Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-22-2017 6:41 PM
362 online now:
jar, JonF, Meddle, Modulous (AdminModulous) (4 members, 358 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Happy Birthday: DC85
Post Volume:
Total: 822,856 Year: 27,462/21,208 Month: 1,375/1,714 Week: 218/365 Day: 60/62 Hour: 4/6

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
15161718Next
Author Topic:   The God That Paul Marketed Over Time.
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 196 of 267 (796769)
01-04-2017 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by GDR
01-03-2017 2:45 PM


Doctrinal errors
I don't think I answered your post well enough so want to add a couple of things. First, thanks for recognizing that it did take some courage to post those stories. Second, you argued that even though I trust the Bible it's not necessary to true faith. But actually, according to historical Protestantism, it is essential, it is THE authority we are to rely on and we have no other.

In fact the usual teaching is that God speaks to us through the Bible and any other means of hearing from God is untrustworthy. In practice it turns out that this is how He's spoken to me most of the time. But also sometimes through preachers and God's people. All other sources may or may not be true, and the only way to judge them is by the standard of the Bible.

You also seemed to imply that if CS is born again, somehow that validates the Catholic doctrines I object to. I did answer this but I didn't spell out the Catholic doctrines in question, only pointed to the Vatican as the big problem. But there are also problems with doctrines that an ordinary Catholic can fall into as well: praying to Mary or any other "saint" is a big one. The Popes do this which is a major sign of their apostasy. The confessional where Catholics are encouraged to tell their sins is a doctrinal error -- the Bible says we are to confess our sins to God and to fellow believers. And there is no special priesthood in the Bible, we are all a "priesthood of believers." And we don't wear fancy garb, pointy hats and other Roman pagan paraphernalia. And the repetitive prayers the Catholics give as penance is a direct violation of the Bible, compounded by the use of the rosary to count them, which is a pagan practice the RCC adopted along with so many others. The sign of the cross and lighting candles are minor superstitions that also should not be indulged.

Some Catholics don't get much into any of these things, and Jesus as Savior is their main focus. Those are the ones I can accept as true believers. There are likely to be more of them in America than in other parts of the world where Catholicism is a much bigger superstititous deal.

Bible Bible Bible, GDR, that IS our authority.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by GDR, posted 01-03-2017 2:45 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by GDR, posted 01-04-2017 6:52 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 197 of 267 (796771)
01-04-2017 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by Tangle
01-04-2017 9:33 AM


Re: Abide In Me
It's really amazing that you all accuse creationists and Christians of violations of rationaliity that you yourselves commit.

All you've said Faith is that you read something in the bible. Nothing else.

In other words I was lying about how what I read was brought to my attention? And its remarkable relevance to my state of mind is what, something I made up?

The question was about communication. I said that when people say they communicate with god and I ask them for details, they only have instances like your 'breeze turning pages'. This is not communication, at the very best it's circumstantial, but actually it's just superstition and confirmation bias.

It could only be that if it didn't happen as I described it happening, or if there are other explanations of what happened, or if I fudged the facts. Of course the breeze isn't the communication, it's what it brought to my attention that is the communication.

But there is no point in trying to prove anything to someone whose mind is so closed. I can only hope the stories weren't wasted on others who might be able to benefit from them. I went for years under the usual atheistic delusions that might have been dispelled by some believable supernatural accounts.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 9:33 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 12:13 PM Faith has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5161
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 198 of 267 (796773)
01-04-2017 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Faith
01-04-2017 11:16 AM


Re: Abide In Me
Faith writes:

In other words I was lying about how what I read was brought to my attention? And its remarkable relevance to my state of mind is what, something I made up?

Oh don't be such a martyr. I neither said nor implied that you are lying only that what you say happened didn't amount to anything even resembling communication from god. I'm not doubting what you said.

It could only be that if it didn't happen as I described it happening, or if there are other explanations of what happened, or if I fudged the facts. Of course the breeze isn't the communication, it's what it brought to my attention that is the communication.

There was no communication at all, you just read some parts of the bible that resonated with you. You could do that rightaway now, try it. Communication requires some, well, communicatin.

But there is no point in trying to prove anything to someone whose mind is so closed. I can only hope the stories weren't wasted on others who might be able to benefit from them. I went for years under the usual atheistic delusions that might have been dispelled by some believable supernatural accounts.

There was absolutely nothing in your stories that amounts to communication. That you were convinced I have no doubt, but that's hardy evidence.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 11:16 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 12:31 PM Tangle has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 199 of 267 (796775)
01-04-2017 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Tangle
01-04-2017 12:13 PM


Re: Abide In Me
Sigh. There's nothing martyrish in my remarks, I just think there is no other way you could reasonably conclude that what I described is not communication from God. Strictly factual statements I think you should rethink and acknowledge.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 12:13 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 1:10 PM Faith has responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5161
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 200 of 267 (796778)
01-04-2017 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Faith
01-04-2017 12:31 PM


Re: Abide In Me
Faith writes:

I just think there is no other way you could reasonably conclude that what I described is not communication from God.

Then you need to re-read what I said and try to do it without adding your own persecuted interpretation.

Again, I accept the facts of what you say; but I say that they amount to nothing more than confirmation bias. They can not - in any way at all - be described as communication.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 12:31 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 2:00 PM Tangle has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 201 of 267 (796780)
01-04-2017 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by Tangle
01-04-2017 1:10 PM


Re: Abide In Me
I answered that already. Your logic is wacko. You have no logic.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 1:10 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Tangle, posted 01-04-2017 2:40 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5161
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 202 of 267 (796784)
01-04-2017 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Faith
01-04-2017 2:00 PM


Re: Abide In Me
If you say so Faith.

But you might consider how different the conversation we've just had is to the 'conversation' you say you had with god.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 2:00 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10077
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 203 of 267 (796794)
01-04-2017 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Tangle
01-03-2017 12:33 PM


Re: Abide In Me
Phat writes:

1 Cor 1:18-25 writes:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

What does Paul mean here? What does it mean to preach Christ crucified?

jar writes:

You would have to ask Paul but it does seem very much like what much of Christianity markets as opposed to what Jesus marketed. It seems simply another example of Paul the "End Times" "what's in it for me" salesman.

Your bias is showing here. As I may have said before, your whole interpretation of what jesus said and did...Matthew 25 included...portrays Jesus message as nothing more than reformed judaism.

I have no idea what it means nor have I ever had anyone who seemed able to explain it in anything but word salad.
Are you saying that Pauls writings are little more than word salad to you? Talk about willful ignorance!
1 Cor 2:14-15 writes:

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

jar writes:

Give us an example of any wisdom that is not of the world?

I would quote scripture, but you somehow see it as word salad. I am talking Source and you are talking Content, but even if I agree with you that the content is the issue, I cannot add anything to what the scripture (of Paul) plainly says. You seem to think Paul is some sort of salesman that attempted to usurp Judaism and the "being a good Jew (or Christian) is based entirely on what you do...not what you believe."
jar writes:

How can there be any wisdom that is not of the world?

It would come from someone who was not of this world.
John 18:33-37 writes:


Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?"
34 "Is that your own idea," Jesus asked, "or did others talk to you about me?"
35 "Am I a Jew?" Pilate replied. "It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?"

36 Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

37 "You are a king, then!" said Pilate.

Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."

ringo writes:

The wisdom of the world is all you have, period.

Perhaps. I would argue, however, that if Christ were not of this world...as He says...and if He came into the world to testify to the truth, that scripture itself is not confined to worldly wisdom.

jar writes:

The issue is that the God people worship is always a creation of themselves, it is a human creation.
Most folk it seems do not seem to think or understand that.

Would you also say that the Jesus we speak of is a creation of our own minds, bias, and desire? If so, you cannot claim that the Jesus you speak of is in any way more representative of anything more than your bias towards reformed judaism and personal responsibility.

jar writes:

How is Christ being crucified any stumbling block to any Jew?

As you have said before, He is to you a failed Messiah. It appears that you now preach that we are all responsible for ushering in a Messianic Age.
jar writes:

How can it be determined that God is communicating through a redactor?

It can no more be determined than it can that Jesus is communicating from God to humanity in Matthew 25. You are biased towards Matthew 25 because it emphasizes personal responsibility. I have nothing against personal responsibility but I do have an issue with you teaching us that we create the Gods we preach.
jar writes:

Are there not Christians who consider the Bible as without error and factual and also Christians that understand the Bible is filled with factual errors, contradictions and ambiguities?

Yes there are....which is why I doubt we will ever agree.

Taq writes:

From what we can see, it is purely the invention of the human mind.

Just because humans wrote it down does not mean that humans made it up.

ringo writes:

You're the one who thinks the Bible has some relevance. I'm just pointing out to you what it actually says.

As long as we stick to the Bible, we can safely say we ourselves are not making any new things up!

ringo writes:

You have a belief in belief but you don't understand what belief means.

Yes i do. I've gotten your point about belief being no good without action.
ringo writes:

Believers are convinced by something other than evidence.

Evidence is not the only means to be convinced.
ringo writes:

...ANY evidence-based conclusion is superior to an unevidenced belief.

Depends what standard you base superiority on. To me, it all gets back to 1 Thessalonians again.
1 Thess 1:4-7 writes:


4 For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, 5 because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction. You know how we lived among you for your sake. 6 You became imitators of us and of the Lord; in spite of severe suffering, you welcomed the message with the joy given by the Holy Spirit.

The evidence in this case was the actions of the people themselves.
You may argue that the reports themselves are simply stories and not real evidence...

Tangle writes:

...all I ever get is woo - signs and omens, coincidences and spookiness. Never what people say they do, which is communicate. Two way normal communication. Not ouija board stuff.

Can the reports of what was said qualify as communication? If not, all you will ever have is woo.
Tangle writes:

The mere fact that you're reading the bible is enough to tell any objective observer that you're simply selecting what is significant to you.

Of course it is significant. Spending time discussing this stuff is significant or i may as well go fishing!

Tangle,to Faith writes:

Why you and not me? Am I not worth saving? (Please don't give me that bollox about needing to believe before you can believe - that's just more evidence of delusion.)

Well as I may have said before, you have to be seeking evidence for a valid reason.

Edited by Phat, : corrected broken quote


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ĖRC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ĖMark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Tangle, posted 01-03-2017 12:33 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by jar, posted 01-04-2017 4:37 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 207 by ringo, posted 01-05-2017 11:00 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29622
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 204 of 267 (796798)
01-04-2017 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Phat
01-04-2017 3:31 PM


Re: Abide In Me
But Jesus was only trying to reform Judaism. He preached to the Jews, lived as a Jew, was born a Jew and died a Jew.

Yes, much of what Paul wrote really is word salad. But wait...there's more. When folk like you then take pieces parts out of it, when you quote mine, when you use proof texts you increase the destruction of any message that might have been there.

Yes, you market source but never, ever present the actual content.

Look at your post above. You once again failed to provide anything in the way of explanation. You do not explain what "preach Christ crucified" means or why it is of any import.

The very next example you repeat the tactic. I say no one has ever explained something and you respond with another silly proof text that answers nothing, explains nothing.

Sorry Phat but so far you have presented no content at all.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios † † My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Phat, posted 01-04-2017 3:31 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4349
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 205 of 267 (796804)
01-04-2017 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Faith
01-04-2017 11:04 AM


Re: Doctrinal errors
Faith writes:

First, thanks for recognizing that it did take some courage to post those stories. Second, you argued that even though I trust the Bible it's not necessary to true faith. But actually, according to historical Protestantism, it is essential, it is THE authority we are to rely on and we have no other.


That is the whole thing in a nut shell Faith. You say there is no other authority than the Bible. What about Jesus? As it says in the gospel of John;í the Word became flesh, it doesnít say that the Word became a book. You choose the Bible over Jesus and make an idol of the Bible. Jesus corrects the OT in several places and also personifies a very different nature of God than what we see often, but not even always, in the OT. You cannot have it both ways.

You cannot rationalize Godís nature as being able to ask His chosen people to engage in genocide and public stoning, with His Word, that is incarnate in Jesus, where His followers are told to love their enemy, turn the other cheek etc. You canít even rationalize it with much of the OT such as the verse from Micah that is my signature.

Faith writes:

In fact the usual teaching is that God speaks to us through the Bible and any other means of hearing from God is untrustworthy. In practice it turns out that this is how He's spoken to me most of the time. But also sometimes through preachers and God's people. All other sources may or may not be true, and the only way to judge them is by the standard of the Bible.


I agree that Jesus speaks to us through the Bible, through other people, through the Holy Spirit speaking to our hearts and, even as Paul says by seeing God in what He has created. However, once again; how about judging sources by the message of Jesus and the law of love.
Faith writes:

You also seemed to imply that if CS is born again, somehow that validates the Catholic doctrines I object to. I did answer this but I didn't spell out the Catholic doctrines in question, only pointed to the Vatican as the big problem. But there are also problems with doctrines that an ordinary Catholic can fall into as well: praying to Mary or any other "saint" is a big one. The Popes do this which is a major sign of their apostasy. The confessional where Catholics are encouraged to tell their sins is a doctrinal error -- the Bible says we are to confess our sins to God and to fellow believers. And there is no special priesthood in the Bible, we are all a "priesthood of believers." And we don't wear fancy garb, pointy hats and other Roman pagan paraphernalia. And the repetitive prayers the Catholics give as penance is a direct violation of the Bible, compounded by the use of the rosary to count them, which is a pagan practice the RCC adopted along with so many others. The sign of the cross and lighting candles are minor superstitions that also should not be indulged.


The point was not, implied or otherwise, that CSí experience validated RC doctrine or any doctrine at all. My point was that you canít make claim to the validity of your doctrine because of your experience of God, and the same holds true for me. Many, if not all, people are touched by God one way or another, whether they recognize it as such or not. Godís love for the world is omnipresent. Doctrine and theology are a separate issues.

This thread is about the idea of Paulís marketing of the faith. I disagree with the premise. Paul is simply a theologian who is building a coherent theology based on his understanding of Jewish scriptures as revised by the life, death and particularly the resurrection of Jesus. Yes, he was an evangelist telling the world about what God was doing through the Jews and specifically through the Jewish Messiah.

Faith writes:

Some Catholics don't get much into any of these things, and Jesus as Savior is their main focus. Those are the ones I can accept as true believers. There are likely to be more of them in America than in other parts of the world where Catholicism is a much bigger superstititous deal.


A couple of things here. Firstly it is your focus on intellectual ascent to Jesus as Saviour, and as you have said elsewhere, Jesus as your personal saviour. Iím on board with the idea of Jesus as saviour but the point about salvation, is that one is saved for a purpose. We are saved so that we can serve God and His creation by reflecting His love into it. It is not about the specic doctrine that we espouse. This can be true for people of any belief.

The point about believing is not about our doctrinal views but about what we believe in our hearts. Are we about self love or the sacrificial love that we have for others. We can see this love of God personified in the life and death ofJesus, and confirmed by the Father having resurrected Him.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 11:04 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 9:04 PM GDR has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 206 of 267 (796812)
01-04-2017 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by GDR
01-04-2017 6:52 PM


Re: Doctrinal errors
GDR: When you come to this post, please note that I added a few paragraphs on your claim that Jesus changed the OT Law.

=======================================

That is the whole thing in a nut shell Faith. You say there is no other authority than the Bible. What about Jesus? As it says in the gospel of John;í the Word became flesh, it doesnít say that the Word became a book. You choose the Bible over Jesus and make an idol of the Bible. Jesus corrects the OT in several places and also personifies a very different nature of God than what we see often, but not even always, in the OT. You cannot have it both ways.

You cannot rationalize Godís nature as being able to ask His chosen people to engage in genocide and public stoning, with His Word, that is incarnate in Jesus, where His followers are told to love their enemy, turn the other cheek etc. You canít even rationalize it with much of the OT such as the verse from Micah that is my signature.

Pitting the Bible against Jesus who as a member of the Godhead wrote it is a very strange thing you do. To obey the Bible is to obey Jesus. To read the Bible is to know Jesus and know what He thinks. The Bible is all about Him -- as He told the disciples on the road to Emmaus. You can't separate Jesus and the Bible, one does not put one above the other, their proper relation is that the Bible reveals Jesus to us, whom otherwise we couldn't know at all. If you are hearing from "Jesus" outside the Bible and "He" says something that contradicts the Bible, that's proof it's not Jesus you are hearing from.

The biggest falseness people impute to Jesus is a false idea of what love is. Its usual fault is to severely limit justice, but true justice is a great act of love, without it the world would be overrun with violence.

"genocide" is murder, God forbids murder. Justice is the actual term for what you are calling "genocide." The objective of it is to reduce the corruptions and contamination of unbridled sin, crime, violence, demonic influence in the world. That's actually love. Stoning by the entire community was the means of executing the death penalty in those days, partly to impress the seriousness of the crime on the community and make sure all got the point, not some special form of torture.

ABE:

Jesus corrects the OT in several places and also personifies a very different nature of God than what we see often, but not even always, in the OT. You cannot have it both ways.

This is not true at all. Are you even thinking about the actual "corrections" Jesus supposedly did of the OT? And do remember that He Himself IS as much the God of the OT as is the Father.

If anything He made the laws stricter, but this wasn't a change as much as a revelation of what the Law is really all about. Now it isn't merely external obedience that counts but internal. He wasn't correcting this at all, He was saying this is what the Law always meant. Not just external harm but hating a person in your heart is murder for which you will be judged; not just actual adultery but lust in the heart is the sin of adultuer.

As for an eye for an eye, He didn't change that law as law for the government of society, what He did was give His own disciples the command to be willing to suffer rather than prosecute someone who insults us. And note well, all His examples are on the level of personal insult or personal inconvenience, they are not physical abuse and nothing here is implied about not resisting that sort of evil. Turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, give up your cloak to the one who would take your coat. The OT Law, however, continues to stand as the perfection of justice, while we as His disciples are to be willing to tolerate personal insults and inconveniences as He did. If He meant we were not to resist all kinds of evil then He wouldn't have driven the moneychangers out of the temple. With a whip yet.

There is a false idea that Jesus softened the Law. He did not. He made it more rigorous -- from the heart -- on the one hand, and He required His disciples to tolerate personal abuses as He did.

In reality there is no way to change The Law anyway, because it is of the character of God Himself. It is universal. In fact in reality it rules the universe. It is the Law that Hinduism imperfectly intuits with its concept of karma. It is always in operation, it is always judging us, it never stops judging us because it is moral and we are moral beings. THIS IS WHY JESUS DIED FOR US. Otherwise we have no way to escape the condemnation of the Law. It is inexorable.

THERE IS NO CHANGE WHATEVER IN THE CHARACTER OF GOD OR HIS LAW IN ANYTHING JESUS DID. /ABE

I agree that Jesus speaks to us through the Bible, through other people, through the Holy Spirit speaking to our hearts and, even as Paul says by seeing God in what He has created. However, once again; how about judging sources by the message of Jesus and the law of love.

What you miss is that the entire Bible does just that and you cannot properly apply its teachings without applying the law of love. The problem is that you make the law of love into something that suits your own limited imagination, and the result of that is usually to promote violence in the world, and that is not love but does harm. To appreciate God's severe judgments probably requires a realistic sense of the depths of evil in this fallen world, even within the fallen human heart, but also promoted by the demonic hordes that are always seeking to destroy humanity. Those who think God's justice is too severe end up having compassion on demons and putting humanity more in harm's way. Liberals, and "liberal Christians" commit this crime against humanity all the time by substituting a false sentimental emotional and dangerous idea of love for the passionate love of humanity God gives us in His word.

The point was not, implied or otherwise, that CSí experience validated RC doctrine or any doctrine at all. My point was that you canít make claim to the validity of your doctrine because of your experience of God, and the same holds true for me.

I didn't do that and wouldn't do that. But I might claim that if my experience is in accord with God's word that it shows my doctrine to be correct, and that spiritual experiences that are not so in accord are doctrinally false. I've had a very interesting time dealing with a particular issue on my blog over the last few years in which I'm repeatedly astonished by people's comments who consider themselves to be Christians but are incapable of recognizing demonic spiritual experiences, imputing them to Jesus, and taking me to task for revealing their true nature. Repeatedly my responses to those comments have to point the writer back to the Bible where the demonic nature of those experiences is clearly revealed. If you can't make this kind of distinction your Christian understanding is necessarily very weak and your own spiritual wellbeing is in danger. The demons are very very good at putting on a show of love and mercy and compassion and sweetness and light. "Satan appears as an angel of light." If you don't get anything else out of the Bible it would serve you well to get what that line means.

Many, if not all, people are touched by God one way or another, whether they recognize it as such or not. Godís love for the world is omnipresent. Doctrine and theology are a separate issues.

Big big dangerous mistake GDR. God gave us the Bible for precisely the purpose of revealing His true nature so we can recognize Him, and steering us away from false ideas of God, which the majority of mankind are still in bondage to. Counterfeit love is the devils' forte. True doctrine is nothing but the codification of the truth, you can't make it equal to personal experiences of God which are a major source of deception. Experience must reflect true doctrine or it's not to be trusted. Human nature is FALLEN, GDR, corrupted by the legacy of the Fall in Eden, we can not trust our experiences, and the devil is always working overtime to influence humanity against our own best interests and call it love.

You've got Paul all wrong of course but that's a tome in itself.

Faith writes:
Some Catholics don't get much into any of these things, and Jesus as Savior is their main focus. Those are the ones I can accept as true believers. There are likely to be more of them in America than in other parts of the world where Catholicism is a much bigger superstititous deal.

A couple of things here. Firstly it is your focus on intellectual ascent to Jesus as Saviour, and as you have said elsewhere, Jesus as your personal saviour.

That is not a mere intellectual assent, far far from it. He "bought me at a price," if I am truly saved. I belong to Him, He belongs to me. That being the case I owe Him every moment of my life, and complete obedience to His every command, out of deepest love. You have no idea what salvation means.

Iím on board with the idea of Jesus as saviour but the point about salvation, is that one is saved for a purpose. We are saved so that we can serve God and His creation by reflecting His love into it. It is not about the specic doctrine that we espouse. This can be true for people of any belief.

Utter nonsense. Yes of course we are saved for a purpose, and serving God as you put it is a way to describe it, which would be fine except that I know from so much of what you said that you use those words in a false and distorted way. You are misleading everybody you talk to about these things. There is no way to be saved without knowing Jesus personally and the only way to know Him is first of all through His word. He also communicates to our regenerated spirits but that always has to line up with scripture or there is the risk of hearing from a counterfeit Jesus. Jesus warns us in Matthew 25 and Luke 21 and elsewhere that many false Christs will come, and we are now living in a time when they are all around us, and your doctrine gives them approval instead of warning against them.

The point about believing is not about our doctrinal views but about what we believe in our hearts.

You really need to learn Jeremiah's warning about how the human heart is deceitful above all things. Trusting the human heart is utter folly. In fact there is nowhere in scripture we are guided to the heart. We are told to obey God "from the heart" but that means sincerely, with all our being, and according to His word. Please, learn Jeremiah's warning: the human heart is deceitful above all things. The ONLY thing we can trust is God's word to us, and He gave it to us in mercy BECAUSE our hearts are deceitful.

Are we about self love or the sacrificial love that we have for others.

That sounds so good and it would be just fine if you hadn't got everything else so upside down and backwards, which in the end makes everything you say along these lines very likely some kind of counterfeit. You CANNOT love people rightly, and your "sacrificial" love is probably deceptive too, because you trust in your own emotions instead of in God's word.

We can see this love of God personified in the life and death ofJesus, and confirmed by the Father having resurrected Him.

Again, sounds good, but since you've got so much doctrine wrong, meaning you are not in line with the truth given us by Jesus Himself, even such nice words end up ringing hollow.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by GDR, posted 01-04-2017 6:52 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by GDR, posted 01-06-2017 8:48 PM Faith has responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13881
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 207 of 267 (796846)
01-05-2017 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Phat
01-04-2017 3:31 PM


Re: Abide In Me
Phat writes:

ringo writes:

The wisdom of the world is all you have, period.


Perhaps. I would argue, however, that if Christ were not of this world...as He says...and if He came into the world to testify to the truth, that scripture itself is not confined to worldly wisdom.

The scriptures were written down by humans, translated by humans, redacted by humans, transcribed by humans - so it doesn't matter what spaceship Christ rode in on, scripture is the wisdom of the world.

Phat writes:

As long as we stick to the Bible, we can safely say we ourselves are not making any new things up!


But you don't stick to the Bible. You conveniently ignore what you don't like and make up what isn't there.

Phat writes:

Evidence is not the only means to be convinced.


Indeed. Any kind of snake oil can convince the gullible.

Phat writes:

ringo writes:

...ANY evidence-based conclusion is superior to an unevidenced belief.


Depends what standard you base superiority on.

I base superiority on relationship to reality. Evidence is reality, so evidence-based conclusions are necessarily connected to reality. Belief has no requirement to correspond to reality, which is why belief produces nonsense like creationism.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Phat, posted 01-04-2017 3:31 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4349
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


(2)
Message 208 of 267 (796890)
01-06-2017 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Faith
01-04-2017 9:04 PM


False Idols
Faith writes:

THERE IS NO CHANGE WHATEVER IN THE CHARACTER OF GOD OR HIS LAW IN ANYTHING JESUS DID.

Let's narrow it down to that statement as you emphasized it. In the OT they claim that God said that they were to slaughter their enemies. Jesus said, "love your enemies". In the OT they claim that God said that you are to stone to death people for various offences such as adulterers, whereas Jesus said when it came to the adulteress woman that the one without sin should cast the first stone saving her life.

Let's just look at the issue of genocide first. You call it God's justice. They were called to slaughter infants and you call that justice. They were to slaughter every living thing and you call that justice. Why then didnít Jesus not call on the Israelites to slaughter the Romans. He was highly critical of the revolutionaries, telling them that if they kept it up Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed as it was in 70AD. He said that they were to turn the other cheek, go the extra mile etc. Paul tells us in Ephesians that we should;

quote:
13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
Jesus was clear that evil is defeated with love not the sword.

How about justice for the Israelites? In how many cases in the last century have we seen people coming back from war, where they fought consenting adults and have been completely traumatized to the point where they take their own lives. We know what war does to its combatants. You think it is just fine for God as you understand Him to order His chosen people, the ones that He loves, to slaughter women and infants. What kind of justice is that for the Israelites? By your understanding of the OT God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah all on His own. If it was necessary then why wouldnít He just do that rather than putting His people, the people He loves, through that ordeal.

You state that Godís justice was being done when He supposedly ordered that some poor smuck was to be stoned to death for picking up firewood on the Sabbath. Jesus, as I said before repudiated that with the woman caught in adultery. Once again, what does that do to someone required to go out with the rest of the community and throw rocks at your neighbour until heís dead. If it really was necessary, why wouldn't God do it Himself or at least come up with a more humane way of doing it?

If you really believe that God ordered that done, then I really have to ask the question of why you would want to worship a deity like that. Is it just because Heís God and therefore youíll worship Him no matter how nasty he is. Isnít that what the pagans do? Isnít that what the members of ISIS do?

It is Christianity and you are a Christian. So why sacrifice the teaching of Jesus in favour of an inerrant Bible? You are making a false idol out of the Bible


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Faith, posted 01-04-2017 9:04 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Faith, posted 01-06-2017 11:09 PM GDR has not yet responded
 Message 210 by Faith, posted 01-06-2017 11:48 PM GDR has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 209 of 267 (796892)
01-06-2017 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by GDR
01-06-2017 8:48 PM


Re: False Idols
I've been writing this in a half-blind state for hours, so it's possible there are parts of it I'm not saying as I would like to. I am unable right now to do anything about that. Im going to post it anywa.

============================================

Faith writes:
THERE IS NO CHANGE WHATEVER IN THE CHARACTER OF GOD OR HIS LAW IN ANYTHING JESUS DID.

Let's narrow it down to that statement as you emphasized it. In the OT they claim that God said that they were to slaughter their enemies. Jesus said, "love your enemies".

I assume you are aware of the New Testament injunction to "rightly divide the word of truth." You are wrongly dividing it. You are equating OT commands on the level of the nation with Jesus' commands which are always exclusively directed at individuals, in fact individual believers. Jesus didn't denounce war, for instance; there are times when war is regrettably necessary, because of the evil in this fallen world. Jesus is not addressing nations. He is addressing us individually: I personally, you personally, are to love our enemies. Its intent is evangelistic; it's also a foreshadowing of the Kingdom of God.

The OT is all about the Law, which Paul says was intended to demonstrate our inability to obey it, which is intended to "lead us to Christ" for forgiveness and salvation from its inexorable condemnation. The Law punishes violators; Jesus came to fulfill the Law in His own body in order to set us captives free from it, as we, bing sinners, are captives to the Law itself. If you don't understand how the Law works, how it punishes wrongdoing, then you'll never understand what Jesus is doing to save us from it. He said He did not come to abolish the Law, but that is pretty much what you are imputing to Him. He came to fulfill it in His own Person.

In the OT they claim that God said that you are to stone to death people for various offences such as adulterers, whereas Jesus said when it came to the adulteress woman that the one without sin should cast the first stone saving her life.

Commentators agree that Jesus would not have rescinded any of the Law of Moses, as He Himself said, so they start with that assumption. The main idea seems to be that the Pharisees were themselves violating the Law of Moses by singling out the woman for punishment, while the Law calls for both the man and the woman to be punished for the sin. They also point out that He is responding to the Phariseesí attempt to trap Him, and to their hypocritical blindness to their own sin. They conclude that Jesus did not violate the Law of Moses in having mercy on the woman, for these reasons. At the same time He told her to go and sin no more, acknowledging that she was guilty as charged.

Let's just look at the issue of genocide first. You call it God's justice. They were called to slaughter infants and you call that justice. They were to slaughter every living thing and you call that justice. Why then didnít Jesus not call on the Israelites to slaughter the Romans.

Because on his first Advent He came to forgive and to save. Read Isaiah 61:1-2a, which according to Luke 4:16-22 He Himself read in the synagogue, stopping just before the line about the Day of Vengeance of our God:

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Isa 61:2
To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD

The next line which He didnít read is about the Day of Vengeance of God, Which will be His task on His second Advent, His first being to forgive and save.

Again, His mission is to save us from the Law, not to abolish the Law, which remains in force as always, judging humanity as always. He does not change the Law, He fulfills it.

He was highly critical of the revolutionaries, telling them that if they kept it up Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed as it was in 70AD.

You need to quote this so Iíll know what you have in mind; I donít think you quite understand it but Iím not sure what the reference is. I donít get the line, ďif they kept it up.Ē The temple was to be destroyed because of the accumulated sins of Israel and especially their failure to recognize their Messiah. He and His disciples were ďnot of this world,Ē so of course they had nothing to do with revolution against Rome. Beyond that Iím not sure of your point so canít comment further.

He said that they were to turn the other cheek, go the extra mile etc. Paul tells us in Ephesians that we should

13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Jesus was clear that evil is defeated with love not the sword.

Um, sort of, not quite. Again, Heís talking to His own disciples. Only those who put their trust in God could possibly obey such instruction. This is how WE are to be able to resist the ďprincipalities and powers,Ē meaning the devils, itís not a statement addressed to unbelievers or to the world in general. OUR weapons ďare not carnal but mighty in GodÖĒ while the worldís weapons are of necessity carnal. If everybody converted and trusted God and obeyed this kind of command, the Kingdom of God would have come for good, the devil would be vanguished forever, and there would be nothing more for us to fight about, either spiritually or physically. That isnít going to happen, though, until Jesus returns.

How about justice for the Israelites? In how many cases in the last century have we seen people coming back from war, where they fought consenting adults and have been completely traumatized to the point where they take their own lives. We know what war does to its combatants. You think it is just fine for God as you understand Him to order His chosen people, the ones that He loves, to slaughter women and infants. What kind of justice is that for the Israelites? By your understanding of the OT God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah all on His own. If it was necessary then why wouldnít He just do that rather than putting His people, the people He loves, through that ordeal.

First, as I recall there are only two instances where God Himself commanded anything like what you are talking about, any other instances of slaughter being the Israelitesí own decision, in some cases if I recall correctly clearly against Godís will.

Wow, you liberals are holier than God, arenít you? I know God to be good, I know the Bible to be Godís word, I know therefore that everything He Himself commands and does is right and just whether I am able to wrap my mind around it or not. I trust Him by faith, I donít always need to know why He does what He does. I know this world is fallen, that human beings are fallen, that because of our first parentsí disobedience weíve lost our ability to know God as they originally knew Him, that this loss was the result of the devilís plots against God and against humanity, that the devil is now the ďprince of this world,Ē though Jesus has defeated him. That was Jesusí purpose in coming to earth, to defeat the devil and set us free from his rule over us, though It wonít be until He returns that the devilís power will be finally completely broken. Until then it is only through believing in Jesusí death for us that we have any power over sin and the devil, until He reigns again wholly over Creation and returns to us that connection with our Creator that was lost.

So if God slaughters people it is a justice according to the Law that runs this universe. After all, by sending Jesus He has given us freedom from that Law at His own expense, clearly showing that the operations of the Law are horrible things to have to endure. Just as Hell will be horrible to endure. In fact some of the horrible things that happen in the OT, AND IN LIFE IN ALL TIMES FOR THAT MATTER, are pictures of Hell, of the final punishment for sin by Godís inexorable Law. To teach us the seriousness of sin and how to get free of it. Nobody likes Godís Law, itís scary, itís overwhelming. But God gave us a way out. Those who donít take that way out arenít going to be saved from the punishments of the Law by pretending Jesus rescinded them.

You state that Godís justice was being done when He supposedly ordered that some poor smuck was to be stoned to death for picking up firewood on the Sabbath.

Picking up firewood on the Sabbath was a capital crime because the Sabbath was crucial to understanding Godís plan of salvation. This ďpoor schmuckĒ would have KNOWN the Law. To disobey it willfully was to thumb his nose at God AND to be a temptation to the corruption of the people by trivializing the Law. You fail to grasp the context of such an act, that shows it to be an incredibly evil act. Also, is there an example of anyone doing this and being punished for it? If not, the Law itself was sufficient to keep anyone from committing such a heinous sin against God and against the people, and for impressing its importance on the people.

Jesus, as I said before repudiated that with the woman caught in adultery. Once again, what does that do to someone required to go out with the rest of the community and throw rocks at your neighbour until heís dead. If it really was necessary, why wouldn't God do it Himself or at least come up with a more humane way of doing it?

It was to impress the sseriousness of the sin on the community, and by making them part of the punishment no doubt to impress their own sin the more indelibly on their own consciences. You trivialize sin so you canít appreciate how important it is for it to be punished, and for people to KNOW how serious it is by knowing how severe the punishment is

.If you really believe that God ordered that done, then I really have to ask the question of why you would want to worship a deity like that.

I should have said enough above to make that clear. His Moral Law is beautiful and exacting, and for that reason its punishments must be severe. It exalts God that His moral law is beyond our obedience and must be severely punished, just as it exaclts Him greatly that He has given us salvation from it at great cost.

Is it just because Heís God and therefore youíll worship Him no matter how nasty he is. Isnít that what the pagans do? Isnít that what the members of ISIS do?

No. I KNOW HIM to be good, I know it personally, I have good reason to trust that everything He does is good. He commands me to be good and kind. He is nothing like Allah who commands murder.

Allah is a murderer. He is the devil himself.

If I havenít explained sufficiently by now, I donít suppose thereís anything more I could say that would do it.

It is Christianity and you are a Christian. So why sacrifice the teaching of Jesus in favour of an inerrant Bible? You are making a false idol out of the Bible

You are do misled, GDR. I guess I canít say anything to lead you to a different view. Iím sorry about that.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by GDR, posted 01-06-2017 8:48 PM GDR has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 26611
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 210 of 267 (796893)
01-06-2017 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by GDR
01-06-2017 8:48 PM


Re: False Idols
I keep wondering how anyone could confuse God with Allah. An extreme failure to read in context. But why? I don't get it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by GDR, posted 01-06-2017 8:48 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by jar, posted 01-07-2017 7:12 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 212 by GDR, posted 01-07-2017 5:33 PM Faith has responded
 Message 215 by Modulous, posted 01-07-2017 10:47 PM Faith has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
15161718Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017