Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith

But not everybody is required to sell or give up everything unless perhaps metaphorically. Take The Centurion, for example. Not only did he have a house--he had servants! Having faith does not automatically mean selling or giving away everything. Some, in fact, use it as an excuse to let go of everything that they are losing anyway...perhaps in the name of socialism.

The point is that Jesus complimented the man for having great faith...even as he owned a house and had servants. You actually think that Jesus wouldn't fully capitalize on a teaching moment if the teaching were needed? My point is that you personally embrace this teaching of giving it all up because you yourself are giving a lot up---even if unintentionally--and need the "teaching" as a valid excuse. Then you attempt to project it onto me as if I am guilty of some sin. I am only showing you that "giving it all away" is not a primary theme in all of the scripture nor is it intended for everyone.

Its patently ridiculous to sell all that one has.That's not an excuse---that's simply common sense. Modern Psychologists would see your explanation that it was what Jesus wanted us to do as irrational and a bit extreme. Of course you can join Faith in indicting them.

Not at all. You need an excuse why you are losing all of your stuff. (And maybe why its not worth fighting/working to save). You likely enjoyed hanging out on the streets helping people anyway.But you cant project your plain reading of the Bible into a sermon for all of us and argue against an entire church that its the gospel...just because you lean socialist anyway. Ask Milton Friedman. (If he were alive! )You will end up falling in the ditch with the very sheep you are trying to help and expecting someone else to give you the spare change.

You probably won't care--but this news team did a good job at investigative reporting.
I work hard for my money, and I dont give it away carelessly.We probably won't ever agree on this debate, so I think we are done.

Just the fact that they were punished by death for such an offense is reason enough to ignore and oppose that entire platform. I don't care who the leader is.If someone told me that I would somehow be punished for not surrendering all that I owned, I would oppose such a person and platform and ideology 100%.

Says the guy who believes neither exists!

As does any book and any message. The problem, as you yourself would have accused us of, is when someone claims truth through one message over another. So even if you can claim that this message says what it says, you have provided no reason why such a message should be accepted. There is no place on earth where all of the people are expected to surrender all that they have to a central governing authority. And though some societies have strived for this "ideal" they all fell apart. Whether this system would even work is highly questionable, given the reality of human nature. Moreover, few would want it. Many of us respect working for what we have and being responsible for our own survival and welfare. Granted I can say that limited social welfare is useful...Social Security is a case in point...but I paid into it in order to reap benefit from it. The point of contention is whether the governing authority should have the right to force me to give. I believe that I myself should and will keep that right. I will continue to argue with Jesus because I sure won't convince you. You expect to have to fully support others (even lazy ones) and also expect others to support you (which is naive and idealistic). So we will never agree. If you were my neighbor I would always make sure you had enough to eat, but I'll not pay everything I have to clothe and house you and be mandatorily forced to do so. I see the truth in the ideal. I see no truth in being forced to fork it over in reality.You have been poisoned by Left Wing ideology. Far far left.

The envelope contains the letter. The letter is from someone who put it in the envelope.The messenger contains the message. The message is from Someone Who put It In The Messenger.You cant simply claim that any envelope can just as easily hold your letter. One envelope addressed to YOU was sent.One Messenger sent to "whosoever" was sent. The messenger is the message, for the messenger contains the message. Now that we have that out of the way...... Sounds like a club I wouldn't necessarily favor joining...kinda like joining the Navy Seals or the Marines. You claim that I want to belong to a club where I don't even accept the message. But this is not true.I'm not as stingy as you think...I'm just selective over how I give. Granted I don't give enough. I'm scared of being broke. I don't trust that I will be taken care of.I'm curious what your little town is like up there in Canada. Is the library within walking distance from your house? Where do the locals gather to socialize?

I dont see how it matters. People claim that the Bible was made up anyway, so what difference does it make who comments or adds to the plain reading? How could we say that adding commentary and interpretation is a false belief? Are you suggesting that sticking to plain textual interpretation is the only "true" belief? If so, what is it that the plain text teaches us to believe? How does that differ from what GDR thinks we should believe?Edited by Phat, : subtitle

Shaky only in the context of hard evidence...which believers don't have anyway. We believe that the Word was the Word long before it was written down. We also believe that Jesus existed long before the Bible was even written. We dont believe that it would be impossible to hear of or know of Jesus without the book...there have been many global converts who were simply told the story.Granted I can't prove any of this to your rigid critical thinking standards, but believers don't limit their understanding of God or Jesus to the book. My point is that belief is what people individually and collectively decide that it is. There is no standard based on the plain textual reading.Otherwise, the majority of the church would agree with jars warped theology that claims that the god character differed throughout the Bible and was often in need of human correction and that the snake told the truth. Obviously, the vast majority of Christians do not believe these things to be true.

Who says?

So tell me this:
Do you believe that the Book was made-up?

If so, what difference does it make if the authors of an ancient book wrote down how they believed the story went? Granted it could be argued that they wrote the story, but my point is that there is no problem interpreting ones personal (or collective church) belief the way that one chooses. You bring up Long John Silver. People read the book for entertainment. In order to provide a proper analogy, if people read Long John Silver to determine the teaching and meaning from two Welsh brothers, it would be respectful to follow John Amrhein's original story to the letter. If, however, one simply believed in the legend of an opportunistic pirate, why not have poetic license to interpret such a character the way one wants? Give him a spaceship if you want to go there.

OK, I'll give you that argument for a moment. Tell me what good anyone could gain through belief that
1) God is nothing more than a character in a book that is often in need of correction and is "learning on the job"?
2) God kills a man and his wife for not giving everything to the common good.3) The snake told the truth. (and you mention that Satan is a plot device for how our own inner conscience works) If so, what's the point of plain textual belief and how does it differ in your mind from what Faith, GDR, and myself believe and what many of the apologists believe? Particularly GDR who says that Jesus is the word embodied as an example for us...which you seem to agree with except that you toss the envelope.In summation, you believe that it is the plain text message that we learn from and the evidence suggests nothing else...nor does the evidence suggest that there is any real benefit apart from selflessly helping our fellow man.