"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
Repenting and confessing your sins to some so-called man of God is not it.
[bleep] organized religion. Learn to be one with God and do the right thing(s) not out of fear but out of knowing natural law and living by the word of God.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
One rule of interpretation isn't any theological higher critical learned scholar stuff. It goes like this. If there's 100 verses about the topic that are clear and one verse that seems to contradict, you go with the clear majority over the speculative few. Romans speaks to believers ABOUT salvation in a clear way, like the chapter you cited. It's hard to come away from the book with a works based salvation, even though it teaches much about the separate post salvation walk with the Lord that includes some works.
There's one book of the Bible that is not only written to believers, but UNbelievers as well. Do you want to take a guess which one?
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
Jesus said, "unless you repent you will perish."
Acts 20:17-21 17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in [k]Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me [l]through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and [m]from house to house, 21 solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
Jesus said, "unless you repent you will perish."
Acts 20:17-21 17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in [k]Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me [l]through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and [m]from house to house, 21 solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is always fascinating to me to observe men choosing to divide and separate themselves from one another... over the tiniest nuance of a single precept.
While ignoring that the VAST MAJORITY of the world would rape either man's Chihuahua... then eat it for dinner.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
Jesus said, "unless you repent you will perish."
Acts 20:17-21 17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in [k]Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me [l]through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and [m]from house to house, 21 solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is always fascinating to me to observe men choosing to divide and separate themselves from one another... over the tiniest nuance of a single precept.
While ignoring that the VAST MAJORITY of the world would rape either man's Chihuahua... then eat it for dinner.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
One rule of interpretation isn't any theological higher critical learned scholar stuff. It goes like this. If there's 100 verses about the topic that are clear and one verse that seems to contradict, you go with the clear majority over the speculative few. Romans speaks to believers ABOUT salvation in a clear way, like the chapter you cited. It's hard to come away from the book with a works based salvation, even though it teaches much about the separate post salvation walk with the Lord that includes some works.
There's one book of the Bible that is not only written to believers, but UNbelievers as well. Do you want to take a guess which one?
No, you do not. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. If the original language can be understood as well as the customs of the time, there will be no contradiction. However, few of us know Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. It makes it hard for us to understand what the authors were getting at but in the end, a heartfelt "Jesus, save me" will do it. That acknowledges that Jesus has the authority to save us as well as expressing our need and desire to be saved.
Is it even possible to place your faith in Jesus as your Savior without first changing your mind (repenting) about your sin and your need for God’s forgiveness, and accepting His grace…?
I don’t see changing your mind (repenting), or acknowledging a need, or accepting a gift as being a ‘work’.
I don’t see changing your mind (repenting), or acknowledging a need, or accepting a gift as being a ‘work’.
Right .... We might even think it was our decision to turn to God but how do we really know that it wasn't the hand of God on our life who caused us to make that choice?
We put so much faith in ourselves and our own "righteousness" it makes a mockery of the Cross.
Repentance is a natural result of accepting Christ as your Savior and being in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is not the key to the kingdom, but it does demonstrate the fruits of The Spirt.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
One rule of interpretation isn't any theological higher critical learned scholar stuff. It goes like this. If there's 100 verses about the topic that are clear and one verse that seems to contradict, you go with the clear majority over the speculative few. Romans speaks to believers ABOUT salvation in a clear way, like the chapter you cited. It's hard to come away from the book with a works based salvation, even though it teaches much about the separate post salvation walk with the Lord that includes some works.
There's one book of the Bible that is not only written to believers, but UNbelievers as well. Do you want to take a guess which one?
No, you do not. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. If the original language can be understood as well as the customs of the time, there will be no contradiction. However, few of us know Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic. It makes it hard for us to understand what the authors were getting at but in the end, a heartfelt "Jesus, save me" will do it. That acknowledges that Jesus has the authority to save us as well as expressing our need and desire to be saved.
RC,
I was reinforcing the point you originally made IF I understand you correctly. Did I say "the Bible contradicts itself?" Go back and read the bold text you are pointing to.
I said, " If there's 100 verses about the topic that are clear and one verse that seems to contradict, you go with the clear majority over the speculative few."
The problem some have with understanding the Bible use of the term "repent" in the KJV is Not the translation, or any contradictions. One main problem is covered in the video. Did you listen? Preachers like most popular TV preachers and Catholic priests is that they will not define it properly in context and they add to the gospel in order to bend it to their way of thinking. You don't have to be a Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic scholar in order to understand this doctrine. It is simple enough for children to understand and receive that free gift of life. Even the crew here can figure it out without Greek as a second language. I'll go so far to say that anyone around the world who never had a class on the common Greek culture of Christ time on earth, can understand that gospel today and what repentance is referring to. If you watch the video, you'll get a better idea of where I'm coming from.
Looks like me and wabigoon are going to have to make some more mustard vs ketchup threads to slide this crap off of the main page
Where’s all the old whiney kguntz that bitch about lack of hunting and shooting threads? Cmon on you 79 year old bastards!!!
The only "crap" I saw on the main page were three bowl movement threads that YOU started. 1. Pictures of your toilet after you crapped 2. Pictures of animals lifting their tails and deficating... 3. The latest was about your bathroom habits.....how you prefer to undress to take a crap so you don't crap on yourself.
The gospel of the Savior and what defines that is NOT crap, Slum.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
And John was the greatest of them all said no less than Jesus who by the way also preached the grace of salvation produced by repentance and evidenced by the fruit of good works.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
And John was the greatest of them all said no less than Jesus who by the way also preached the grace of salvation produced by repentance and evidenced by the fruit of good works.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
There's a lot of sermon topics and applications in the Bible that most preachers proclaim. John preached on more than one, which is what we read. Read the angel's message from God to Zachariah, John's Dad. He mentions more than one topic. They don't all include the gospel of salvation. I'm not trying to argue, I'm just wondering, Do you know what John the Baptist preached about salvation?
""But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."
He certainly preached the gospel that folks had to believe before he would baptize them. However, there are things mentioned here that are to prepare Israel for their Messiah/ Christ. Some things John preached were to show the false teachers for who they were. The pharisees and Sadducees preached false work salvation gospels to their people, many who went to hear him preach.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
There's a lot of sermon topics and applications in the Bible that most preachers proclaim. John preached on more than one, which is what we read. Read the angel's message from God to Zachariah, John's Dad. He mentions more than one topic. They don't all include the gospel of salvation. I'm not trying to argue, I'm just wondering, Do you know what John the Baptist preached about salvation?
I think Hastings covered it pretty well.
Prior to his death I believe he admonished his captors to repent of what he charged them with.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
I agree, John was absolutely right. To distinguish the walk of someone with the Lord after salvation with John's preaching of repentance FOR salvation, it's quoted by someone who listened to him preach.
"Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." Acts 19:4
The people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Baptism was not a requirement for salvation, but a work of obedience following the free gift.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
What does the first sermon say by a first person student of the One Who saves?
"Repent and let each of you be baptised..." Acts 2:38
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
I agree, John was absolutely right. To distinguish the walk of someone with the Lord after salvation with John's preaching of repentance FOR salvation, it's quoted by someone who listened to him preach.
"Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." Acts 19:4
The people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Baptism was not a requirement for salvation, but a work of obedience following the free gift.
If it’s not needed then John The Baptist was barking up a tree. I don’t think that he was. He was spot on.
I agree, John was absolutely right. To distinguish the walk of someone with the Lord after salvation with John's preaching of repentance FOR salvation, it's quoted by someone who listened to him preach.
"Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." Acts 19:4
The people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Baptism was not a requirement for salvation, but a work of obedience following the free gift.
Does that make sense, Houston?
Yes, HC, it does make sense.
One could easily conceive that there’s no forgiveness without repentance but He asked that they be forgiven for they know not what they do. From that one could assume in some manner that ignorance doesn’t necessarily mean total condemnation.
I realize that’s stretching things out pretty far.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
Jesus said, "unless you repent you will perish."
Acts 20:17-21 17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them, “You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in [k]Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me [l]through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and [m]from house to house, 21 solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is always fascinating to me to observe men choosing to divide and separate themselves from one another... over the tiniest nuance of a single precept.
While ignoring that the VAST MAJORITY of the world would rape either man's Chihuahua... then eat it for dinner.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
What does the first sermon say by a first person student of the One Who saves?
"Repent and let each of you be baptised..." Acts 2:38
Let's see the context of this one phrase in Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost.
Not many days earlier, Jesus left to go to Heaven. The last thing He told the disciples was in the first chapter of Acts.
"To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
So they were told that they crucified the Savior Jesus Christ. They had to repent/ change their minds and realize Who He was and believe on Him.
'He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses."
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
What occurred at the time they believed the preaching of Peter? They were automatically baptized by the Holy Spirit into union with Christ and endued with a spiritual gift. Just days earlier, Jesus was clear as to this distinction between water baptism and this baptism.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
I agree, John was absolutely right. To distinguish the walk of someone with the Lord after salvation with John's preaching of repentance FOR salvation, it's quoted by someone who listened to him preach.
"Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus." Acts 19:4
The people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Baptism was not a requirement for salvation, but a work of obedience following the free gift.
Does that make sense, Ringman?[/quote]
No. Jesus says, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." After that obedience of love begins.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
What does the first sermon say by a first person student of the One Who saves?
"Repent and let each of you be baptised..." Acts 2:38
Let's see the context of this one phrase in Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost.
Not many days earlier, Jesus left to go to Heaven. The last thing He told the disciples was in the first chapter of Acts.
"To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
So they were told that they crucified the Savior Jesus Christ. They had to repent/ change their minds and realize Who He was and believe on Him.
'He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses."
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
What occurred at the time they believed the preaching of Peter? They were automatically baptized by the Holy Spirit into union with Christ and endued with a spiritual gift. Just days earlier, Jesus was clear as to this distinction between water baptism and this baptism.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
There's certainly certain areas of scripture, some refer to as fundamentals, that are clear as a blue sky. I think that I understand what you mean there. However, I find that when I ask for wisdom and understanding, the Lord gives that and sheds light on some passages that were previously not as clear.
Jesus told the woman at the well to go and SIN NO MORE. Being born again, means giving up your sins and starting a new life in Christ. So yes, if you read ALL the scriptures and ALL of what Jesus said, repentance is necessary.
Mathew 4:17 Jesus said "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand"
II Peter 3:9 talks about coming to repentance, and Peter was with Jesus.
Mathew 11:21 Jesus said "woe to you" talking about repentance.
There are over 60 verses talking about repentance.
After repentance, you then must accept Jesus' sacrifice for your sins into your heart. Then the Holy Spirit comes in and opens up the scriptures to your understanding. You don't have to go to a priest or such. Jesus said to pray to the Father in His name. Come before the Father in the Name of Jesus.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
Yes, a person must repent.
Repentance is not works anymore than choosing to believe is works. Repentance is a recognition that you have sinned and wronged God. It's an Admission of your state of sin just as believing in Christ is an admission that Christ is Lord of all.
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" Luke 5:32 This clearly connects repentance with the sin.
The game the preacher plays in the video is he shifts from specific verses which clearly state we must repent of sin to the general statement that every time the word repent is used it means sin. All it takes is one verse and Luke 5:32 does it.
Furthermore, simple belief is not enough to be saved. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" James 2:19
Repentance is a natural result of accepting Christ as your Savior and being in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is not the key to the kingdom, but it does demonstrate the fruits of The Spirt.
I was taught years ago by my pastor friend of a campus ministry that repent meant "turn from your sins.". Then he gave me his Sermon notes on his study. I took that as a challenge to do a word and then a doctrine study of the subject. I'm not saying you are doing this. I'm just pointing out that many preachers do this. He was taking the use of the word as it applies.to believers that sinned and turning it into a salvation verse that was not even meant to be. When I was saved, it was the result of the first verses of the ones underneath the video. I realized it was not of works, (like trying to give up sins, or bad habits, or giving my life to Christ, or baptism). It was the undeserved kindness/ grace of the Lord offered as a gift free of charge. It cost God's Son His life. It was offered to me, as to everyone else, with no strings attached. Repentance then meant to change my mind to that reality. I asked God for that gift based upon the promises I read about it.....like ... ..I John 5
"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
After knowing that I had that gift and could not lose it, I also realized that I still had a problem. I still sinned. In order to stay close to God, I found out that I needed to confess my sins to Him, again based upon His Son's sacrifice. This is O.T. and N.T. direction for restoration to fellowship. Sometimes it is referred to as turning to God as in Israel rebelling against God and committing idolatry and blasphemy, etc. If they turn in the sense of Nineveh then it's works which didn't save each individual from hell, but rather the nation from God's immediate judgement. Jonah 3:9
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Since we are not saved by works, their repentance only stayed God's hand of swift destruction on them. Individuals would still need to call upon the Name of the Lord in faith to be saved for ever.
Note also, who else repented? God turned and repented. Can God sin? No So we see that the term repent, as used by Billy Graham and others, does Not mean turn from your sins. God repented many times as the result of believers prayer requests. He did not turn from sins. He simply changed his mind or turned as He did concerning the major city of Nineveh.
That's a whole Bible study there, and maybe more than you wanted to hear. What do you think about the topic?
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
Have you ever read the gospel of John all the way through?
The purpose was stated near the end in chapter 20
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."
I don’t think any external act is necessary for salvation.
^^ This. The first and great Commandment.
And the second is like unto it. Good works beyond that to your fellow man are just stars in your crown.
I think that's what antlers said, but you mentioned the first and great commandment. That makes me think of what Jesus said, not antlers.
"Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
Did this man keep that commandment since he was a child? Did you keep that since you were a boy? I didn't. I still fail both of those more than I know.
I don’t think any external act is necessary for salvation.
^^ This. The first and great Commandment.
And the second is like unto it. Good works beyond that to your fellow man are just stars in your crown.
I think that's what antlers said, but you mentioned the first and great commandment. That makes me think of what Jesus said, not antlers.
"Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
Did this man keep that commandment since he was a child? Did you keep that since you were a boy? I didn't. I still fail both of those more than I know.
I believe you maybe have gotten off of the path of your original question. I may have also.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
Yes, a person must repent.
Repentance is not works anymore than choosing to believe is works. Repentance is a recognition that you have sinned and wronged God. It's an Admission of your state of sin just as believing in Christ is an admission that Christ is Lord of all.
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" Luke 5:32 This clearly connects repentance with the sin.
The game the preacher plays in the video is he shifts from specific verses which clearly state we must repent of sin to the general statement that every time the word repent is used it means sin. All it takes is one verse and Luke 5:32 does it.
Furthermore, simple belief is not enough to be saved. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" James 2:19
If you notice that common example throughout the video of Billy Graham clips. The preacher is giving a very brief point that can literally take hours to teach on the doctrines surrounding this topic. He is addressing one. That sounds like a "game", but he is responding to what I have heard hundreds of times from various people. I have heard both uses of which I took the effort as a young man to approach the study with an open mind, asking God to reveal this to me. Graham says something my Bible never said as if he is Quoting Scripture. That's commonly misused. However Keep in mind that the literal definition of the Greek word translated repent doesn't even contain a term for "sin.". I was lied to by many preachers for years, who did so willfully or ignorantly.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
Yes, a person must repent.
Repentance is not works anymore than choosing to believe is works. Repentance is a recognition that you have sinned and wronged God. It's an Admission of your state of sin just as believing in Christ is an admission that Christ is Lord of all.
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" Luke 5:32 This clearly connects repentance with the sin.
The game the preacher plays in the video is he shifts from specific verses which clearly state we must repent of sin to the general statement that every time the word repent is used it means sin. All it takes is one verse and Luke 5:32 does it.
Furthermore, simple belief is not enough to be saved. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" James 2:19
If you notice that common example throughout the video of Billy Graham clips. The preacher is giving a very brief point that can literally take hours to teach on the doctrines surrounding this topic. He is addressing one. That sounds like a "game", but he is responding to what I have heard hundreds of times from various people. I have heard both uses of which I took the effort as a young man to approach the study with an open mind, asking God to reveal this to me. Graham says something my Bible never said as if he is Quoting Scripture. That's commonly misused. However Keep in mind that the literal definition of the Greek word translated repent doesn't even contain a term for "sin.". I was lied to by many preachers for years, who did so willfully or ignorantly.
I don’t think any external act is necessary for salvation.
^^ This. The first and great Commandment.
And the second is like unto it. Good works beyond that to your fellow man are just stars in your crown.
I think that's what antlers said, but you mentioned the first and great commandment. That makes me think of what Jesus said, not antlers.
"Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
Did this man keep that commandment since he was a child? Did you keep that since you were a boy? I didn't. I still fail both of those more than I know.
I believe you maybe have gotten off of the path of your original question. I may have also.
Probably.
To wrap up what Jesus said by answering that man. Sometimes Jesus would bring up the old covenant so that people could see that they already failed and broke it. Plenty of times. They want to justify themselves before God, as the Pharisees taught. They thought they had no sins to be forgiven, but of course they were wrong. Rich young ruler comes to mind as well. Jesus came to bring a new covenant, a BETTER covenant that includes what they lost sight of through the animal sacrifices. Of course they blew it a long time ago and since. They needed to change their minds about what they were trusting in to save them and make Christ the Object of their faith.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
You are right. I think that the devil tries to throw in a monkey wrench to confuse the issues.
"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. " II Corinthians 4:4
He's worked behind the scenes for thousands of years.
However, God reveals the truth to those who are humble and want to learn more about this all important subject. I was challenged by a preacher in my youth. Glad I took it up and studied all of the uses of the word repent that applied to salvation.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
Yes, a person must repent.
Repentance is not works anymore than choosing to believe is works. Repentance is a recognition that you have sinned and wronged God. It's an Admission of your state of sin just as believing in Christ is an admission that Christ is Lord of all.
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" Luke 5:32 This clearly connects repentance with the sin.
The game the preacher plays in the video is he shifts from specific verses which clearly state we must repent of sin to the general statement that every time the word repent is used it means sin. All it takes is one verse and Luke 5:32 does it.
Furthermore, simple belief is not enough to be saved. "You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!" James 2:19
If you notice that common example throughout the video of Billy Graham clips. The preacher is giving a very brief point that can literally take hours to teach on the doctrines surrounding this topic. He is addressing one. That sounds like a "game", but he is responding to what I have heard hundreds of times from various people. I have heard both uses of which I took the effort as a young man to approach the study with an open mind, asking God to reveal this to me. Graham says something my Bible never said as if he is Quoting Scripture. That's commonly misused. However Keep in mind that the literal definition of the Greek word translated repent doesn't even contain a term for "sin.". I was lied to by many preachers for years, who did so willfully or ignorantly.
Preachers lying?
Apology for the mirth.
I don't apologize for any of them. The consequences of their teachings are either salvation or damnation. Whatever is going on politically right now is not nearly as important.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
You are right. I think that the devil tries to throw in a monkey wrench to confuse the issues.
"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. " II Corinthians 4:4
He's worked behind the scenes for thousands of years.
However, God reveals the truth to those who are humble and want to learn more about this all important subject. I was challenged by a preacher in my youth. Glad I took it up and studied all of the uses of the word repent that applied to salvation.
The Devil? You know that beliefs about Satan or the Devil, not one and the same concept, evolved over time?
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
Like I said before, a child can understand the true gospel.
Here's a question. It's not a trick question or to get one up. It's just a way to think and learn.
If you had a little girl or boy who was following you around the field on their bicycle while you were mowing, but you couldn't see them. You already warned them to stay away, but they nevertheless followed closely. Then they wanted to surprise you by coming around the brush hog or harvester. All of a sudden they're peddling next to you on the tractor. Would they no longer be your child?
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
Like I said before, a child can understand the true gospel. However, if you listen to many preachers on TV or pop Christianity, they will misdefine the issues of the gospel.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
There's certainly certain areas of scripture, some refer to as fundamentals, that are clear as a blue sky. I think that I understand what you mean there. However, I find that when I ask for wisdom and understanding, the Lord gives that and sheds light on some passages that were previously not as clear.
I've been a Christian for about fifty years. For decades I listened to the Bible at work, in the garden, while loading, and while driving. In the evening I read It. It's been years since I had a change of mind. One of those changes was getting the correct view of Jesus' instructions.
Repentance is a natural result of accepting Christ as your Savior and being in-dwelt by the Holy Spirit. It is not the key to the kingdom, but it does demonstrate the fruits of The Spirt.
I was taught years ago by my pastor friend of a campus ministry that repent meant "turn from your sins.". Then he gave me his Sermon notes on his study. I took that as a challenge to do a word and then a doctrine study of the subject. I'm not saying you are doing this. I'm just pointing out that many preachers do this. He was taking the use of the word as it applies.to believers that sinned and turning it into a salvation verse that was not even meant to be. When I was saved, it was the result of the first verses of the ones underneath the video. I realized it was not of works, (like trying to give up sins, or bad habits, or giving my life to Christ, or baptism). It was the undeserved kindness/ grace of the Lord offered as a gift free of charge. It cost God's Son His life. It was offered to me, as to everyone else, with no strings attached. Repentance then meant to change my mind to that reality. I asked God for that gift based upon the promises I read about it.....like ... ..I John 5
"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
After knowing that I had that gift and could not lose it, I also realized that I still had a problem. I still sinned. In order to stay close to God, I found out that I needed to confess my sins to Him, again based upon His Son's sacrifice. This is O.T. and N.T. direction for restoration to fellowship. Sometimes it is referred to as turning to God as in Israel rebelling against God and committing idolatry and blasphemy, etc. If they turn in the sense of Nineveh then it's works which didn't save each individual from hell, but rather the nation from God's immediate judgement. Jonah 3:9
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Since we are not saved by works, their repentance only stayed God's hand of swift destruction on them. Individuals would still need to call upon the Name of the Lord in faith to be saved for ever.
Note also, who else repented? God turned and repented. Can God sin? No So we see that the term repent, as used by Billy Graham and others, does Not mean turn from your sins. God repented many times as the result of believers prayer requests. He did not turn from sins. He simply changed his mind or turned as He did concerning the major city of Nineveh.
That's a whole Bible study there, and maybe more than you wanted to hear. What do you think about the topic?
Jesus says, "They believed for awhile and then turned away."
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
There's certainly certain areas of scripture, some refer to as fundamentals, that are clear as a blue sky. I think that I understand what you mean there. However, I find that when I ask for wisdom and understanding, the Lord gives that and sheds light on some passages that were previously not as clear.
I've been a Christian for about fifty years. For decades I listened to the Bible at work, in the garden, while loading, and while driving. In the evening I read It. It's been years since I had a change of mind. One of those changes was getting the correct view of Jesus' instructions.
What part(s) of His instructions are difficult to understand?
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
Like I said before, a child can understand the true gospel.
Here's a question. It's not a trick question or to get one up. It's just a way to think and learn.
If you had a little girl or boy who was following you around the field on their bicycle while you were mowing, but you couldn't see them. You already warned them to stay away, but they nevertheless followed closely. Then they wanted to surprise you by coming around the brush hog or harvester. All of a sudden they're peddling next to you on the tractor. Would they no longer be your child?
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
There's certainly certain areas of scripture, some refer to as fundamentals, that are clear as a blue sky. I think that I understand what you mean there. However, I find that when I ask for wisdom and understanding, the Lord gives that and sheds light on some passages that were previously not as clear.
I've been a Christian for about fifty years. For decades I listened to the Bible at work, in the garden, while loading, and while driving. In the evening I read It. It's been years since I had a change of mind. One of those changes was getting the correct view of Jesus' instructions.
What part(s) of His instructions are difficult to understand?
For most folks all; starting with "believe AND be baptized."
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
His wacked out version of religion and his multiple head injuries (TBI) would get his ass whipped on a legit religion site - hence the incessant trolling here.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
There was a young Mennonite couple who came to the church I attended forty-five years ago. The lady was extremely conservative in her attire. One of the older women told her she should "prayerfully" consider her position. She started wearing sleeveless blouses and much shorter dresses. This taught me to not take time to pray about what God has clearly addressed in His Word.
There's certainly certain areas of scripture, some refer to as fundamentals, that are clear as a blue sky. I think that I understand what you mean there. However, I find that when I ask for wisdom and understanding, the Lord gives that and sheds light on some passages that were previously not as clear.
I've been a Christian for about fifty years. For decades I listened to the Bible at work, in the garden, while loading, and while driving. In the evening I read It. It's been years since I had a change of mind. One of those changes was getting the correct view of Jesus' instructions.
What part(s) of His instructions are difficult to understand?
For most folks all; starting with "believe AND be baptized."
Careful about cherrypicking any one particular phrase or admonishment .
"And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her,
Wabigoon,
We see a couple clear points. First we know from a hundred other places in John's Gospel that salvation is by believing in Christ. We take the vast majority as a clear. basic doctrine. Now we look at the less clear passages in light of the very clear majority. The woman was accused of a capital sin which was a crime. The accusers left for which reason is not relevant now. The woman was asked, "Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. " Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."
He didn't get into the gospel as He did with the woman at the well and moreso with Nicodemus. However as we see one aspect of the story we ask ourselves,
Did Jesus just condone adultery? No Did he explain that He was going to suffer for her sins, die and be resurrected the third day? No, but we see that He who had right to condemn her, chose to not condemn. Then He said go and sin no more. Adultery is a serious sin and Jesus told her not to do that any more. It would damage herself and others, not to mention it could get her into this situation again is a reasonable conclusion. As grave a sin as it was, What the statement was not is a discertation on keeping the law for salvation from hell.
This is where some teach that we must keep the law in order to be saved. The book is Galatians teaches about that topic.
If you had a child trying to keep up with her daddy by racing the harvester, and dad saw this, what would he say? Don't do that any more. Would that keep her in the family? No, it is irrelevant to whether or not she has her Daddy's last name. However, the behavior will likely end up in an injury or perhaps discipline. Compare this to the lady above and I think you can relate as well as believe John 3.
It sure appears to me you don't understand God's grace. Consider this illustration.
You receive a check for $10,000 in the mail from someone you don't know and never did work for. How much work did you do to earn it by going to the mailbox? You get in your vehicle and take the check to the bank. How much work did you do to earn the money by gong to the bank? You walk up to the teller and show your I.D. How much word did you do to earn the money by this by doing this? Now you endorse the check. How much work did you do to earn the money by endorsing the check?
The same is true of God's grace and baptism. We are not "working" to "earn" salvation by accepting God's rules for appropriating His gracious salvation.
In Timothy we are told God is the Saviour of all men, especially of believers. How many atheists and others, including believers, weren't run over by a bus today because God intervened and they weren't aware?
We finites really don't know The Infinite God of this universe.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
That's an interesting point. It there a biblical type publication for those far, far below any standard IQ range, that they are capable of understanding, or are there exemptions for such people? Surely no-one will burn in hell for eternity for a simple misunderstanding or misinterpretation?
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity for others. Christianity is on the decrease and Islam on the increase - what's the message here? Or is it all just personal belief?
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity to others.
Don't the Muslims accept Jesus as a prophet and Moses also? I met a Hindu that believed in Jesus as divinely inspired. Mahatma Gandhi expressed that he liked Jesus but didn't much like those that claimed to follow Jesus.
Some folks if they make it through the pearly gates might be surprised who they find also made it.
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity for others. Christianity is on the decrease and Islam on the increase - what's the message here? Or is it all just personal belief?
I guess you didn't understand he studied the religions of the world and concluded the only true one is Christianity. The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't investigate their own beliefs, so they go with their parent's belief.
Your argument about which is growing or shrinking is irrelevant to the Truth.
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity for others. Christianity is on the decrease and Islam on the increase - what's the message here? Or is it all just personal belief?
I guess you didn't understand he studied the religions of the world and concluded the only true one is Christianity. The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't investigate their own beliefs, so they go with their parent's belief.
Your argument about which is growing or shrinking is irrelevant to the Truth.
Many people study comparative religion and come to different conclusions. Selecting someone who happens to agree with one's faith is biased.
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity for others. Christianity is on the decrease and Islam on the increase - what's the message here? Or is it all just personal belief?
I guess you didn't understand he studied the religions of the world and concluded the only true one is Christianity. The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't investigate their own beliefs, so they go with their parent's belief.
Your argument about which is growing or shrinking is irrelevant to the Truth.
Your single case example is also irrelevant but you give it credibility so you can use it to provide yourself with justification of your belief. I was pointing out an equally absurd conclusion with the statement that I made. You saw that but still didn't recognise that of your own because of your bias. End of the day it's still a personal belief.
Also, there are many people who have studied religion and become atheists despite being raised as believers. Would you still look to that guy in your case if he became atheist? I suspect that you would not because he would no longer validate your belief - he's only "credible" if he matches your belief. It's not the other way around (ie you don't follow him for his belief).
What if reality doesn't conform to faith? What if the truth is unpalatable? Things may not be how we would like them to be....what then? Do we just pretend that they are?
It sure appears to me you don't understand God's grace. Consider this illustration.
You receive a check for $10,000 in the mail from someone you don't know and never did work for. How much work did you do to earn it by going to the mailbox? You get in your vehicle and take the check to the bank. How much work did you do to earn the money by gong to the bank? You walk up to the teller and show your I.D. How much word did you do to earn the money by this by doing this? Now you endorse the check. How much work did you do to earn the money by endorsing the check?
The same is true of God's grace and baptism. We are not "working" to "earn" salvation by accepting God's rules for appropriating His gracious salvation.
In Timothy we are told God is the Saviour of all men, especially of believers. How many atheists and others, including believers, weren't run over by a bus today because God intervened and they weren't aware?
We finites really don't know The Infinite God of this universe.
Certainly the rain falls upon the just and unjust. Plenty of times even lives of unbelievers are spared without acknowledgement or thanks to God. How many times unbelievers even here mock answers to prayer over and over. The forum is a heathen's haven.
I've been raised Roman Catholic and plenty of Church of Christ ministers have talked with me about baptism. I know what many protestant pastors teach. They consider it a "work of grace", ordinance, or sacrament. They make it a requirement based upon their church dogmas and bylaws. I've been told that "obedience to baptism" is a requirement for salvation by these and looked up many sources to see if their statements were reflected by the denominations. These are clearly works. I've noticed that not only is obedience required, exception of infants, ones faith in Christ is shared by faith in the baptism. Baptism is in the same category as those in the N.T. who taught circumcision. It was recorded in acts and addressed in Galatians . It's not a work as one might pick up a shovel and dig a ditch. You won't work up a sweat, however it is required by certain denominations as conditional for salvation, just as some require circumcision and other sacraments. The check signing doesn't prove a doctrine. One hundred times the one book in the Bible that has the stated purpose that it was written that you may have eternal life, does indeed prove doctrine.
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
[Your single case example is also irrelevant but you give it credibility so you can use it to provide yourself with justification of your belief. I was pointing out an equally absurd conclusion with the statement that I made. You saw that but still didn't recognise that of your own because of your bias. End of the day it's still a personal belief.
Also, there are many people who have studied religion and become atheists despite being raised as believers. Would you still look to that guy in your case if he became atheist? I suspect that you would not because he would no longer validate your belief - he's only "credible" if he matches your belief. It's not the other way around (ie you don't follow him for his belief).
What if is for junior high girls. When I first met Dr. Kindell he told me, "Christians have two brains. One is lost and the other is out looking for it." By the time he graduated and earn a couple doctorates he had studied ten fields of study: Biology, geology, astronomy, etc, etc. He told me he proved himself wrong in all ten. He became a creationists. Recently he told me, "There would be a lot more Christians if we had a lot more serious skeptics."
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
You do cherry pick and hang your hat upon a single statement.
Did He not also specify that simply believing upon Him was enough for salvation?
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Did He not also specify that simply believing upon Him was enough for salvation?
I don’t think water baptism…or any other external act…is necessary for salvation. It symbolizes that your old life is ending, and that you’ve started a new life following Jesus.
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
You do cherry pick and hang your hat upon a single statement.
Did He not also specify that simply believing upon Him was enough for salvation?
I used to be a boss. What I told them right before I left was of utmost importance. Trying to use something else I said at a previous time did not work when someone tried to get away with something.
By the way, how did the Savior tell us to make disciples recorded at the end of Matthew? Why did Jesus' disciples baptize new believer? Because they believed the Savior.
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
You do cherry pick and hang your hat upon a single statement.
Did He not also specify that simply believing upon Him was enough for salvation?
I used to be a boss. What I told them right before I left was of utmost importance. Trying to use something else I said at a previous time did not work when someone tried to get away with something.
By the way, how did the Savior tell us to make disciples recorded at the end of Matthew? Why did Jesus' disciples baptize new believer? Because they believed the Savior.
Are you saying, straight out, that no Baptism equals no Salvation?
A simple yes or no will suffice. No need for an essay about your earlier life as a boss.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Same here. Isn't funny how this particular forum has thousands of subjects from politics to bathroom habits and some want to ban talk about God's Word? I remember two of the most rabid anti Christian, anti-gospel members that tried their hardest to drive away believers. Where did they go? What were their names? One had the last name Brown and the other a girl's name... Oh yeah, Rene'.
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
So, what are you saying? Do you believe that the thief on the cross didn't get baptized after believing in the crucified Lord because Jesus wasn't resurrected yet? If I remember correctly, John the Baptist was baptizing his converts before Jesus started His full time ministry. Even John the Baptist did not attribute spiritual forgiveness conditioned upon water baptism. When he preached salvation, in a nutshell he said that you must believe on Christ. Baptisms were not what you believe in. That was only a physical demonstration of the spiritual reality.
Go with someone who has researched it thoroughly. There is a book by a former Muslim: Jesus and Mohamad. By age twelve he memorized the Koran. He graduated number two in a class of 6,000 from Cairo university. Early on he was an Imam. Eventually he earned a Ph.D in world religions. He is now what is called a born-again Christian. He teaches Jesus is the only way to the only God.
That's his belief. There are many others with different beliefs. It doesn't display validity for others. Christianity is on the decrease and Islam on the increase - what's the message here? Or is it all just personal belief?
I guess you didn't understand he studied the religions of the world and concluded the only true one is Christianity. The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't investigate their own beliefs, so they go with their parent's belief.
Your argument about which is growing or shrinking is irrelevant to the Truth.
All you made is an Argument From Authority. Christopher Hitchens disagrees with your chosen authority:
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
So, what are you saying? Do you believe that the thief on the cross didn't get baptized after believing in the crucified Lord because Jesus wasn't resurrected yet? If I remember correctly, John the Baptist was baptizing his converts before Jesus started His full time ministry. Even John the Baptist did not attribute spiritual forgiveness conditioned upon water baptism. When he preached salvation, in a nutshell he said that you must believe on Christ. Baptisms were not what you believe in. That was only a physical demonstration of the spiritual reality.
I believe Jesus. What did Jesus say? "Today you will be with Me in Paradise."
What does John's baptizing his converts have to do with what Jesus says at the end of His earthly ministry?
Your commentary on baptism does not line up with Peter's command in Acts 10. He said, "What prevents these from water baptism?"
What did Ananias tell Saul of Tarsus? Don't forget Ananias was sent by God to heal Saul and teach him. Ananis informed, "Be baptized and wash away your sins."
The early followers of Jesus accepted Jesus' teaching about water baptism. Why don't you?
One time a pastor of mine wanted one of the new converts to be baptized. She was not into it. He asked, "If it was good enough for Jesus why isn't it good enough for you?"
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too.
Don't judge...........especially if you've never walked in ones shoes
So, what are you saying? Do you believe that the thief on the cross didn't get baptized after believing in the crucified Lord because Jesus wasn't resurrected yet? If I remember correctly, John the Baptist was baptizing his converts before Jesus started His full time ministry. Even John the Baptist did not attribute spiritual forgiveness conditioned upon water baptism. When he preached salvation, in a nutshell he said that you must believe on Christ. Baptisms were not what you believe in. That was only a physical demonstration of the spiritual reality.
I believe Jesus. What did Jesus say? "Today you will be with Me in Paradise."
What does John's baptizing his converts have to do with what Jesus says at the end of His earthly ministry?
Your commentary on baptism does not line up with Peter's command in Acts 10. He said, "What prevents these from water baptism?"
What did Ananias tell Saul of Tarsus? Don't forget Ananias was sent by God to heal Saul and teach him. Ananis informed, "Be baptized and wash away your sins."
The early followers of Jesus accepted Jesus' teaching about water baptism. Why don't you?
One time a pastor of mine wanted one of the new converts to be baptized. She was not into it. He asked, "If it was good enough for Jesus why isn't it good enough for you?"
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Do I believe in baptism? Yes, but not as a requirement to be saved. Apparently Jesus agreed when He told the thief next to Him on the cross that he would be in paradise with Him. No obedience to baptism was required. No promises to turn from a list of sins and clean up his life or go through catholic or protestant sacraments. That was grace. I understand that grace. I received it.
You post here by the grace of God. And yet you disagree with Jesus and try to convince those who will not accept Jesus Word: "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." He said this AFTER the resurrection. The thief on the cross was alive with Jesus before Jesus died, much less after the resurrection.
So what are you meaning by this. Each time I be asked a straight question, you stop short of clearly answering what you believe. I gave as clear answers as I know how from the first post. I'm just asking the same.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
So what's your idea of religion?
Why do you peek? LOL
Pervs always peek.
🦫
You're not on the" Beavis rules of ignore" list. You are on my Reprobate list. The function is there to keep track of all of you.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
So what's your idea of religion?
Why do you peek? LOL
Why do you barge onto Christian threads and act like a Maniac of Gadera?
So what are you meaning by this. Each time I be asked a straight question, you stop short of clearly answering what you believe. I gave as clear answers as I know how from the first post. I'm just asking the same.
You remind me of a pastor who asked me a question.
The next day I handed him a page of typed out verses. He responded, "Remind me to never ask you another question."
When I have a question I go to God's Word. I write myself an essay so I know what I believe and can defend it from the Bible.
You on the other hand post videos and other folks opinions.
You can't understand a simple allegory of a child endangering themselves and how a parent might respond. How can you answer a basic spiritual question? This isn't Jepardy.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
So what's your idea of religion?
Why do you peek? LOL
Why do you barge onto Christian threads and act like a Maniac of Gadera?
Shouldn't beliefs be examined and questioned? It is a good thing to do.
Look at the sheer volume of contradictory beliefs.
Everyone believes not only what they believe is true, but that they are right and everyone who disagrees or questions is, by default, wrong.
Everybody who assumes they a right, can't be right.
Somebody has to be mistaken. Somebody has to be wrong. Given the sheer volume of contradictory beliefs, many if not most folks have to be wrong in regard to their faith based beliefs.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
Your kind tried to "run off" my Lord too. It was a city of Gadera who rather wanted 2,000 demons in their land than the very Son of God.
So what's your idea of religion?
Why do you peek? LOL
Why do you barge onto Christian threads and act like a Maniac of Gadera?
I f you weren’t such a blind heretic, you’d have seen that the post of mine that you quoted, was a reply to Houston_2.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
They are false gods. Anything can become an idol. All idolatry is forbidden.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
One application for repentance in context of receiving the heavenly gift is explained in the videos. Like on the day of pentecost, you must turn from what is keeping you from the Savior to the true One Who died and rose again bodily . The pagan or Hindu turns from false gods to the true Living God in faith. That requires a change of mind and an acceptance of Christ.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
Yes, Hindu's are Polytheistic, as were the early Jews.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
Hinduism is a belief in the principle of Brahman, the manifestor of the Universe and all it contains, including all the gods, Shiva, Shakti, Kali, etc.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Ro 10:9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Paul doesn't mention repentance in this verse.
Jesus "unless you repent you will all likewise perish"
Paul is contradicted by Jesus so many times. It is a shame that Paul never met him so he could keep his story straight.
I think all of Paul’s epistles were to believing Jews or Gentiles. Probably why he didn’t preach or write on repentance much but the sermon on mars hill were to mostly unbelievers.
“Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,” Acts 17:30 NASB1995
[Your single case example is also irrelevant but you give it credibility so you can use it to provide yourself with justification of your belief. I was pointing out an equally absurd conclusion with the statement that I made. You saw that but still didn't recognise that of your own because of your bias. End of the day it's still a personal belief.
Also, there are many people who have studied religion and become atheists despite being raised as believers. Would you still look to that guy in your case if he became atheist? I suspect that you would not because he would no longer validate your belief - he's only "credible" if he matches your belief. It's not the other way around (ie you don't follow him for his belief).
What if is for junior high girls. When I first met Dr. Kindell he told me, "Christians have two brains. One is lost and the other is out looking for it." By the time he graduated and earn a couple doctorates he had studied ten fields of study: Biology, geology, astronomy, etc, etc. He told me he proved himself wrong in all ten. He became a creationists. Recently he told me, "There would be a lot more Christians if we had a lot more serious skeptics."
It’s as per my previous response (I thought it was clear enough but you appear to have missed it) – this is still just one mans personal choice of belief. I can’t say why he decided in both science and faith but there are also many cases of scientists who are believers. There are unknowns in science and maybe he was looking to fill the voids, so read a couple of books, liked Christianity and went with that. Since much of what he read was either undeniably false or unverifiable or undemonstrable or even unpalatable, he would have had to pick one that he liked best, of had some emotional “resonation” with. Maybe he has his own take on it and accepts parts and rejects other parts, although science alone would lead to rejection of many parts. There are no real barriers or limits to beliefs unless you go mainstream versions.
Skepticism and critical thinking is the reason that many have turned away from belief – odd how you think that it works the other way. Mainstream version belief requires abandonment of critical thinking and acceptance of the written word. Skepticism of the belief is not allowed. Do as instructed, or else.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
One application for repentance in context of receiving the heavenly gift is explained in the videos. Like on the day of pentecost, you must turn from what is keeping you from the Savior to the true One Who died and rose again bodily . The pagan or Hindu turns from false gods to the true Living God in faith. That requires a change of mind and an acceptance of Christ.
Happy Camper: I believe you are guessing on your beliefs. You can't do like I do and admit your ignorance. A lot of what you know you don't actually know. I have studied the New Testament enough to know that Paul doesn't agree with Jesus, John, or James. There is evidence that Paul was planted among Jesus' followers as an agent/spy of Rome and the Jewish power brokers of the day who actually seem to have been in concert. I can see no other reason he was rescued and spirited off to Rome.
I notice you put up videos occasionally. By chance are any of those preachers you?
Do you listen to and accept Jimmy Swaggart? Y'all seem to be in agreement.
Do you think Jesus was God. If so who was he talking about and praying to? If he wasn't how did a Jewish rabbi and prophet become a Christian God? And if he is a separate entity how is making him a God not violating the main commandment of the big 10? Can we accept that Jesus was God's messenger sent to give the Jews (and Gentiles) one last chance. Maybe we could compare Jesus to a country's leader sending his Secretary of State or Foreign Minister who would say "I speak for the president" .
Just wondering. I am always suspicious of someone doctrinaire and too sure of a thing that is unknowable.
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
How hard is it to simply not to participate in or pass over threads that one finds offensive?
How hard is it to use the Ignore function from those one dislikes?
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
One application for repentance in context of receiving the heavenly gift is explained in the videos. Like on the day of pentecost, you must turn from what is keeping you from the Savior to the true One Who died and rose again bodily . The pagan or Hindu turns from false gods to the true Living God in faith. That requires a change of mind and an acceptance of Christ.
Happy Camper: I believe you are guessing on your beliefs. You can't do like I do and admit your ignorance. A lot of what you know you don't actually know. I have studied the New Testament enough to know that Paul doesn't agree with Jesus, John, or James. There is evidence that Paul was planted among Jesus' followers as an agent/spy of Rome and the Jewish power brokers of the day who actually seem to have been in concert. I can see no other reason he was rescued and spirited off to Rome.
Do you listen to and accept Jimmy Swaggart? Y'all seem to be in agreement.
Is that the best insult you can come up with Hastings? Surprised you'd not be embarrassed to write that for others to read.
Do you think Jesus was God.
YES! " For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:" Ever read the book of Revelation? Is Jesus simply a man or created being to you?
If so who was he talking about and praying to?
You are a non- trinitarian Unitarian Universalist. You know the answer to this, but do not believe it even though the Trinity is described throughout the gospels.
If he wasn't how did a Jewish rabbi and prophet become a Christian God?
He didn't become a God. He always was from eternity past and ever will be God. He became a man when He humbled Himself to take on humanity so as to die in our place the torments of the crucifixion. That death and resurrection gives you the option to choose heaven over the hell that He warned us all about time and again.
Just wondering. I am always suspicious of someone doctrinaire and too sure of a thing that is unknowable.
My confidence is in the written truth of God's Holy Word. That's one difference between me and those who undermine the faith of others. I know Who He is personally. He is my Friend.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
One application for repentance in context of receiving the heavenly gift is explained in the videos. Like on the day of pentecost, you must turn from what is keeping you from the Savior to the true One Who died and rose again bodily . The pagan or Hindu turns from false gods to the true Living God in faith. That requires a change of mind and an acceptance of Christ.
Happy Camper: I believe you are guessing on your beliefs. You can't do like I do and admit your ignorance. A lot of what you know you don't actually know. I have studied the New Testament enough to know that Paul doesn't agree with Jesus, John, or James. There is evidence that Paul was planted among Jesus' followers as an agent/spy of Rome and the Jewish power brokers of the day who actually seem to have been in concert. I can see no other reason he was rescued and spirited off to Rome.
Do you listen to and accept Jimmy Swaggart? Y'all seem to be in agreement.
Is that the best insult you can come up with Hastings? Surprised you'd not be embarrassed to write that for others to read.
Do you think Jesus was God.
YES! " For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:" Ever read the book of Revelation? Is Jesus simply a man or created being to you?
If so who was he talking about and praying to?
You are a non- trinitarian Unitarian Universalist. You know the answer to this, but do not believe it even though the Trinity is described throughout the gospels.
If he wasn't how did a Jewish rabbi and prophet become a Christian God?
He didn't become a God. He always was from eternity past and ever will be God. He became a man when He humbled Himself to take on humanity so as to die in our place the torments of the crucifixion. That death and resurrection gives you the option to choose heaven over the hell that He warned us all about time and again.
Just wondering. I am always suspicious of someone doctrinaire and too sure of a thing that is unknowable.
My confidence is in the written truth of God's Holy Word. That's one difference between me and those who undermine the faith of others. I know Who He is personally. He is my Friend.
OK, what about the videos, are you personally appearing in them?
Isn't there a site devoted to religion rather than hunting and the outdoors that would be more fitting to your throw? I would think such would be more than desired, all in the same camp and all...
The Campfires that I’ve sat around have a wide range of discussions far beyond just the outdoors.
Of course. But, If some ass hole like the unhappy noncamper was there not doing a damn thing but pushing his perverted idea of religion, he'd get run off.
How hard is it to simply not to participate in or pass over threads that one finds offensive?
How hard is it to use the Ignore function from those one dislikes?
Hard or easy have nothing to do with it. That's not how bulletin boards work.
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Turning from sin is a work just like keeping the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore when someone tells you that you must "repent of your sins to be saved", they are issuing you an Unbiblical requirement or good works. It might persuade God to change His mind about destroying a nation, but it's not a requirement He has for personal salvation from hell, if you get what I mean. Again, we know that it's not works of righteousness that saves us.
It’s as per my previous response (I thought it was clear enough but you appear to have missed it) – this is still just one mans personal choice of belief. I can’t say why he decided in both science and faith but there are also many cases of scientists who are believers. There are unknowns in science and maybe he was looking to fill the voids, so read a couple of books, liked Christianity and went with that. Since much of what he read was either undeniably false or unverifiable or undemonstrable or even unpalatable, he would have had to pick one that he liked best, of had some emotional “resonation” with. Maybe he has his own take on it and accepts parts and rejects other parts, although science alone would lead to rejection of many parts. There are no real barriers or limits to beliefs unless you go mainstream versions.
Skepticism and critical thinking is the reason that many have turned away from belief – odd how you think that it works the other way. Mainstream version belief requires abandonment of critical thinking and acceptance of the written word. Skepticism of the belief is not allowed. Do as instructed, or else.
I don't think I can remember the last time I saw so much speculation in one paragraph. Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Turning from sin is a work just like keeping the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore when someone tells you that you must "repent of your sins to be saved", they are issuing you an Unbiblical requirement or good works. It might persuade God to change His mind about destroying a nation, but it's not a requirement He has for personal salvation from hell, if you get what I mean. Again, we know that it's not works of righteousness that saves us.
Have you read the gospel of John, mrmarklin?
Acts 2. Read the whole chapter. John was present when this was uttered.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
So what are you meaning by this. Each time I be asked a straight question, you stop short of clearly answering what you believe. I gave as clear answers as I know how from the first post. I'm just asking the same.
I don't know how to make it any clearer. When someone askes me a question about my beliefs I answer with God's Word. The Scripture is more elequent that I can ever be.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
That's an interesting point. It there a biblical type publication for those far, far below any standard IQ range, that they are capable of understanding, or are there exemptions for such people? Surely no-one will burn in hell for eternity for a simple misunderstanding or misinterpretation?
Seems to me that IQ and/or “intellectual understanding” is not the critical issue. Maybe there is a two ways to look at this one issue…
First way….. has the person rejected the Son, turned his back on the Creator and followed after gods/idols of his own making?
IQ May not be a factor here at all… truth about oneself and about God is spiritually discerned….it may not be solely a matter of “intellectual understanding” or not understanding. You don’t need to understand all the details of the Bible or Christian doctrine to be saved….
It may be a simple matter of reacting to light given by the Spirit and in turn, seeking Jesus. Does not take a superior IQ to respond to the call of God……Superior intelligence may be in fact be a hindrance and cause a wellspring of pride resulting in rejection of the Son.
Second…. The old age of accountability issue…. If one is a child or has the mind of a child….then perhaps that one cannot reject the Son…..ie…not guilty.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2
" Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us...Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Titus 3
"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Romans 11
What does the first sermon say by a first person student of the One Who saves?
"Repent and let each of you be baptised..." Acts 2:38
Let's see the context of this one phrase in Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost.
Not many days earlier, Jesus left to go to Heaven. The last thing He told the disciples was in the first chapter of Acts.
"To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
So they were told that they crucified the Savior Jesus Christ. They had to repent/ change their minds and realize Who He was and believe on Him.
'He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses."
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."
What occurred at the time they believed the preaching of Peter? They were automatically baptized by the Holy Spirit into union with Christ and endued with a spiritual gift. Just days earlier, Jesus was clear as to this distinction between water baptism and this baptism.
Please prayerfully study that through and watch the short video and see if it makes sense. Ok?
It's good that we look at 2:38 in context...agreed. Let's see what Jesus told them back in the beginning of the book. From what Jesus just told them days earlier, the Holy Spirit would give the believers power. This day of pentecost was that day. They actually saw a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, those who believed were baptized by Him and given spiritual gifts. My explanation was posted above from a previous page.
It's not all the complex. I've never read, or heard that an IQ of 120, or higher is required to get to Heaven.
Like I said before, a child can understand the true gospel.
Here's a question. It's not a trick question or to get one up. It's just a way to think and learn.
If you had a little girl or boy who was following you around the field on their bicycle while you were mowing, but you couldn't see them. You already warned them to stay away, but they nevertheless followed closely. Then they wanted to surprise you by coming around the brush hog or harvester. All of a sudden they're peddling next to you on the tractor. Would they no longer be your child?
Are you nuts?
Some say so, but I'm only giving a clear example to make a point about another totally different passage that I was talking to Wabigoon about. It made sense in context.
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
What is true or false is true or false regardless of our beliefs. Believing something is true or false doesn't make it true or false. Faith changes nothing.
I am not religious but always liked the old testament. In the bronze age folks werent as edumacated and God liked direct examples.
When the burning bush said free your people and committ genocide 7 times on the way to the holy land, you listened!
Just ask the canaanite council in the UN what they think of the old testament. Actually there isnt any canaanite council, Moses killed every canaanite down to the last child
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
Ringman has exactly zero idea about what constitutes good logical evidence.
Skepticism and critical thing is what drives Scientific discovery and Christian apologetics
LOL! I understand the source of your comprehension issues now – you don’t understand what scepticism and critical thinking is, and what facts and evidence are either more than likely.
There are plenty of videos on-line pointing out the “problems” with the “science explanations” of the Christian apologetics. Me and the kids laugh ourselves silly at those.
That is because you and your kids don't understand critical thinking.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah, etc….
Yep Jahrs. Jesus made it crystal clear that He was the Messiah mentioned in the sacred Jewish Scriptures; He explained to His followers what was said in all of the Law and the Prophets concerning Himself. The Old Testament is about Jesus.
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah etc but you’re right they didn’t want Him. They wanted an earthly king
No, it wasn't .
Basically; "There is no doubt that the New Testament authors had the suffering servant in mind in developing their respective works. But this does not prove Jesus is the servant.
In the traditions coming down to them concerning Jesus they did not fully eliminate the contradictions between the description of the servant and the description of Jesus.
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
You're right. Judaism rejected their True Messiah. He rebuked their leaders harshly for that too.
You are also right about Him being in the O.T. Genesis to Malachi. Even Jesus Himself "said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
1. Jesus meets with some disciples after His resurrection. 2. He rebukes them for their lack of faith in the O.T. Scriptures regarding Himself. 3. He reminds them of the gospel. 4. Then He expounded into them all of the scriptures of things concerning Himself. So, ALL of the Old Testament points to Jesus the Messiah/Christ.
You asked me a dozen questions and throw in an arrogant insult for your good measure. Between you and Navel asking for personal financial information, I'd guess that you both work for the government.
You asked me a dozen questions and throw in an arrogant insult for your good measure. Between you and Navel asking for personal financial information, I'd guess that you both work for the government.
Simple question Clappy. Are you in any of the video's you've posted or not?
I have a question. Does "thou shalt have no other gods before Me" imply that there are actually other gods. If so is it ok to deal with them as lesser gods?
Originally Posted by DBT
Early belief was Polytheistic.
I'm wondering. As I posted earlier I met an Indian Hindu that accepted Jesus' words as true but he was still a Hindu. Are they polytheistic?
There are examples of O.T. and N.T. believers who gave up idolatry because they believed on the true God/Man, Jesus Christ. When someone trusts Christ, they don't add Him to a pantheon of other Hindu false deities. Example, a Catholic I used to know said she prayed a prayer to trust Christ, but wasn't sincere because she said she still prayed to and worshipped Mary, trusted the sacraments.
There is no Jesus in Judaism, that is Christian theology. The Jews still await their prophesied Messiah.
Which messiah were they looking for in Isaiah chapter 53?
You're right. Judaism rejected their True Messiah. He rebuked their leaders harshly for that too.
You are also right about Him being in the O.T. Genesis to Malachi. Even Jesus Himself "said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
1. Jesus meets with some disciples after His resurrection. 2. He rebukes them for their lack of faith in the O.T. Scriptures regarding Himself. 3. He reminds them of the gospel. 4. Then He expounded into them all of the scriptures of things concerning Himself. So, ALL of the Old Testament points to Jesus the Messiah/Christ.
No, the Messiah identity issues are related to the discrepancies between descriptions given in the OT and NT .
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah, etc….
Yep Jahrs. Jesus made it crystal clear that He was the Messiah mentioned in the sacred Jewish Scriptures; He explained to His followers what was said in all of the Law and the Prophets concerning Himself. The Old Testament is about Jesus.
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah etc but you’re right they didn’t want Him. They wanted an earthly king
No, it wasn't .
Basically; "There is no doubt that the New Testament authors had the suffering servant in mind in developing their respective works. But this does not prove Jesus is the servant.
In the traditions coming down to them concerning Jesus they did not fully eliminate the contradictions between the description of the servant and the description of Jesus.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
Justice is what we deserve mercy is what is offered.
It was Jesus who Isaiah prophesied about and Micah, David, Moses Zachariah etc but you’re right they didn’t want Him. They wanted an earthly king
No, it wasn't .
Basically; "There is no doubt that the New Testament authors had the suffering servant in mind in developing their respective works. But this does not prove Jesus is the servant.
In the traditions coming down to them concerning Jesus they did not fully eliminate the contradictions between the description of the servant and the description of Jesus.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
Justice is what we deserve mercy is what is offered.
You seem to have missed the point with that remark. According to what you said, God selects who to save and who to condemn. There are verses to support this, which does raise moral issues.
Justice is what we deserve mercy is what is offered.
Sounds like your god is playing with you guys - creating imperfect beings and then providing ultamatums for redemption. Very loving of him. Thank god I'm exempt from your system.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
Justice is what we deserve mercy is what is offered.
You seem to have missed the point with that remark. According to what you said, God selects who to save and who to condemn. There are verses to support this, which does raise moral issues.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
Being of the Calvinist persuasion I’m in agreement with you!
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
If that statement is true, how does it square with '...GOD, who desires that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth...' ???
AND
'...The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance...'
ALSO, Would you consider yourself 'evangelistic'??? If yes, to what end or purpose?
I gave a bunch of straight answers and more doctrine in one thread than you're likely to get from your dress wearing priestess in a month.
Matthew 10:33 "If you deny me before men" I would like to know if you are personally featured in any of your videos? If you are afraid to say, I understand. Remember you are the one that started this discussion which I took as an invitation to respond.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
In which case it is God who chooses who to 'save' and nobody has a real choice. Those who would not have 'repented' are modified to do so, others left to rot.....The God of Love?
If that statement is true, how does it square with '...GOD, who desires that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth...' ???
AND
'...The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance...'
ALSO, Would you consider yourself 'evangelistic'??? If yes, to what end or purpose?
If God desires all to be saved and it is God who chooses those who are saved, everyone can be saved. If only some are saved while others are condemned, it is God's choice to condemn.....which contradicts the desire that all are saved.
I gave a bunch of straight answers and more doctrine in one thread than you're likely to get from your dress wearing priestess in a month.
Matthew 10:33 "If you deny me before men" I would like to know if you are personally featured in any of your videos? If you are afraid to say, I understand. Remember you are the one that started this discussion which I took as an invitation to respond.
How does Matthew 10:33 apply when I have Who Jesus is and His gospel published clearly in every post. You Hastings don't have ANY that I've been able to find. So, tell me is Jesus the Son of God? Is He the only Christ? How do expect to escape the everlasting punishment of the literal hell that He described?
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
Sometimes the desire to repent of carnal sins comes at the same time as a person's salvation, but in most cases the indwelling of God's spirit come first and that produces a desire to abandon the old ways. It's more a process than an event. There is an event mind you.....but that's the start of the new life. Not the finish line.
It's from the power of God Himself that you repent. If you could do it yourself you would need no savior in the 1st place.
Amen
Is faith a work, or is that itself given by the grace of God?
I gave a bunch of straight answers and more doctrine in one thread than you're likely to get from your dress wearing priestess in a month.
Don't be coy about it, you didn't mention you being voted this site's biggest bullshitter. Well done.
Coming from a reprobate, I could not have a bigger compliment. Thanks for the blessing! 🌄☕ 🙂 👍
You remind me of this great blessing. "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you."
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
I gave a bunch of straight answers and more doctrine in one thread than you're likely to get from your dress wearing priestess in a month.
Matthew 10:33 "If you deny me before men" I would like to know if you are personally featured in any of your videos? If you are afraid to say, I understand. Remember you are the one that started this discussion which I took as an invitation to respond.
How does Matthew 10:33 apply when I have Who Jesus is and His gospel published clearly in every post. You Hastings don't have ANY that I've been able to find. So, tell me is Jesus the Son of God? Is He the only Christ? How do expect to escape the everlasting punishment of the literal hell that He described?
I am going to try and avoid hell in case you are there I'm afraid the devil would make you a lieutenant and give you free rein, and if you and I make it to heaven I'm pretty sure Jesus will keep you in check.
In answer to your question, Yes I believe Jesus is the son of God and I believe he was/is exactly who he claimed to be.
Now, tell us please, are you personally in any of those videos you have so graciously shared with us.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
To break God given laws is considered to be a sin;
'''Whosoever commits SIN transgresses also the law: for SIN is the transgression of the law.'' - 1 JOHN 3:4
The laws represent Godly values, though shalt not kill, etc.....yet we have many descriptions of God not only killing the innocent (the first born of Egypt), and on a grand scale (the flood), but ordering his chosen tribe to commit wholesale slaughter, women children, animals, rape (keep the virgins for yourselves)
This is not something I am making up, it is there for all to see and read.
A God of Love, by definition, cannot resort to wholesale killing as a 'solution.'
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''- 1 Corinthians
Quote
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
That's you. The problem is that you don't read objective material relating to the history and development of beliefs, that Adam and Eve, the Flood, etc, was borrowed from older cultures and adapted for the purpose of building an identity and religion for the tribe of Israel. Not to mention that Satan in Judaism is not the Devil of Christian theology.
Salvation isn’t based on Adam and Eve, the flood, Judaism, the Devil, the assertion that “the history and development of beliefs that was borrowed from older cultures and adapted for the purpose of building an identity and religion for the tribe of Israel,” or any other flippin’ thing along those lines. None of that, none, has anything to do with requirements for salvation.
Ancient Judaism is over with; it’s done. And it has been since August 6th in AD 70, when the four-year war between Rome and the Jewish rebels came to a violent conclusion. The Jewish temple was looted and burned and razed to the ground. Its destruction signaled the end of ancient Judaism. The words of the Old Covenant were preserved, but Israel’s ability to live in accordance with those words disappeared in a single day. Ancient Judaism...as prescribed by Moses at Mount Sinai...ceased to exist.
It’s pretty simple, and easy. Change your mind (repent) about your sin and your need for God’s forgiveness, believe the Gospel and accept His free gift of grace. That’s it.
Then let God’s love for you and for those around you inform your conscience and shape your behavior. Love God, and demonstrate your love for God by loving others. It’s a totally different way of approaching life, within the context of a brand New Covenant that says “your sin is paid for, now live a life that reflects the forgiveness of God as you mirror that in your forgiveness of the people around you.”
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
To break God given laws is considered to be a sin;
'''Whosoever commits SIN transgresses also the law: for SIN is the transgression of the law.'' - 1 JOHN 3:4
The laws represent Godly values, though shalt not kill, etc.....yet we have many descriptions of God not only killing the innocent (the first born of Egypt), and on a grand scale (the flood), but ordering his chosen tribe to commit wholesale slaughter, women children, animals, rape (keep the virgins for yourselves)
This is not something I am making up, it is there for all to see and read.
A God of Love, by definition, cannot resort to wholesale killing as a 'solution.'
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''- 1 Corinthians
Quote
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
That's you. The problem is that you don't read objective material relating to the history and development of beliefs, that Adam and Eve, the Flood, etc, was borrowed from older cultures and adapted for the purpose of building an identity and religion for the tribe of Israel. Not to mention that Satan in Judaism is not the Devil of Christian theology.
Widen your reading. Inform yourself.
Wait a minute….you presumably don’t believe the Bible is the word of God….you rail against it…. Make rash and poorly thought accusations against God….”….utterances without knowledge..”
And then you try to use that very same Bible to rebuke me?
Nah, you just don’t like it when some one points out your nonsense for what it is.
Yep, you continue to make no sense and continue to “…. speak without knowledge…”
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Well, let me ask you this….do you believe in the God of the Bible? Is the Bible the word of God?
If not, one would assume you to be an unbeliever…..
If not a believer , why are you even on this forum wasting your time?
More “…utterances without knowledge…” …… because that’s all you can do….
Salvation isn’t based on Adam and Eve, the flood, Judaism, the Devil, the assertion that “the history and development of beliefs that was borrowed from older cultures and adapted for the purpose of building an identity and religion for the tribe of Israel,” or any other flippin’ thing along those lines. None of that, none, has anything to do with requirements for salvation.
Ancient Judaism is over with; it’s done. And it has been since August 6th in AD 70, when the four-year war between Rome and the Jewish rebels came to a violent conclusion. The Jewish temple was looted and burned and razed to the ground. Its destruction signaled the end of ancient Judaism. The words of the Old Covenant were preserved, but Israel’s ability to live in accordance with those words disappeared in a single day. Ancient Judaism...as prescribed by Moses at Mount Sinai...ceased to exist.
It’s pretty simple, and easy. Change your mind (repent) about your sin and your need for God’s forgiveness, believe the Gospel and accept His free gift of grace. That’s it.
Then let God’s love for you and for those around you inform your conscience and shape your behavior. Love God, and demonstrate your love for God by loving others. It’s a totally different way of approaching life, within the context of a brand New Covenant that says “your sin is paid for, now live a life that reflects the forgiveness of God as you mirror that in your forgiveness of the people around you.”
I do this when I sin as a believer who is in the family of God already. This is different from repentance for salvation. When it comes to salvation, giving up sin, ie keeping the law, is a mandate forbidden in scripture. The only issue when it comes to salvation is that all sins, past and future have been paid in full by the only One Who could. The repentance is from that belief that opposed complete faith in Christ. In this case, it would be a change of mind towards His complete atonement from a mixture of that and keeping the law. (See the book of Galatians)
"Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Turning from sin is a work just like keeping the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore when someone tells you that you must "repent of your sins to be saved", they are issuing you an Unbiblical requirement or good works. It might persuade God to change His mind about destroying a nation, but it's not a requirement He has for personal salvation from hell, if you get what I mean. Again, we know that it's not works of righteousness that saves us.
Have you read the gospel of John, mrmarklin?
Acts 2. Read the whole chapter. John was present when this was uttered.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Yes, all of the disciples in Jerusalem were working hard that day. My points are this.
Repentance is considered a good work as it pertains to sins. Example is that we are tempted and it takes effort on our part to obey the many laws of God. That's the same as trying to turn from breaking the laws to keeping His laws. Those are works in the O.T. and N.T. There's many places, but the book of Galatians addresses it as a theme.
There's a place for this as applied to a national policy to stave off God's wrath and judgement as in Nineveh. However, it is not a requirement for personal salvation.
The theme of John's book is the person and gospel of salvation. John 20
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."
Do you know how many times the terms "repent and repentance" are used in this book that is written to the lost?
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Don't forget that He and Jesus are setting up there in some Heaven plotting on nuking the Earth and most of the inhabitants. Sounds like a fun living entity doesn't it. OH, and then there's the He is no respecter of persons, BUT the Jews are His chosen people and they are the only people He recognized.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Don't forget that He and Jesus are setting up there in some Heaven plotting on nuking the Earth and most of the inhabitants. Sounds like a fun living entity doesn't it. OH, and then there's the He is no respecter of persons, BUT the Jews are His chosen people and they are the only people He recognized.
Actually, the chosen are the children of Abraham. Those are defined as anyone who agrees with God to accept His mercy and forgiveness by simply believing on His Son and His unlimited payment for all your sins.
Those physical descendents of Abraham also needed to believe that same Lord. When they were given a home base where Abraham lived, they were supposed to be a light for ALL NATIONS. They were given instructions to share the true God and His message with all people.
Those in the end when the Lord opens the judgement upon the earth will destroy those who hardened their hearts to a point that they made their final decision to reject God's mercy and forgiveness. These people decided to become devil worshippers and God rejected them.
The wise thing is to accept His forgiveness before the heart grows hard. V
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
n
Don't forget that He and Jesus are setting up there in some Heaven plotting on nuking the Earth and most of the inhabitants. Sounds like a fun living entity doesn't it. OH, and then there's the He is no respecter of persons, BUT the Jews are His chosen people and they are the only people He recognized.
Actually, the chosen are the children of Abraham. Those are defined as anyone who agrees with God to accept His mercy and forgiveness by simply believing on His Son and His unlimited payment for all your sins.
Those physical descendents of Abraham also needed to believe that same Lord. When they were given a home base where Abraham lived, they were supposed to be a light for ALL NATIONS. They were given instructions to share the true God and His message with all people.
Those in the end when the Lord opens the judgement upon the earth will destroy those who hardened their hearts to a point that they made their final decision to reject God's mercy and forgiveness. These people decided to become devil worshippers and God rejected them.
The wise thing is to accept His forgiveness before the heart grows hard. V
I see you're very comfortable changing the meaning of words and phrases to suit your needs.
The Bible basics are clear on what I just said. I wrote a whole chapter on the subject for anyone to read if they go back to each of my posts. The videos amount to a book. It's not difficult for anyone with ears to hear.
The Bible basics are clear on what I just said. I wrote a whole chapter on the subject for anyone to read if they go back to each of my posts. The videos amount to a book. It's not difficult for anyone with ears to hear.
I never found them clear, especially when you try and read that book literally. But I see you never answered my question.
The Bible basics are clear on what I just said. I wrote a whole chapter on the subject for anyone to read if they go back to each of my posts. The videos amount to a book. It's not difficult for anyone with ears to hear.
I never found them clear, especially when you try and read that book literally. But I see you never answered my question.
As The Science is to Fauci, so Biblical hermeneutics are to HC.
He is like the baptist pope; one need only ask his interpretation and then rest knowing that is correct.
However, this is who I believe instead. How about YOU?
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." *Jesus
It's a waste of time to argue about religion. The born-agains believe in faith, not logic. You can't win by arguing evidence vs. faith.
Today I heard on the radio that 29% of Americans, the largest group, now identify as "none" when asked their religion. Up from 19% three years ago. I'm not sure this is good. The mainstream churches need to do something new instead of the same old dirgy hymns and rituals.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Well, let me ask you this….do you believe in the God of the Bible? Is the Bible the word of God?
If not, one would assume you to be an unbeliever…..
If not a believer , why are you even on this forum wasting your time?
More “…utterances without knowledge…” …… because that’s all you can do….
If you can't refute a claim, may as well try misdirection hey?
How about god is a murderer and directs others to murder also - refer your bible if you need to.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Well, let me ask you this….do you believe in the God of the Bible? Is the Bible the word of God?
If not, one would assume you to be an unbeliever…..
If not a believer , why are you even on this forum wasting your time?
More “…utterances without knowledge…” …… because that’s all you can do….
If you can't refute a claim, may as well try misdirection hey?
How about god is a murderer and directs others to murder also - refer your bible if you need to. [/quote]
Oh…? You are asking me to refute an allegation made by a non-believer against a God he pretends or does not believe exists?
Proverbs provides some counsel here….”….do not argue with a fool….”
No worries. We can disagree. My pastor for over ten years disagreed with me too. He had the gospel right at the time, but he never listened closely to the requirements that Graham added to faith during the invitations.
Would it be wrong for an unbelieving sinner to add to faith in the sacrifice of Christ....? A. Giving his own life to pay for his own sins? B. Giving up sins and being obedient to the law? C. Deny self D. Surrender his own life and heart to God to receive Christ E. Willing to obey Him, take a stand for Jesus no matter what the cost. F. Love God with all of his heart, mind and soul G. Make God THE priority in his life H. Make Him his Lord I. Follow and serve Jesus as his disciple and follower J. Obey God in respect to His many commands. Make a big change in his behaviors?
H/C: You have posted a good many videos and have been inviting members to private message you. I wonder if you are the performer in some of these videos. And I wonder if you are seeking members and donations for your ministry? Kind of a backdoor approach? There is something odd going on with you and your postings.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
How about god murders and orders for murders to be undertaken?
Well, let me ask you this….do you believe in the God of the Bible? Is the Bible the word of God?
If not, one would assume you to be an unbeliever…..
If not a believer , why are you even on this forum wasting your time?
More “…utterances without knowledge…” …… because that’s all you can do….
If you can't refute a claim, may as well try misdirection hey?
How about god is a murderer and directs others to murder also - refer your bible if you need to.
Oh…? You are asking me to refute an allegation made by a non-believer against a God he pretends or does not believe exists?
Proverbs provides some counsel here….”….do not argue with a fool….”
No, I'm undertaking a "critical thinking" exercise and seeing if you will refute, or otherwise, what is provided in the bible, your reference document.
At this stage I have to say that my conclusion is that TF49 is unwilling to refute the statement "God murders and orders for murders to be undertaken."
It kinda looks like you are actively avoiding a hairy topic that you can't properly address to even satisfy yourself, but that's just my speculation.
The term "repent" as it applies to salvation does not mean "turn from sins. Does God sin? Never. If you look up who in the Bible repented more than anyone else, it was God. That's because it is a change of mind. Sometimes He changes His mind at the request of His servants or when those suffering believers cry out to Him.
The Jewish people were told to quit trusting in the law and traditions of what became to be commonly taught in the Jewish religion and repent, meaning (change their minds ). Their Savior, Christ Jesus was beginning His ministry and preaching this as well. So they had to change their minds about the false belief they had in keeping the law and choose to believe in Christ. Baptism was a work or first step of identifying with Christ AFTER they put their faith in Him...."that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ." Details are in my original post as well as the links below.
God does not sin? The bible has its god cursing the whole world and the generations that follow over the actions of a naive couple, drowning the world, ordering wholesale slaughter, women, children, infants, livestock....that is sin on Grand Scale.
Oh well… there was another man who once questioned and accused God….God asked him a series of questions…this is just part of God’s responses:
“Then the Lord answered……out of the whirlwind….and said, Who is this that darkeneth (my) counsel by words without knowledge?”
Words without knowledge…. There you have it in a nutshell… you speak but speak without knowledge.
I'm not making accusations. It is in the bible. I am merely pointing to what is written.
Well sure you are making the allegation that God sins…. You end your statements with “….:that is sin on a grand scale.”
You don’t seem stupid so one would assume you know what you wrote… but then you try to deny it by saying you are not making an accusation…..you then just make yourself like ….well what…let me see…..wishy washy?…. Well yes but …. Maybe just just onlooker blurting out rash and poorly thought out nonsense…...like a *******?
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
To break God given laws is considered to be a sin;
'''Whosoever commits SIN transgresses also the law: for SIN is the transgression of the law.'' - 1 JOHN 3:4
The laws represent Godly values, though shalt not kill, etc.....yet we have many descriptions of God not only killing the innocent (the first born of Egypt), and on a grand scale (the flood), but ordering his chosen tribe to commit wholesale slaughter, women children, animals, rape (keep the virgins for yourselves)
This is not something I am making up, it is there for all to see and read.
A God of Love, by definition, cannot resort to wholesale killing as a 'solution.'
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.''- 1 Corinthians
Quote
Btw…. You seem to have your own odd, ill informed and unsubstantiated opinions about all sorts the biblical topics….so perhaps you can ponder this…. Did the fall of Lucifer happen before or after the creation of man?
That's you. The problem is that you don't read objective material relating to the history and development of beliefs, that Adam and Eve, the Flood, etc, was borrowed from older cultures and adapted for the purpose of building an identity and religion for the tribe of Israel. Not to mention that Satan in Judaism is not the Devil of Christian theology.
Widen your reading. Inform yourself.
Wait a minute….you presumably don’t believe the Bible is the word of God….you rail against it…. Make rash and poorly thought accusations against God….”….utterances without knowledge..”
And then you try to use that very same Bible to rebuke me?
Nah, you just don’t like it when some one points out your nonsense for what it is.
Yep, you continue to make no sense and continue to “…. speak without knowledge…”
I'm not railing against the bible. I am pointing out its history, its development in terms of theology and moral values (OT atrocities, etc) and inconsistencies, which are undeniable.
H/C: You have posted a good many videos and have been inviting members to private message you. I wonder if you are the performer in some of these videos. And I wonder if you are seeking members and donations for your ministry? Kind of a backdoor approach? There is something odd going on with you and your postings.
The one who accused a good pastor of arson without so much as a scrap of evidence after an extremely thorough investigation is more than a little odd. You know who I'm talking to.....Hastings
Did you know that there was a trial that included dirty cops who falsely accused Jesus of a felony? Sounds like you are used to this.
Today I heard on the radio that 29% of Americans, the largest group, now identify as "none" when asked their religion. Up from 19% three years ago. I'm not sure this is good. The mainstream churches need to do something new instead of the same old dirgy hymns and rituals.
Yep. Clearly. And anytime churches take steps to make their settings more appealing, their communication more engaging, and their content more helpful…they’re castigated by many ‘Christians’ and the churches they go to who are responsible for the very things you mentioned above.
“They’ve turned their worship services into concert venues.” They’ve started preaching ‘feel good’ messages instead of ‘preaching the Bible.” “They don’t even preach about hell…!” “It’s not Biblical to have women pastors.” “You don’t need audio-visual equipment and rock music to preach the Gospel.” And so on, and so on, and so on, etc., ad nauseam.
This kinda crap from many of the very churches (and many in their congregations) that are hemorrhaging members and actually driving people away with their approach. It’s not Jesus that the ‘nones’ aren’t attracted to ~ it’s many ‘Christians’ and their churches.
In order to reach people that no one else is reaching, you gotta do things that no one else is doing. The human condition and social conditions change. I’m not advocating for theological change. This is purely methodological.
H/C: You have posted a good many videos and have been inviting members to private message you. I wonder if you are the performer in some of these videos. And I wonder if you are seeking members and donations for your ministry? Kind of a backdoor approach? There is something odd going on with you and your postings.
The one who accused a good pastor of arson without so much as a scrap of evidence after an extremely thorough investigation is more than a little odd. You know who I'm talking to.....Hastings Did you know that there was a trial that included dirty cops who falsely accused Jesus of a felony? Sounds like you are used to this.
You are absolutely correct, I have no idea who started that fire or why, so if I did accuse a particular person of starting a fire I apologize. The only information I had was from reports such as the information you posted. Help me remember what I said about the church arson. Did I say the pastor did it or did I say something to the effect that he should be looked at as a possibility? If you can find it please repost it without editing please. Very often the arsonist has a close connection to the place burned. I was a professional firefighter for several years. More often than you might think fires are started by (usually young) volunteer firefighters seeking attention. And preachers have staged attacks on themselves or their churches for various reasons, usually to get attention and claim persecution. Law officers have many times shot up their own vehicles to claim an assassination attempt. It would not be unusual for a preacher to fake an attack and any competent investigator would consider that.
Oh by the way, are you appearing personally in any of your videos?
The word repent is used 105 times in the Bible. John the Baptist preached on it before he baptized Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ preached on it. "Except ye repent, ye shqll qll likewise perish." Luke 13:3
The word repent is used 105 times in the Bible. John the Baptist preached on it before he baptized Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ preached on it. "Except ye repent, ye shqll qll likewise perish." Luke 13:3
AMEN, Jesus and John were not just saying that to hear themselves talk. If you believe Jesus message is God's message it would be a good idea to pay attention to what He said and not what someone claims he forgot to tell us in his 3 years of active preaching and prophesying.
Proverbs provides some counsel here….”….do not argue with a fool….”
Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Matthew 5:22
Well, I am glad you brought that up.
The context and meaning for Matthew 5:22 shows that the term “Thou fool….” Goes well beyond the designation of one who is just in “want of wisdom“…. The term is used for to describe the “highest guilt.” A term reserved for those who have committed the gravest of sins. One should think twice about allegations of great sins like idolatary and those guilty of great crimes....see Psalm 14:1 : ......The fool says in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt; their acts are vile...."
But are there other teachings about “fools?”
What about these verses?:
Luke 24:25…..”And He said to them , Oh foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!”
Luke 12:16-21……”But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your soul will be required of you…….”
Proverbs 1:32….”For the waywardness of the naïve will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them.”
Proverbs 26:4….”Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him.”
And of course, Proverbs 26:5 …”Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.
Nope, I am not in danger of hell fire as you insinuate.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
Dismissing those who point out problems and inconsistencies in our holy book as fools is a convenient means of avoiding the awkward questions. The Muslim can dismiss the 'fool' Christian for rejecting Mohammad, the Christian can dismiss the 'fool' Muslim or the 'fool' Atheist, the 'fool' Hindu, as being unworthy of debate. A wave of the hand, deeming anyone who disagrees a 'fool.'
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Jesus said He came to call sinners to repentance. To call them to see the entire world in a different way, to change their thinking about themselves, to change their thinking about God, to change their thinking about the people around them, to change their thinking about everything, and to see themselves in a way that allows them to connect with God, and to change from the inside out.
This was good news. This was the invitation of Jesus. And people leaned in. They hoped there was something behind these words. And as they found out, there was.
Happy Camper: Can you give me the date of the thread about the California church arson you referred to yesterday? I sure hope I didn't directly accuse the preacher (maybe you) of actually being guilty. I only meant to suggest the possibility, but I'm sure the local sheriff had already considered the possibility of an inside job.
I answered you almost 10 hours ago, so please refer me to my unedited remarks.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
Happy Camper: Can you give me the date of the thread about the California church arson you referred to yesterday? I sure hope I didn't directly accuse the preacher (maybe you) of actually being guilty. I only meant to suggest the possibility, but I'm sure the local sheriff had already considered the possibility of an inside job.
I answered you almost 10 hours ago, so please refer me to my unedited remarks.
I have thought about this general subject some more and would like to cycle back a bit.
It is my opinion that you made an allegation to the effect that “…. God is a murderer…..”
To be clear, do you believe that a supreme being….a creator of the universe does indeed exist….or are you a staunch unbeliever in “God?”
Further…. Am I correct that you discount the Bible as the word of God?
I am wondering if you are uncomfortable with the idea of a Creator God or find yourself simply rejecting the Bible?
Could be both…..
I have made no allegations. The bible describes God drowning the world because He wasn't happy with Mankind. The bible describes God ordering slaughter, rape, etc.....this is in the bible for anyone to see and read. This is not my 'allegation ,' the descriptions are there.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
No. I'm interested in your explanation of the moral contradictions - surely you have thought about them and reconciled the justification of such abhorant qualities. You're only interested in avoidance of addressing the question. I'm using a process of critical thinking and you're using a case of believe without question and ignore any major logical or moral flaws. Mass murder by a loving creator needs some plausible explanation
First time round he condemned man to death for a minor indescretion. Next he wiped out the bulk of the population for sinning. Next he forgives all sin as a trade for the death of Jesus. You'd kinda think he'd have the power to forgive sin without the need for all that murder, torture and human sacrifice, and that would be a more loving alternative.
You can understand why people are turning away from bible based Christianity in droves. Resorting to attacks and name calling isn't going to help prevent that.
Number 31 31 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the sons of Israel; afterward you will be gathered to your people.” 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm men from among you for the war, so that they may [a]go against Midian to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian. 4 You shall send a thousand from each tribe of all the tribes of Israel to the war.” 5 So there were selected from the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war. 6 And Moses sent them, a thousand from each tribe, to the war, and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war with them, and the holy implements and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand. 7 So they made war against Midian, just as the Lord had commanded Moses, and they killed every male. 8 They killed the kings of Midian along with the rest of those killed: Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba, the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword. 9 And the sons of Israel took captive the women of Midian and their little ones; and they plundered all their cattle, all their flocks, and all their property. 10 Then they burned all their cities where they lived and all their encampments. 11 And they took all the plunder and all the spoils, both of people and of livestock. 12 They brought the captives and the spoils and the plunder to Moses, to Eleazar the priest, and to the congregation of the sons of Israel, to the camp at the plains of Moab which are by the Jordan, opposite Jericho.
13 And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the congregation went out to meet them outside the camp. 14 But Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, who had come from service in the war. 15 And Moses said to them, “Have you [c]spared all the women? 16 Behold, they caused the sons of Israel, through the [d]counsel of Balaam, to be unfaithful to the Lord in the matter of Peor, so that the plague took place among the congregation of the Lord! [b]17 Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man [e]intimately. 18 However, all the [f]girls who have not known a [g]man intimately, keep alive for yourselves. 19 And as for you, camp outside the camp for seven days; whoever has killed a person and whoever has touched anyone killed, purify yourselves, you and your captives, on the third day and on the seventh day. 20 And you shall purify for yourselves every garment, every article of leather, every work of goats’ hair, and every article of wood.”
21 Then Eleazar the priest said to the men of war who had gone to battle, “This is the statute of the Law which the Lord has commanded Moses: 22 only the gold and the silver, the bronze, the iron, the tin, and the lead, 23 everything that can [h]withstand the fire, you shall pass through the fire, and it will be clean, only it shall be purified with water for impurity. But whatever cannot [i]withstand the fire you shall pass through the water. 24 And you shall wash your clothes on the seventh day and you will be clean; and afterward you may enter the camp.”
Division of the Plunder 25 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 26 “You and Eleazar the priest and the heads of the fathers’ households of the congregation take a count of the spoils [j]that were captured, both of people and of livestock; 27 and divide the spoils between the warriors who went to battle and all the congregation. 28 Also, collect a tribute tax for the Lord from the men of war who went to battle, one [k]in five hundred of the persons, of the cattle, of the donkeys, and of the sheep; 29 take it from their half and give it to Eleazar the priest, as an [l]offering to the Lord. 30 And from the sons of Israel’s half, you shall take one drawn from every fifty of the persons, of the cattle, of the donkeys, and of the sheep, from all the animals; and give them to the Levites who perform the duty of the tabernacle of the Lord.” 31 Moses and Eleazar the priest did just as the Lord had commanded Moses.
32 Now the spoils that remained from the plunder which the [m]men of war had plundered was 675,000 sheep, 33 seventy-two thousand cattle, 34 sixty-one thousand donkeys, 35 and of captive people, of the women who had not known a [n]man intimately, in all were thirty-two thousand people.
36 The half, the share of those who went to war, was as follows: the number of sheep was 337,500, 37 the Lord’s tribute tax of the sheep was 675; 38 the cattle were thirty-six thousand, from which the Lord’s tribute tax was seventy-two; 39 the donkeys were 30,500, from which the Lord’s tribute tax was sixty-one; 40 and the captive people were sixteen thousand, from whom the Lord’s tribute tax was thirty-two persons. 41 And Moses gave the tribute tax, which was the Lord’s offering, to Eleazar the priest, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.
42 As for the sons of Israel’s half, which Moses [o]separated from the men who had gone to war— 43 now the congregation’s half was 337,500 sheep, 44 thirty-six thousand cattle, 45 30,500 donkeys, 46 and the captive people were sixteen thousand— 47 from the sons of Israel’s half Moses took one drawn from every fifty, both of people and of animals, and gave them to the Levites, who performed the duty of the tabernacle of the Lord, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.
48 Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, approached Moses, 49 and they said to Moses, “Your servants have taken a census of the men of war who are [p]under our authority, and no man of us is missing. 50 So we have brought as an offering to the Lord what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings, and necklaces, to make atonement for ourselves before the Lord.” 51 Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from them, all kinds of crafted articles. 52 All the gold of the offering which they offered up to the Lord, from the commanders of thousands and the commanders of hundreds, was 16,750 shekels. 53 The men of war had taken plunder, every man for himself. 54 So Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it to the tent of meeting as a memorial for the sons of Israel before the Lord.
Why is it that you people can't stand on your own two feet and not rely on some type of religion? Do what's right, treat people fairly and don't put up with bullshit. So sick of hearing you spout your rightous bullshit. Ju
And we thought the Japs were brutal. That story is worthy of Genghis Khan.
Belief in a brutal god is a reflection of the brutal times and brutal attitudes of the time, Greek thought and philosophy went some way in evolving the idea of God into a more benevolent form.
Here's one that Rene' told me I had to do to be saved. "Turn or burn.". He told me that I had to turn from believing the gospel back to the Catholic denomination. This is why I defined it from the Bible clearly, so there's no misunderstanding. I believe that this guy got it right.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Meh….Your claim that you see “….no good reason to believe that’s true ” simply places you in the company of skeptics.
While you may not see the “…good reason…” the fact remains that the evidence for the Creator is all around you. This Creator communicated to us….. it is your choice not to believe the evidence…. It is your choice not be believe the message….It is your choice to claim the evidence is insufficient to be reason to believe. This is your choice….
Of course the Bible speaks of the “blind.” I would guess that this Bible you see no merit it in, would kinda describe you as blind…. You do not see….
It would also infer that your “utterances are without knowledge.”
At least you and I understand a bit about the other.
I have thought about this general subject some more and would like to cycle back a bit.
It is my opinion that you made an allegation to the effect that “…. God is a murderer…..”
To be clear, do you believe that a supreme being….a creator of the universe does indeed exist….or are you a staunch unbeliever in “God?”
Further…. Am I correct that you discount the Bible as the word of God?
I am wondering if you are uncomfortable with the idea of a Creator God or find yourself simply rejecting the Bible?
Could be both…..
I have made no allegations. The bible describes God drowning the world because He wasn't happy with Mankind. The bible describes God ordering slaughter, rape, etc.....this is in the bible for anyone to see and read. This is not my 'allegation ,' the descriptions are there.
Sure you made allegations…. There is no question about that. You are simply trying to back away from that fact.
As an aside, many would agree that not all killing is murder. But, we could get to that if this discussion progresses.
But, moving on….. do you see that you sitting in judgement of “God” and are placing YOUR standards and by YOUR moral code superior to His?
(There is a follow on issue here….why would you even care about the “moral code” of a God you don’t believe in? Seems odd to me, but many here are provoked by this idea of a God that would presume to hold His creation accountable. Perhaps that’s it…. Folks don’t want to be held accountable……)
Btw….why would YOUR moral code be any better or worse than mine?
You don’t hold to the God of the Bible…ok…. So on what basis…. or where did you get or what led you to adopt the moral code that causes you to call a God you probably don’t hold to…. a God you likely don’t believe in…. a “murderer?”
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
I am so glad you asked that. Here is how I would respond:
The first thing I would do is take the young Christian to John 17:20-23.....this is Jesus speaking and look at verses21-23 ..
"that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be as one as we are one -- I in them and you (the Father) in me --- so that they (the young Christian) maybe brought to complete unity...."
Consider the meaning of these verses..... Jesus in the Father and the Father in Jesus.....but there is more....Jesus goes on.....He says "I in them and you in me."
Jesus and the Father are one and Jesus is IN YOU.... you are borne of the Spirit and the SPIRIT is in you as well.
The young Christian must see and know that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in indeed within him, witnessing to him and caring for him. He has become a child of the King.
Once this experience... this evidence is clear to the young Christian, he has the opportunity to live his life, knowing.... without a shadow of doubt that Jesus is real and living with him.
This is what the Body of Christ is like.... the Body of Christ is each believer, indwelt by the God.
Then the next step is learning about God, his principles and his ways. Should he have questions about presumed contradictions, then study of the Word with the oversight of the Holy Spirit is in order. The Holy Spirit indwelling us "shows us the truth about God and ourselves."
Regarding the Numbers questions already raised there are two very sources of insight.... the first is the book "Is God a Moral Monster?" Then there is the short read about the same subject from GotQuestions.org
The wise man will investigate on his own and hopefully with the joy that comes when God comes to live with him.
Do what you want with this.... neither God nor I will be offended by your comments..... also know that even if you reject this whole idea now, God may call it to remembrance to you in the future. He is calling and He wants you to turn your face to Him. He smiles when an unbeliever does this.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
I am so glad you asked that. Here is how I would respond:
The first thing I would do is take the young Christian to John 17:20-23.....this is Jesus speaking and look at verses21-23 ..
"that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be as one as we are one -- I in them and you (the Father) in me --- so that they (the young Christian) maybe brought to complete unity...."
Consider the meaning of these verses..... Jesus in the Father and the Father in Jesus.....but there is more....Jesus goes on.....He says "I in them and you in me."
Jesus and the Father are one and Jesus is IN YOU.... you are borne of the Spirit and the SPIRIT is in you as well.
The young Christian must see and know that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are in indeed within him, witnessing to him and caring for him. He has become a child of the King.
Once this experience... this evidence is clear to the young Christian, he has the opportunity to live his life, knowing.... without a shadow of doubt that Jesus is real and living with him.
This is what the Body of Christ is like.... the Body of Christ is each believer, indwelt by the God.
Then the next step is learning about God, his principles and his ways. Should he have questions about presumed contradictions, then study of the Word with the oversight of the Holy Spirit is in order. The Holy Spirit indwelling us "shows us the truth about God and ourselves."
Regarding the Numbers questions already raised there are two very sources of insight.... the first is the book "Is God a Moral Monster?" Then there is the short read about the same subject from GotQuestions.org
The wise man will investigate on his own and hopefully with the joy that comes when God comes to live with him.
Do what you want with this.... neither God nor I will be offended by your comments..... also know that even if you reject this whole idea now, God may call it to remembrance to you in the future. He is calling and He wants you to turn your face to Him. He smiles when an unbeliever does this.
Doesn't answer the question, and I can assure you that the murderous "spirit" is not part of me nor would I ever want it to be. Who wants that? That's not a good "sales pitch".
I have thought about this general subject some more and would like to cycle back a bit.
It is my opinion that you made an allegation to the effect that “…. God is a murderer…..”
To be clear, do you believe that a supreme being….a creator of the universe does indeed exist….or are you a staunch unbeliever in “God?”
Further…. Am I correct that you discount the Bible as the word of God?
I am wondering if you are uncomfortable with the idea of a Creator God or find yourself simply rejecting the Bible?
Could be both…..
I have made no allegations. The bible describes God drowning the world because He wasn't happy with Mankind. The bible describes God ordering slaughter, rape, etc.....this is in the bible for anyone to see and read. This is not my 'allegation ,' the descriptions are there.
Sure you made allegations…. There is no question about that. You are simply trying to back away from that fact.
As an aside, many would agree that not all killing is murder. But, we could get to that if this discussion progresses.
But, moving on….. do you see that you sitting in judgement of “God” and are placing YOUR standards and by YOUR moral code superior to His?
(There is a follow on issue here….why would you even care about the “moral code” of a God you don’t believe in? Seems odd to me, but many here are provoked by this idea of a God that would presume to hold His creation accountable. Perhaps that’s it…. Folks don’t want to be held accountable……)
Btw….why would YOUR moral code be any better or worse than mine?
You don’t hold to the God of the Bible…ok…. So on what basis…. or where did you get or what led you to adopt the moral code that causes you to call a God you probably don’t hold to…. a God you likely don’t believe in…. a “murderer?”
Backing away? That's just silly. You know that what I said is in the bible.
All you need to do is explain why the OT God orders slaughter and rape, kills the innocent (passover) and drowns the world, etc....and how this brutality relates to a God of Love and Tender Mercy as described in the NT.
Have you read the bible? Do you want me to quote things that you should already know?
Jesus said that God is kind to ungrateful people, and to evil and morally wrong people. That’s good news to me, because I’ve been ungrateful, and I’ve been evil and morally wrong. Why aren’t many ‘Christians’ known for being kind to the ungrateful, and to evil and morally wrong people…?
To me, too many ‘Christians,’ for generations, have been content to ‘believe,’ but not ‘follow.’ Jesus’ initial invitation was “follow me.” To me, if one follows Him, one’ll discover that following Him will make one’s life better, and it’ll make one better at life. And even if one is not sure it’s all true at the outset, one’ll discover…one’ll know…that it’s all good.
He said to be compassionate and graceful and forgiving, just as God is those things. What is not attractive about that…? If people grew up with, or only know of, a version of Christianity where God is anything other than that, it’s not the original Christian version.
Jesus introduced a new version of good, and He said that God is good, and I believe He took all of our ‘ungood’ upon Himself to provide us with an on ramp to this good God.
Is the original version of Christianity…where God is compassionate and graceful and forgiving…, is it good…? Good for the world, good for society, good for your family, good for you and me…? Luke thought so, so did Matthew and Mark, so did John and Peter, Apostle Paul eventually thought so, James (Jesus’ brother) thought so, and many others thought so.
Because, to me, the original version of Christianity was good news, and it was compelling news. And when it’s presented in its rawest form…in its clearest and most uncluttered form…I’m convinced that it’s good news. So, to me, if people don’t buy it, if it never sounded good, maybe they never heard the original it. Maybe they grew up with the wrong it. Maybe somebody misused it to them.
The people who were closest to Jesus, they met good in a body, because they met God in a body, and they documented it. They felt like it was good news, of great joy, for everybody. Especially for those of us who are, and who haven’t been, all that good.
Jesus said that God is kind to ungrateful people, and to evil and morally wrong people. That’s good news to me, because I’ve been ungrateful, and I’ve been evil and morally wrong. Why aren’t many ‘Christians’ known for being kind to the ungrateful, and to evil and morally wrong people…?
To me, too many ‘Christians,’ for generations, have been content to ‘believe,’ but not ‘follow.’ Jesus’ initial invitation was “follow me.” To me, if one follows Him, one’ll discover that following Him will make one’s life better, and it’ll make one better at life. And even if one is not sure it’s all true at the outset, one’ll discover…one’ll know…that it’s all good.
He said to be compassionate and graceful and forgiving, just as God is those things. What is not attractive about that…? If people grew up with, or only know of, a version of Christianity where God is anything other than that, it’s not the original Christian version.
Jesus introduced a new version of good, and He said that God is good, and I believe He took all of our ‘ungood’ upon Himself to provide us with an on ramp to this good God.
Is the original version of Christianity…where God is compassionate and graceful and forgiving…, is it good…? Good for the world, good for society, good for your family, good for you and me…? Luke thought so, so did Matthew and Mark, so did John and Peter, Apostle Paul eventually thought so, James (Jesus’ brother) thought so, and many others thought so.
Because, to me, the original version of Christianity was good news, and it was compelling news. And when it’s presented in its rawest form…in its clearest and most uncluttered form…I’m convinced that it’s good news. So, to me, if people don’t buy it, if it never sounded good, maybe they never heard the original it. Maybe they grew up with the wrong it. Maybe somebody misused it to them.
The people who were closest to Jesus, they met good in a body, because they met God in a body, and they documented it. They felt like it was good news, of great joy, for everybody. Especially for those of us who are, and who haven’t been, all that good.
You speak of kindness and love.
Give me your take on The Slaughter of the Midianites from Numbers 31 that I posted above.
And we thought the Japs were brutal. That story is worthy of Genghis Khan.
Belief in a brutal god is a reflection of the brutal times and brutal attitudes of the time, Greek thought and philosophy went some way in evolving the idea of God into a more benevolent form.
I remember talking to a Muslim fella about this OT God. He told me that the Christians made up a war God and took away the lands and rights of the Muslim people, so the Muslim people had to make up a Muslim war God in order to take back those lands. Sounded just about right to me.
One of the many problems with Christianity is they make their God out to be a male human. All those evil things their God tells them to do is what a human mind would conjure up. Numbers 23:19 is very explicit as to what God is not...."God is not a man"..... and 1John 1:5 is very explicit as to what God is..........."This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light"..... so therefore to give God a name is ludicrous. What name do you give to Light? None, hence the reason God told Moses to call Him I Am that, I Am.
Then you also have the problem, error, of reading the Bible literally when it specifically says not to.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Meh….Your claim that you see “….no good reason to believe that’s true ” simply places you in the company of skeptics.
While you may not see the “…good reason…” the fact remains that the evidence for the Creator is all around you. This Creator communicated to us….. it is your choice not to believe the evidence…. It is your choice not be believe the message….It is your choice to claim the evidence is insufficient to be reason to believe. This is your choice….
Of course the Bible speaks of the “blind.” I would guess that this Bible you see no merit it in, would kinda describe you as blind…. You do not see….
It would also infer that your “utterances are without knowledge.”
At least you and I understand a bit about the other.
I used to be a Christian. It was knowledge, specifically that gained through reading the Bible that made me Atheist.
Give us your take on Numbers 31, the Slaughter of the Midianites I posted above.
You speak of kindness and love. Give me your take on The Slaughter of the Midianites from Numbers 31 that I posted above.
I understand why people might struggle with that issue. I struggle with it myself.
My take is that what I spoke of…what you referred to in my post…is unique to the original version of Christianity. Apostle John actually equated God with love, and this was uncommon and even revolutionary. And this is in stark contrast to the devout perspectives of Judaism.
God was holy, unconnected, jealous, temperamental, withdrawn and even standoffish for the Jews. And His love was reserved for the Jews; His covenant was with them. He even lived in their Tabernacle behind a curtain (later He lived in their Temple behind a curtain).
A lot of us have trouble resolving a good and loving God with the pain and suffering in the world. Apostle John saw firsthand some pretty awful and horrific stuff, but he still equated God with love.
I do not treat the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures equally. I don’t revamp aspects of God’s covenant with the Jews and incorporate it into Jesus’ ekklesia. And I don’t see that Old Covenant as being a directive to Jesus’ followers for their ideology and principles and convictions.
I despise legalism, I’m not a Hebrew, nor do I think Judaism is part of Christianity. And I strongly and firmly believe in Jesus’ New Covenant and God’s grace.
I don’t have to understand everything to believe in something. And I don’t want to be apart from Him just because I can't grasp all of this...all of the things that I don’t fully understand.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Meh….Your claim that you see “….no good reason to believe that’s true ” simply places you in the company of skeptics.
While you may not see the “…good reason…” the fact remains that the evidence for the Creator is all around you. This Creator communicated to us….. it is your choice not to believe the evidence…. It is your choice not be believe the message….It is your choice to claim the evidence is insufficient to be reason to believe. This is your choice….
Of course the Bible speaks of the “blind.” I would guess that this Bible you see no merit it in, would kinda describe you as blind…. You do not see….
It would also infer that your “utterances are without knowledge.”
At least you and I understand a bit about the other.
I used to be a Christian. It was knowledge, specifically that gained through reading the Bible that made me Atheist.
Give us your take on Numbers 31, the Slaughter of the Midianites I posted above.
Well…. Let me think about how to address this. I will do something….. this issue has come up a number of times in the past and perhaps…. Perhaps…. I can address it correctly. We’ll see.
I have been very busy with house guests and a daughter that recently came home from the hospital so there will be some significant time lag…. But I will respond.
I used to be a Christian. It was knowledge, specifically that gained through reading the Bible that made me Atheist.
I get that, and I understand that. Many can relate to exactly what you said. People feel the way they do, and they often have very good reasons for feeling as they do.
The Bible certainly doesn’t carry the weight that it once did. And thanks to the Internet and the easy access to tremendous amounts of easily available information that it provides, it’s easy for anybody to know what all of the Bible says (like the things you mentioned from Numbers 31) without picking one up and reading it.
Yet, many churches and many Bible thumpers continue to sermonize, instruct, author, and converse as if this isn’t so (as if things haven’t changed)…as if the Bible still settles it.
I simply think it’s more appropriate to model the faith after the first-century original followers of Jesus…who had no official Bible…yet their original version of Christianity was compelling, defensible, and attractive. That’s the version of the faith that I find desirable.
You speak of kindness and love. Give me your take on The Slaughter of the Midianites from Numbers 31 that I posted above.
I understand why people might struggle with that issue. I struggle with it myself.
My take is that what I spoke of…what you referred to in my post…is unique to the original version of Christianity. Apostle John actually equated God with love, and this was uncommon and even revolutionary. And this is in stark contrast to the devout perspectives of Judaism.
God was holy, unconnected, jealous, temperamental, withdrawn and even standoffish for the Jews. And His love was reserved for the Jews; His covenant was with them. He even lived in their Tabernacle behind a curtain (later He lived in their Temple behind a curtain).
A lot of us have trouble resolving a good and loving God with the pain and suffering in the world. Apostle John saw firsthand some pretty awful and horrific stuff, but he still equated God with love.
I do not treat the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Scriptures equally. I don’t revamp aspects of God’s covenant with the Jews and incorporate it into Jesus’ ekklesia. And I don’t see that Old Covenant as being a directive to Jesus’ followers for their ideology and principles and convictions.
I despise legalism, I’m not a Hebrew, nor do I think Judaism is part of Christianity. And I strongly and firmly believe in Jesus’ New Covenant and God’s grace.
I don’t have to understand everything to believe in something. And I don’t want to be apart from Him just because I can't grasp all of this...all of the things that I don’t fully understand.
Antlers,
I see a lot of similarities between what you wrote and the teaching of Marcion of Sinope, specifically that the Gods of the Old and New Testaments are so different they cannot be reconciled. As you probably know, he put together the earliest Christian Cannon, and some scholars consider him the most likely writer of the early versions of the six "undisputed" books attributed to Paul, and the early version of Luke included in his Cannon.
Compared to the majority of Christian I consider yours to be a more honest, more congruent position, and one more consistent with living a moral life in these modern times.
The scholarly consensus is that this war did not take place, certainly not as narrated.[2][4]: 66 Within the wider context of the Exodus, there probably never was an invasion of Canaan (the "Promised Land") by all Israelites escaping from slavery in Egypt.[11] Scholars such as Mark S. Smith assert that Israelite culture emerged from the wider Canaanite culture surrounding it, with whom it had strong linguistic, religious and other cultural links.[12] There was no political unification of several Semitic Canaanite tribes into a single Israelite state until after 1100 BCE.[11] Although some Egyptologists such as Redford (1997), Na'aman (2011) and Bietak (2015) have argued that some Canaanites (referred to by Bietak as "Proto-Israelites") may have been deported to Egypt during the Nineteenth Dynasty's occupation and rule over Canaan under pharaoh Ramesses II (r. 1279–1213 BCE), they say there is no indication that this included all so-called "Proto-Israelites", most of whom would have experienced Egyptian rule inside Canaan itself in the late 13th century BCE.[13] Na'aman argued that the existing narrative in the collective Hebrew memory of Egyptian rule "was remodeled according to the realities of the late eighth and seventh centuries in Canaan, integrating the experience with the Assyrian oppression and deportations."[13]: 18 The modern scholarly consensus is that the biblical person of Moses is largely a mythical figure while also holding that "a Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in the southern Transjordan in the mid-late 13th century B.C." and that archaeology is unable to confirm either way.[14][15]
The narrative of Numbers 31 specifically is one out of many in the Hebrew Bible seeking to establish the Israelites as the chosen people of the god Yahweh, who blessed them with victory in battle, health and prosperity, as long as they were faithful to his commands.[2] This second generation of Israelites suffered not a single casualty throughout Numbers 26–36, while the first generation suffered much death in the wilderness (chapters 13–14, 25).[2][note 2] The claims that 12,000 Israelite soldiers exterminated or captured the entire Midianite population and destroyed all their towns without suffering a single casualty are held to be historically impossible, and should be understood as symbolic.[2] Moreover, even other biblical books set in later times still refer to the Midianites as an independent people, such as Judges chapters 6–8, where Gideon fights them.[2] Most likely, the author(s) wished to convey a certain theological message about who Yahweh, Moses, Eleazar and Phinehas were, and how powerful the Israelites would be if Yahweh was on their side.[2]
Olson (2012) noted that the name Kozbi comes from the three Hebrew consonants kzb, meaning "to lie, deceive"; the idea that Kozbi deceived the Israelites is emphasised in verse 25:18: "[The Midianites] deceived (or: 'harassed, assaulted, vexed'; נִכְּל֥וּ nikkəlū) you with their tricks (בְּנִכְלֵיהֶ֛ם bəniḵlêhem) in the matter of Peor and in the matter of Kozbi, the daughter of a Midianite leader, the woman who was killed when the plague came as a result of that incident."[2][17] This suggests she was not a historical character, but invented as a metaphor for danger to the Israelites.[2]
Brown (2015) described how the structure of Numbers 31 showed a pattern of 'command, obedience, extension, purification, command, obedience, extension.' Yahweh commands the Israelites through Moses to execute vengeance and divide the spoils, the Israelite soldiers obey, then do more than Yahweh commanded (extension); the purification is the only action that happens only once and functions as a bridge between the two series.[4] Both Olson and Brown noted that Moses is portrayed as remarkably passive in chapter 25 and, as he was failing to solve the problem, Phinehas had to intervene and take the initiative to slay Kozbi and Zimri, was granted the eternal priesthood and later allowed to lead the Israelites against Midian.[2]: 155 [4]: 70 Brown added that chapter 27 further undermined the political position of an increasingly disobedient Moses in favour of the priesthood, with Yahweh revealing Moses' time is up and he will soon die.[4]: 70–71 This supports the view that the added text was written at a time when the priestly line of Phinehas' descendants was being challenged, as it bolsters their legitimacy as the priestly successors of Moses.[2]: 155
Read Genesis 34. Simeon and Levi took care of business there. The prince in that town was screwing their sister so they pulled a trick on all the men there by telling the prince he couldn't have Dinah unless the whole town got circumcised. After 3 days when no one was in fighting condition they went in and killed them all.
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Meh….Your claim that you see “….no good reason to believe that’s true ” simply places you in the company of skeptics.
While you may not see the “…good reason…” the fact remains that the evidence for the Creator is all around you. This Creator communicated to us….. it is your choice not to believe the evidence…. It is your choice not be believe the message….It is your choice to claim the evidence is insufficient to be reason to believe. This is your choice….
Of course the Bible speaks of the “blind.” I would guess that this Bible you see no merit it in, would kinda describe you as blind…. You do not see….
It would also infer that your “utterances are without knowledge.”
At least you and I understand a bit about the other.
I used to be a Christian. It was knowledge, specifically that gained through reading the Bible that made me Atheist.
Give us your take on Numbers 31, the Slaughter of the Midianites I posted above.
Well…. Let me think about how to address this. I will do something….. this issue has come up a number of times in the past and perhaps…. Perhaps…. I can address it correctly. We’ll see.
I have been very busy with house guests and a daughter that recently came home from the hospital so there will be some significant time lag…. But I will respond.
AS,
The info provided by mrmarklin is good from a wiki or secular perspective. May be valid, idk.
But, I am concerned that you have a “character of God” issue. Any explanation from the Bible that addresses the “character issue” is complicated by your rejection of the Bible as a credible source of explanation.
For example…. A starting point for discussion of the Numbers issue would be the acknowledgements that “God exists” and that God interacts with humankind.
You have already made your opinions of the Bible known…..so…..would you be prepared to acknowledge some “givens” along the way?
A discussion can be fruitful but it seems that it will be a time waster unless you are prepared….. for the purposes of the discussion ….to accept the Biblical explanation and perspective of the Numbers issue.
In a related example some one might ask about what the Bible says about sin and salvation…. But some one might not like the answer and then dismiss the entire discussion by claiming that “Jesus never existed” so all all discussion and debate is for naught.
You have already claimed something like “justifying the Bible by using the Bible” is an invalid approach.
So, if the discussion of the Numbers issue and the “character of God” issue are to be addressed it can only be from a Biblical perspective.
In short…. The discussion about Numbers and the character of God can only be addressed by using the Bible. You have already made your secular judgment…. You must set that aside as this progresses.
I don’t think this would be a problem for you as you refer to the Numbers issue as a real issue that prevents people from either accepting Jesus or abandoning Jesus due to questions about God’s character. Why would you not want a “Bible based response” to a Bible issue?
[No. I'm interested in your explanation of the moral contradictions - surely you have thought about them and reconciled the justification of such abhorant qualities. You're only interested in avoidance of addressing the question. I'm using a process of critical thinking and you're using a case of believe without question and ignore any major logical or moral flaws. Mass murder by a loving creator needs some plausible explanation
First time round he condemned man to death for a minor indescretion. Next he wiped out the bulk of the population for sinning. Next he forgives all sin as a trade for the death of Jesus. You'd kinda think he'd have the power to forgive sin without the need for all that murder, torture and human sacrifice, and that would be a more loving alternative.
You can understand why people are turning away from bible based Christianity in droves. Resorting to attacks and name calling isn't going to help prevent that.
You say He condemned man to death for a “minor indiscretion”. Being Infinite God would react in an infinite way to a command He gave. It may appear to be a “minor indiscretion” to you but to Him being Infinite it was as big a deal as your neighbor coming into your house and torturing your kid all day long and then finally killing him. As a result, God even cursed the stars because man was the crowning glory of His creation. As a finite man you can’t comprehend His anger. One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later God sent a worldwide flood and killed all air breathing land creatures which didn’t get on the ship He had Noah build. He did this because man no longer accepted Him as Sovereign Lord. He owned them after all. It’s no different than you making a page of stick man drawings and burning it up. Since God is All Powerful He has the authority and power to set rules. The Ultimate Rule Maker can make any rule He wishes. He set a rule: The wages of sin is death! But your own death is not enough to pay the penalty. The Rule Maker also established the rule His Own death would suffice. Being Infinite Spirit, He could not die. Therefore He took on the form of a Perfect Man and died for man’s sin. God can’t abide the presents of unforgiven sin. God offers sinful man the opportunity to accept His death for the forgiveness of their sin. We don’t understand, we just accept the Rule Maker’s rules. You in your finiteness try to inform us what is or isn’t loving. You, finite man, don’t have the credentials to decide what is or isn’t love, just like morals above.
I have thought about this general subject some more and would like to cycle back a bit.
It is my opinion that you made an allegation to the effect that “…. God is a murderer…..”
To be clear, do you believe that a supreme being….a creator of the universe does indeed exist….or are you a staunch unbeliever in “God?”
Further…. Am I correct that you discount the Bible as the word of God?
I am wondering if you are uncomfortable with the idea of a Creator God or find yourself simply rejecting the Bible?
Could be both…..
I have made no allegations. The bible describes God drowning the world because He wasn't happy with Mankind. The bible describes God ordering slaughter, rape, etc.....this is in the bible for anyone to see and read. This is not my 'allegation ,' the descriptions are there.
Sure you made allegations…. There is no question about that. You are simply trying to back away from that fact.
As an aside, many would agree that not all killing is murder. But, we could get to that if this discussion progresses.
But, moving on….. do you see that you sitting in judgement of “God” and are placing YOUR standards and by YOUR moral code superior to His?
(There is a follow on issue here….why would you even care about the “moral code” of a God you don’t believe in? Seems odd to me, but many here are provoked by this idea of a God that would presume to hold His creation accountable. Perhaps that’s it…. Folks don’t want to be held accountable……)
Btw….why would YOUR moral code be any better or worse than mine?
You don’t hold to the God of the Bible…ok…. So on what basis…. or where did you get or what led you to adopt the moral code that causes you to call a God you probably don’t hold to…. a God you likely don’t believe in…. a “murderer?”
Backing away? That's just silly. You know that what I said is in the bible.
All you need to do is explain why the OT God orders slaughter and rape, kills the innocent (passover) and drowns the world, etc....and how this brutality relates to a God of Love and Tender Mercy as described in the NT.
Have you read the bible? Do you want me to quote things that you should already know?
Again, you did indeed make the allegation that God is guilty of murder.
You pick and choose what excerpts of the Bible to rail against.
Like I said…..”utterances without knowledge.”
See commo to Antelope Sniper…..
Btw…. Do you have any beliefs about God? I suspect you do but simply don’t want to share them. No, all you want to do is rant.
Do you believe a “god” exists?…… any god? ….. any Creator?
Perhaps my responses to DBT and mauserman got their dander up... ok.... See Proverbs 26:4-5 again.
The document that you pull these proverbs from is historically, factually, ethically and morally wrong, and you choose to ignore a major condradiction within it that was pointed out to you. That is blind faith for sure - no question about it.
If a young Christian asked you about these moral contradictions, how would you respond - get angry and call them fools?
Those man made proverbs don't spook me by the way.
Your statements about the “document” is verification that my response to you was indeed warranted and appropriate. Any response from the Word of God will be instantly discounted and demeaned.
You are not interested in any sort of discussion or debate. Your mind is closed and you are attempting a clumsy game of gotcha.
You are simply a troll….and a clumsy one at that.
You claim it's the word of you God, but I see no good reason to believe that's true. Until you provide sufficiently extraordinary evidence to establish the truth of your extraordinary claim your arguments based in scripture carry no weight.
Meh….Your claim that you see “….no good reason to believe that’s true ” simply places you in the company of skeptics.
While you may not see the “…good reason…” the fact remains that the evidence for the Creator is all around you. This Creator communicated to us….. it is your choice not to believe the evidence…. It is your choice not be believe the message….It is your choice to claim the evidence is insufficient to be reason to believe. This is your choice….
Of course the Bible speaks of the “blind.” I would guess that this Bible you see no merit it in, would kinda describe you as blind…. You do not see….
It would also infer that your “utterances are without knowledge.”
At least you and I understand a bit about the other.
I used to be a Christian. It was knowledge, specifically that gained through reading the Bible that made me Atheist.
Give us your take on Numbers 31, the Slaughter of the Midianites I posted above.
Well…. Let me think about how to address this. I will do something….. this issue has come up a number of times in the past and perhaps…. Perhaps…. I can address it correctly. We’ll see.
I have been very busy with house guests and a daughter that recently came home from the hospital so there will be some significant time lag…. But I will respond.
AS,
The info provided by mrmarklin is good from a wiki or secular perspective. May be valid, idk.
But, I am concerned that you have a “character of God” issue. Any explanation from the Bible that addresses the “character issue” is complicated by your rejection of the Bible as a credible source of explanation.
For example…. A starting point for discussion of the Numbers issue would be the acknowledgements that “God exists” and that God interacts with humankind.
You have already made your opinions of the Bible known…..so…..would you be prepared to acknowledge some “givens” along the way?
A discussion can be fruitful but it seems that it will be a time waster unless you are prepared….. for the purposes of the discussion ….to accept the Biblical explanation and perspective of the Numbers issue.
In a related example some one might ask about what the Bible says about sin and salvation…. But some one might not like the answer and then dismiss the entire discussion by claiming that “Jesus never existed” so all all discussion and debate is for naught.
You have already claimed something like “justifying the Bible by using the Bible” is an invalid approach.
So, if the discussion of the Numbers issue and the “character of God” issue are to be addressed it can only be from a Biblical perspective.
In short…. The discussion about Numbers and the character of God can only be addressed by using the Bible. You have already made your secular judgment…. You must set that aside as this progresses.
I don’t think this would be a problem for you as you refer to the Numbers issue as a real issue that prevents people from either accepting Jesus or abandoning Jesus due to questions about God’s character. Why would you not want a “Bible based response” to a Bible issue?
So, give me some guidance here….
Take a look at how Antlers responded.
He provided an honest answer regarding what he believed, why he believed it and how Numbers 31 and other passage like it in the Old Testament informed his beliefs.
That's what I'm asking of you. How does this fit into YOUR system of Christian Beliefs?
And we thought the Japs were brutal. That story is worthy of Genghis Khan.
Belief in a brutal god is a reflection of the brutal times and brutal attitudes of the time, Greek thought and philosophy went some way in evolving the idea of God into a more benevolent form.
I remember talking to a Muslim fella about this OT God. He told me that the Christians made up a war God and took away the lands and rights of the Muslim people, so the Muslim people had to make up a Muslim war God in order to take back those lands. Sounded just about right to me.
One of the many problems with Christianity is they make their God out to be a male human. All those evil things their God tells them to do is what a human mind would conjure up. Numbers 23:19 is very explicit as to what God is not...."God is not a man"..... and 1John 1:5 is very explicit as to what God is..........."This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light"..... so therefore to give God a name is ludicrous. What name do you give to Light? None, hence the reason God told Moses to call Him I Am that, I Am.
Then you also have the problem, error, of reading the Bible literally when it specifically says not to.
So the described slaughter did not happen? It was all peace and love?
You realize that the Fall did not happen, no original sin, that there was no world flood, no Passover, etc, that these are morality tales and myths, allegory, storytelling, that each tribe or culture had their own traditions?
If that book is read literally then yes, there is something not quite right about that God. He reminds me of a childish person. Then there are the contradictions which many try to explain away and those who just cap it with well he's God and can do want ever he wants. Then add to all of the confusion and misunderstandings with all of the interpretations that man has made right down to how the Bible was canonized. And once again, just on that singular thought of canonizing you are back to humans canonizing a spiritual document. The biggest mistake we make is thinking our human spirit (ego and emotion) is the spirit the Bible is talking about. It is not. Christians claim to be following Jesus's teachings but they don't, they refuse which prompted Jesus to say "46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" You give lip service with words but don't do those things he said to do. According to Christian teachings you must die before you get to enter the Kingdom and that is an absolute lie. Jesus said the Kingdom resides in you and I believe that. You can enter that Kingdom now not after your dead. It is to late by then and the very reason it says that God is a God of the living and not the dead. Refusing to do those things Jesus said is why the Church is waiting for the second coming and the Kingdom when the first one has already happened/is happening and the second comes NOT by visual seeing as Jesus said. It all dwells within you and you have to go into yourself to find it all and that is done by being "still" and taking "no thought" and casting "your net to the right side". So once again, that book is NOT a literal book. You will never know "And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” If you "Christians" who have professed by mouth, if you do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of God now, I'm afraid you never will unless you do those things that Jesus said to do. Christians believe that all the things they do or say, being baptized (literally), believing there was a cross and a resurrection, ect. gives them salvation, but not according to the teachings of Jesus. "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." So Jesus taught in Matt 6:33 to FIRST seek the Kingdom, and in Luke 17:21 that the Kingdom resides within you and in Matt: 24:24 the very thing that is to be preached to all the World is the Gospel of the Kingdom and that Kingdom resides within you and can only be accessed one way. With all the false prophets and false preachers in the world to day teaching the "broad" path it is not wonder Christ said "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." Since his name was never ever Jesus, but was instead Yasushua which means the "Way" and His Way is not accepted in the Christian world and that is why those who don't call themselves Christians nor follow that teaching but instead prefer to be an atheist or teach the symbolic mystic parable ways, those folks are hated by the Christians and would be delivered up to be afflicted. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Holy Trinity of Christianity is Guilt, Fear, and Money.
If that book is read literally then yes, there is something not quite right about that God. He reminds me of a childish person. Then there are the contradictions which many try to explain away and those who just cap it with well he's God and can do want ever he wants. Then add to all of the confusion and misunderstandings with all of the interpretations that man has made right down to how the Bible was canonized. And once again, just on that singular thought of canonizing you are back to humans canonizing a spiritual document. The biggest mistake we make is thinking our human spirit (ego and emotion) is the spirit the Bible is talking about. It is not. Christians claim to be following Jesus's teachings but they don't, they refuse which prompted Jesus to say "46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" You give lip service with words but don't do those things he said to do. According to Christian teachings you must die before you get to enter the Kingdom and that is an absolute lie. Jesus said the Kingdom resides in you and I believe that. You can enter that Kingdom now not after your dead. It is to late by then and the very reason it says that God is a God of the living and not the dead. Refusing to do those things Jesus said is why the Church is waiting for the second coming and the Kingdom when the first one has already happened/is happening and the second comes NOT by visual seeing as Jesus said. It all dwells within you and you have to go into yourself to find it all and that is done by being "still" and taking "no thought" and casting "your net to the right side". So once again, that book is NOT a literal book. You will never know "And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” If you "Christians" who have professed by mouth, if you do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of God now, I'm afraid you never will unless you do those things that Jesus said to do. Christians believe that all the things they do or say, being baptized (literally), believing there was a cross and a resurrection, ect. gives them salvation, but not according to the teachings of Jesus. "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." So Jesus taught in Matt 6:33 to FIRST seek the Kingdom, and in Luke 17:21 that the Kingdom resides within you and in Matt: 24:24 the very thing that is to be preached to all the World is the Gospel of the Kingdom and that Kingdom resides within you and can only be accessed one way. With all the false prophets and false preachers in the world to day teaching the "broad" path it is not wonder Christ said "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." Since his name was never ever Jesus, but was instead Yasushua which means the "Way" and His Way is not accepted in the Christian world and that is why those who don't call themselves Christians nor follow that teaching but instead prefer to be an atheist or teach the symbolic mystic parable ways, those folks are hated by the Christians and would be delivered up to be afflicted. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Holy Trinity of Christianity is Guilt, Fear, and Money.
If the descriptions of events are not literal, being merely what the people of the time and place thought and believed, what relevance does it have for us?
How are verses describing God ordering slaughter, rape, drowning the world, killing the innocent, etc, relevant for us?
If allegory, allegory for what purpose? What interpretation?
And we thought the Japs were brutal. That story is worthy of Genghis Khan.
Belief in a brutal god is a reflection of the brutal times and brutal attitudes of the time, Greek thought and philosophy went some way in evolving the idea of God into a more benevolent form.
I remember talking to a Muslim fella about this OT God. He told me that the Christians made up a war God and took away the lands and rights of the Muslim people, so the Muslim people had to make up a Muslim war God in order to take back those lands. Sounded just about right to me.
One of the many problems with Christianity is they make their God out to be a male human. All those evil things their God tells them to do is what a human mind would conjure up. Numbers 23:19 is very explicit as to what God is not...."God is not a man"..... and 1John 1:5 is very explicit as to what God is..........."This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light"..... so therefore to give God a name is ludicrous. What name do you give to Light? None, hence the reason God told Moses to call Him I Am that, I Am.
Then you also have the problem, error, of reading the Bible literally when it specifically says not to.
So the described slaughter did not happen? It was all peace and love?
You realize that the Fall did not happen, no original sin, that there was no world flood, no Passover, etc, that these are morality tales and myths, allegory, storytelling, that each tribe or culture had their own traditions?
What does the Book say about this? Psalms 78 Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2 I will open my mouth in a parable: I will utter dark sayings of old: What are the dark sayings of Old? Proverbs 1 : 3To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity; 4To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion. 5A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: 6To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings. These dark sayings of old are what was taught by the Ancient Egyptians, Greeks, Chaldeans, Assyrians, ect. This is how the Bible was written. Christ and Paul verify this. Parables are coded words or put in a true definition, they are occultic i.e. occult adjective oc·cult | \ ə-ˈkəlt , ä-; ˈä-ˌkəlt \ Definition of occult 1: not revealed : SECRET hidden from view : CONCEALED. One could say that Christ was a teacher of occult by its very definition. We have taken that word and demonized so that now people are afraid of using it for FEAR. So once again, the Holy Trinity of Christianity is Guilt, FEAR, and Money.
Let me add that the word "sin" is a Chaldean word which means the Moon (Ur) and represents the emotions. The word sin in this Book means emotions.
You realize that the Fall did not happen, no original sin, that there was no world flood, no Passover, etc, that these are morality tales and myths, allegory, storytelling, that each tribe or culture had their own traditions?
This is why some Christians such as Ringman insist on a literal Young Earth Creationist view.
Without oud Eden there is not original sin, No original Sin there is no Fall. Without the Fall there is no need Jesus. Without Jesus there is no salvation.
If that book is read literally then yes, there is something not quite right about that God. He reminds me of a childish person. Then there are the contradictions which many try to explain away and those who just cap it with well he's God and can do want ever he wants. Then add to all of the confusion and misunderstandings with all of the interpretations that man has made right down to how the Bible was canonized. And once again, just on that singular thought of canonizing you are back to humans canonizing a spiritual document. The biggest mistake we make is thinking our human spirit (ego and emotion) is the spirit the Bible is talking about. It is not. Christians claim to be following Jesus's teachings but they don't, they refuse which prompted Jesus to say "46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" You give lip service with words but don't do those things he said to do. According to Christian teachings you must die before you get to enter the Kingdom and that is an absolute lie. Jesus said the Kingdom resides in you and I believe that. You can enter that Kingdom now not after your dead. It is to late by then and the very reason it says that God is a God of the living and not the dead. Refusing to do those things Jesus said is why the Church is waiting for the second coming and the Kingdom when the first one has already happened/is happening and the second comes NOT by visual seeing as Jesus said. It all dwells within you and you have to go into yourself to find it all and that is done by being "still" and taking "no thought" and casting "your net to the right side". So once again, that book is NOT a literal book. You will never know "And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” If you "Christians" who have professed by mouth, if you do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of God now, I'm afraid you never will unless you do those things that Jesus said to do. Christians believe that all the things they do or say, being baptized (literally), believing there was a cross and a resurrection, ect. gives them salvation, but not according to the teachings of Jesus. "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." So Jesus taught in Matt 6:33 to FIRST seek the Kingdom, and in Luke 17:21 that the Kingdom resides within you and in Matt: 24:24 the very thing that is to be preached to all the World is the Gospel of the Kingdom and that Kingdom resides within you and can only be accessed one way. With all the false prophets and false preachers in the world to day teaching the "broad" path it is not wonder Christ said "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." Since his name was never ever Jesus, but was instead Yasushua which means the "Way" and His Way is not accepted in the Christian world and that is why those who don't call themselves Christians nor follow that teaching but instead prefer to be an atheist or teach the symbolic mystic parable ways, those folks are hated by the Christians and would be delivered up to be afflicted. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Holy Trinity of Christianity is Guilt, Fear, and Money.
If the descriptions of events are not literal, being merely what the people of the time and place thought and believed, what relevance does it have for us?
How are verses describing God ordering slaughter, rape, drowning the world, killing the innocent, etc, relevant for us?
If allegory, allegory for what purpose? What interpretation?
It is allegory and allegory for you. Is the Kingdom and God real...........in a nut shell yes. But by humanizing it is where we begin to go off path. God is Light not some Dude sitting on some cloud somewhere. God dwells within you and has from the day you were born. The Temple, the Kingdom, and God dwell in the "Right" hemisphere of the mind. The only way to access that 90% is by following Christs and Gods teachings. Be Still, take no thought, these are just a couple off the top of my head. This is meditation. Meditation causes the pituitary to give off colostrum (white in color) which activates the solar plex area (the third chakra, which color is Orange and hence the reason it was called the SOLAR plex, that furnace in turns cause the colostrum to travel up the spine (Jacobs ladder) to activate the Pineal gland that sits in the middle of the brain. The pineal gland when activated gives off melatonin (honey colored) which is known to be a skin whitener. Genesis 33:3 The Pineal gland then opens the right hemisphere. What does Genisis 32:30 say? As for Numbers 31, start by translating the names. Names have a meaning such as Israel. Israel is 3 Egyptian words put into one. Is- the goddess Isis known as the Mother, Ra- the mind i.e. Father and El - God or the Spirit of God hence the arch angel names Gabri el ect. Then there are the numbers such as the one mentioned above "One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later" 1656 = 18 = 9. 9 in Greek mysticism is the mind. It can be the lower mind (ego, emotion) or the higher mind ( the right hemisphere where God dwells) For example Rev. 13: 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." Add the numbers up....666=18=9 in this case the 9 represents the lower mind of man, the ego/emotion. Now the very next Chapter and verse Rev. 14:1 14 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. Add the numbers up again........144,000 = 9 . Since we are talking about redeemed this is the higher mind where God dwells. Lets do one more as a for instance. Now notice this is an instruction, teaching from Christ..... John 21:6 6 And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes." Now go down to verse 11..."Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken." 153 fish. Why not 200 fish or 160, or any other number? Add them up.. 153 = 9 and again this is the higher mind the 9 represents. So how do you get to the higher mind according to Christs teachings. Go to the right side of the Mind, the right hemisphere, and there you will meet God and He will teach you the mysteries of the Kingdom of God/Heaven.
So encoded that nobody can agree on what it's supposed to mean, so we have thousands years of dispute over theology and interpretation of verse.....
Follow the Teachings of Christ and you will know. It is not that difficult. It is written in the Stars which God named (hint) and gave the Stars for Signs (another hint) Job 38:31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences (we are influenced) of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth (the Zodiac of the 12 Constellations) in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
So encoded that nobody can agree on what it's supposed to mean, so we have thousands years of dispute over theology and interpretation of verse.....
This should answer those questions.........if you follow Christs teachings then Matt 13:11 “He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” Luke 8:10 “And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” Jeremiah 5:21Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not:
If that book is read literally then yes, there is something not quite right about that God. He reminds me of a childish person. Then there are the contradictions which many try to explain away and those who just cap it with well he's God and can do want ever he wants. Then add to all of the confusion and misunderstandings with all of the interpretations that man has made right down to how the Bible was canonized. And once again, just on that singular thought of canonizing you are back to humans canonizing a spiritual document. The biggest mistake we make is thinking our human spirit (ego and emotion) is the spirit the Bible is talking about. It is not. Christians claim to be following Jesus's teachings but they don't, they refuse which prompted Jesus to say "46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" You give lip service with words but don't do those things he said to do. According to Christian teachings you must die before you get to enter the Kingdom and that is an absolute lie. Jesus said the Kingdom resides in you and I believe that. You can enter that Kingdom now not after your dead. It is to late by then and the very reason it says that God is a God of the living and not the dead. Refusing to do those things Jesus said is why the Church is waiting for the second coming and the Kingdom when the first one has already happened/is happening and the second comes NOT by visual seeing as Jesus said. It all dwells within you and you have to go into yourself to find it all and that is done by being "still" and taking "no thought" and casting "your net to the right side". So once again, that book is NOT a literal book. You will never know "And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” If you "Christians" who have professed by mouth, if you do not know the mysteries of the kingdom of God now, I'm afraid you never will unless you do those things that Jesus said to do. Christians believe that all the things they do or say, being baptized (literally), believing there was a cross and a resurrection, ect. gives them salvation, but not according to the teachings of Jesus. "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." So Jesus taught in Matt 6:33 to FIRST seek the Kingdom, and in Luke 17:21 that the Kingdom resides within you and in Matt: 24:24 the very thing that is to be preached to all the World is the Gospel of the Kingdom and that Kingdom resides within you and can only be accessed one way. With all the false prophets and false preachers in the world to day teaching the "broad" path it is not wonder Christ said "Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." Since his name was never ever Jesus, but was instead Yasushua which means the "Way" and His Way is not accepted in the Christian world and that is why those who don't call themselves Christians nor follow that teaching but instead prefer to be an atheist or teach the symbolic mystic parable ways, those folks are hated by the Christians and would be delivered up to be afflicted. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Holy Trinity of Christianity is Guilt, Fear, and Money.
If the descriptions of events are not literal, being merely what the people of the time and place thought and believed, what relevance does it have for us?
How are verses describing God ordering slaughter, rape, drowning the world, killing the innocent, etc, relevant for us?
If allegory, allegory for what purpose? What interpretation?
It is allegory and allegory for you. Is the Kingdom and God real...........in a nut shell yes. But by humanizing it is where we begin to go off path. God is Light not some Dude sitting on some cloud somewhere. God dwells within you and has from the day you were born. The Temple, the Kingdom, and God dwell in the "Right" hemisphere of the mind. The only way to access that 90% is by following Christs and Gods teachings. Be Still, take no thought, these are just a couple off the top of my head. This is meditation. Meditation causes the pituitary to give off colostrum (white in color) which activates the solar plex area (the third chakra, which color is Orange and hence the reason it was called the SOLAR plex, that furnace in turns cause the colostrum to travel up the spine (Jacobs ladder) to activate the Pineal gland that sits in the middle of the brain. The pineal gland when activated gives off melatonin (honey colored) which is known to be a skin whitener. Genesis 33:3 The Pineal gland then opens the right hemisphere. What does Genisis 32:30 say? As for Numbers 31, start by translating the names. Names have a meaning such as Israel. Israel is 3 Egyptian words put into one. Is- the goddess Isis known as the Mother, Ra- the mind i.e. Father and El - God or the Spirit of God hence the arch angel names Gabri el ect. Then there are the numbers such as the one mentioned above "One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later" 1656 = 18 = 9. 9 in Greek mysticism is the mind. It can be the lower mind (ego, emotion) or the higher mind ( the right hemisphere where God dwells) For example Rev. 13: 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." Add the numbers up....666=18=9 in this case the 9 represents the lower mind of man, the ego/emotion. Now the very next Chapter and verse Rev. 14:1 14 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. Add the numbers up again........144,000 = 9 . Since we are talking about redeemed this is the higher mind where God dwells. Lets do one more as a for instance. Now notice this is an instruction, teaching from Christ..... John 21:6 6 And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes." Now go down to verse 11..."Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken." 153 fish. Why not 200 fish or 160, or any other number? Add them up.. 153 = 9 and again this is the higher mind the 9 represents. So how do you get to the higher mind according to Christs teachings. Go to the right side of the Mind, the right hemisphere, and there you will meet God and He will teach you the mysteries of the Kingdom of God/Heaven.
Descriptions of God ordering slaughter and rape need not be literal in order to contradict descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy to have a problem. Logically, one does not go with the other.
Then, if allegory, what is it supposed to tell us about God or anything else?
So encoded that nobody can agree on what it's supposed to mean, so we have thousands years of dispute over theology and interpretation of verse.....
Follow the Teachings of Christ and you will know. It is not that difficult. It is written in the Stars which God named (hint) and gave the Stars for Signs (another hint) Job 38:31 Canst thou bind the sweet influences (we are influenced) of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth (the Zodiac of the 12 Constellations) in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
33 Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
If it not that difficult we would not have thousands of years of dispute over theology, with countless cults and splinter groups.
It's easy if the initial assumptions are not questioned, just run with the conclusions while dismissing opposing views But that's not the way to truth.
There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
You say He condemned man to death for a “minor indiscretion”. Being Infinite God would react in an infinite way to a command He gave. It may appear to be a “minor indiscretion” to you but to Him being Infinite it was as big a deal as your neighbor coming into your house and torturing your kid all day long and then finally killing him.
Seems like a significant over reaction to me. God punished everyone, even those not yet born, for a minor act of a couple of individuals.
Originally Posted by Ringman
One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later God sent a worldwide flood and killed all air breathing land creatures which didn’t get on the ship He had Noah build. He did this because man no longer accepted Him as Sovereign Lord. He owned them after all. It’s no different than you making a page of stick man drawings and burning it up.
Sounds like another unnecessary over reaction. Later he enabled a human sacrifice to provide for forgiveness of sins. Pity that the flood sinners didn’t have that choice. Can’t help bad luck I suppose – being born at the wrong side of time when god was less loving.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Since God is All Powerful He has the authority and power to set rules. The Ultimate Rule Maker can make any rule He wishes.
He looks like a hypocrite for personally breaking them though, and some of his requests even go beyond what a moral and ethical person would do.
Originally Posted by Ringman
You in your finiteness try to inform us what is or isn’t loving. You, finite man, don’t have the credentials to decide what is or isn’t love, just like morals above.
An immoral, spiteful god is not worthy of respect or worship.
There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
You say He condemned man to death for a “minor indiscretion”. Being Infinite God would react in an infinite way to a command He gave. It may appear to be a “minor indiscretion” to you but to Him being Infinite it was as big a deal as your neighbor coming into your house and torturing your kid all day long and then finally killing him.
Seems like a significant over reaction to me. God punished everyone, even those not yet born, for a minor act of a couple of individuals.
Originally Posted by Ringman
One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later God sent a worldwide flood and killed all air breathing land creatures which didn’t get on the ship He had Noah build. He did this because man no longer accepted Him as Sovereign Lord. He owned them after all. It’s no different than you making a page of stick man drawings and burning it up.
Sounds like another unnecessary over reaction. Later he enabled a human sacrifice to provide for forgiveness of sins. Pity that the flood sinners didn’t have that choice. Can’t help bad luck I suppose – being born at the wrong side of time when god was less loving.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Since God is All Powerful He has the authority and power to set rules. The Ultimate Rule Maker can make any rule He wishes.
He looks like a hypocrite for personally breaking them though, and some of his requests even go beyond what a moral and ethical person would do.
Originally Posted by Ringman
You in your finiteness try to inform us what is or isn’t loving. You, finite man, don’t have the credentials to decide what is or isn’t love, just like morals above.
An immoral, spiteful god is not worthy of respect or worship.
You are being arrogant to think you can correctly judge an Infinite Being while being a dying finite man. You don't understand His actions and reactions can only be Grand.
The info provided by mrmarklin is good from a wiki or secular perspective. May be valid, idk.
But, I am concerned that you have a “character of God” issue. Any explanation from the Bible that addresses the “character issue” is complicated by your rejection of the Bible as a credible source of explanation.
For example…. A starting point for discussion of the Numbers issue would be the acknowledgements that “God exists” and that God interacts with humankind.
You have already made your opinions of the Bible known…..so…..would you be prepared to acknowledge some “givens” along the way?
A discussion can be fruitful but it seems that it will be a time waster unless you are prepared….. for the purposes of the discussion ….to accept the Biblical explanation and perspective of the Numbers issue.
In a related example some one might ask about what the Bible says about sin and salvation…. But some one might not like the answer and then dismiss the entire discussion by claiming that “Jesus never existed” so all all discussion and debate is for naught.
You have already claimed something like “justifying the Bible by using the Bible” is an invalid approach.
So, if the discussion of the Numbers issue and the “character of God” issue are to be addressed it can only be from a Biblical perspective.
In short…. The discussion about Numbers and the character of God can only be addressed by using the Bible. You have already made your secular judgment…. You must set that aside as this progresses.
I don’t think this would be a problem for you as you refer to the Numbers issue as a real issue that prevents people from either accepting Jesus or abandoning Jesus due to questions about God’s character. Why would you not want a “Bible based response” to a Bible issue?
So, give me some guidance here….
AS posted: Take a look at how Antlers responded.
He provided an honest answer regarding what he believed, why he believed it and how Numbers 31 and other passage like it in the Old Testament informed his beliefs.
That's what I'm asking of you. How does this fit into YOUR system of Christian Beliefs?
AS…..
I have always held antlers in very high regard and appreciate his posts. The post you refer to is typical of clear thinking and clear expression of ideas.
However, your post above is simply hollow. The issue of Numbers 31 has come up and it is clear that you and two “posters” do not really encourage dialogue. You three all take offense when someone calls baloney on you.
To my knowledge, DBT and mauserman have never revealed any of their own beliefs when it comes to creation and God. They only exist to provide inflammatory and poorly thought out rants against a “God” they likely do not believe in.
You did not pick up on my overture to explain what I thought about Numbers 31….. you did not agree with the premise to explain Numbers 31 in light of what the Bible teaches.
I offered to start the discussion about Numbers 31 with the premise that God is sovereign … if offered to view the idea that “God” is sovereign “just for the sake of argument.” You did not agree…..
Understanding and reconciling Numbers 31 requires an understanding and acceptance of the Sovereignty of God…an acceptance that there are moral absolutes and they are defined by God in the Bible…. An understanding of how he dealt with the nation of Israel and the tribes that were the mortal enemies of His people…. An understanding of the concept of “dispensations”….An understanding of the reality of sin and God’s rejection of sin….the fact that Satan is active on earth today as he was 3000 years ago ….. an understanding that God allows evil….an acknowledgement that God’s ways are higher than our ways and that His thoughts are greater than our thoughts…an understanding that the Father does indeed discipline his children to make them stronger and more “perfect” ……
The list could go on. Not all Biblical content nor concepts easily understood…
You will not understand and will never understand until you want to.
The fact of the matter is that you do not want to understand, you are simply playing a game of internet gotcha.
You say He condemned man to death for a “minor indiscretion”. Being Infinite God would react in an infinite way to a command He gave. It may appear to be a “minor indiscretion” to you but to Him being Infinite it was as big a deal as your neighbor coming into your house and torturing your kid all day long and then finally killing him.
Seems like a significant over reaction to me. God punished everyone, even those not yet born, for a minor act of a couple of individuals.
Originally Posted by Ringman
One thousand, six hundred, and fifty-six years later God sent a worldwide flood and killed all air breathing land creatures which didn’t get on the ship He had Noah build. He did this because man no longer accepted Him as Sovereign Lord. He owned them after all. It’s no different than you making a page of stick man drawings and burning it up.
Sounds like another unnecessary over reaction. Later he enabled a human sacrifice to provide for forgiveness of sins. Pity that the flood sinners didn’t have that choice. Can’t help bad luck I suppose – being born at the wrong side of time when god was less loving.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Since God is All Powerful He has the authority and power to set rules. The Ultimate Rule Maker can make any rule He wishes.
He looks like a hypocrite for personally breaking them though, and some of his requests even go beyond what a moral and ethical person would do.
Originally Posted by Ringman
You in your finiteness try to inform us what is or isn’t loving. You, finite man, don’t have the credentials to decide what is or isn’t love, just like morals above.
An immoral, spiteful god is not worthy of respect or worship.
You are being arrogant to think you can correctly judge an Infinite Being while being a dying finite man. You don't understand His actions and reactions can only be Grand.
That might work as a retort to shut down some fellow believers if they raised similar concerns but your statement is meaningless to me - about the only factual truth in what you wrote is that I am finite, as are you.
It appears that the conclusion is that you have no issue with the actions and recommendations of god as provided in the bible. Critical thinking and questioning not warranted, in fact would appear to be discouraged.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
The religious leaders who offered up Jesus to the authorities are NOT known today as Christians. They were Jews who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah.
The religious leaders who offered up Jesus to the authorities are NOT known today as Christians. They were Jews who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah.
No they were not. The Tribe of Judah, known as Jews, did not offer up Jesus. It was the religious clergymen known to us as Pharisees, Scribes, Lawyers, ect. Today we call them Christian clergymen, Preachers, Pastors, Religious Scholars, ect. Those modern day religious leaders also reject the teachings of Jesus in favor of the "law" or in todays language, the scriptures.
If any of them were of the tribe of judah then yes, but those that are not, no.
If you are doing a literal reading, then history shows that if there were any tribes in the middle east they were Caucasian for the simple fact that they traveled thru the Caucasus Mts leaving the middle east and got the name Caucasian because of it. While some Archeologist claim to having found proof of a desert people related to the 12 tribes, the majority of those having searched for proof while readily tell you that there is no proof of any people associated with 12 tribes. They never existed! It was, as Paul said, an allegory, or as God and Jesus said, a parable. Those 12 tribes were taken from the 12 Constellations, just as the 12 cranial nerves were, the 12 disciples, ect. It is as scripture indicates, it is a story that was and is written in the Stars for any and all to read/follow. Hence the reason the Stars were named by God. Here is a for instance. In Mark 5 there is a story about a ruler of a synagogue (Temple or Assembly) who's daughter died, she was known as the Daughter of the Assembly. So Jesus goes to the Assembly and calls the daughter by name, Talitha, which is not a jewish name, and tells the daughter to rise up. This is a story taken right out of Greek mythology from the story of the Great Bear known as Ursa Major. There is a Star in the RIGHT paw of the Bear called Talitha, daughter of the assembly. In the Bible story Talitha is how old? 12 yrs old. How many Constellations are there? 12! And in which paw is this Star? The RIGHT paw. To enter into the Upper room in the Temple you go thru the RIGHT door. Cast your net to the RIGHT side of the boat. The Kingdom is within you a dwells in the RIGHT hemisphere of the mind. The tribe of judah was to camp on the East side ...i.e. Right side where the Sun comes up. Judah was known as the Lion Tribe and the LIGHT Tribe. .......If therefore your eye be single, thy whole body will be full of light. Numbers 2:9 “All that were numbred in the Campe of Iudah, were an hundred thousand, and fourescore thousand, and sixe thousand, and foure hundred, throughout their armies: these shall first set foorth.” How many men from the camp of Judah? 186,282,400. The speed of light travels how many miles per second? 182,282,400 Is all this a coincidence? I don't think so.
All the finer points are intrestering, but I like to keep it simple.
I suppose this verse should be discarded then .
“And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”
For many people, the resistance to Christianity revolves around the question of whether or not it’s true. And for many people, the resistance to Christianity revolves around the question of whether or not it’s even good.
Many ‘Christians’ have reduced Christianity simply to what you believe rather than what you do. It’s almost like it’s become fire insurance for them. It’s not so much because they love God, or because they want to follow Jesus; they’re simply trying to avoid something undesirable in the afterlife, there’s a lot of fear involved. A lot of it is only about what it’s gonna do for them.
But the accounts of Jesus’ life aren’t only about the hereafter, and they’re not only about what you believe; it’s about how you live your life. And it’s about how you treat other people. And when it gets reduced to to “What’s in it for me…?”, despite other people…that’s not “good news of great joy for all people.” That’s not the original news, that’s the pick and choose news.
Pick and choose the parts that suit you. Pick and choose the parts that you think are gonna benefit you exclusively. If one’s news isn’t good for all people, then it’s not the original news; it’s not the original version of Christianity.
Jesus didn’t say that His followers would be characterized by their correct belief; He said they would be characterized by how they treat other people. Period. He modeled the behavior that His followers are supposed to exemplify.
“And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”
“And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.”
K22: Do you believe that the “single eye” that Jesus mentions refers specifically to the pineal gland of the brain, and that one finds the Kingdom of God by turning on the pineal gland in their brain (the “single eye”)…?
The info provided by mrmarklin is good from a wiki or secular perspective. May be valid, idk.
But, I am concerned that you have a “character of God” issue. Any explanation from the Bible that addresses the “character issue” is complicated by your rejection of the Bible as a credible source of explanation.
For example…. A starting point for discussion of the Numbers issue would be the acknowledgements that “God exists” and that God interacts with humankind.
You have already made your opinions of the Bible known…..so…..would you be prepared to acknowledge some “givens” along the way?
A discussion can be fruitful but it seems that it will be a time waster unless you are prepared….. for the purposes of the discussion ….to accept the Biblical explanation and perspective of the Numbers issue.
In a related example some one might ask about what the Bible says about sin and salvation…. But some one might not like the answer and then dismiss the entire discussion by claiming that “Jesus never existed” so all all discussion and debate is for naught.
You have already claimed something like “justifying the Bible by using the Bible” is an invalid approach.
So, if the discussion of the Numbers issue and the “character of God” issue are to be addressed it can only be from a Biblical perspective.
In short…. The discussion about Numbers and the character of God can only be addressed by using the Bible. You have already made your secular judgment…. You must set that aside as this progresses.
I don’t think this would be a problem for you as you refer to the Numbers issue as a real issue that prevents people from either accepting Jesus or abandoning Jesus due to questions about God’s character. Why would you not want a “Bible based response” to a Bible issue?
So, give me some guidance here…. AS posted: Take a look at how Antlers responded.
He provided an honest answer regarding what he believed, why he believed it and how Numbers 31 and other passage like it in the Old Testament informed his beliefs.
That's what I'm asking of you. How does this fit into YOUR system of Christian Beliefs?
AS…..
I have always held antlers in very high regard and appreciate his posts. The post you refer to is typical of clear thinking and clear expression of ideas.
However, your post above is simply hollow. The issue of Numbers 31 has come up and it is clear that you and two “posters” do not really encourage dialogue. You three all take offense when someone calls baloney on you.
To my knowledge, DBT and mauserman have never revealed any of their own beliefs when it comes to creation and God. They only exist to provide inflammatory and poorly thought out rants against a “God” they likely do not believe in.
You did not pick up on my overture to explain what I thought about Numbers 31….. you did not agree with the premise to explain Numbers 31 in light of what the Bible teaches.
I offered to start the discussion about Numbers 31 with the premise that God is sovereign … if offered to view the idea that “God” is sovereign “just for the sake of argument.” You did not agree…..
Understanding and reconciling Numbers 31 requires an understanding and acceptance of the Sovereignty of God…an acceptance that there are moral absolutes and they are defined by God in the Bible…. An understanding of how he dealt with the nation of Israel and the tribes that were the mortal enemies of His people…. An understanding of the concept of “dispensations”….An understanding of the reality of sin and God’s rejection of sin….the fact that Satan is active on earth today as he was 3000 years ago ….. an understanding that God allows evil….an acknowledgement that God’s ways are higher than our ways and that His thoughts are greater than our thoughts…an understanding that the Father does indeed discipline his children to make them stronger and more “perfect” ……
The list could go on. Not all Biblical content nor concepts easily understood…
You will not understand and will never understand until you want to.
The fact of the matter is that you do not want to understand, you are simply playing a game of internet gotcha.
Good Morning TF, I think you mis-understood my reply. I said:
Quote
He provided an honest answer regarding what he believed, why he believed it and how Numbers 31 and other passage like it in the Old Testament informed his beliefs.
That's what I'm asking of you. How does this fit into YOUR system of Christian Beliefs?
I asked what do you believe regarding this story, and how does it fit into YOUR Christian Beliefs. Full Stop. No Limitations. I intentionally asked it in a very open ended manner in order to NOT make it a "gotcha" question. If your beliefs are truly based in Scripture, so be it.
With that said, what ever answer you give will be subjected to a high level of scrutiny by myself and other skeptics on this forum. Specifically, I'll examine your position for congruency, does the left side match the right side, or in this case, does your response square the obvious differences between the gods of the Old and New Testaments. I wish you the best of luck in this endeavor, because I don't believe you can do it with honest argument. Marcion gave up as did our good friend Antlers. Even within the New Testament, it's difficult, it not impossible to honestly reconcile "Paul" with "Peter". The author of Luke tried with the addition of Acts, but it's a transparent post-hoc attempt that fails under close scrutiny.
When you talk of the "Sovereignty of God", I take it you are a follower of Divine Command Theory. There's nothing moral nor objective about Divine Command Theory. If it was both there would be only one Christianity, not tens of thousands of Christians denominations and sects. Everyday, Christians choose which Bible passage they will use to form their "objective" morality, but the choice of passages is purely subjective. Antler's in supporting his personal morality choose to toss the entire Old Testament. Other's, such as the Jews have done, could choose to toss the entire New Testament. Either is a subjective choice that leads to very different "objective" moralities. Even if you Choose the New Testament, you still have to reconcile Peter and Paul. Hastings tosses Paul, yet many Christians rely more on Paul then the Gospels, another subjective choice.
As for the alleged actions of Moses and his followers in Numbers 31, They were not moral. Today we call them War Crimes, and Crimes against Humanity. Keep in mind, the slaughter describes is in par with the Armenian Genocide by the Ottomans from 1915-1917. If you were jury of a Nuremburg type tribunal for mass slaughter of a quarter million people, and enslavement and rape of over 30,000 young girls, would you accept the defendants arguments their actions were completely moral because they were ordered to do so by their god, or would you follow the Nuremburg precedent that they are still guilty because they should have refused the orders?
That's the problem with Divine Command Theory. There is no bad action that cannot be justified through it, and why it is not the basis for a truly moral system.
K22: Do you believe that the “single eye” that Jesus mentions refers specifically to the pineal gland of the brain, and that one finds the Kingdom of God by turning on the pineal gland in their brain (the “single eye”)…?
Let us never forget, the devil divides us, and distracts us.
The devil the Jews borrowed from Zoroastrianism? The devil God created knowing in advance everything he would do?
Devil was the word evil that the symbolic language added a D to as they did with other words which in some cases they would drop a letter. It may have been at the hand of Zoroaster since his hand was in much of Bible writings. Devil is nothing more than a reference to the lower consciousness or the lower mind where ego and emotional thoughts rule us.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
I'm not actually a Gnostic, but like many beliefs, they have some truths imho.
I believe that the Bible was written by the Eastern Mystics and done in symbolic language so the intellectuals and religious leaders couldn't understand what was being written because they could only read it from a literal meaning. If you and I met up one day and I said lets go shoot the bull, would that mean we were going to go shoot a cow or go sit down and talk. That as you know is symbolic language and we use it every day, but if you interpreted it in a literal sense...........well know what those folks would say. Without any knowledge of numerology it is impossible to understand what is going on in the Bible. For instance...........this 7 yrs. of tribulation that the church teaches. It has never happened and it never will. This is where DBT and mauser9mm are on the right path. Why would this God of love and peace bring 7yrs of hell? He's not and that is not what it meant. The number 7 represents Divine Intervention. God will intervene in your tribulations thru the 7 Chakra (nerve centers) which run up the spine to the Pineal gland, the stone the builders rejected, which sits at the top. That is the upper room of the Temple that was not made by hands. This upper room is reached by meditation, "take no thought" .You then are taking that tribulation to God and He intervenes on your behalf, by overcoming the lower conscious/mind, ridding you of those tribulating thoughts that are controlling you.
Haven't read all 17 pages here but here's a little insight. Repentance means "to turn" as it's written in the text. It's a turning from one path down another. A change.
Remember that before the flood God repented for creating man as he "man" had become wicked. So God repented and turned in his outlook on mankind as we became wicked.
The Repentance we are led to is a turning away from sin and toward the son of God and righteousness. It's why we perish if we don't repent or turn from sin. Pretty easy to understand.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Haven't read all 17 pages here but here's a little insight. Repentance means "to turn" as it's written in the text. It's a turning from one path down another. A change.
Remember that before the flood God repented for creating man as he "man" had become wicked. So God repented and turned in his outlook on mankind as we became wicked.
The Repentance we are led to is a turning away from sin and toward the son of God and righteousness. It's why we perish if we don't repent or turn from sin. Pretty easy to understand.
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." (2Peter 3:9)
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
It is not my scriptural writings making the claim of allegory or parables. You'll have to take that up with God, Jesus, and Paul.
And what human operating from their left hemisphere can accomplish that?
To me, there’s a lot more to it all than just what happens when you die. There are implications for your life right now; it’s about a way of living and a lifestyle in the here and now. It’s a new mode of operation in this life.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
It is not my scriptural writings making the claim of allegory or parables. You'll have to take that up with God, Jesus, and Paul.
And what human operating from their left hemisphere can accomplish that?
You appear to be avoiding the question. What do you think is being described about the nature of Love? Do the descriptions mean something other than what is described?
Why describe love only to intend it to mean something else entirely? What is the point? If allegory, something else is meant....so what is the hidden message to be found in descriptions of love?
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
It is not my scriptural writings making the claim of allegory or parables. You'll have to take that up with God, Jesus, and Paul.
And what human operating from their left hemisphere can accomplish that?
You appear to be avoiding the question. What do you think is being described about the nature of Love? Do the descriptions mean something other than what is described?
Why describe love only to intend it to mean something else entirely? What is the point? If allegory, something else is meant....so what is the hidden message to be found in descriptions of love?
I am not avoiding the question. I guess I didn't understand that it was an actual question. But before I give an answer it is becoming obvious you don't believe any of what I've posted so why would I want to throw more pearls out there.
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
This. None are really good.
(Sorry, Im entering this late and it may have been previously explained.)
And if all you have to do to be saved and have everlasting life, why wont satan be there also? Doesnt satan believe?
Why this scripture then, S Cub, R Chuck, HC?
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall. enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth. the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Didnt those who said unto Him, Lord, Lord believe in Him?
I'll try to answer your question best I can.
Matthew 7:21... "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
I will try to break it down to Q & A so that it's easy enough for me to understand. When I get to a text I need to ask basic questions like...
Who is this addressed to? Answer:. The condemned/lost/ unregenerate Verse 21 b & 23
Were they saved by their works, but then lost it somehow how? A:. No, because Jesus " never knew" them to start with.
Did they make Jesus Lord of their life, or consider Him such? Jesus did not dispute that. 21, 22
Did they preach/ prophesy in Jesus Name? I would say yes, because again Jesus did not dispute this.
Did they do many "wonderful works" including casting out devil's?
What/ who were they trusting in for salvation? Why did they think they should be allowed into heaven? A: 22 Their own wonderful works. They had the same confusion that many preachers do today. They mixed faith in Jesus with faith in good works.
"[b]Not by works of righteousness which we have done[/u], but according to his mercy he saved us..." Titus 3:5
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. "Ephesians 2:8,9
What should they have done instead of "AND and in thy name done many wonderful works" kind of faith?
Jaguar,
Jesus gave us the answer to your question.
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40
He didn't say, "pr0phesy, keep the law, or do many good works, because it's too easy to just believe." He was going to be beaten half to death, tortured and the Father putting each and every one of our sins on Him to be punished as much as necessary. Then Christ gave Himself The Sacrifice for us so we could choose.
Is that not enough or is there something else you want to add? I honestly can't think of anything worthy of or compatible to that, can you?
Indeed. I can see how anyone can look at those verses and come to a conclusion of Christ plus good works, because that's what was taught to us about these more difficult passages. Once I step back and can break it down to bite size pieces, it starts making sense.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
It is not my scriptural writings making the claim of allegory or parables. You'll have to take that up with God, Jesus, and Paul.
And what human operating from their left hemisphere can accomplish that?
You appear to be avoiding the question. What do you think is being described about the nature of Love? Do the descriptions mean something other than what is described?
Why describe love only to intend it to mean something else entirely? What is the point? If allegory, something else is meant....so what is the hidden message to be found in descriptions of love?
I am not avoiding the question. I guess I didn't understand that it was an actual question. But before I give an answer it is becoming obvious you don't believe any of what I've posted so why would I want to throw more pearls out there.
You say you are not avoiding the question even while assuming that I won't accept what you say. Why not just explain and see what the response is?
An explanation is meant to clarify the meaning of a narrative by tying the elements of the narrative to a given translation.
What is the translation when we are told that God is Love and Love is not vindictive, does not hold account of wrongs, always perseveres, always forgives, etc.....what are we being told, if not the attributes of Love and the nature of God?
Indeed. I can see how anyone can look at those verses and come to a conclusion of Christ plus good works, because that's what was taught to us about these more difficult passages. Once I step back and can break it down to bite size pieces, it starts making sense.
Apparently there is no real choice:
“for it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2:8-9).
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
This. None are really good.
(Sorry, Im entering this late and it may have been previously explained.)
And if all you have to do to be saved and have everlasting life, why wont satan be there also? Doesnt satan believe?
Why this scripture then, S Cub, R Chuck, HC?
Fair question. Here is a response to the other verse you quoted. I have a lot of notes that I can post, but it will save us both time to watch a brief video. I'm interested in your thoughts about this and the previous response to your question.
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
This. None are really good.
(Sorry, Im entering this late and it may have been previously explained.)
And if all you have to do to be saved and have everlasting life, why wont satan be there also? Doesnt satan believe?
Why this scripture then, S Cub, R Chuck, HC?
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall. enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth. the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Didnt those who said unto Him, Lord, Lord believe in Him?
I'll try to answer your question best I can.
Matthew 7:21... "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
I will try to break it down to Q & A so that it's easy enough for me to understand. When I get to a text I need to ask basic questions like...
Who is this addressed to? Answer:. The condemned/lost/ unregenerate Verse 21 b & 23
Were they saved by their works, but then lost it somehow how? A:. No, because Jesus " never knew" them to start with.
Did they make Jesus Lord of their life, or consider Him such? Jesus did not dispute that. 21, 22
Did they preach/ prophesy in Jesus Name? I would say yes, because again Jesus did not dispute this.
Did they do many "wonderful works" including casting out devil's?
What/ who were they trusting in for salvation? Why did they think they should be allowed into heaven? A: 22 Their own wonderful works. They had the same confusion that many preachers do today. They mixed faith in Jesus with faith in good works.
"[b]Not by works of righteousness which we have done[/u], but according to his mercy he saved us..." Titus 3:5
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. "Ephesians 2:8,9
What should they have done instead of "AND and in thy name done many wonderful works" kind of faith?
Jaguar,
Jesus gave us the answer to your question.
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40
He didn't say, "pr0phesy, keep the law, or do many good works, because it's too easy to just believe." He was going to be beaten half to death, tortured and the Father putting each and every one of our sins on Him to be punished as much as necessary. Then Christ gave Himself The Sacrifice for us so we could choose.
Is that not enough or is there something else you want to add? I honestly can't think of anything worthy of or compatible to that, can you?
So how do you know they didnt believe first, before doing their good works?
Wouldnt they have to believe in the power of Him to use His name to cast out demons?
If they believed in the power of His name didnt they believe in who He was, who He had to be?
Seems pretty obvious to me that they believed in Him, and now they are cast into the lot of vipers who deny Him.
Is that just?
Didnt they say unto Him, Lord, Lord? Is that not confessing Him with their own mouths?
John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.
Indeed. I can see how anyone can look at those verses and come to a conclusion of Christ plus good works, because that's what was taught to us about these more difficult passages. Once I step back and can break it down to bite size pieces, it starts making sense.
Apparently there is no real choice:
“for it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Predestination, anyone?
Nope.
He knew you in your mothers womb. He knew what you and Cain would do. He knew who would reject Him. Still, He is guiltless, because He gave even you a way.
It was His gift to us believers, that we do believe.
If one does not believe and yet wants the gift of salvation, they can have it by believing, but they can not make themselves believe.
Therefore, Matthew 7:7-8
7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
To the OP, to the initial question, I think yes. I do not think you can accept salvation without understanding the need for it. I don't think you can understand the need for salvation without truly understanding your own sin nature. I do not believe you have to confess them to mortal man. I do think you have to put them on the table before God, to "own" them before Him, before you can truly ask for forgiveness for them.
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
This. None are really good.
(Sorry, Im entering this late and it may have been previously explained.)
And if all you have to do to be saved and have everlasting life, why wont satan be there also? Doesnt satan believe?
Why this scripture then, S Cub, R Chuck, HC?
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall. enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth. the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Didnt those who said unto Him, Lord, Lord believe in Him?
I'll try to answer your question best I can.
Matthew 7:21... "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
I will try to break it down to Q & A so that it's easy enough for me to understand. When I get to a text I need to ask basic questions like...
Who is this addressed to? Answer:. The condemned/lost/ unregenerate Verse 21 b & 23
Were they saved by their works, but then lost it somehow how? A:. No, because Jesus " never knew" them to start with.
Did they make Jesus Lord of their life, or consider Him such? Jesus did not dispute that. 21, 22
Did they preach/ prophesy in Jesus Name? I would say yes, because again Jesus did not dispute this.
Did they do many "wonderful works" including casting out devil's?
What/ who were they trusting in for salvation? Why did they think they should be allowed into heaven? A: 22 Their own wonderful works. They had the same confusion that many preachers do today. They mixed faith in Jesus with faith in good works.
"[b]Not by works of righteousness which we have done[/u], but according to his mercy he saved us..." Titus 3:5
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. "Ephesians 2:8,9
What should they have done instead of "AND and in thy name done many wonderful works" kind of faith?
Jaguar,
Jesus gave us the answer to your question.
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40
He didn't say, "pr0phesy, keep the law, or do many good works, because it's too easy to just believe." He was going to be beaten half to death, tortured and the Father putting each and every one of our sins on Him to be punished as much as necessary. Then Christ gave Himself The Sacrifice for us so we could choose.
Is that not enough or is there something else you want to add? I honestly can't think of anything worthy of or compatible to that, can you?
So how do you know they didnt believe first, before doing their good works?
Wouldnt they have to believe in the power of Him to use His name to cast out demons?
If they believed in the power of His name didnt they believe in who He was, who He had to be?
Seems pretty obvious to me that they believed in Him, and now they are cast into the lot of vipers who deny Him.
Is that just?
Didnt they say unto Him, Lord, Lord? Is that not confessing Him with their own mouths?
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
There's some who certainly call Him Lord, who mix faith in Christ with faith in their own works, as we see here. Many Epistles address this in one way or another. I think that the Books of Hebrews ie 10, and Galatians chapter 1 cover the keeping of the law as it applies to the subject. These books are written to believers who some had been convinced that they were no longer saved unless they kept some portions of the law.
The gospel of John (KJV) Is the one book devoted to answer your question. It is an honest question with an honest answer 20:30-31. It's only 21 short chapters. I've taken this as a personal"challenge" many times to prove it to myself before I asked others to.
Underline in a hard copy KJV the various forms of the word believe (s, eth, ed). After reading the chapter, write the total down with the chapter number. After reading the 21 chapters, you will have just 21 numbers to add. Then do the same for the word "repent / repentance". Tell me what you have for the sum totals for that book when you are done. I hope that this will be as much a blessing to you as it is for me.
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
This. None are really good.
(Sorry, Im entering this late and it may have been previously explained.)
And if all you have to do to be saved and have everlasting life, why wont satan be there also? Doesnt satan believe?
Why this scripture then, S Cub, R Chuck, HC
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall. enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth. the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Didnt those who said unto Him, Lord, Lord believe in Him?
I'll try to answer your question best I can.
Matthew 7:21... "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
I will try to break it down to Q & A so that it's easy enough for me to understand. When I get to a text I need to ask basic questions like...
Who is this addressed to? Answer:. The condemned/lost/ unregenerate Verse 21 b & 23
SO, HIS REQUIREMENTS FOR THE JUST AND CONDEMNED/LOST ARE DIFFERENT?
Were they saved by their works, but then lost it somehow how? A:. No, because Jesus " never knew" them to start with.
Did they make Jesus Lord of their life, or consider Him such? Jesus did not dispute that. 21, 22
Did they preach/ prophesy in Jesus Name? I would say yes, because again Jesus did not dispute this.
Did they do many "wonderful works" including casting out devil's?
What/ who were they trusting in for salvation? Why did they think they should be allowed into heaven? A: 22 Their own wonderful works. They had the same confusion that many preachers do today. They mixed faith in Jesus with faith in good works. SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THEY WERE SURPRISED AND WERE ONLY SHOWING THAT THEY BELIEVED IN HIM
"[b]Not by works of righteousness which we have done[/u], but according to his mercy he saved us..." Titus 3:5
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. "Ephesians 2:8,9
What should they have done instead of "AND and in thy name done many wonderful works" kind of faith?
IM WAITING FOR YOU TO TELL ME.
Jaguar,
Jesus gave us the answer to your question.
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40
He didn't say, "pr0phesy, keep the law, or do many good works, because it's too easy to just believe." He was going to be beaten half to death, tortured and the Father putting each and every one of our sins on Him to be punished as much as necessary. Then Christ gave Himself The Sacrifice for us so we could choose.
Is that not enough or is there something else you want to add?
SO, IF YOU ARE NOT A GENTLE, LOVING EXAMPLE OF THE 9 FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT YOU'RE JUST SOL? IF YOU EVER DECIDE TO CUSS SOMEONE OUT EVEN THOUGH YOU KNOW HE DOESNT WANT YOU TO AND YOU DO AS YOU WISH INSTEAD OF WHAT HE WISHES YOU'RE JUST SOL?
A WHOLE LOT OF BELIEVERS CANT SAY THEY ARE COVERED IN THIS: … 22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, and self-control.
HC, my replies to your post are in CAPITAL letters above.
Can you say that if you were starving you wouldnt steal an apple off your neighbors tree?
IOW, HC, There are a lot of believers who believe compared to the very few who actually make HIM ruler or Lord of their life.
So, i guess most believers best repent.
Now, what does that mean? To be sorry for your sins, or turn from them and live as the scripture i quoted said?
If you repent of your sin and ever follow your own desire, did you truly repent?
So, that leaves us with You have to believe AND DOETH THE WILL OF THE FATHER (which the suckers He said He didnt know didnt evidently do.)
How many times have I answered your question. I told you if you ask me a question about Jesus or God's Word I will use God's Word to help answer a question.
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
There's some who certainly call Him Lord, who mix faith in Christ with faith in their own works, as we see here. Many Epistles address this in one way or another. I think that the Books of Hebrews ie 10, and Galatians chapter 1 cover the keeping of the law as it applies to the subject. These books are written to believers who some had been convinced that they were no longer saved unless they kept some portions of the law.
The gospel of John (KJV) Is the one book devoted to answer your question. It is an honest question with an honest answer 20:30-31. It's only 21 short chapters. I've taken this as a personal"challenge" many times to prove it to myself before I asked others to.
Underline in a hard copy KJV the various forms of the word believe (s, eth, ed). After reading the chapter, write the total down with the chapter number. After reading the 21 chapters, you will have just 21 numbers to add. Then do the same for the word "repent / repentance". Tell me what you have for the sum totals for that book when you are done. I hope that this will be as much a blessing to you as it is for me.
You want us readers to read John. For some reason you think it's all there. But how many times in Matthew, Mark, or Luke do you find, "In the beginning was the Word......."? You try to use a portion of God's Word to distort God's Word. What happens to people who distort God's Word. 2 Peter 3:16 says they distort God's Word to their own destruction.
You seem to be caught up in the Law of Moses. And then distort that to conflate the New Testament instructions with the Moses Law. There are many things God wants believers to do to demonstrate they are believers. If these are not present they are NOT believers. You used Hebrews 10. Take a look at Hebrews 3:18-19. Here God's Word defines belief. It reads, "And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those were were DISOBEDIENT? And we see that they were not able to enter because of UNBELIEF."
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
There's some who certainly call Him Lord, who mix faith in Christ with faith in their own works, as we see here. Many Epistles address this in one way or another. I think that the Books of Hebrews ie 10, and Galatians chapter 1 cover the keeping of the law as it applies to the subject. These books are written to believers who some had been convinced that they were no longer saved unless they kept some portions of the law.
The gospel of John (KJV) Is the one book devoted to answer your question. It is an honest question with an honest answer 20:30-31. It's only 21 short chapters. I've taken this as a personal"challenge" many times to prove it to myself before I asked others to.
Underline in a hard copy KJV the various forms of the word believe (s, eth, ed). After reading the chapter, write the total down with the chapter number. After reading the 21 chapters, you will have just 21 numbers to add. Then do the same for the word "repent / repentance". Tell me what you have for the sum totals for that book when you are done. I hope that this will be as much a blessing to you as it is for me.
You want us readers to read John. For some reason you think it's all there. But how many times in Matthew, Mark, or Luke do you find, "In the beginning was the Word......."? You try to use a portion of God's Word to distort God's Word. What happens to people who distort God's Word. 2 Peter 3:16 says they distort God's Word to their own destruction.
You seem to be caught up in the Law of Moses. And then distort that to conflate the New Testament instructions with the Moses Law. There are many things God wants believers to do to demonstrate they are believers. If these are not present they are NOT believers. You used Hebrews 10. Take a look at Hebrews 3:18-19. Here God's Word defines belief. It reads, "And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those were were DISOBEDIENT? And we see that they were not able to enter because of UNBELIEF."
If you want to apply what I said to Jaguar, you might want to at least read the reference I started with.
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." Theme of this book. Some may argue, 3:16, but either way, Jesus is THE way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but by Him."...... Not the law of the Old Covenant.
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
There's some who certainly call Him Lord, who mix faith in Christ with faith in their own works, as we see here. Many Epistles address this in one way or another. I think that the Books of Hebrews ie 10, and Galatians chapter 1 cover the keeping of the law as it applies to the subject. These books are written to believers who some had been convinced that they were no longer saved unless they kept some portions of the law.
The gospel of John (KJV) Is the one book devoted to answer your question. It is an honest question with an honest answer 20:30-31. It's only 21 short chapters. I've taken this as a personal"challenge" many times to prove it to myself before I asked others to.
Underline in a hard copy KJV the various forms of the word believe (s, eth, ed). After reading the chapter, write the total down with the chapter number. After reading the 21 chapters, you will have just 21 numbers to add. Then do the same for the word "repent / repentance". Tell me what you have for the sum totals for that book when you are done. I hope that this will be as much a blessing to you as it is for me.
You want us readers to read John. For some reason you think it's all there. But how many times in Matthew, Mark, or Luke do you find, "In the beginning was the Word......."? You try to use a portion of God's Word to distort God's Word. What happens to people who distort God's Word. 2 Peter 3:16 says they distort God's Word to their own destruction.
You seem to be caught up in the Law of Moses. And then distort that to conflate the New Testament instructions with the Moses Law. There are many things God wants believers to do to demonstrate they are believers. If these are not present they are NOT believers. You used Hebrews 10. Take a look at Hebrews 3:18-19. Here God's Word defines belief. It reads, "And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those were were DISOBEDIENT? And we see that they were not able to enter because of UNBELIEF."
Our two crazies believers arguing about which one of them is the true believer and which one will go to hell.
If you want to apply what I said to Jaguar, you might want to at least read the reference I started with.
"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." Theme of this book. Some may argue, 3:16, but either way, Jesus is THE way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father but by Him."...... Not the law of the Old Covenant.
And what does Jesus, Who is the Savior, tell us recorded at the end of Luke? Here It is....Luke 24:46-47,
"And Jesus said to them, 'Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations....'"
No, a decent good person is one who practices the Golden rule as much as possible.
Do you think if you're "good enough", you're GTG?
What did Christ die for if you can make it in on your own account?
+1
All men sin and fall short of the standard. Anyone claiming to be good and decent a) deludes themselves and b) tries to replace God's standard with their own. Hint: it's gonna backfire.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT. He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure. I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
DBT fear not, I will answer your question soon as I get some time. I may be 70 but I still work.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT.
I am going by the Good Book as all can see from the past year. Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?"
He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure.
The Bible translation I use is correct. Faith and believe are terms that convey trust to the unbeliever so they will be a BELIEVER, Not a doubter. Please read the gospel of John and see if you can come away thinking that the reader should be"not sure" Who Jesus is and what He did to obtain our salvation.
I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
To the OP, to the initial question, I think yes. I do not think you can accept salvation without understanding the need for it. I don't think you can understand the need for salvation without truly understanding your own sin nature. I do not believe you have to confess them to mortal man. I do think you have to put them on the table before God, to "own" them before Him, before you can truly ask for forgiveness for them.
Tom
Thanks Tom. In case you didn't read my posts on the subject, I just want to leave you with my personal view on this subject. I believe in repentance too. There's a distinction that must be made by the use and context. First, the word "repent" doesn't mean "turn from your sins." God repented many times and we know that God does not sin. As the term applies to salvation I will provide the short video below.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT.
I am going by the Good Book as all can see from the past year. Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?"
He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure.
The Bible translation I use is correct. Faith and believe are terms that convey trust to the unbeliever so they will be a BELIEVER, Not a doubter. Please read the gospel of John and see if you can come away thinking that the reader should be"not sure" Who Jesus is and what He did to obtain our salvation.
I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
Don't you wish you or your translation was correct.
Quote
Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT.
I am going by the Good Book as all can see from the past year. Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?"
He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure.
The Bible translation I use is correct. Faith and believe are terms that convey trust to the unbeliever so they will be a BELIEVER, Not a doubter. Please read the gospel of John and see if you can come away thinking that the reader should be"not sure" Who Jesus is and what He did to obtain our salvation.
I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
Don't you wish you or your translation was correct.
Quote
Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
He did not say that he was not good. His question should have gotten that man to see Who was actually before him. Jesus says, "there is none good but one, that is, God."
Jesus is not admitting to sin, but I can share more than one O.T. and N.T. statement about all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Jesus, the sinless sacrifice, went to the cross bearing our sins. After His resurrection, He spent time with over 500 people to prove this before going up to His earned glory to be with the Father.
I think that there must be a lot of sermons across the country applying this as a passage simply on humility. I've heard one say that if Jesus Christ didn't think He was good, then so much worse are we. However, this is a mistaken presumption. There are many references to not only God being good, but Jesus as well. In fact, Jesus would not be Christ if He were not good. Is He not the "Good Shepherd?" Rather than a mock humility, I look at what the man called Jesus when he approached Him....."good master." The rabbis were calling themselves masters/ teachers. It doesn't look to me like this man realized that Jesus was not only a master, but the One and only Christ. Jesus often asked questions to get the audience to think and come to their own conclusion. He taught to multitudes and healed many, even creating food for thousands at a time. Any old Rabbi doesn't do that. Any ol master isn't good either.....but God is.
One last thing is that the man wanted to inherit eternal life. Jesus must have known that he was trusting in his ability to keep the law, so Jesus threw him a curve ball. He approached him about covetousness and giving up that which he valued. Rather than realizing his own short coming and that He really did need the Christ, he went away sorrowful. When we try to keep all the commandments to have eternal life, we all fail. I thank God that He is Savior, because I need Him.
The nature of Love is described in the NT. We are told that god is Love. According to the rules of Love, a blood sacrifice is not required, love we are told forgives unconditionally. To have someone killed as the cost of forgiveness is not an act of love.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT.
I am going by the Good Book as all can see from the past year. Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?"
He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure.
The Bible translation I use is correct. Faith and believe are terms that convey trust to the unbeliever so they will be a BELIEVER, Not a doubter. Please read the gospel of John and see if you can come away thinking that the reader should be"not sure" Who Jesus is and what He did to obtain our salvation.
I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
Don't you wish you or your translation was correct.
Quote
Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
He did not say that he was not good. His question should have gotten that man to see Who was actually before him. Jesus says, "there is none good but one, that is, God."
Jesus is not admitting to sin, but I can share more than one O.T. and N.T. statement about all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Jesus, the sinless sacrifice, went to the cross bearing our sins. After His resurrection, He spent time with over 500 people to prove this before going up to His earned glory to be with the Father.
I think that there must be a lot of sermons across the country applying this as a passage simply on humility. I've heard one say that if Jesus Christ didn't think He was good, then so much worse are we. However, this is a mistaken presumption. There are many references to not only God being good, but Jesus as well. In fact, Jesus would not be Christ if He were not good. Is He not the "Good Shepherd?" Rather than a mock humility, I look at what the man called Jesus when he approached Him....."good master." The rabbis were calling themselves masters/ teachers. It doesn't look to me like this man realized that Jesus was not only a master, but the One and only Christ. Jesus often asked questions to get the audience to think and come to their own conclusion. He taught to multitudes and healed many, even creating food for thousands at a time. Any old Rabbi doesn't do that. Any ol master isn't good either.....but God is.
One last thing is that the man wanted to inherit eternal life. Jesus must have known that he was trusting in his ability to keep the law, so Jesus threw him a curve ball. He approached him about covetousness and giving up that which he valued. Rather than realizing his own short coming and that He really did need the Christ, he went away sorrowful. When we try to keep all the commandments to have eternal life, we all fail. I thank God that He is Savior, because I need Him.
What utter BS. You read this from a humanized literal reading and when you can't make come out the way you want it to you start trying explain it away with some sort of dazzling bull [bleep]. Prove that Jesus is God. And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the [a]Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
Jesus claimed to be God. See John 8. I think around verse 58.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
The "love" being referenced here is not the kind of love we as ego driven humans think it is. When we talk of God's love we do it from OUR stand point, how we intellectually or emotionally think it should be and that is why we are instructed to "take no thought" or "be still". When we try to describe or explain what God or Christ is saying or what a scripture means from our reading of it we are literally sinning. The word "sin" was taken from the Chaldeans which meant the Moon or emotion, this was represented by the Goddess Ur. If you study any "mazzaroth" teachings, to use a Bible word, it would not take long before you would see that the planet ruling the Constellation Cancer is the Moon, hence the term "Moon Child" used for those born June 21 - July 22. Those Cancer folks can be very emotion driven. So the writers used the symbolic language word sin to say that your emotions and thoughts will keep you from seeing the face of God, hence the reason for "take no thought". When it says to go into your closet and SHUT THE DOOR it is telling you to shut the door on your thoughts so that in the stillness God can talk to you. But we read the bible literally and interpret prayer to mean you talking to God, even down to praying out loud for all to hear how well we pray or look at me I pray to God, can you hear me. We even do it in the market place, i.e. the Church where some, Preachers, are marketing their wares. If you think that meditation is not the way to hear God or even that meditation is easy, then there's the challenge. Try it for 15 min. and have no thoughts or feelings when you do...............NONE! Do it 3 or 4 times a week until you can do it without any thoughts, then you will know what I am telling you and what Christ instructed us to do. This doesn't ever require faith which is worthless anyway. You will know. Then you will understand the true meaning of Love from God's stand point.
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
Jesus claimed to be God. See John 8. I think around verse 58.
Yes, and he in me and I in him..........that makes me the same.
20At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you
The nature of Love is described in the NT. We are told that god is Love. According to the rules of Love, a blood sacrifice is not required, love we are told forgives unconditionally. To have someone killed as the cost of forgiveness is not an act of love.
There's different kinds of love. As God applied it to humanity, Christ demonstrated perfectly.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wabigoon,
What do you think?
Originally Posted by wabigoon
What do I think?
John 3:16 is what I think.
Thanks 🌄☕🙂👍
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son"....
How many times have I answered your question. I told you if you ask me a question about Jesus or God's Word I will use God's Word to help answer a question.
[/quote]
Quit being lukewarm and evasive. You aren’t being asked to quote the whole New Testament.
A simple yes or a simple no. Is Baptism required for Salvation?
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
The "love" being referenced here is not the kind of love we as ego driven humans think it is. When we talk of God's love we do it from OUR stand point, how we intellectually or emotionally think it should be and that is why we are instructed to "take no thought" or "be still". When we try to describe or explain what God or Christ is saying or what a scripture means from our reading of it we are literally sinning. The word "sin" was taken from the Chaldeans which meant the Moon or emotion, this was represented by the Goddess Ur. If you study any "mazzaroth" teachings, to use a Bible word, it would not take long before you would see that the planet ruling the Constellation Cancer is the Moon, hence the term "Moon Child" used for those born June 21 - July 22. Those Cancer folks can be very emotion driven. So the writers used the symbolic language word sin to say that your emotions and thoughts will keep you from seeing the face of God, hence the reason for "take no thought". When it says to go into your closet and SHUT THE DOOR it is telling you to shut the door on your thoughts so that in the stillness God can talk to you. But we read the bible literally and interpret prayer to mean you talking to God, even down to praying out loud for all to hear how well we pray or look at me I pray to God, can you hear me. We even do it in the market place, i.e. the Church where some, Preachers, are marketing their wares. If you think that meditation is not the way to hear God or even that meditation is easy, then there's the challenge. Try it for 15 min. and have no thoughts or feelings when you do...............NONE! Do it 3 or 4 times a week until you can do it without any thoughts, then you will know what I am telling you and what Christ instructed us to do. This doesn't ever require faith which is worthless anyway. You will know. Then you will understand the true meaning of Love from God's stand point.
The verses that I quoted carefully describe the attributes of love. Love does not hold a record of wrongs, love is not jealous, love is not vindictive, does not punish, etc, etc.
This is not some special, woopy do, esoteric, hidden message to be seen by those who 'have the eyes,' but simply a description of the nature of Love, and we are clearly told "God is Love."
You seem to trying to transform what is clearly being described about love and god into what you want it to mean....
How many times have I answered your question. I told you if you ask me a question about Jesus or God's Word I will use God's Word to help answer a question.
Quit being lukewarm and evasive. You aren’t being asked to quote the whole New Testament.
A simple yes or a simple no. Is Baptism required for Salvation?
Which is it?[/quote]
Again I will refer you to The One in charge of Salvation. Jesus says, "'The one who believes and is baptized will be saved.'"
The nature of Love is described in the NT. We are told that god is Love. According to the rules of Love, a blood sacrifice is not required, love we are told forgives unconditionally. To have someone killed as the cost of forgiveness is not an act of love.
There's different kinds of love. As God applied it to humanity, Christ demonstrated perfectly. ..
It is the nature of love that is being described.
Again:
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
Jesus was righteousness personified. And His righteousness wasn’t a stand apart holier than thou attitude, His righteousness wasn’t praying all the right kind of prayers, and His righteousness wasn’t walking around only quoting scripture to everyone. His righteousness was Jesus in motion, it was Jesus in action. He put other people first.
He told His followers that to be great in His kingdom, they had to serve others. He told them they could be great in His kingdom if they were willing to serve others.
In all the other kingdoms of this world, the person at the top who has all the resources and power leverages their resources and power to get more resources and power, to the detriment of everybody else.
Not so with Him.
He mailed it clear to His followers that He didn’t come to be served by others, but to serve others. And then later He washed their dirty stinkin’ feet. And I’d imagine it takes a long time to wash 12 pairs of dirty stinkin’ feet. He set an example for all of His followers, and let’s them know that His kingdom is an others first kingdom.
Next time you go to the assembly of believers in the wilderness church, may I suggest taking a N.T. and highlighter?
Every time Jesus quoted O.T. Scripture, use the highlighter. You will start to see the red letters bathed in yellow throughout the gospels. Read further and you'll see that much of the rest are descriptions of O.T. doctrines.
My quotations on this forum are few compared to Jesus of the Bible.
And here is the Lamb's take....................And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.”
Don't you think Jesus is good?
I don't know if he was or not and neither do you factually, so all we have left to go on is what was written in that book. He himself says he is not good. That was repeated by 3 of the writers in the NT.
I am going by the Good Book as all can see from the past year. Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?"
He even says there are none righteous either, so there you are. I have noticed where it says that the unjust get to go to the wedding supper. So I'm not worried one bit about going any where after death. God is not a god of the dead and everything promised can be had right now and I know that to be true. Don't even need "faith" to know that since faith means you are not sure.
The Bible translation I use is correct. Faith and believe are terms that convey trust to the unbeliever so they will be a BELIEVER, Not a doubter. Please read the gospel of John and see if you can come away thinking that the reader should be"not sure" Who Jesus is and what He did to obtain our salvation.
I do find it interesting that you refuse to follow Christ's instructions but find it necessary to preach to me or whomever and as God in your book wrote, He knew you not. Never called you, never asked you to do anything of the sort.
Don't you wish you or your translation was correct.
Quote
Where exactly did Jesus say he "is NOT good?
I posted this before, but just for your convenience and so you show all your churchy buddies what you found, I'll post one of them this last time. Go find the rest yourself.
Mark 10:18 18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
He did not say that he was not good. His question should have gotten that man to see Who was actually before him. Jesus says, "there is none good but one, that is, God."
Jesus is not admitting to sin, but I can share more than one O.T. and N.T. statement about all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Jesus, the sinless sacrifice, went to the cross bearing our sins. After His resurrection, He spent time with over 500 people to prove this before going up to His earned glory to be with the Father.
I think that there must be a lot of sermons across the country applying this as a passage simply on humility. I've heard one say that if Jesus Christ didn't think He was good, then so much worse are we. However, this is a mistaken presumption. There are many references to not only God being good, but Jesus as well. In fact, Jesus would not be Christ if He were not good. Is He not the "Good Shepherd?" Rather than a mock humility, I look at what the man called Jesus when he approached Him....."good master." The rabbis were calling themselves masters/ teachers. It doesn't look to me like this man realized that Jesus was not only a master, but the One and only Christ. Jesus often asked questions to get the audience to think and come to their own conclusion. He taught to multitudes and healed many, even creating food for thousands at a time. Any old Rabbi doesn't do that. Any ol master isn't good either.....but God is.
One last thing is that the man wanted to inherit eternal life. Jesus must have known that he was trusting in his ability to keep the law, so Jesus threw him a curve ball. He approached him about covetousness and giving up that which he valued. Rather than realizing his own short coming and that He really did need the Christ, he went away sorrowful. When we try to keep all the commandments to have eternal life, we all fail. I thank God that He is Savior, because I need Him.
What utter BS. You read this from a humanized literal reading and when you can't make come out the way you want it to you start trying explain it away with some sort of dazzling bull [bleep]. Prove that Jesus is God. And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the [a]Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
Next time you go to the assembly of believers in the wilderness church, may I suggest taking a N.T. and highlighter?
Every time Jesus quoted O.T. Scripture, use the highlighter. You will start to see the red letters bathed in yellow throughout the gospels. Read further and you'll see that much of the rest are descriptions of O.T. doctrines.
My quotations on this forum are few compared to Jesus of the Bible.
He would be better off with a copy of the Prophet Zoroaster writings. Much more accurate.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
The "love" being referenced here is not the kind of love we as ego driven humans think it is. When we talk of God's love we do it from OUR stand point, how we intellectually or emotionally think it should be and that is why we are instructed to "take no thought" or "be still". When we try to describe or explain what God or Christ is saying or what a scripture means from our reading of it we are literally sinning. The word "sin" was taken from the Chaldeans which meant the Moon or emotion, this was represented by the Goddess Ur. If you study any "mazzaroth" teachings, to use a Bible word, it would not take long before you would see that the planet ruling the Constellation Cancer is the Moon, hence the term "Moon Child" used for those born June 21 - July 22. Those Cancer folks can be very emotion driven. So the writers used the symbolic language word sin to say that your emotions and thoughts will keep you from seeing the face of God, hence the reason for "take no thought". When it says to go into your closet and SHUT THE DOOR it is telling you to shut the door on your thoughts so that in the stillness God can talk to you. But we read the bible literally and interpret prayer to mean you talking to God, even down to praying out loud for all to hear how well we pray or look at me I pray to God, can you hear me. We even do it in the market place, i.e. the Church where some, Preachers, are marketing their wares. If you think that meditation is not the way to hear God or even that meditation is easy, then there's the challenge. Try it for 15 min. and have no thoughts or feelings when you do...............NONE! Do it 3 or 4 times a week until you can do it without any thoughts, then you will know what I am telling you and what Christ instructed us to do. This doesn't ever require faith which is worthless anyway. You will know. Then you will understand the true meaning of Love from God's stand point.
The verses that I quoted carefully describe the attributes of love. Love does not hold a record of wrongs, love is not jealous, love is not vindictive, does not punish, etc, etc.
This is not some special, woopy do, esoteric, hidden message to be seen by those who 'have the eyes,' but simply a description of the nature of Love, and we are clearly told "God is Love."
You seem to trying to transform what is clearly being described about love and god into what you want it to mean....
So you are saying that if the verses are talking about killing civilizations, raping women, and killing children, then it can be "some, woopy do , esoteric, hidden message, but if it is talking about love then is not. I'm curious how you know this.
How many times have I answered your question. I told you if you ask me a question about Jesus or God's Word I will use God's Word to help answer a question.
Quit being lukewarm and evasive. You aren’t being asked to quote the whole New Testament.
A simple yes or a simple no. Is Baptism required for Salvation?
Which is it?
Again I will refer you to The One in charge of Salvation. Jesus says, "'The one who believes and is baptized will be saved.'" [/quote]
Still lukewarm, tepid and wishy washy.
The question remains. Is Baptism necessary for Salvation?
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
The "love" being referenced here is not the kind of love we as ego driven humans think it is. When we talk of God's love we do it from OUR stand point, how we intellectually or emotionally think it should be and that is why we are instructed to "take no thought" or "be still". When we try to describe or explain what God or Christ is saying or what a scripture means from our reading of it we are literally sinning. The word "sin" was taken from the Chaldeans which meant the Moon or emotion, this was represented by the Goddess Ur. If you study any "mazzaroth" teachings, to use a Bible word, it would not take long before you would see that the planet ruling the Constellation Cancer is the Moon, hence the term "Moon Child" used for those born June 21 - July 22. Those Cancer folks can be very emotion driven. So the writers used the symbolic language word sin to say that your emotions and thoughts will keep you from seeing the face of God, hence the reason for "take no thought". When it says to go into your closet and SHUT THE DOOR it is telling you to shut the door on your thoughts so that in the stillness God can talk to you. But we read the bible literally and interpret prayer to mean you talking to God, even down to praying out loud for all to hear how well we pray or look at me I pray to God, can you hear me. We even do it in the market place, i.e. the Church where some, Preachers, are marketing their wares. If you think that meditation is not the way to hear God or even that meditation is easy, then there's the challenge. Try it for 15 min. and have no thoughts or feelings when you do...............NONE! Do it 3 or 4 times a week until you can do it without any thoughts, then you will know what I am telling you and what Christ instructed us to do. This doesn't ever require faith which is worthless anyway. You will know. Then you will understand the true meaning of Love from God's stand point.
The verses that I quoted carefully describe the attributes of love. Love does not hold a record of wrongs, love is not jealous, love is not vindictive, does not punish, etc, etc.
This is not some special, woopy do, esoteric, hidden message to be seen by those who 'have the eyes,' but simply a description of the nature of Love, and we are clearly told "God is Love."
You seem to trying to transform what is clearly being described about love and god into what you want it to mean....
So you are saying that if the verses are talking about killing civilizations, raping women, and killing children, then it can be "some, woopy do , esoteric, hidden message, but if it is talking about love then is not. I'm curious how you know this.
It's obvious. I don't understand how you can't see this. It's like you read between the lines then totally ignore the lines.
[quote=K22]There was a reason the religious leaders burned the Library of Alexandria and why the vatican will not allow anyone in the vaults or tunnels. It would confirm what I have told you, but there is no money in it nor do you need anyone to show you the way. You can do it all by yourself.
It was a simple question.
How does this description....
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
''The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.'' - Psalm 145:9
....relate to this violent attitude;
Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. Ezekiel 8:18
He is a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins. - Joshua 24:19 dicrous
''Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ - 1 Samuel 25:3
[/quote
Trying mix a literal reading with Mythology/Astrology/Numerology/Mysticism will never work. Apples and Oranges are not the same fruit. You are reading those versus from a literal reading perspective. From that perspective I would let mauserand9mm answer because he is correct. That is the very reason I'm saying that the entire book was written from a mythology position and known of those atrocities ever happened. With a literal reading, there is not doubt that God hates women and puts them barely above an animal. In mythology, women represent emotion and emotion is what we as humans like to run on. Ego is another word for emotion. In a literal reading it is very apparent that this God is dysfunctional entity. In a literal reading, you have to die to receive any of the treasures stored up for you making God a god of the dead. In a mythological position, those treasures are right at your fingertips if you so desire them and God is a god of the living. In a literal reading, you must die to get to Heaven. From a mythological position, Heaven, God, Jesus, the Temple all dwell within you and all you need is the key to open the door. In a literal reading, you are nothing more than a lowly "Gentile" barely saved by Grace. From a mythological position you are gods, but as of yet you have no idea who or what you are and the powers you really have. In a literal reading, you have to "invite" Jesus into your heart. From a mythological position, Jesus already dwells within you so inviting him in is ludicrous, he's already there. And remember, it was the religious leaders, known today as Christians, who offered up Jesus to the authorities to be killed for His teachings which went against the teachings of their scriptures. They killed him for not teaching the letter of the law.
They are literal descriptions. On one hand we have verses that have God ordering slaughter and rape, and on the other hand we have descriptions of a God of Love and Tender Mercy where slaughter and rape are not possible.
To simply say ''oh, none of this is literal" does not resolve the contradiction.
You ignore what the verses actually say and insist that they mean something other than what they say.....because, well, there is a hidden code and arcane knowledge that only those with 'spiritual insight' can unravel.
It doesn't work.
They are only literal descriptions if you read them literally. If you believe that you are to read that book literally, then you explain to me the contradictions as you've shown and how do you explain them.
As far as I'm concerned those versus are symbolic language.
Description of the attributes of love, for example, are meant to tell us what Love is, its attributes and features and how love is manifested.
The descriptions are meant to tell us about Love. That God is Love and this is what Love is like.
You cannot transform what the given verses say about Love by dismissing the descriptions as allegory or poetry.
This is not allegory or metaphor, we are being told about the nature of God and Love;
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
The "love" being referenced here is not the kind of love we as ego driven humans think it is. When we talk of God's love we do it from OUR stand point, how we intellectually or emotionally think it should be and that is why we are instructed to "take no thought" or "be still". When we try to describe or explain what God or Christ is saying or what a scripture means from our reading of it we are literally sinning. The word "sin" was taken from the Chaldeans which meant the Moon or emotion, this was represented by the Goddess Ur. If you study any "mazzaroth" teachings, to use a Bible word, it would not take long before you would see that the planet ruling the Constellation Cancer is the Moon, hence the term "Moon Child" used for those born June 21 - July 22. Those Cancer folks can be very emotion driven. So the writers used the symbolic language word sin to say that your emotions and thoughts will keep you from seeing the face of God, hence the reason for "take no thought". When it says to go into your closet and SHUT THE DOOR it is telling you to shut the door on your thoughts so that in the stillness God can talk to you. But we read the bible literally and interpret prayer to mean you talking to God, even down to praying out loud for all to hear how well we pray or look at me I pray to God, can you hear me. We even do it in the market place, i.e. the Church where some, Preachers, are marketing their wares. If you think that meditation is not the way to hear God or even that meditation is easy, then there's the challenge. Try it for 15 min. and have no thoughts or feelings when you do...............NONE! Do it 3 or 4 times a week until you can do it without any thoughts, then you will know what I am telling you and what Christ instructed us to do. This doesn't ever require faith which is worthless anyway. You will know. Then you will understand the true meaning of Love from God's stand point.
The verses that I quoted carefully describe the attributes of love. Love does not hold a record of wrongs, love is not jealous, love is not vindictive, does not punish, etc, etc.
This is not some special, woopy do, esoteric, hidden message to be seen by those who 'have the eyes,' but simply a description of the nature of Love, and we are clearly told "God is Love."
You seem to trying to transform what is clearly being described about love and god into what you want it to mean....
So you are saying that if the verses are talking about killing civilizations, raping women, and killing children, then it can be "some, woopy do , esoteric, hidden message, but if it is talking about love then is not. I'm curious how you know this.
No...isn't that you who is claiming metaphor and hidden meaning? Which is why I asked you to explain what you think is meant.
I'd say that both the attributes love and the behaviour of the Israelites at war are meant literally. Because of this, we have a contradiction between the character of the old testament and new testament versions of God.
The former being a fierce tribal God of war with the morality to suit, in stark contrast to the universal God of love as described in the NT.
Next time you go to the assembly of believers in the wilderness church, may I suggest taking a N.T. and highlighter?
Every time Jesus quoted O.T. Scripture, use the highlighter. You will start to see the red letters bathed in yellow throughout the gospels. Read further and you'll see that much of the rest are descriptions of O.T. doctrines.
My quotations on this forum are few compared to Jesus of the Bible.
He would be better off with a copy of the Prophet Zoroaster writings. Much more accurate.
I didn't know that you were Zoroastrian. You might want to consider Jesus since he actually has the power to walk out of His grave and give life. I can't say that about Zoro.
Next time you go to the assembly of believers in the wilderness church, may I suggest taking a N.T. and highlighter?
Every time Jesus quoted O.T. Scripture, use the highlighter. You will start to see the red letters bathed in yellow throughout the gospels. Read further and you'll see that much of the rest are descriptions of O.T. doctrines.
My quotations on this forum are few compared to Jesus of the Bible.
He would be better off with a copy of the Prophet Zoroaster writings. Much more accurate.
I didn't know that you were Zoroastrian. You might want to consider Jesus since he actually has the power to walk out of His grave and give life. I can't say that about Zoro.
I think you might find the Hebrew religion a child of Zoroaster, and Christianity and Islam definitely a child of the Hebrew religion.
If anyone here claims the present renditions Christianity and Islam hasn't stitched on a bunch of extraneous doctrine and gobbledegook onto the Hebrew and Jesus' message and doctrine they just don't have much reading comprehension or either they are so heavily invested they don't wish to admit "I've gone down a very wrong road and I need to turn back". It happens in lots of life situations, marriages, and investments, you name it. People will drive off into a swamp rather than admit "I was wrong".
Present day renditions of Christianity and Islam have sewn on so many things to the original that Christianity has become a Frankenstein Freak.
By the way Happy Camper. Do you appear personally in any of your videos? Have you ever received monetary donations for video or media appearances? For personal appearances? I am talking about any donations or payments connected to religion?
As it said that God is Love, why does a God of Love require a death/blood sacrifice in order to forgive?
God is love. - 1 John 4:8
''Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.'' 1 Corinthians 13;
Here's a video that very briefly covers the Matthew 7 question that came up on a previous page Wabigoon.
I'll post the text so it's handy. Context: "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing..."
They look like sheep and appear as ministers of God, but Jesus warns about them.
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
He calls their "good" works iniquity.
Here's the will of the Father for salvation. "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:40
Do you have a little documentation for your post about the gobigo...?
Paul, with his law is dead theory and his constant chasing of his tail. Churches that use Paul as the basis of their doctrine and ignore his contradictions of Jesus who is only mentioned in passing (Jimmy Swaggart et al). Catholic doctrine and rituals, Papal authority, Calvinism, Pentecostalism, Jehovah's Witnesses (read their literature), Joel Osteen's (and his ilk) prosperity gospel, the LDS book of fiction. The Islamist and Christian anti Semitism, praying the rosary and other chants, adopting pagan holidays such as our present Christmas and Easter and making them Christian holy days. Prohibitions against alcohol by some churches. The Christian toleration and blessing of eating things clearly prohibited such as swine. The Methodist and Episcopal churches seem to me to be almost atheist. I've never been to a Lutheran Church but I hear they are pretty much secular clubs. It is past midnight and I am about to go into a trance. Give me a day or two and I'll do better. Jesus did not come up with anything new, and he clearly said he came not to do away with the law and the prophets.
Do you have a little documentation for your post about the gobigo...?
Paul, with his law is dead theory and his constant chasing of his tail. Churches that use Paul as the basis of their doctrine and ignore his contradictions of Jesus who is only mentioned in passing (Jimmy Swaggart et al). Catholic doctrine and rituals, Papal authority, Calvinism, Pentecostalism, Jehovah's Witnesses (read their literature), Joel Osteen's (and his ilk) prosperity gospel, the LDS book of fiction. The Islamist and Christian anti Semitism, praying the rosary and other chants, adopting pagan holidays such as our present Christmas and Easter and making them Christian holy days. Prohibitions against alcohol by some churches. The Christian toleration and blessing of eating things clearly prohibited such as swine. The Methodist and Episcopal churches seem to me to be almost atheist. I've never been to a Lutheran Church but I hear they are pretty much secular clubs. It is past midnight and I am about to go into a trance. Give me a day or two and I'll do better. Jesus did not come up with anything new, and he clearly said he came not to do away with the law and the prophets.
Hastings,
Thanks for taking time for this list. That is great obsevation. I never noticed before, but what you posted sure is correct.
To complete what Jesus says, He says He came not to do away with the law and the prophets until all is fulfilled. I am persuaded His death, burial, and resurrection was the fulfillment. Christians no longer offer burnt sacrifices.
By the way, I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
I think Jesus laid the foundation for the kind of behavior His followers are supposed to exemplify when He issued His New Covenant command. “A new command I give you,” He said, not to be added to the existing commands; His new command was to replace all of the existing commands. This all encompassing new command is The Law of Christ, which is to love others as Jesus loves us.
I do think following Jesus will make your life better, and it will make you better at life. I think it’ll make you a better parent, a better partner to your significant other, and a better friend, because at the core of following Jesus is an ethic of others first; an ethic of selflessness.
To me, the core ethic and value system of Jesus becomes more relevant than ever because insecurity and anger and fear are all manifestations of self-preservation, and maybe reputation preservation, on our part. Both of which fuel the very behaviors that drive a wedge between us and those closest to us.
To me, our response to others says a great deal about who and what we are most concerned about. When we get it right, and we are able to keep our pride and ego in check, when we’re able to respond out of concern for others, rather than in response to how their behavior reflects on us…and affects us…our response has the potential to create some really good moments…even defining moments.
Do you have a little documentation for your post about the gobigo...?
Paul, with his law is dead theory and his constant chasing of his tail. Churches that use Paul as the basis of their doctrine and ignore his contradictions of Jesus who is only mentioned in passing (Jimmy Swaggart et al). Catholic doctrine and rituals, Papal authority, Calvinism, Pentecostalism, Jehovah's Witnesses (read their literature), Joel Osteen's (and his ilk) prosperity gospel, the LDS book of fiction. The Islamist and Christian anti Semitism, praying the rosary and other chants, adopting pagan holidays such as our present Christmas and Easter and making them Christian holy days. Prohibitions against alcohol by some churches. The Christian toleration and blessing of eating things clearly prohibited such as swine. The Methodist and Episcopal churches seem to me to be almost atheist. I've never been to a Lutheran Church but I hear they are pretty much secular clubs. It is past midnight and I am about to go into a trance. Give me a day or two and I'll do better. Jesus did not come up with anything new, and he clearly said he came not to do away with the law and the prophets.
Hastings,
Thanks for taking time for this list. That is great obsevation. I never noticed before, but what you posted sure is correct.
To complete what Jesus says, He says He came not to do away with the law and the prophets until all is fulfilled. I am persuaded His death, burial, and resurrection was the fulfillment. Christians no longer offer burnt sacrifices.
By the way, I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
There is the promised return in power and glory yet to be fulfilled.
Do you have a little documentation for your post about the gobigo...?
Paul, with his law is dead theory and his constant chasing of his tail. Churches that use Paul as the basis of their doctrine and ignore his contradictions of Jesus who is only mentioned in passing (Jimmy Swaggart et al). Catholic doctrine and rituals, Papal authority, Calvinism, Pentecostalism, Jehovah's Witnesses (read their literature), Joel Osteen's (and his ilk) prosperity gospel, the LDS book of fiction. The Islamist and Christian anti Semitism, praying the rosary and other chants, adopting pagan holidays such as our present Christmas and Easter and making them Christian holy days. Prohibitions against alcohol by some churches. The Christian toleration and blessing of eating things clearly prohibited such as swine. The Methodist and Episcopal churches seem to me to be almost atheist. I've never been to a Lutheran Church but I hear they are pretty much secular clubs. It is past midnight and I am about to go into a trance. Give me a day or two and I'll do better. Jesus did not come up with anything new, and he clearly said he came not to do away with the law and the prophets.
Hastings,
Thanks for taking time for this list. That is great obsevation. I never noticed before, but what you posted sure is correct.
To complete what Jesus says, He says He came not to do away with the law and the prophets until all is fulfilled. I am persuaded His death, burial, and resurrection was the fulfillment. Christians no longer offer burnt sacrifices.
By the way, I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
Jesus said the law would stand until heaven and earth pass away.
Do you have a little documentation for your post about the gobigo...?
Paul, with his law is dead theory and his constant chasing of his tail. Churches that use Paul as the basis of their doctrine and ignore his contradictions of Jesus who is only mentioned in passing (Jimmy Swaggart et al). Catholic doctrine and rituals, Papal authority, Calvinism, Pentecostalism, Jehovah's Witnesses (read their literature), Joel Osteen's (and his ilk) prosperity gospel, the LDS book of fiction. The Islamist and Christian anti Semitism, praying the rosary and other chants, adopting pagan holidays such as our present Christmas and Easter and making them Christian holy days. Prohibitions against alcohol by some churches. The Christian toleration and blessing of eating things clearly prohibited such as swine. The Methodist and Episcopal churches seem to me to be almost atheist. I've never been to a Lutheran Church but I hear they are pretty much secular clubs. It is past midnight and I am about to go into a trance. Give me a day or two and I'll do better. Jesus did not come up with anything new, and he clearly said he came not to do away with the law and the prophets.
Hastings,
Thanks for taking time for this list. That is great obsevation. I never noticed before, but what you posted sure is correct.
To complete what Jesus says, He says He came not to do away with the law and the prophets until all is fulfilled. I am persuaded His death, burial, and resurrection was the fulfillment. Christians no longer offer burnt sacrifices.
By the way, I hope you have a wonderful Christmas.
Jesus said the law would stand until heaven and earth pass away.
Yes,that is what was said. But there is more…… Jesus fulfilled the law and was the perfect sacrifice. So, HE fulfilled the law and those found to be “in Christ” are not bound by nor subject to the law…. As Jesus was perfect and sinless and most effective “stand in” for our sin,
The non-believer?….. well, not so much…. Perhaps they will be judged by the law.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Well, I wonder what “…until everything is accomplished….” means….. end of the age? The judgment of Satan? The final Great White Throne judgment?
18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Well, I wonder what “…until everything is accomplished….” means….. end of the age? The judgment of Satan? The final Great White Throne judgment?
Presumably "until everything is accomplished" means just that: everything.
If there is something yet to be accomplished, everything has not been accomplished.
Believers still await the return of Jesus in power and glory, judgement, etc, which clearly has not happened, therefore not everything has been accomplished.
Everything means everything, not just some event chosen because, well, it's appealing.
Well, I wonder what “…until everything is accomplished….” means…..
Until everything in the law is accomplished…until everything in the law is fulfilled. Jesus accomplished everything in the law…He fulfilled it. He clearly said so. Pretty simple, really.
Well, I wonder what “…until everything is accomplished….” means…..
Until everything in the law is accomplished…until everything in the law is fulfilled. Jesus accomplished everything in the law…He fulfilled it. He clearly said so. Pretty simple, really.
Not specifically, he was referring his sacrifice. More was promised, his return in power and glory, judgment, etc. All that was promised was not accomplished.
Nope. He was specifically referring to the Law. His assertion in Matthew 5:18 was specifically regarding the Law; and every single thing He said in His assertion above was in regards to the Law. The Law was the central and primary focus of His assertion. Again, pretty simple.
It ain't over. Heaven and earth still stand, they have not passed away. Not everything has been accomplished. Not all prophesy has been fulfilled. Listen to Jesus' words, leave Paul out of it. He is likely a fraud or someone altered his writings. Take the words of John the Baptist, Jesus, James, Moses, and the old testament prophets, and you cannot reconcile them with Paul or should I say reconcile Paul with them. We don't know what happened to Paul, but I hope he repented and received salvation if he truly is the author of works that negated Jesus.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
There seems to be God’s ceremonial law…. and there is His judicial law and then there is His moral law.
Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial and the judicial law….the judicial law being fulfilled by His death on the cross.
Seems to me that God’s moral law has not changed not nor will it change.
You can twist it or slice it any way you wish. He said "until heaven and earth pass away" and everybody knows that is what he said and you can't have Jesus and Paul both. It does not work.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
There seems to be God’s ceremonial law…. and there is His judicial law and then there is His moral law. Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial and the judicial law….the judicial law being fulfilled by His death on the cross. Seems to me that God’s moral law has not changed not nor will it change.
The divisions of the the Law into the different categories that you refer to is a human construct, and nowhere in the Bible does it indicate that God intended a division of the Law into different categories.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
There seems to be God’s ceremonial law…. and there is His judicial law and then there is His moral law.
Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial and the judicial law….the judicial law being fulfilled by His death on the cross.
Seems to me that God’s moral law has not changed not nor will it change.
I agree. That last one is what has upset the apple cart with some. I still stand on that too.
The ceremonial law as in sacrifices and those observances having to do with the temple have been replaced. We have a better covenant with God.
Back to the topic of repentance having to do with salvation, even the moral law does not save. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have other purposes. Jesus confronted those who taught an incorrect view of the law more than once. I've had some accuse me of legalism, but that's because they have no problem with even heinous sins like blasphemy. That's where I've made enemies most on the forum. However, I never taught that they would be saved by "turning from their sins" like blasphemy, or any other sin. It's the belief that keeping the laws of God perfectly can save some is a belief that must be repented of.
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." And " For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."
That's what makes us/humanity guilty with but one sin.
The requirement for mankind is where most of us get confused.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
There seems to be God’s ceremonial law…. and there is His judicial law and then there is His moral law. Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial and the judicial law….the judicial law being fulfilled by His death on the cross. Seems to me that God’s moral law has not changed not nor will it change.
The divisions of the the Law into the different categories that you refer to is a human construct, and nowhere in the Bible does it indicate that God intended a division of the Law into different categories.
You are of course correct that the divisions are not explicitly noted in the Bible. But, the 10 Commandments …. Are distinctly different from what many would consider the many ceremonial and judicial laws. … the 10 seem to be referring to God’s holy character and I would not expect His character to change …..and an offense to the holiness of God would…. at least in my view… still be an offense and still be a sin.
If one considers the final judgment of the unbeliever, would one consider that the unbeliever is a “lawbreaker?”
On what basis is the “judgment?” Seems to be unforgiven sin….ie rejection of the Gift.
So if you believe and ask forgiveness of your sins and He forgives them and doesnt remember them then what sins are held against you at the Christs thrown of judgement?
And then He said “And the second is like it. Love your neighbor as you love yourself. Everything that is written in the Law and the Prophets is based on these two commandments.” “Like it” means ‘just as important’ or ‘equal to’...it means you can’t have the first without the second. To me, the second commandment is not subordinate to the first, but merely second in sequence. Our love and devotion to God is authenticated, validated, and substantiated by our love for others.
I agree. That last one is what has upset the apple cart with some. I still stand on that too.
The ceremonial law as in sacrifices and those observances having to do with the temple have been replaced. We have a better covenant with God.
Back to the topic of repentance having to do with salvation, even the moral law does not save. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have other purposes. Jesus confronted those who taught an incorrect view of the law more than once. I've had some accuse me of legalism, but that's because they have no problem with even heinous sins like blasphemy. That's where I've made enemies most on the forum. However, I never taught that they would be saved by "turning from their sins" like blasphemy, or any other sin. It's the belief that keeping the laws of God perfectly can save some is a belief that must be repented of.
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." And " For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."
That's what makes us/humanity guilty with but one sin.
The requirement for mankind is where most of us get confused.
Where are those quotes from the the bible ? Who spake them?
Very good. The laws were made for the lawless. This is one of the purposes of the law. If it was legal to steal and murder tomorrow by an act of Congress, etc, most of us would continue living our lives as usual. Why? Because we love the Lord and our fellow man. The law points out right and wrong as it has penalties for crimes. As we love the Lord, we keep the law.
I agree. That last one is what has upset the apple cart with some. I still stand on that too.
The ceremonial law as in sacrifices and those observances having to do with the temple have been replaced. We have a better covenant with God.
Back to the topic of repentance having to do with salvation, even the moral law does not save. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have other purposes. Jesus confronted those who taught an incorrect view of the law more than once. I've had some accuse me of legalism, but that's because they have no problem with even heinous sins like blasphemy. That's where I've made enemies most on the forum. However, I never taught that they would be saved by "turning from their sins" like blasphemy, or any other sin. It's the belief that keeping the laws of God perfectly can save some is a belief that must be repented of.
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." And " For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."
That's what makes us/humanity guilty with but one sin.
The requirement for mankind is where most of us get confused.
Where are those quotes from the the bible ? Who spake them?
You rejected the first as it was written by Paul, but the Lord's half brother, James, show us that we are all guilty before the Lord. We've all broken far more than even one. Where does that put us? ......? 🤔 That's why I gave up "trying" to keep the many laws of God and decided to place complete faith in the Savior instead. BTW, That's not turning from sin to be saved. That's turning from a belief in keeping the law to a belief in the Christ to be saved. True repentance.
I think Jesus laid the foundation for the kind of behavior His followers are supposed to exemplify when He issued His New Covenant command. “A new command I give you,” He said, not to be added to the existing commands; His new command was to replace all of the existing commands. This all encompassing new command is The Law of Christ, which is to love others as Jesus loves us.
I do think following Jesus will make your life better, and it will make you better at life. I think it’ll make you a better parent, a better partner to your significant other, and a better friend, because at the core of following Jesus is an ethic of others first; an ethic of selflessness.
To me, the core ethic and value system of Jesus becomes more relevant than ever because insecurity and anger and fear are all manifestations of self-preservation, and maybe reputation preservation, on our part. Both of which fuel the very behaviors that drive a wedge between us and those closest to us.
To me, our response to others says a great deal about who and what we are most concerned about. When we get it right, and we are able to keep our pride and ego in check, when we’re able to respond out of concern for others, rather than in response to how their behavior reflects on us…and affects us…our response has the potential to create some really good moments…even defining moments.
Fantastic! Thank you for putting into words what we should all live.
Nope. He was specifically referring to the Law. His assertion in Matthew 5:18 was specifically regarding the Law; and every single thing He said in His assertion above was in regards to the Law. The Law was the central and primary focus of His assertion. Again, pretty simple.
''It is finished'' clearly refers to the sacrifice, taking away sin, and not abolishing the law. If it was the case, why say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets'' only to abolish the law of the prophets?
It makes no sense to say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets,'' then abolish them.
Thanks. Here are more details about that if you are interested. It's an audio file . A little more on law as it applies to believers. I'm interested in your opinion, even if you disagree. Good night http://www.faithfulwordbaptist.org/060919p.mp3
Nope. He was specifically referring to the Law. His assertion in Matthew 5:18 was specifically regarding the Law; and every single thing He said in His assertion above was in regards to the Law. The Law was the central and primary focus of His assertion. Again, pretty simple.
''It is finished'' clearly refers to the sacrifice, taking away sin, and not abolishing the law. If it was the case, why say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets'' only to abolish the law of the prophets? It makes no sense to say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets,'' then abolish them.
Nope. There’s a difference between abolishing the Law and fulfilling the Law. Jesus fulfilled the Law; He clearly said so.
He clearly said that He came to fulfill all that was written in the Law and the Prophets. All of it pointed to Him, and He accomplished what the Law required. He did fulfill it, just like He said He came to do. The sacrifices stopped because Jesus fulfilled all that they pointed to...He was the ‘final’ sacrifice for sins. The priesthood stopped...the one that stood between God and those who worshipped Him…there was no longer ‘any’ mediator between God and men. The physical temple stopped...it was no longer the geographical center of worship because God now lived within His followers...‘they’ themselves were the temple. “Jesus is the end of the Law.”
The Law had a built-in expiration date. When Jesus said that He came to fulfill it, He meant that He came to bring it to a preplanned, designated end. He didn’t come to abolish...as in ‘destroy’...the validity of it, or undermine the credibility of it. He came to bring it to a preplanned, designated end. If the Law were a plane, He was landing it; if the Law were a speech, He was concluding it; if the Law were a homework assignment, He was completing it. You don’t destroy a plane by landing it; and you don’t destroy a speech by concluding it; and you don’t destroy a homework assignment by completing it.
Jesus said nothing in the law would “disappear” until everything in it was “fulfilled.” Once it was “fulfilled” however, the Law would begin to disappear. Which is exactly what happened.
To me, “It is finished” means just that. Jesus wasn’t finished, as His broken-hearted followers would soon find out. But something else ‘was’ finished. I believe He was telling His followers who were present...in His final moments...that the Old Covenant that He came to fulfill ‘was’ at last fulfilled. And that His New Covenant, a better covenant, a broader covenant between God and all of the people in all of the world...who would choose to participate...was being ushered in through the shedding of His blood.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved.” To me, its purpose was achieved. Jesus achieved it. He fulfilled it. To me, it’s a simple matter.
There seems to be God’s ceremonial law…. and there is His judicial law and then there is His moral law.
Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial and the judicial law….the judicial law being fulfilled by His death on the cross.
Seems to me that God’s moral law has not changed not nor will it change.
I agree. That last one is what has upset the apple cart with some. I still stand on that too.
The ceremonial law as in sacrifices and those observances having to do with the temple have been replaced. We have a better covenant with God.
Back to the topic of repentance having to do with salvation, even the moral law does not save. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have other purposes. Jesus confronted those who taught an incorrect view of the law more than once. I've had some accuse me of legalism, but that's because they have no problem with even heinous sins like blasphemy. That's where I've made enemies most on the forum. However, I never taught that they would be saved by "turning from their sins" like blasphemy, or any other sin. It's the belief that keeping the laws of God perfectly can save some is a belief that must be repented of.
"But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." And " For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."
That's what makes us/humanity guilty with but one sin.
The requirement for mankind is where most of us get confused.
So if you believe and ask forgiveness of your sins and He forgives them and doesnt remember them then what sins are held against you at the Christs thrown of judgement?
Your slate is clean.
I don’t think I was clear about this.
It is my understanding that the Great White Throne judgment is for unbelievers only.
Followers of Christ will have their lives examined at the Bema seat….Born again believers only…..it is my understanding that we will not be judged for any sins, but will give an accounting of what we did with what we were given…. So, based upon the gifts and capabilities you were gifted by the Creator…. What did you do with the gifts? What was done in service to the King…. The Creator.
Nope. He was specifically referring to the Law. His assertion in Matthew 5:18 was specifically regarding the Law; and every single thing He said in His assertion above was in regards to the Law. The Law was the central and primary focus of His assertion. Again, pretty simple.
''It is finished'' clearly refers to the sacrifice, taking away sin, and not abolishing the law. If it was the case, why say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets'' only to abolish the law of the prophets? It makes no sense to say ''I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets,'' then abolish them.
Nope. There’s a difference between abolishing the Law and fulfilling the Law. Jesus fulfilled the Law; He clearly said so.
He clearly said that He came to fulfill all that was written in the Law and the Prophets. All of it pointed to Him, and He accomplished what the Law required. He did fulfill it, just like He said He came to do. The sacrifices stopped because Jesus fulfilled all that they pointed to...He was the ‘final’ sacrifice for sins. The priesthood stopped...the one that stood between God and those who worshipped Him…there was no longer ‘any’ mediator between God and men. The physical temple stopped...it was no longer the geographical center of worship because God now lived within His followers...‘they’ themselves were the temple. “Jesus is the end of the Law.”
The Law had a built-in expiration date. When Jesus said that He came to fulfill it, He meant that He came to bring it to a preplanned, designated end. He didn’t come to abolish...as in ‘destroy’...the validity of it, or undermine the credibility of it. He came to bring it to a preplanned, designated end. If the Law were a plane, He was landing it; if the Law were a speech, He was concluding it; if the Law were a homework assignment, He was completing it. You don’t destroy a plane by landing it; and you don’t destroy a speech by concluding it; and you don’t destroy a homework assignment by completing it.
Jesus said nothing in the law would “disappear” until everything in it was “fulfilled.” Once it was “fulfilled” however, the Law would begin to disappear. Which is exactly what happened.
To me, “It is finished” means just that. Jesus wasn’t finished, as His broken-hearted followers would soon find out. But something else ‘was’ finished. I believe He was telling His followers who were present...in His final moments...that the Old Covenant that He came to fulfill ‘was’ at last fulfilled. And that His New Covenant, a better covenant, a broader covenant between God and all of the people in all of the world...who would choose to participate...was being ushered in through the shedding of His blood.
If it's claimed that the law of the prophets no longer apply after the sacrifice of Jesus, the law of the prophets has been abolished.
Yet we have Jesus saying that he has not come to abolish the law of the prophets.
You can twist it or slice it any way you wish. He said "until heaven and earth pass away" and everybody knows that is what he said and you can't have Jesus and Paul both. It does not work.
If it's claimed that the law of the prophets no longer apply after the sacrifice of Jesus, the law of the prophets has been abolished.
Nope. He said He came to fulfill the law. He said He spoke the truth, and that until heaven and earth pass away, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until it’s purpose is fulfilled.
There is a Greek term, translated ‘fulfill’, used by Matthew describing Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, and by Luke in describing Jesus’ message in the synagogue. This Greek term...πληρόω...in both instances, means to bring to a designated end. Jesus didn’t come to “do away with the law”...as in to abolish it…He came to bring it to a designated end. Jesus fulfilled its purpose. He said so.
If the Law were a history homework assignment, Jesus was completing it. If the Law were a motivational speech, Jesus was concluding it. If the Law were a 747, Jesus was landing it. You don’t abolish a history homework assignment by completing it; you don’t abolish a motivational speech by concluding it; and you don’t abolish a 747 by landing it. When Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, He was saying that God’s conditional, temporary covenant with Israel was coming to an end...the intended-from-the-beginning end. It was completed, it was concluded, it was landed.
If it's claimed that the law of the prophets no longer apply after the sacrifice of Jesus, the law of the prophets has been abolished.
Nope. He said He came to fulfill the law. He said He spoke the truth, and that until heaven and earth pass away, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until it’s purpose is fulfilled.
There is a Greek term, translated ‘fulfill’, used by Matthew describing Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, and by Luke in describing Jesus’ message in the synagogue. This Greek term...πληρόω...in both instances, means to bring to a designated end. Jesus didn’t come to “do away with the law”...as in to abolish it…He came to bring it to a designated end. Jesus fulfilled its purpose. He said so.
If the Law were a history homework assignment, Jesus was completing it. If the Law were a motivational speech, Jesus was concluding it. If the Law were a 747, Jesus was landing it. You don’t abolish a history homework assignment by completing it; you don’t abolish a motivational speech by concluding it; and you don’t abolish a 747 by landing it. When Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, He was saying that God’s conditional, temporary covenant with Israel was coming to an end...the intended-from-the-beginning end. It was completed, it was concluded, it was landed.
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."
There's some who certainly call Him Lord, who mix faith in Christ with faith in their own works, as we see here. Many Epistles address this in one way or another. I think that the Books of Hebrews ie 10, and Galatians chapter 1 cover the keeping of the law as it applies to the subject. These books are written to believers who some had been convinced that they were no longer saved unless they kept some portions of the law.
The gospel of John (KJV) Is the one book devoted to answer your question. It is an honest question with an honest answer 20:30-31. It's only 21 short chapters. I've taken this as a personal"challenge" many times to prove it to myself before I asked others to.
Underline in a hard copy KJV the various forms of the word believe (s, eth, ed). After reading the chapter, write the total down with the chapter number. After reading the 21 chapters, you will have just 21 numbers to add. Then do the same for the word "repent / repentance". Tell me what you have for the sum totals for that book when you are done. I hope that this will be as much a blessing to you as it is for me.
You want us readers to read John. For some reason you think it's all there. But how many times in Matthew, Mark, or Luke do you find, "In the beginning was the Word......."? You try to use a portion of God's Word to distort God's Word. What happens to people who distort God's Word. 2 Peter 3:16 says they distort God's Word to their own destruction.
You seem to be caught up in the Law of Moses. And then distort that to conflate the New Testament instructions with the Moses Law. There are many things God wants believers to do to demonstrate they are believers. If these are not present they are NOT believers. You used Hebrews 10. Take a look at Hebrews 3:18-19. Here God's Word defines belief. It reads, "And to whom did He swear that they should not enter His rest, but to those were were DISOBEDIENT? And we see that they were not able to enter because of UNBELIEF."
So, if you fail in any of the Fruits of the Spirit, you are disobedient because of unbelief, right?
None of the Law applies to New Covenant followers of Jesus. Not 613 things, and not 10 things. None.
New Covenant followers of Jesus are not under the Mosaic Law. Any of it. But if one follows the all-encompassing New Covenant Law of Christ, then it covers the entirety of the Law (including the 10 Commandments). Jesus made that very clear. He specifically said so.
None of the Law applies to New Covenant followers of Jesus. Not 613 things, and not 10 things. None.
New Covenant followers of Jesus are not under the Mosaic Law. Any of it. But if one follows the all-encompassing New Covenant Law of Christ, then it covers the entirety of the Law (including the 10 Commandments). Jesus made that very clear. He specifically said so.
None of the Law applies to New Covenant followers of Jesus. Not 613 things, and not 10 things. None.
New Covenant followers of Jesus are not under the Mosaic Law. Any of it. But if one follows the all-encompassing New Covenant Law of Christ, then it covers the entirety of the Law (including the 10 Commandments). Jesus made that very clear. He specifically said so.
None of the Law applies to New Covenant followers of Jesus. Not 613 things, and not 10 things. None.
New Covenant followers of Jesus are not under the Mosaic Law. Any of it. But if one follows the all-encompassing New Covenant Law of Christ, then it covers the entirety of the Law (including the 10 Commandments). Jesus made that very clear. He specifically said so.
Where specifically did He say that?
In Matthew 22:40. He said that ALL of the Law and the Prophets (that’s the ‘entire’ Old Testament) hangs on loving God and loving others. Period.
“I promise that the soul that will venerate this image will not perish. I also promise victory over [its] enemies already here on earth, especially at the hour of death. I Myself will defend [that soul] as My own glory.”
So Jesus says 'I have not come to abolish the law of the prophets' 'Heaven and Earth shall pass before the Law is abolished' ......then proceeds to abolish the law of the prophets......gotcha.
That's the bible for you, contradictions at every turn of the page.
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
The contradictions are there. Those of bible faith only read what they want it to read, including whatever they see between the lines even if that means ignoring the actual lines. How can 1 book produce so many meanings? All speculation can't be valid at the same time, and isn't a good substitute for facts.
The contradictions are there. Those of bible faith only read what they want it to read, including whatever they see between the lines even if that means ignoring the actual lines. How can 1 book produce so many meanings? All speculation can't be valid at the same time, and isn't a good substitute for facts.
It sounds like you’re confusing the bible with modern science. The insistence of my previous point being wrong only proves it correct. The hardened heart chooses not to look for God. The hardest hearts seek to abolish God, often by digging into the smallest details, convoluting them and using extraordinary debate skills to create contradictions that appear as “Facts”.
Seeking out God’s Word and perfect will allows a person to see the truth.
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
You got that right.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
You got that right.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
John 10: 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.
The contradictions are there. Those of bible faith only read what they want it to read, including whatever they see between the lines even if that means ignoring the actual lines. How can 1 book produce so many meanings? All speculation can't be valid at the same time, and isn't a good substitute for facts.
It sounds like you’re confusing the bible with modern science. The insistence of my previous point being wrong only proves it correct. The hardened heart chooses not to look for God. The hardest hearts seek to abolish God, often by digging into the smallest details, convoluting them and using extraordinary debate skills to create contradictions that appear as “Facts”.
Seeking out God’s Word and perfect will allows a person to see the truth.
Sounds like you are confusing facts with wanting to believe. Facts are true for all people
A fact is a point of data which is not in dispute. A fact is a point of data that is objectively verifiable.
In short: FACT = OBSERVATION
Facts will never change. Facts are always true.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
Not a hardened heart, just an examination of what the words say. The words themselves have Jesus saying ''Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil' - then proceed to destroy the law of the prophets.
The words themselves say ''For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.''
The difficulty of course lies in the interpretation of 'until everything is accomplished''
But if the sacrifice was meant to abolish the law, Jesus did come abolish the law despite saying that he has not come to abolish the law.
A hardened heart will find contradictions wherever the Word doesn’t apply to it’s agenda. A heart seeking God will find what He wants us to do in different situations.
Not a hardened heart, just an examination of what the words say. The words themselves have Jesus saying ''Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil' - then proceed to destroy the law of the prophets.
The words themselves say ''For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.''
The difficulty of course lies in the interpretation of 'until everything is accomplished''
But if the sacrifice was meant to abolish the law, Jesus did come abolish the law despite saying that he has not come to abolish the law.
Can you see the problem?
DBT: I understand that some are hanging their hat on the ambiguous "until everything is accomplished" while ignoring the unambiguous "until heaven and earth pass away". Otherwise very rational people have the capacity to ignore something they do not want to be true even when it is clearly true. What I have trouble understanding is how one disputed witness that disagrees with every other witness in the book is to be believed when it takes an absolute mental contortionist to make him fit in.
That said, I am not an atheist and I'm guessing you are but we have both spotted the dichotomy in Jesus versus Paul.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
Anything? Interesting interpretation, given the provided definition.
The condition of the heart affects one’s ability to accept God’s perfect will. Jesus would have died for you if you were the only one…..but you’re not. We’re all sinners.
What I have trouble understanding is how one disputed witness that disagrees with every other witness in the book is to be believed when it takes an absolute mental contortionist to make him fit in.
Hastings, This book is supposed to be "inspired by God", The perfect word of the all knowing perfect creator of the universe, but it contradicts itself on fundamental theological issues such as, does The Law still apply, or not.
That said, I am not an atheist and I'm guessing you are but we have both spotted the dichotomy in Jesus versus Paul.
Hastings, "Paul" doesn't even agree with "Paul". The letters of "Paul" were written by multiple people over several centuries. They are highly edited, and often combinations of multiple source documents. As an example Second Corinthians is an "undisputed" letter of "Paul", but it's actually two, three or perhaps even more letters stitched together into a single document. "Pauls" Pastoral Epistles where likely written in the latter half of the second century.
This all speaks to a human, non-divine origin of the scriptures.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
Anything? Interesting interpretation, given the provided definition.
The condition of the heart affects one’s ability to accept God’s perfect will. Jesus would have died for you if you were the only one…..but you’re not. We’re all sinners.
God's perfect will?
Do I need to requote the slaughter of the Midianites for you? How do you reconcile "God's perfect will" with this slaughter?
What I have trouble understanding is how one disputed witness that disagrees with every other witness in the book is to be believed when it takes an absolute mental contortionist to make him fit in.
Hastings, This book is supposed to be "inspired by God", The perfect word of the all knowing perfect creator of the universe, but it contradicts itself on fundamental theological issues such as, does The Law still apply, or not.
Nope…. you’re wrong. Whether or not the law was abolished is not a fundamental issue.
The fundamental issue is Jesus.
Your fundamental issue is your relationship with Jesus.
But of course you perhaps don’t believe Jesus ever existed…
What I have trouble understanding is how one disputed witness that disagrees with every other witness in the book is to be believed when it takes an absolute mental contortionist to make him fit in.
Hastings, This book is supposed to be "inspired by God", The perfect word of the all knowing perfect creator of the universe, but it contradicts itself on fundamental theological issues such as, does The Law still apply, or not.
Nope…. you’re wrong. Whether or not the law was abolished is not a fundamental issue.
The fundamental issue is Jesus.
Your fundamental issue is your relationship with Jesus.
But of course you perhaps don’t believe Jesus ever existed…
Meh….
Saying Jesus is the fundamental issues is a nice excuse to ignore all the unpleasantries and inconsistence in the Bible. Regardless of how deep you stick your head in the sand, it doesn't go away.
Did you answer my question about The Slaughter of the Midianites?
The expression “Till heaven and earth pass” is just an idiom; it simply indicates that the Law wouldn’t disappear until it was all fulfilled. And it was. By Jesus.
It’s the same as saying that everything else might change, and the very earth and heaven might pass away, but the Law wouldn’t disappear until its whole design had been accomplished. And it was. By Jesus.
Jesus simply declared that no part of the Law would be unaccomplished, and that all of the Law would be fulfilled before "heaven and earth pass", as they will. The Law was accomplished. The Law was fulfilled. By Jesus.
The expression “Till heaven and earth pass” is just an idiom; it simply indicates that the Law wouldn’t disappear until it was all fulfilled. And it was. By Jesus.
It’s the same as saying that everything else might change, and the very earth and heaven might pass away, but the Law wouldn’t disappear until its whole design had been accomplished. And it was. By Jesus.
Jesus simply declared that no part of the Law would be unaccomplished, and that all of the Law would be fulfilled before "heaven and earth pass", as they will. The Law was accomplished. The Law was fulfilled. By Jesus.
An idiom? Why say something that is the opposite of what is meant? If Jesus came to offer his life in atonement, which abolished the law of the prophets, why say " Do not think that I have come to abolish the law of the prophets....? It makes no sense to say that, only to proceed to do that very thing.
Did you answer my question about The Slaughter of the Midianites?
There was a whole lot of slaughtering going on back then. Moses may have been getting a bit crack brained in his old age, but the more likely explanation is that the Hebrews were going all out to take the land and it would have been unwise to leave even a remnant of an enemy behind as they advanced. I'm sure they had no way to deal with prisoners capable of revolt.
Antelope Sniper: This is unrelated to the discussion at hand and I'm not asking your address, town or anything like that, but do you live on the eastern plains, the front range, or the west part of the state. Just curious and it is ok if you don't wish to say.
Sounds like you are confusing facts with wanting to believe. Facts are true for all people
A fact is a point of data which is not in dispute. A fact is a point of data that is objectively verifiable.
In short: FACT = OBSERVATION
Facts will never change. Facts are always true.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
Anything? Interesting interpretation, given the provided definition.
The condition of the heart affects one’s ability to accept God’s perfect will. Jesus would have died for you if you were the only one…..but you’re not. We’re all sinners.
Well I could say the condition of the mind affects one's ability to accept facts. The bible was written by men and has either proven to be false or otherwise unable to be proven true, and given some of the fantastic claims you'd expect there to be some verifiable and undeniable evidence to support it's narrative.
There was a whole lot of slaughtering going on back then. Moses may have been getting a bit crack brained in his old age, but the more likely explanation is that the Hebrews were going all out to take the land and it would have been unwise to leave even a remnant of an enemy behind as they advanced. I'm sure they had no way to deal with prisoners capable of revolt.
Are you forgetting Gibeon? The Jews were suckered by them so they weren't slaughtered. Even God helped out in saving Gibeon. Check out Joshua 9.
Sounds like you are confusing facts with wanting to believe. Facts are true for all people
A fact is a point of data which is not in dispute. A fact is a point of data that is objectively verifiable.
In short: FACT = OBSERVATION
Facts will never change. Facts are always true.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
You mean like abiogenesis?
I'm not sure if that has been fully worked out, but the evolution of life is fact with tons of supporting evidence.
Christianity doesn’t rise and fall on the integrity or the verifiability of the Bible, or whether or not it contains contradictions. Christianity preceded the Bible; the reason we have the Bible is because of something that happened before the Bible ever existed. There were many thousands of Christians before ‘the Bible’ ever came along in the 4th century.
And if you never opened the Bible, if you never saw a Bible, if the entire Bible…with all of its alleged contradictions…suddenly vanished from the earth, it would do nothing to undermine Christianity. Because Christianity began when Jesus rose from the dead. People followed Jesus after the resurrection because of the resurrection.
That’s how Christianity got started. It’s not near as fragile as some people choose to think. It doesn’t hang by a thread of some passage in the Bible, it’s much more sturdier than that. If it was that fragile, Christianity would have never survived the 1st century.
Presumably those who translated the bible understood what they were reading in Aramaic, Hebrew and the ancient Greek of the NT.
If not, why do you trust their interpretations? Are you not placing your faith in God on the strength of material that has been translated into English?
I was raised a Christian and I guess I'll die as Christian....
As I grew older it dawned on me that the Christain Religion started in the sands of the Middle East traveled to Europe and the rest of the world as a means to control.people.
Christianity is one of the newest Religions on the planet.
Practice what Religion you want but don't force your beliefs on me or try and infringe on my freedom and call it Religion.
It's no secret that Bible believing Christians outside of the big denominational state religion were slaughtered by the millions throughout the dark ages. Lot's of atheists like to try that blame game and falsely blame the people of the Word with the "holy" Roman Empire. Some people do it because that's all they've been taught. In addition, the pagans were enslaving and committing human sacrifices throughout history. A bunch of devil worshippers.
Every liberty we enjoy are gifts from the God of the Bible.
The topic is about whether or not giving up sins is a requirement for salvation. Answer below.
Sounds like you are confusing facts with wanting to believe. Facts are true for all people
A fact is a point of data which is not in dispute. A fact is a point of data that is objectively verifiable.
In short: FACT = OBSERVATION
Facts will never change. Facts are always true.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
You mean like abiogenesis?
I'm not sure if that has been fully worked out, but the evolution of life is fact with tons of supporting evidence.
Sorry, man. Your faith in the untestable is showing. Give it a try to tell us how even a small snippet of DNA could form naturally.
I was raised a Christian and I guess I'll die as Christian....
As I grew older it dawned on me that the Christain Religion started in the sands of the Middle East traveled to Europe and the rest of the world as a means to control.people.
Christianity is one of the newest Religions on the planet.
Practice what Religion you want but don't force your beliefs on me or try and infringe on my freedom and call it Religion.
Well, LFC, I hope you have a wonderful Christmas. By the way, no one forced you to open this thread. No one on 24hour is forcing you.
I don't think I said anything about Christians getting slaughtered.....
I was referring to the whole sale slaughter of history and culture the Christians have did throughout History.
In some cases worse than what Hitler did to the Jews.
If you get from believers here anything close to what Hitler did to the Jews, please let your family know to contact us. We gotta warn the others before they get the same. 😨
You might not celebrate Christmas. No problem. Have a Happy New Year!
It's no secret that Bible believing Christians outside of the big denominational state religion were slaughtered by the millions throughout the dark ages. Lot's of atheists like to try that blame game and falsely blame the people of the Word with the "holy" Roman Empire. Some people do it because that's all they've been taught. In addition, the pagans were enslaving and committing human sacrifices throughout history. A bunch of devil worshippers.
Every liberty we enjoy are gifts from the God of the Bible.
The topic is about whether or not giving up sins is a requirement for salvation. Answer below.
Merry Christmas
The bible doesn't condemn slavery. It instructs slaves to obey their masters. Overall, the Pagans were no better or worse, human behaviour is motivated by more than just religion. There are other needs and wants....
Do you think that our own sense of regret…as the mere humans that we are…is identical to what God is experiencing here…? Or do you think that God, who is omniscient and omnipotent, had the foreknowledge and knew the outcome in advance, yet allowed it to happen anyway in order to achieve His sovereign purpose…? And, is ‘regret’ to us analogous with ‘regret’ to the Creator of the universe…? Is it even accurate to describe God using human terms…?
Sounds like you are confusing facts with wanting to believe. Facts are true for all people
A fact is a point of data which is not in dispute. A fact is a point of data that is objectively verifiable.
In short: FACT = OBSERVATION
Facts will never change. Facts are always true.
Irrespective of the condition of your heart, anything around the bible fails the above criteria - the dispute of interpretations being evidenced by this thread and typical of all the other religious threads.
You mean like abiogenesis?
I'm not sure if that has been fully worked out, but the evolution of life is fact with tons of supporting evidence.
Sorry, man. Your faith in the untestable is showing. Give it a try to tell us how even a small snippet of DNA could form naturally.
Like they say "science doesn't know everything, religion knows nothing". Pretending to know and believing it is being dishonest to one's self.
Do you think that our own sense of regret…as the mere humans that we are…is identical to what God is experiencing here…? Or do you think that God, who is omniscient and omnipotent, had the foreknowledge and knew the outcome in advance, yet allowed it to happen anyway in order to achieve His sovereign purpose…? And, is ‘regret’ to us analogous with ‘regret’ to the Creator of the universe…? Is it even accurate to describe God using human terms…?
Or perhaps it's just one more piece of evidence that its' all BS.
"When sin entered the World" is a brief statement, not an explanation. I'm still waiting for the explanation.
lol
Again, you asked me a question. And I clearly answered your question. Then, I asked the same question of you.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
I knew ahead of time that my children were going to experience pain and heartache in this life; but I’m still sad when it happens.
Where did the heartache, suffering and pain come from?
Originally Posted by antlers
I think when sin entered the world, it held the door open for heartache, suffering, and pain.
Still not an explanation for why 'sin entered the world' - or who, in this scenario, was responsible.
A hint, the Creator is supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent.
Free will is not an excuse.
Where does the buck stop? Who do you think is responsible for the mess? The creator of the mess or the creatures for acting in accordance to their created nature and makeup? Created fallable, only to be condemned for it?
So, you ask a simple question of me, which I clearly answer. And then, I ask the same question of you, which you refuse to answer. And then you move the goalposts.
So, you ask a simple question of me, which I clearly answer. And then, I ask the same question of you, which you refuse to answer. And then you move the goalposts.
shocker
Asking for details is not moving the goalposts. I understand why you prefer to keep your 'explanations' at simple slogan level.
Nor is my position relevant to the subject of creation or the question of why 'sin entered' a world created by an omniscient/omnipotent God...which is the point of contention. Slogans do not explain a thing.
Religion says, “Change and you can join us.” But Jesus says, “Follow me and you will change.” There's a very big difference. Jesus doesn't expect us to be perfect. He just wants us to follow Him. Being a sinner doesn't disqualify us from following Him. Being an unbeliever doesn't disqualify us from following Him. In fact, following Him almost always begins with a sinner taking one small step.
Being a sinner doesn't disqualify us from following Him. Being an unbeliever doesn't disqualify us from following Him. In fact, following Him almost always begins with a sinner taking one small step.
I think His teachings are so good, that even if one ‘is’ an unbeliever, if one will simply follow His teachings, it will make one’s life better, and it will make one better at life. And who doesn’t want their life to be better…? And who doesn’t want to be better at life…?
I knew ahead of time that my children were going to experience pain and heartache in this life; but I’m still sad when it happens.
Where did the heartache, suffering and pain come from?
Where do ‘you’ think it came from…?
I asked for an explanation.
You asked me a question. And I clearly provided you with an answer to your question. And then I asked the same question of you.
"When sin entered the World" is a brief statement, not an explanation. I'm still waiting for the explanation.
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sine entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
I knew ahead of time that my children were going to experience pain and heartache in this life; but I’m still sad when it happens.
You are not a god.
That’s a fact. What’s your point…?
Since you are not a god, you do not control the initial conditions, so your comparison is not valid.
As their parent, I absolutely do control the initial conditions…I chose to bring them into this world…knowing ahead of time that they were going to experience pain and heartache in this life. My comparison is absolutely valid.
I think His teachings are so good, that even if one ‘is’ an unbeliever, if one will simply follow His teachings, it will make one’s life better, and it will make one better at life. And who doesn’t want their life to be better…? And who doesn’t want to be better at life…?
Can the same not be said of other philosophies and religions?
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sin entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
The faith of Christianity says that we have a future hope; and to me, it’s tethered to a brutal fact. And that brutal fact is that there is a global relationship between sin and suffering. When sin entered the world…whether the original sin theology from the Law and the Prophets is literally true or allegory…it held the door open for death, illness, sorrow, pain, suffering, and despair. They all came in right behind sin. It's not fair, and it takes everything out of our control. But there it is. I believe that God’s plan…whatever it is…is sovereign. Do I understand it all…? Nope. Neither does anyone else. But Jesus’ message was one of hope, that never lost sight of the brutal fact that sin was making its way through the world and would touch every single one of us human beings.
I think His teachings are so good, that even if one ‘is’ an unbeliever, if one will simply follow His teachings, it will make one’s life better, and it will make one better at life. And who doesn’t want their life to be better…? And who doesn’t want to be better at life…?
Can the same not be said of other philosophies and religions?
You tell me. But, if the same can be said of other philosophies and religions, it still in no wise diminishes my assertion above.
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sine entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
It entered the world when Eve, of free will, chose to do so. You assume that everything that happens is God’s will, therefore it’s part of His micro-managed plan. That is YOUR interpretation of how it should work.
God hates sin. Yet it happens. Why? The natural sin that’s been passed down to us as well as our individual free wills. Knowing specific humans will commit specific sins isn’t the same as making those humans commit those sins and in the end, they won’t affect His perfect plan. In the end, we all give up this human form and stand in His judgement. That’s His stated plan and when you look at your life in the flesh as a “puff of smoke” in the timeline of infinity, the minutia that unbelievers dredge up suddenly becomes inconsequential in the scope of that perfect plan.
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sin entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
The faith of Christianity says that we have a future hope; and to me, it’s tethered to a brutal fact. And that brutal fact is that there is a global relationship between sin and suffering. When sin entered the world…whether the original sin theology from the Law and the Prophets is literally true or allegory…it held the door open for death, illness, sorrow, pain, suffering, and despair. They all came in right behind sin. It's not fair, and it takes everything out of our control. But there it is. I believe that God’s plan…whatever it is…is sovereign. Do I understand it all…? Nope. Neither does anyone else. But Jesus’ message was one of hope, that never lost sight of the brutal fact that sin was making its way through the world and would touch every single one of us human beings.
It's a lot easier to understand if you just take god(s) out of the equation.
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sine entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
It entered the world when Eve, of free will, chose to do so. You assume that everything that happens is God’s will, therefore it’s part of His micro-managed plan. That is YOUR interpretation of how it should work.
God hates sin. Yet it happens. Why? The natural sin that’s been passed down to us as well as our individual free wills. Knowing specific humans will commit specific sins isn’t the same as making those humans commit those sins and in the end, they won’t affect His perfect plan. In the end, we all give up this human form and stand in His judgement. That’s His stated plan and when you look at your life in the flesh as a “puff of smoke” in the timeline of infinity, the minutia that unbelievers dredge up suddenly becomes inconsequential in the scope of that perfect plan.
Did he not make Eve and know every action she would take at that moment, but have a choice to make her differently, and hence she would make different choices? Didn't he have trillions of versions of Eve to choose from, yet he chose one that would bring sin into the world?
To be clear, Free Will and Pascals Wager and threats of Judgement doesn't get you out of this chain of responsibility.
Did he not make Eve and know every action she would take at that moment, but have a choice to make her differently, and hence she would make different choices? Didn't he have trillions of versions of Eve to choose from, yet he chose one that would bring sin into the world?
To be clear, Free Will and Pascals Wager and threats of Judgement doesn't get you out of this chain of responsibility.
Please re-read my last post. It literally addresses every aspect of your response…..with exception to the concept of alternate realities. I can’t recall alternate realities being mentioned in the bible, though. That’s a secular thing. I’ll have to defer to your opinion on that matter.
To be clear, ignoring the significance of free will and God’s judgement as acceptable is YOUR choice. Anyone who believe’s in God’s Word knows them to be valid points in the topic of sin.
And how exactly did "sin enter the world"? Does your god not plan everything? Is his plan not perfect? Yet everything came a part when "sine entered the world" as part of his perfect plan?
It entered the world when Eve, of free will, chose to do so. You assume that everything that happens is God’s will, therefore it’s part of His micro-managed plan. That is YOUR interpretation of how it should work.
God hates sin. Yet it happens. Why? The natural sin that’s been passed down to us as well as our individual free wills. Knowing specific humans will commit specific sins isn’t the same as making those humans commit those sins and in the end, they won’t affect His perfect plan. In the end, we all give up this human form and stand in His judgement. That’s His stated plan and when you look at your life in the flesh as a “puff of smoke” in the timeline of infinity, the minutia that unbelievers dredge up suddenly becomes inconsequential in the scope of that perfect plan.
Did he not make Eve and know every action she would take at that moment, but have a choice to make her differently, and hence she would make different choices? Didn't he have trillions of versions of Eve to choose from, yet he chose one that would bring sin into the world?
To be clear, Free Will and Pascals Wager and threats of Judgement doesn't get you out of this chain of responsibility.
Not only that, but all the elements of failure are put into place to practically guarantee failure; a naive couple who have no knowledge of good and evil, a cunning serpent, forbidden fruit, a test that ensures failure, etc.....
Imagine a conversation between Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins...and the Apostle Peter. Harris and Dawkins would start out with their blistering critique of the Old Testament and highlight God’s genocidal directives to the Hebrews to go into a land and kill everybody and everything in the land, then they’d go on and on about the dangers of religion and they’d cite all of the atrocities carried out in the name of religion throughout history, and especially Christian atrocities. And, they might question God’s plan and how He set up a naive couple in the Garden of Eden to fail. And then punish humanity for their failure.
But...the foundation of the Christian faith is not a cobbled together group of manuscripts that describes these things. Peter might respond by telling them that he’s certainly familiar with the history of his people; much more so than they are. And maybe that he’s never questioned it because that’s how he was raised. And he’d likely point out that none of that...nothing thats been said by any of them has anything to do with his decision to now follow Jesus. The unbelievers would reference the inadequacy of Peter’s beliefs, so then Peter would explain his reasoning...and He only has one reason.
When Jesus was arrested, Peter ran...and when asked if he knew Jesus, Peter lied. And when the Romans crucified Jesus, He died. And at that time, Peter was like the unbelievers…he had no faith. He didn’t know what to believe. He had no reason to believe, because he didn’t know what to believe. He’d just spent 3 years of his life following a now dead false prophet, and now he had a price on his head.
And then Jesus came, and there He was...very much alive.
Peter wouldn’t see it as bein’ worth arguing about anything the unbelievers had said, but he’d very likely clarify one thing...his reason for believing wasn’t something he’d heard or read or had read to him. Peter believed what he believed because of what he saw...he watched Jesus die, he knew exactly where He was buried, but God raised Him from the dead...and Peter saw Him, and he saw Him more than once. That’s the reason...that’s the only reason...for Peter’s hope and belief.
And that’s the reason for my hope and belief as well.
Imagine a conversation between Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins...and the Apostle Peter. Harris and Dawkins would start out with their blistering critique of the Old Testament and highlight God’s genocidal directives to the Hebrews to go into a land and kill everybody and everything in the land, then they’d go on and on about the dangers of religion and they’d cite all of the atrocities carried out in the name of religion throughout history, and especially Christian atrocities. And, they might question God’s plan and how He set up a naive couple in the Garden of Eden to fail. And then punish humanity for their failure.
But...the foundation of the Christian faith is not a cobbled together group of manuscripts that describes these things. Peter might respond by telling them that he’s certainly familiar with the history of his people; much more so than they are. And maybe that he’s never questioned it because that’s how he was raised. And he’d likely point out that none of that...nothing thats been said by any of them has anything to do with his decision to now follow Jesus. The unbelievers would reference the inadequacy of Peter’s beliefs, so then Peter would explain his reasoning...and He only has one reason.
When Jesus was arrested, Peter ran...and when asked if he knew Jesus, Peter lied. And when the Romans crucified Jesus, He died. And at that time, Peter was like the unbelievers…he had no faith. He didn’t know what to believe. He had no reason to believe, because he didn’t know what to believe. He’d just spent 3 years of his life following a now dead false prophet, and now he had a price on his head.
And then Jesus came, and there He was...very much alive.
Peter wouldn’t see it as bein’ worth arguing about anything the unbelievers had said, but he’d very likely clarify one thing...his reason for believing wasn’t something he’d heard or read or had read to him. Peter believed what he believed because of what he saw...he watched Jesus die, he knew exactly where He was buried, but God raised Him from the dead...and Peter saw Him, and he saw Him more than once. That’s the reason...that’s the only reason...for Peter’s hope and belief.
And that’s the reason for my hope and belief as well.
You are cleverly making an unassailable point. But alas most sceptics are too biased to realize it. But then they are not serious sceptics.
An argument is only as good as the premises upon which it is based. Interpretations and assumptions may be flawed, Muslim or Hindu theology, Judaism, Christianity, New Age, etc, etc,
You are cleverly making an unassailable point. But alas most sceptics are too biased to realize it. But then they are not serious sceptics.
Yet when those of Islamic faith make cleverly unassailable points regarding their particular beliefs you lot seem more than happy to denigrate their considered argument. You are all religious nutjobs not because of your beliefs, but because you insist that all should follow your beliefs.
Not one of you proselytising pricks is any different from the Muslim turds or the Jewish turds that seek to control others.
You are cleverly making an unassailable point. But alas most sceptics are too biased to realize it. But then they are not serious sceptics.
Yet when those of Islamic faith make cleverly unassailable points regarding their particular beliefs you lot seem more than happy to denigrate their considered argument. You are all religious nutjobs not because of your beliefs, but because you insist that all should follow your beliefs.
Not one of you proselytising pricks is any different from the Muslim turds or the Jewish turds that seek to control others.
Well put. If they had been born Muslim's, I wonder what their belief would be.
They would be much the same as others in their family, community, nation and culture. Hindus, Christians, Jews, Muslims, conservatives, liberals.......
They would be much the same as others in their family, community, nation and culture. Hindus, Christians, Jews, Muslims, conservatives, liberals.......
True. As Thomas Paine called it.............accident of birth.
You are all religious nutjobs not because of your beliefs, but because you insist that all should follow your beliefs. Not one of you proselytising pricks is any different from the Muslim turds or the Jewish turds that seek to control others.
smh
I don’t insist that all should follow my beliefs. Nor do I seek to control others. I face my greatest challenge every morning when I look in the mirror. I have my hands full enough with that guy.
And the atheists here do just as much “proselytizing” for their religion of no beliefs than a lot of the ‘Christians’ do.
It’s OK with me for others to choose to believe whatever they choose to believe.
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/8a/e6/25/8ae625df99bfcf9aee918ce46bd5151c.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/t6kwsIe.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/UAJiTvo.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/XqqRwbqC/brain-slice.gif)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ad/a1/15/ada11524c355442db44ea3a7e218c1fd.jpg)
![[Linked Image from dailyverses.net]](https://dailyverses.net/images/en/niv/john-3-16-2.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.ytimg.com]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6sLEb8iReiQ/maxresdefault.jpg)
![[Linked Image from pm1.narvii.com]](https://pm1.narvii.com/6883/eaae49f8895f4f2e407a1106399241924ad7c1acr1-1920-1080v2_hq.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/79/ee/20/79ee208f83937fbc9fbc4b3f604b2227.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/5b/43/70/5b43704bf85aa392cec50fe8d41056f2--christmas-pictures-christmas-.jpg)
