Maybe Ray you should start wearing a WWJS bracelet. (What Would Jesus Say?)
John 6:70, 71
"Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve."
Judas was an Apostle, and Jesus chose him knowing that he was a son of the devil from the beginning. This explains Jar's belief about himself ("I am a Christian").
When Christians and atheists agree on origins (betrayal) then one is not genuinely as such. Jar, and all TEists, are living proof that what is written in the Bible corresponds perfectly to reality in the 21st century.
We also know that the Bible records Christ's lineage from the "first man Adam". Imagine that, the TEist Savior was the product of ape sperm and accidential mutation "that did not have Him in mind".
Except for what I evidenced, Jar has no source for his "Christianity" or for any of his beliefs - entirely subjective. The source for Supernaturalism (Bible) does not support atheist naturalistic human evolution. One is totally correct and one is totally wrong. Since human evolution is assumed, and the evidence is scarce compared to the enormity of the claim, objective persons can safely conclude need usurps reality.
I don't know what kind of standards Christians are held to, but in my view Jar is no freak. His ideas are commonplace.
You are absolutely correct. Jar's ideas = the status quo. His beliefs and opinions are freak when compared next to the objective claims of the Bible.
IN, I repeat, IN the Bible the majority is always WRONG. This is a typological claim of truth. If the claim is true THEN we should be able to match majorities found IN the Bible with their counterparts in reality.
TEists/Jar are the majority, they oppose the Bible tooth and nail while claiming Christian status. We know real Christians do just the opposite, that is, defend the Bible tooth and nail. IN the Bible the Pharisees are the type of the religious establishment, and they opposed Christ tooth and nail.
In other words, we have a perfect match: TEist majority as best typified by Jar corresponds to theist Pharisee majority. Both are majorities and both oppose Christ while THINKING that they are for God.
We know Jesus is the ultimate Authority, and Jar claims to be His follower. Listen to Jesus's objective identification of the theist majority who THINK they are God's:
John 8:44 (Context: Jesus speaking to the Pharisees).
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
Jesus identifies the majority as liars belonging to Satan. The Pharisees and TEists are a perfect match. Both oppose Christ (in the flesh, Pharisees) and in the Logos/written word (Bible, TEists deny Christological lineage from the first man Adam, and many other scriptural declarations in favor of atheist nonsense).
How do we explain Pharisees/TEists/Jar's beliefs about themselves, that is, belonging to God ?
Since Jesus objectively identified the same as belonging to the devil, their belief about themselves, is explained as being massively deceived, which is an indigenous trait of Satan as revealed through-out the Scriptures.
In this precise context:
Dr. Gene Scott: "The essence of being deceived is that you think that you are all right with God [long pause] but you're not."
Both majorities think they represent God. The theist majority IN the Bible corresponds to a theist majority in reality, both are shown to belong to Satan while thinking that they belong to God. Typological claim of truth is sustained.
It's a funny thing Ray but you know when I read your "freak" comment the first thing that occured to me was that Christians that take your position of extreme literalism are the modern equivalents of the NT Pharisees.
You are following along the exact same path that the Pharisees did 2000 years ago. You pour through scriptures, taking a literalist reading of them, and then claim that the important thing is about following the laws that you come up with which includes that everything in the Bible is to be read literally.
The Bible is to be read for the timeless spiritual truths that are found there. It is God's revelation to us and you minimalize its message by insisting that it is to be read literally instead of trying to comprehend the spiritual message that can be found in its many metaphors. It is a message of love not the condemnation that you are engaging in right now. Jesus said that everything hinges on love of God and love of neighbour. IMHO I'm not seeing either in your posts in this thread.
This commentary says the Bible is not true. It is a reply that completely evades my previous post showing how the Bible is true.
The evasion proves Darwinists are not loyal to evidence, but are in the business of misrepresenting all evidence that contradicts the needs of their atheistic theory.
Greg's subjective and sourceless opinions prove that if you want accurate information about the Bible: do not consult a Darwinist/atheist.
He claims that the way a person fulfills the First Commandment is by loving ones neighbor.
The error here is the conflation of the First and Second Commandments.
The ONLY way to fulfill the First Commandment, that is, love an invisible and untouchable God is to do what pleases Him. Hebrews 11:6 says ONLY faith pleases God, therefore, if we continually trust Him by N.T. faith (and in the Greek pisteo (faith) is a verb and not a noun) then we are pleasing God, and thus loving Him, and fulfilling the First Commandment.
The only way to have faith in God is to act on a promise found in the Bible until God brings it to pass in ones life.
As Jar is fond of saying, "it is really just as simple as that".