The Tension of Faith

Careful about claiming integrity Phat, when you so easily give in to the idiotic lies of so many here.

The gospels, all of them, and in fact the whole bible, are clearly the work of honest people. This arrogant attempt to discredit these honest people is deplorable.

Sounds like an accusation of dishonesty to me. Whatever words he imputed to Jesus were words acceptable by God Himself. If he wrongly thought they represented Jesus' thought, that sounds like dishonesty to me, or error, which of course cannot occur in God's word
. The Bible is God's own revelation to us, and not subject to the kinds of errors you are talking about. You are speculating anyway, this is all made-up junk to discredit the Bible. . Whqtever the Bible includes is the truth. Period. Oh dear, sounds serious, but it's undecipherable anyway, and it can only be seriously wrong.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The gospel of John seeks to persuade to the truth, for the sake of the immortal souls of human beings. The distinction you are making about persuasion versus truth is spurious. John simply and truthfully said he wrote much of his gospel so that people could be persuaded to the truth of the supernatural abilities of Christ. All anyone has done since I pointed that out is twist it into a lie. Such lies don't deserve respectful debate but simple condemnation.You and others here impute my views to me as some odd idiosyncratic invention of my own, but every day i hear sermons that share my point of view, I own hundreds of books that share it, my entire Christian life has revolved around the traditional understanding of the Bible, traditional theology. My view of the Bible is as traditional and orthodox as you can get. There are over a million sermons on the site Sermon Audio by preachers who share the point of view I try to represent faithfully here. I believe I represent it honestly. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The mention of all the preachers wasn't to say they are right, although they are, it was to answer whoever called my beliefs a "cult," the point being that I'm totally traditional.

Phat, a Christian must be an authoritarian, because God is an authoritarian. YOUR "weakness" is that you are a compromiser with God's truth, you "go along to get along," you don't seem to have any scruples about accepting blasphemous notions such as that God could be a "She" or that Christianity is "marketing" its teachings. Whatever "Christian converts" you might succeed in winning with your strategy would not be Christians.ABE, much later: I don't think this conveys what I want to convey. It depends on how the word "authoritarian" is read and it implies some kind of force which I don't mean to imply. I overreacted becauswe I absolutely hate the whole concept of authoritarianism as it was first presented by Theodor Adorno of the Frankfurt Schoo, which in keeping with the whole thrust of that subversive cultural Marxist school of thought was basically an attack on authority, period, amounting in their frame of reference to an attack on Western Civlization. And it had its effect in contributing to the undermining of western institutions starting with the family. The Frankfurt School thought it was attacking any tendencies to Nazism but it was in fact attacking civilization itself. So I despise their work and despise their view of authority and their promotion of the concept of authoritarianism, which is basically just a character assassination of Christian leadership.Is God an authoritarian? I meant first of all that He is the ultimate Authority to whom the whole Creation is subordinate and will some day bow. He ordained institutions with authorities at their head, starting with Adam as authority over Eve. This is a hierarchy of order, not any kind of excuse for tyranny, although since the Fall it has often become that. But it is hard to hold on to a benign view of authority ever since the Frankfurt School trashed it under the concept of authoritarianism. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Commandments aren't opinions and we are given no freedom to disagree with them, we either obey them or violate them. God is Authority, God tells us what is right and wrong. That's it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The permission Elisha gave to Naaman to accompany his master in his idol worship had to be based on Elisha's knowledge that Naaman's heart was changed and that he himself could no longer worship idols so that his act would be only an outward obedience to his master. At least he could anticipate God's forgiveness because he had already repented from idol worship. Idol worship is a sin of the heart. The act should also not be allowed so I'm not completely happy with this interpretation myself.As for saving the life of an animal on the Sabbath that does not violate the commandment because a commandment mustn't be used to do evil. It is not a compromise or an exception, it is in keeping with God's will.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

"Some" argue? Hardly. It is understood that we all sin against all the commandments all the time, Phat. Reemember that Jesus explained that the commandment against adultery forbids adultery in the heart and not just outward behavior, also the commandment against murder forbids hating someone in your heart.What will become of us? How can you ask such a question? Do you believe that Christ's death on the cross means that your sins are forgiven? The commandments remain in force, every jot and tittle, forever, they cannot be abrogated. But Jesus' death paid their price for those who believe in Him.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It's God's own commentary. He is making clear what the commandments cover. All Christians take "kill" to mean murder and always have. Yes, we ALL either obey them or violate them in any particular instance, the point is those are the only two options, we do not have the option of changing their meaning. And as I already said we all violate all of them them every day.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

dup Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I don't think you can make such a blanket statement about all witnesses in all circumstances. And there's nothing particularly difficult about what John or any of the NT writers report of the miracles to suppose error through some sort of mental fog.Water turned to wine? How many ways could that be distorted by this supposed mental fog? Do you suppose it really didn't change at all or maybe turned to apple juice? A lifelong lame man walking? A lifelong blind man seeing? Give me a break.The circumstances of Jesus' ministry were electrifying enough to be vividly imprinted on everyone's memory. But the main problem with your argument is that any description that was faulty had dozens or even hundreds of witnesses ready and able to correct it. You seem to be imagining a lone witness such as might be the case in a court trial. The gospels would not have gone down as inerrant unless they passed all these tests.

God knows that when we think we always disobey. Disobedience is really the extent of our free will when it comes to the moral law. But of course I have not agreed with that at all. The commandments themselves are not as rigid as you think of them, they apply differently in different circumstances, not because of human interpretation but because that's God's definition of them. Acts of mercy are not a violation of the Sabbath commandment, by definition, not human determination. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's just a bunch of BS. For the gospels to have been taken as truth for two millennia means they were not contradicted by the many who could have. THERE WERE LOTS AND LOTS OF WITNESSES TO JESUS' MIRACULOUS ACTS, LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS, WHO PASSED ON THEIR TESTIMONY TO LOTS AND LOTS OF OTHERS.And the minor differences of perspective you insinuate but don't describe (by ONE writer?) --ABE: A different order of events????!!!! /abe-- hardly disqualify the general facts --ABE: THE IMPORTANT FACTS, THE TESTIMONY TO THE MIRACLES /ABE-- Are you kidding an accident? A trick? Switching pots? They were huge heavy clay pots by the way, not "barrels" What would possess anyone to try to invent a miracle out of such a thing and try to palm it off on the many witnesses who were there? -- what a bunch of arrogant creeps today's anti-Christians are --, and besides all you are doing is the usual curmudgeonly speculation, you don't know anything, it's all made up. Blech, yuck.Yes, lifelong.The writings went down as "inspired" in the early years if you don't like "inerrant," because they would not have been accepted into the early canon lists without that attestation of inspiration by the vast majority of the churches.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It's the position Paul described when he said the Law was given as a tutor to bring us to Christ. Meaning we learn from attempting to obey it that we can't, and that causes us to understand we need the salvation from it that Christ offers.