a connection that Scripture does not.
I am still not talking about Salvation, or righteousness or being a follower of Jesus.
The forgiveness is there for all. Salvation and righteousness are a different story.
You are tryig to press gang people into faith.
“You have the king’s shilling, therefore you re drafted”
Forgivensess stands aone. It has nothing to do with discipleship, salvation, or any other religious notion. It is.
Your example from Mattew 25 proves my point not yours. Most of the sheep hadn’t confessed or identified any sins, and God ignored that. He was only interested in their charachter. The charachter that you claim cannot exist because of Adam. It is all poppycock!. God forgives Sins!
I shall do no such thing.
The Scanctuary is for Judaism not me!
Stop trying to mix Judaism with Christianity. They split 2000 years ago (more or less)
Richard
Or we can both stand next to each other and be shocked when Zeus asks us why we never sacrificed any animals to him.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.