Death as in sepperaton of body and spirit, not destruction.
Then why do you quote it at all? IIRC I have seen other times that you took part of scriptures that suit you, while ignoring other parts, which seems like you are either trying to mislead and deceive, or feel you have some revelation/authority as to which sections are valid and which are not. The fact you use them at all seems to indicate something.
All Christians do this, without exception, including you. Interpretation is the name of the game when it comes to the Bible, and to say that any interpretation but yours should be labeled “deception” is rather tactless, in my opinion.
Interpretation is far different then a intentional truncation that vastly changes the meaning. Especially in a book that has a warning about changing the meaning of the Word.
Also I don’t claim to toss it all out (meaning Revelation), while using part of it that suits me.
You interpret Revelation just as much as anyone else does.
Choosing to follow it all literally is just as much an interpretation as choosing to follow some metaphorically.
Who is the better believer: one who professes love of God but does not act on it, or one who denies God, but acts with compassion. The answer:[
](Matthew 7:16-19 - By their fruit you will recognize them. - Bible Gateway)We are judged by our actions.
I think people can agree on at least one thing: do acts of kindness. Details about who exactly is saved isn’t really important–that’s between each individual person and God. It’s up to each person to decide what they do with their life, and it’s up to God to make a judgement.
It’s not about “making it up”, it’s about “understanding what it means”.
Most, not all, protestant Christian doctrine requires belief in Jesus as Saviour. My guess is Catholicism requires belief in God but I’m not 100% sure.
The Bible is subject to interpretation and there are indeed many. There are many passages that indicate we will be judged according to our works and rewarded according to our deeds. Jesus also taught that recognizing him as Lord was not enough but you had to live according the the spirit of God and this was reflected in the way you treated others. Compassion for the poor the sick and those in prison. etc. Jesus also says
an interesting passage also subject to interpretation. I find that there are enough passages in the Bible to support a belief that we don’t need to worship a name like Jehovah or some particular concept of God, nor the icon of Jesus. God sees our spiritual condition and the sincere desires of our hearts and that’s what matters. God has no ego that needs to be stroked. If we reject the Christian God or Allah. but value love and truth and are compassionate to our fellow man, then we’re doing as well as any so called religious person.
I could not provide a cite, as it only something that sticks in my brain from years ago and I cannot recall where I heard it.
askeptic The Gospels are the only recollections of things Jesus actually said, and their authenticity even is in dispute. If you take what Paul or John wrote then you are elevating them to a certain level of authority. The only reason they are in the bible and others are not is because some Christians in the past decided that they should be. So anyone who takes all the books in the bible as presented isn’t necessarily picking and choosing what suits them, they are letting others who lived thousands of years ago do it for them. I pick and choose what resonates with me from the bible, philosophy, science whatever. When I say resonates, I mean something that had meaning for me, and I share my subjective experience of it.
FTR I don’t attend church or even really consider myself a Christian, I am just highly influenced by Christianity. I generally find little fault with what Christ had to say, but Paul was a bit overzealous and dogmatic and John was batshit loco.
It seems to me that people forget that the entire tradition of Christianity is a history of people picking and choosing which books they were going to study. The notion of the Canon is an invention, something that was imposed hundreds of years after Christ’s death. In order to pare down the politics that influenced the creation of what we know of as the bible, I strip it down to basics. ‘What did Jesus do and say?’
kanicbird No, I don’t claim to have any authority over it. I was just discussing a topic on an internet message board. I don’t claim to have a greater authority to pick and choose which books to include in the Canon than you, or the people who imposed these books upon us in antiquity.
Heh, I never thought I would have seen you defending my position. 
Anyway, thank you for putting that so succinctly.
kanicbird Basically, it comes down to whether you think that Revelation really is a prophecy, IE, the direct transcription of the word of God. I don’t. Was John perhaps some sort of inspired Savant tapped into some kind of subconscious undercurrent? I have little doubt of that. It taps into our deep and primal fear of our own destruction. As for the bit about removing any parts of that book, well, that’s a great way for a megalomaniacal lunatic to spread his insanity through guilt now isn’t it?
I more or less believe this. Jesus taught that words without action are meaningless. I think His sacrifice kind of reinforced that. I’m not saying that I don’t follow what is in the Bible but I’m not a scholar and I have to let the Spirit guide my actions. At the end of the day you know in your heart what you have done. And what you haven’t. I think it is important not to judge others as to what they believe or at all really. Each of us will find out the truth soon enough.
Lots of most religions are quite contradictory, but the believers don’t seem to have a problem with it, either in Mormonism or any other religion.
And I’ve never heard anybody state that most mormons will get into the celestial kingdom, any more than most christians believe everyone will get into heaven. Having the necessary rituals done for you give you the theoretical opportunity, but it doesn’t make you qualify on the other fronts.
It’s been my impression that very very few people will make celestial. This of course varies depending on which mormon you ask, of course.
When I began studying again years ago I asked certain questions, posed certain concepts, and then read the Bible and other sources to see if those ideas were compatible with what is in the NT. Not according to any traditional interpretation but using my own judgment. A lot of interpretation has to do with which passages you stress. IMO by looking at a number of passages that are not usually stressed by lots of Christian doctrine other possibilities opened up and made more sense to me. They were also IMO supported by Bible passages.
I agree with you. At the end of the day we have to live with ourselves and face what’s going on within. Guilt, joy, fear love, etc. It’s up to us to pilot our own ship and decide where we want it to go. Not even our well intentioned friends be they believers or atheists can make that determination.
You are honest about how you came by your position, and said position does not offer a potential threat to me and mine.
That is a great quote, and it illustrates my current belief on the matter very well.
Thanks for the reference, cosmosdan. I had heard that verse before, but I didn’t know where it could be found.
To me, it raises another question regarding one’s salvation: if someone “speaks against the Holy Spirit”, they are essentially being condemned to Hell right then and there, aren’t they? (When their time comes, that is.) So, a person’s faith in Jesus as their Savior (or belief in God, etc.) is no longer sufficient grounds for entering Heaven, in this case. When contrasted with the idea of God’s infinite patience and love, this causes the same cognitive dissonance as I described in the OP.
LilShieste
The LDS slant on this is that you have to have a “full knowledge” of the holy spirit if you want to speak against (or as they usually put it, “deny”) it. This limits the number of people who are even capable of denying the holy spirit to 1) prophets, and 2) the devil and other rebel spirits, which excludes most people entirely. Assuming you’re interested in how the mormons handle these things, of course.
The question of whether people who had never heard of Christ were going straight to Hell was one which animated a great many people in the 18th & 19th c. and prompted many to believe that they had an absolute duty to do missionary work, at home or abroad.
I relate this to:
Also Hinted about in Heb 10:38. The way I see it is the people who have accepted Jesus and have experienced the power of God through the spiritual gifts of the Holy Spirit are the only ones able to take this ‘option’. It is a full knowledge choice, one to leave God’s Kingdom (and enter the Satanic Kingdom).
I take this in a more subtle way. I think this is Jesus saying that following the leading of the Holy Spirit within us is more important than what we believe about him. So, people in his day who didn’t believe he was the foretold messiah were okay as long as they still tried to follow the spirit and bear good fruit.
People who speak against the Holy Spirit are the ones who deny the voice of the spirit within that tries to move them to give up their selfishness, vanity, and fear, etc. The spirit whispers, “stop and help this person” and we ignore it and continue to ignore it’s leadings, we have to face the consequences. Saying, “I repent” is not enough if your heart is not changed and you don’t make the effort to change it.
Not be forgiven in this world or the world to come doesn’t speak to me of eternal condemnation. It just speaks to bearing the consequences of our choices. we can’t avoid it by simply mouthing the appropriate words or preforming religious rituals.
Personally I tend to believe in reincarnation or something like it , in which we continue learning from one existence to another. It makes a whole lot more sense to me when I think of God’s love and patience. Years ago I asked the question "Is reincarnation incompatible with the story of Jesus and the NT? I was surprised to find that much of early Christianity believed in reincarnation and many believe there are some references to it in the NT.
But that’s a different subject and I’m not attempting a hijack