Do Christians believe that non-Christians are going to hell?

Great Debates
161

[QUOTE=badchad]
While those who go to hell were doomed, predestined since the dawn of time for their names were not in the book of life. Correct?

You’re wrong about this too. Did you find a book of false doctrines or is it your hobby to make things up that villify the Bible and God’s character? There are volumes of scriptures which refute the idea that God predestines certain people to destruction. A few examples:
(2Pet3:9) …He is longsuffering toward you, not desiring that any should perish, but that all should turn to repentance.
(Matt18:14) …it is not the will of My Father Who is in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost or perish.
(1Tim2:4) God our Savior, Who wishes all men to be saved…
(1Tim4:10) …Who is the Saviour of all men, especially those who believe
(Jn12:32) If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto Myself
(2Cor5:15) … And He died for all…
(1Tim2:6) …the Man Christ Jesus, Who gave Himself a ransom for all
(Heb2:9) …He might experience death for every individual person
(Rom3:24) All are justified and made upright and in right standing with God freely and gratuitously by His grace…

Sorry to tell you this Chad but this will be my last response to your posts. You are either incapable or unwilling to grasp what the Bible really says about doctrinal issues or about God’s true character, even when you are presented with irrefutable evidence contrary to your claims. Instead you ignore the clear facts and use every opportunity to repeatedly insult them. I’m usually pretty patient with those who hold different beliefs or who have legitimate questions and concerns about Biblical issues, but quite frankly, my obligation to you is finished.

162

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Okay, this is a response I can work with. Thanks.
Jesus said" John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."
I agree. Then we’d talk about what is knowing god and JC. To many it is an acknowledgement of the physical life death and resurrection of Jesus. You either believe in those things or you’re damned. You either acknowledge Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross as an atonement for your sins or you are damned.
Having Jesus as a good friend doesn’t require any of those. IMHO when Jesus says “believe in me”, he means if you sense the spirit within me and what that means, then you’re on the path to God.
To that same liberal Christian friend I would use the Gandhi example. Gandhi was an admirer of Jesus and his teachings. Some of his own beliefs were influenced by his reading of the Bible. He remained a Hindu when he observed that the christian s he knew didn’t live according to the teachings of their own deity. Any reading of Gandhi’s beliefs reveals he was a sincere seeker of god and tried to live according to his ideals of love and truth.
to many Christians the idea that Gandhi didn’t acknowledge Jesus as Savior means he was damned. IMO in his heart he was Jesus “good friend” to use your term. At some imagined moment of judgement would not reject Jesus but embrace the truth about JC because in his heart he was a true seeker of truth. IMO any person who sincerely seeks love and truth must eventually come to the truth about Jesus , whatever it is. In the meantime saying “I don’t really know” or rejecting someone else’s’ concept of JC may only be part of sincerely seeking the truth.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think a person can be either saved or condemned by doctrine. Doctrine should be useful to inspire the right type of action. I’ve been told by men more learned than I that when the word “believe” is used in the New Testament that action is implied. In other words are the beliefs in atonement and the resurrection merely ideas? Or instead do they inspire you to live as Jesus lived? Do they inspire you to obey the words that Jesus taught? If not then the beliefs are useless. My opinion is that it is important to believe in these things, but it has to be digested so that proper action results.

As for Gandhi, while I’m not familiar of all the intimate details of his life, I think he did zealously follow that light that he had, and that is admirable. His view of Christianity might have looked something like Imperial colonization and/or domination, so I can understand if he didn’t look upon it too highly.

163

[QUOTE=Voyager]
At least you’ve given a definitive answer to the question asked in the OP.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the encouragement (I hope my head doesn’t start swelling with pride). Sorry I wasn’t able to sugarcoat the Truth to your satisfaction; the reality of hell is indeed a tough pill to swallow. That’s why most churches nowdays avoid the issues of sin and hell and try to be more “seeker friendly”. Jesus called it the “broad road that leads to destruction”.

164

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
May your false God burn in his own Hell, Bible man.
[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah? Well my God is a consuming fire so it wouldn’t hurt Him anyway (Hebrews12:29). So there.
(Is it my imagination or is this thread becoming less intellectually oriented than the other ongoing “Great Debates”)

Well Mr Brain, I certainly hope that after 18,000 posts that I too will have mastered the same expertise in getting to the core issues as succinctly and skillfully as you have exhibited here today. I’m sure you’ve been an inspiration to many, thanks for stopping by.

165

[QUOTE=Bible man]

[QUOTE=badchad]
While those who go to hell were doomed, predestined since the dawn of time for their names were not in the book of life. Correct?

You’re wrong about this too. Did you find a book of false doctrines or is it your hobby to make things up that villify the Bible and God’s character? There are volumes of scriptures which refute the idea that God predestines certain people to destruction. A few examples:
(2Pet3:9) …He is longsuffering toward you, not desiring that any should perish, but that all should turn to repentance.
(Matt18:14) …it is not the will of My Father Who is in heaven that one of these little ones should be lost or perish.
(1Tim2:4) God our Savior, Who wishes all men to be saved…
(1Tim4:10) …Who is the Saviour of all men, especially those who believe
(Jn12:32) If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto Myself
(2Cor5:15) … And He died for all…
(1Tim2:6) ..the Man Christ Jesus, Who gave Himself a ransom for all
(Heb2:9) …He might experience death for every individual person
(Rom3:24) All are justified and made upright and in right standing with God freely and gratuitously by His grace…

Sorry to tell you this Chad but this will be my last response to your posts. You are either incapable or unwilling to grasp what the Bible really says about doctrinal issues or about God’s true character, even when you are presented with irrefutable evidence contrary to your claims. Instead you ignore the clear facts and use every opportunity to repeatedly insult them. I’m usually pretty patient with those who hold different beliefs or who have legitimate questions and concerns about Biblical issues, but quite frankly, my obligation to you is finished.
[/QUOTE]

All those verses you give, about god wanting to save all people sound very nice, but I think their bullshit. What’s neat about our discussion is that you think their bullshit too. The only thing we have really been arguing about is the amount and type of torment Jesus gives to sinners, but we both agree they get torment and as you did say that Jesus kills a lot of people. You just like the way you say it, better than the way I say it.

Now here is the problem with all those loving verses where Jesus says he wants to save all people. Jesus is allegedly omnipotent and thusly if he really wanted to save all people, he would save all people. The fact that some, actually you and me know its most, people don’t get saved, logically follows from only one reason. Jesus doesn’t really want them saved. It’s that disconnect between words and actions I talked about.

Now with regards to predestination and not being able to want or will your way into heaven, the verses worth looking up are as follows:

“For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” Romans 8: 29-30

“According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the pleasure of his will.” Ephesians 1: 4-5

“In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.”
Ephesians 1:11

“For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So **then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.**For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man who art thou repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why has thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Romans 9:15-21

We could also cite those verses where god hardens peoples hearts so that he can kill them for doing wrong but I imagine you’d prefer I didn’t go there.

I suppose you could just make the claim that the bible contradicts itself and is therefore errant with regards to this predestination of souls, but somehow I don’t think you’re the type of guy to do that. Consequently I think the best way to talk your way out of this, considering you believe that god does not in fact save all, but kills plenty, would be to say that when god uses the word all he means all Christians, and when he says everyone, he means everyone Christian. The way I see it you now have to either admit the bible is errant or admit god’s a monster. Perhaps you did see this coming and this is why you say you won’t be replying to me anymore. If I were god’s apologist I’d plead the 5th now too.

166

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
May your false God burn in his own Hell, Bible man.
[/QUOTE]

Gracious, BrainGlutton- we KNOW you are abundantly capable of rational & eloquent discourse! Would you please dump this line which used to be provocative but is now just sad and tired?!?

Now to the main point- Bible man brings up the Nature of God being “a Consuming Fire”. From Genesis to Revelation, God manifests as Fire (among other things). All Creation which was born out of GodFire eventually returns to GodFire.
Whatever refuses to become part of the GodFire will be unable to endure Him & so will be refined, “tormented” and perhaps eventually extinquished by Him. It’s not God “torturing” or “murdering” people. It’s Creation returning to its Source & being re-made or un-made within Him.

The Good News is that as JC, the Creating GodFire became Flesh and took on the
Refining Judgment as Golgotha, so that we entrust ourselves to Him experience that Judgment through Him & so we are guaranteed to through JC survive & thrive through that Judgement. The Better News is that, either in this life or the Afterlife, every created being will have that opportunity (“the predestined” only refer to those given opportunity in this life; there is no verse which states the
non-predestined are eternally lost- they just get their opportunity later) to entrust themselves to God through Jesus. The Bad News is that some created beings may* so twist themselves against their Creator so as to be irreconcilable. I hope this is not the case with our upstanding anti-theist community here.

  • If the Universalist Hope is a valid interpretation of Scripture, and I believe it may be, then no creature has the right or power to eternally resist reconciliation with the Creator. Which mean Jesus is gonna get you anti-theists and your little dogs, too! Surrender, Dorothy!
167

[QUOTE=Bible man]
As I indicated in my post, the preeminent interpreter of the Scriptures is the Holy Spirit because He’s the One Who authored them. Before Jesus ascended, He told the apostles “I will not leave you orphans… I will send you the Holy Spirit and He will teach you all things”. Although God does supply the church with gifted men (see Ephesians 4:11-14), the Holy Spirit is the actual interpreter of the Scriptures and He is actually our Teacher (see Galations1:12 and 1John2:27). Indeed, without His direct revelation, the Scriptures would be a hopeless enigma.
And you are quite right to be cautious regarding the dangers of misinterpretations by men, even good men can make honest mistakes which can have disasterous consequences for those who follow them, and that’s without even considering the likes of Jim Jones and David Koresh. The only way to be safe is for an individual to study the scriptures for themselves and look to the Holy Spirit for revelation and guidance (the Bereans were commended in Acts17:11 as being more noble than others for, after hearing Paul’s message, they “searched and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so”). Indeed, most false doctrines occur because of a failure to examine all the Scriptures concerning a matter; the one we are discussing (hell) is a perfect example: look at what a wide range of beliefs occur when only certain scriptures are considered but ignoring others which bring the issue into proper focus. There’s one other aspect that you touched on: people come to the scriptures with different levels of spiritual growth, different backgrounds, different life experiences, etc and these will “color” their understanding of certain scriptures for a while. It’s very important to extend patience, understanding, and grace to everyone as much as possible while these weighty and important matters are under discussion (I’m also preaching to myself here)
[/QUOTE]

It makes me wonder why the Holy Spirit would inspire different things in different people as seems to be the case. There are many sects of Christianity because of this. Each denomination has a different spin.

Monavis

168

[QUOTE=badchad]

[QUOTE=Bible man]

Is there some reason why you think that distinction is consequential? Whether I were tormented by flame or tormented *in flame, I think I would not like it.
One must either think that these are miracle flames in which a man can speak, or perhaps like torturing a man for information using a blow torch. If you put a blow torch directly up against my hand, I don’t think it would be an incorrect use of the English language to say I was in the flame.
Perhaps under the duress of being tortured in flame the rich man was unable to find the most correct words to communicate his desire for relief. However Jesus clearly said he was being tormented by what was flames and that the man after death was conscious of this.
What you say these verses were intended to teach, and what it does in fact show are two very different things. God is being very stingy with his hope, apparently for no better reason than spite and vengeance.
Right, repent or Jesus will torment and/or murder your soul. Please tell me if I am mistaken, according to your interpretation of the bible.
[/QUOTE]

Wow, badchad. Truly devastating counter-arguments and not a single personal insult or vulgarity. I won’t say I’m PROUD of you, because that would be arrogating partial credit for it..but that was an excellent post.

169

[QUOTE=Bible man]
As I indicated in my post, the preeminent interpreter of the Scriptures is the Holy Spirit because He’s the One Who authored them. Before Jesus ascended, He told the apostles “I will not leave you orphans… I will send you the Holy Spirit and He will teach you all things”. Although God does supply the church with gifted men (see Ephesians 4:11-14), the Holy Spirit is the actual interpreter of the Scriptures and He is actually our Teacher (see Galations1:12 and 1John2:27). Indeed, without His direct revelation, the Scriptures would be a hopeless enigma.
And you are quite right to be cautious regarding the dangers of misinterpretations by men, even good men can make honest mistakes which can have disasterous consequences for those who follow them, and that’s without even considering the likes of Jim Jones and David Koresh. The only way to be safe is for an individual to study the scriptures for themselves and look to the Holy Spirit for revelation and guidance (the Bereans were commended in Acts17:11 as being more noble than others for, after hearing Paul’s message, they “searched and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so”). Indeed, most false doctrines occur because of a failure to examine all the Scriptures concerning a matter; the one we are discussing (hell) is a perfect example: look at what a wide range of beliefs occur when only certain scriptures are considered but ignoring others which bring the issue into proper focus. There’s one other aspect that you touched on: people come to the scriptures with different levels of spiritual growth, different backgrounds, different life experiences, etc and these will “color” their understanding of certain scriptures for a while. It’s very important to extend patience, understanding, and grace to everyone as much as possible while these weighty and important matters are under discussion (I’m also preaching to myself here)
[/QUOTE]

In Acts 17, what scriptures do you suppose they were reading daily? Not the NT. It also says nothing about them receiving any confirmation from the HS.
Yes, the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth and the truth will set us free. I believe that. The Holy Spirit is the mysterious something that connects us all and gives us access to the truth. It is our connection to the source.

Voyager already asked the pertinent question. With so many different Christians of various beliefs all believing that the HS has revealed the truth to them , what are we to conclude about the various beliefs and the very nature of truth?

Some might conclude it’s all a bunch of hogwash, and I can understand that. With so many competing beliefs claiming, “I have the truth to share with you” it’s a perfectly rational and normal response. My own is that no religion has the complete truth. Most are a maze of tradition and myth with elements of the truth hidden within. To seek the truth means to follow the Holy Spirit through the maze. To release tradition and myth when the truth calls us. as Jesus said in mark 7:

" ‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
7They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.’ 8You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."

 If we indeed have the HS to guide us into all truth then we must begin to have faith in that guide within us rather than embracing what someone else tells us is "the truth"  If someone says "But my pastor says" or "my Sunday school teacher says" are we following the spirit or our we surrendering our own seeking for acceptance by someone else? Surely the HS can help us use the bible to teach us. It can also use anything else because it springs from within to call us to understanding. It is that inner voice that is the true word of God. Having this we need not rely on the false tradition of an external written word. Again I say, there is nothing within the Bible to indicate it was ever God's plan that we have one final inspired authoritative work to rely on. We are called to seek and surrender to the HS within ourselves. To seek the truth we must be true to ourselves and not to a doctrine or dogma.

For example,
I have a dear friend who is a member of the RLDS church which I used to be a priest in. This church believes that God still speaks to man today and has always spoken to mankind throughout the world. They believe the Book of Mormon and their own Doctrine and Covenants are valid scripture, also inspired by God. The D&C are modern day revelations. Of course the bulk of Christianity rejects these beliefs and considers them heretical for accepting other books as scripture. A few years ago the church prophet presented a new revelation declaring that women should be ordained into the priesthood. {About time say I} Some congregations , including my friends, decided this was not truly God’s will and decided to reject this. They also refused to change their name to The Community of Christ when the world church did.

Here’s my point to her and all seekers of all religions.
When the moment came to choose what you believe and claim the right to worship and live according to the dictates of your own heart, she and her group decided to reject the message from their own prophet of God and worship in their own way. Having claimed that right for themselves doesn’t that place some moral imperative on them to extend that right to everyone else? I believe it does.

The Bible is a great book but given all the real evidence available I think it’s a shame that so many give it a stature of authority it doesn’t warrant. I Think it only serves tradition over the truth, and does what Jesus tried to undo. Separates us as children of the same God.

All that being said, I agree with your last sentance. We must try to respect others rights to choose a different path and honor whatever love and truth we share.

170

[QUOTE=nano8track]
I don’t think a person can be either saved or condemned by doctrine. Doctrine should be useful to inspire the right type of action. I’ve been told by men more learned than I that when the word “believe” is used in the New Testament that action is implied. In other words are the beliefs in atonement and the resurrection merely ideas? Or instead do they inspire you to live as Jesus lived? Do they inspire you to obey the words that Jesus taught? If not then the beliefs are useless. My opinion is that it is important to believe in these things, but it has to be digested so that proper action results.
[/QUOTE]
Okay. I certainly see that Jesus talked about our actions being the true reflection of our spiritual growth. I love the simplicity of it. My question would be what of those people who display the proper actions, but see no need to believe in those things. Can a person act in true love of God and fellow man without believeing in the resurrection of Jesus?

IMHO Gandhi was a great example of seekers coming to the same conclusion if they seek with a true heart regardless of their religion. I’m reading a book called “The Way to God” by Gandhi. It is a collection of his writings about God and the spiritual journey. It is beautiful in it’s simple yet profound language.
an excerpt
"Truth and Love

Love and truth are faces of the same coin and both very difficult to practice, and the only things worth living for. A person cannot be true if he does not love all God’s creatures. Truth and love are therefore the complete sacrifice. Without truth, there is no love. Without truth it may be affection , as for ones country to the injury of others; or infatuation, as a young man for a girl …Love transcends all animality and is never partial.
True love is boundless like the ocean and, swelling within one, spreads itself out and, crossing all boundaries and frontiers, envelops the whole world. "

IMHO this is every bit as inspired as anything in the Bible and in harmony with the teachings of Jesus. Brought to us by a simple dedicated Hindu.

171

[QUOTE=Bible man]
Thanks for the encouragement (I hope my head doesn’t start swelling with pride). Sorry I wasn’t able to sugarcoat the Truth to your satisfaction; the reality of hell is indeed a tough pill to swallow. That’s why most churches nowdays avoid the issues of sin and hell and try to be more “seeker friendly”. Jesus called it the “broad road that leads to destruction”.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think the problem is not sugarcoating the Truth {nice capital}
It’s your surety that you actually know what the truth is. We must go forward based on what we believe to be true so go for it. It is part of the process of letting go of false perceptions.

You acknowledged that people are influenced by their backgrounds and that colors their beliefs. I’ll assume you realize you are included in this coloring which leads to our understanding being clouded. I know I am. IMO it affects their ability to listen to the HS and surrender to what it is telling us. When the truth whispers within us we must be willing to abandon the false perception that stands in its way. We are all in the process of holding onto to certain falsehoods and embracing certain truths. While we are all as connected as drops making up the ocean, we are individuals in the process of surrendering to the truth.

So what do you think should happen when two people believe differently and both believe they are listening to the Holy Spirit?

Do you think it’s important in listening to the HS to discern the traditions of men from the truth? Your words indicate you do. If that’s the case what are your thoughts on my previous statements about the Bible. Christianity has put this collection of writings on a pedestal. Passed down from generation to generation. My question is , where is there any indication in anything other than Christian tradition that it was ever God’s will that we have one inspired final authoritative collection of writings to guide us. Isn’t it more accurate to say that Jesus taught us to look within to the inner voice of the Holy Spirit as the source of truth, rather than any book or collection of books?

I suppose this is far afield from the OP and perhaps deserves it’s own discussion. I’d be glad to open a new thread or you can answer briefly here. Your choice.

172

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
With so many different Christians of various beliefs all believing that the HS has revealed the truth to them , what are we to conclude about the various beliefs and the very nature of truth? Some might conclude it’s all a bunch of hogwash, and I can understand that. With so many competing beliefs claiming, “I have the truth to share with you” it’s a perfectly rational and normal response.
[/QUOTE]

Almost to a man, those who post negatively about the Bible on this website are repeating the same complaint over and over. It’s like they listened to a group reporting what they just heard at a Mozart symphony: a six year old reports that it was just a bunch of strange noises, a 90 year old says it was boring because all he really heard were some drums and cymbals, a guitarest says it didn’t contain one note of “real” music (electric guitar), while a high school band teacher reports that it was absolutely spectacular. After hearing these different observations from those with different capacities and orientations, to conclude that the symphony must have been “hogwash” is inane. Because some lack the capacity or the will to appreciate something deep and profound, doesn’t mean it was flawed itself, but that the observers were too flawed or too immature to really understand it. Similary, the different denominations and doctrines which emerge from people reading the same Bible are due to the limitations (sometimes innocent, sometimes not) of those who read it, not the book itself. And most of the negative contributors to this site look for the most eccentric people or groups, who have obviously missed the intended meaning of certain Scriptures entirely, and use those mistakes to castigate the Bible itself as being flawed. It’s like observing a child learning to ride a bike and concuding that the bike is faulty because the child keeps falling off. Pure nonsense.
Rail at it as you will, and point to the uninformed or immature who misuse or misinterpret it, but these facts will endure: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Word will never pass away” (Matt24:35); “the scriptures cannot be broken” (John10:35); and “The Word of the Lord endures forever” (1Pet1:25)
Most of the negative contributors are actually no different than the groups they castigate, they have just enough Biblical knowledge to form completely erroneous conclusions. They fulfill what Peter said, “There are some things in those epistles of Paul that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter desruction, just as they distort and misinterpret the rest of the Scriptures” (2Pet3:16 Amplified)

173

[QUOTE=Bible man]
Almost to a man, those who post negatively about the Bible on this website are repeating the same complaint over and over. It’s like they listened to a group reporting what they just heard at a Mozart symphony: a six year old reports that it was just a bunch of strange noises, a 90 year old says it was boring because all he really heard were some drums and cymbals, a guitarest says it didn’t contain one note of “real” music (electric guitar), while a high school band teacher reports that it was absolutely spectacular. After hearing these different observations from those with different capacities and orientations, to conclude that the symphony must have been “hogwash” is inane. Because some lack the capacity or the will to appreciate something deep and profound, doesn’t mean it was flawed itself, but that the observers were too flawed or too immature to really understand it. Similary, the different denominations and doctrines which emerge from people reading the same Bible are due to the limitations (sometimes innocent, sometimes not) of those who read it, not the book itself. And most of the negative contributors to this site look for the most eccentric people or groups, who have obviously missed the intended meaning of certain Scriptures entirely, and use those mistakes to castigate the Bible itself as being flawed. It’s like observing a child learning to ride a bike and concuding that the bike is faulty because the child keeps falling off. Pure nonsense.
Rail at it as you will, and point to the uninformed or immature who misuse or misinterpret it, but these facts will endure: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Word will never pass away” (Matt24:35); “the scriptures cannot be broken” (John10:35); and “The Word of the Lord endures forever” (1Pet1:25)
Most of the negative contributors are actually no different than the groups they castigate, they have just enough Biblical knowledge to form completely erroneous conclusions. They fulfill what Peter said, “There are some things in those epistles of Paul that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter desruction, just as they distort and misinterpret the rest of the Scriptures” (2Pet3:16 Amplified)
[/QUOTE]

It’s interesting how you avoided my direct questions to respond to something that isn’t relevant to my argument.

The flaws in the Bible are plain to see for any honest person who can read it and an accurate historical accounting of its sources, without the bias of religious tradition.
To use your own bike analogy. If someone were to claim that the bike was perfect just as the original manufacturer intended it to be , after the bike had passed through the hands of many others who altered it for their own reasons would be a denial of the truth. The great error is to think that the only valid source of transportation for the journey is that bike and the stubborn denial of it’s flaws.
Your symphony analogy is apt but misdirected.
In fact the different reports about the symphony are all valid.
Whats happening is that some are insisting there own uplifting experience in enjoying the symphony is the only valid experience. Those who don’t share it must be damaged in some way. Those who are uplifted by different music simply don’t understand what the “right” music is. They can’t allow for the differences in the subjective experience so they simply declare others to be wrong. You tell me where the hogwash lies in that scenario.

Here’s another analogy. I’ve heard great guitar players make $100 guitars sound fabulous. The beauty of the music depends less on the perfection of the instrument than it does on the the player.
FTR I was once a believer who saw the Bible in a similar fashion. My current views come not from being confused by others but from conclusions reached through my own studies and a desire to cull the truth out of tradition.
If you will, how about responding to my direct questions.

174

[QUOTE=Bible man]

Rail at it as you will, and point to the uninformed or immature who misuse or misinterpret it, but these facts will endure: “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My Word will never pass away” (Matt24:35); “the scriptures cannot be broken” (John10:35); and “The Word of the Lord endures forever” (1Pet1:25)
Most of the negative contributors are actually no different than the groups they castigate, they have just enough Biblical knowledge to form completely erroneous conclusions. They fulfill what Peter said, “There are some things in those epistles of Paul that are difficult to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter desruction, just as they distort and misinterpret the rest of the Scriptures” (2Pet3:16 Amplified)
[/QUOTE]

Now a comment on your scriptures.

One huge problem I see repeatedly is that many Christians defend their belief about the bible by quoting verses about the “word of God” as if they refer to written scripture. Fairly often they do not. Quite often in the Bible the “word of God” refers to the living word that you acknowledged earlier as the presence of the Holy Spirit.
I won’t discuss what Jesus is talking about in Mat 24:35 but there’s no indication it refers to the written word. I’d be interested in what version you got that from if any. The ones I looked at including the KJV have it as “my words” lower case.
John 10:35 taken in context reveals that Jesus is not necessarily making a statement about the scriptures to all in an instructional form. He is being accused of blasphemy and acknowledging the beliefs of his accusers. In a similar way I would converse with someone by saying “The Bible is inerrant then what about X?” It’s not a statement of my belief but a recognition of theirs.
1 peter 1:25 again, there is no indication that this refers to the written word. In fact in context

Purifying your souls in obeying the truth through the spirit. Sincere love through the word of God.
It seems to me that this reference is to the living word that is within rather than any written word.

In Luke in the parable of the sower it seems obvious that the word of God {the seed} is something within us rather than the written word.
One of my favorites ,

Here obviously the word of God is a force working within.

Inevitably when discussing this passages about the living word within us are used as if they refer to scripture and the written word. Occasionally the term “word of god” may be referencing the scripture of the day which did not include the NT. In many cases it simply does not and it is inaccurate to use verses about the inner voice to support an argument about the written word. It’s not the same thing.

Once again I maintain that there is nothing within the Bible to support the tradition that a final authoritative compilation was ever God’s plan. If you disagree then please point it out to me.

175

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
It’s interesting how you avoided my direct questions to respond to something that isn’t relevant to my argument.
[/QUOTE]

A strange comment since I’ve already answered most of your questions and comments and I just directly answered this one:

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
It makes me wonder why the Holy Spirit would inspire different things in different people as seems to be the case. There are many sects of Christianity because of this. Each denomination has a different spin.
[/QUOTE]

The problem is that you don’t like my answers ie, that the Bible is inspired directly by the Holy Spirit, that it’s without error and can be relied on despite misinterpretations by the unskilled; that as it states, Jesus is the only way to God (Jn14:6) and all other paths (including yours) are false (Jn10:8). The only thing we have agreed on is that men can’t be trusted because of their limitations and inclination to error.
Concerning proof that the Bible is the definitive collection of God’s inspired writings is this: that Jesus endorsed all the writings of the Old Testament in various ways during His earthly ministry. He quoted from them, referred to them, and taught them constantly. Then after His resurrection, on the road to Emmaus, He explained to the disciples every Old Testament Scripture from Moses through all the prophets that referred to Himself (Luke24:27). The problem is that you have chosen not to believe His testimony or any other eyewitness testimony in either the Old or New Testament Scriptures. You prefer to believe instead that it is full of errors or lies and that your own unique path will somehow have a successful result - although it’s completely outside what Christ taught. You are absolutely free to make that choice, you’re certainly old enough to make your own mistakes. But when the day of accounting for what you have believed and taught others has come, at least now you won’t be able to say that no one ever told you the Truth (James3:1).

176

[QUOTE=Bible man]
A strange comment since I’ve already answered most of your questions and comments and I just directly answered this one:
[/QUOTE]

Not so strange. In a previous response you ignored most of my post to focus on a comment I made about how* some others* believed. I said I believed in the guidance of the HS. You said the HS is to be relied on in interpreting the Bible. I completely agree. I can support my beliefs with biblical passages. You seem very sure your interpretation is correct. Should I surrender the fate of my soul to your interpretation or should I follow what I believe the HS is telling me?

The questions ignored ;
If we indeed have the HS to guide us into all truth then we must begin to have faith in that guide within us rather than embracing what someone else tells us is “the truth” If someone says “But my pastor says” or “my Sunday school teacher says” are we following the spirit or our we surrendering our own seeking for acceptance by someone else?
So what do you think should happen when two people believe differently and both believe they are listening to the Holy Spirit?
Do you think it’s important in listening to the HS to discern the traditions of men from the truth?

**
It’s true I don’t like your answers. That’s because I believe they are just plain wrong and/ or incomplete. The Bible or parts of it may indeed be inspired by the HS. Inspiration doesn’t indicate something without error and there are no passages defining inspiration in that way. That too is an unfortunate tradition that is embraced as truth. If the HS is perfectly pure water being poured through the imperfect filter of man what comes out may be wonderful, but it won’t be perfect. What can be relied on is not the Bible but the presence of the HS in our lives. We can rely on that promise and the promise that the truth will set us free. Instead people rely on someone else to tell them the truth, and embrace tradition over truth, calling it God’s will. Jesus is the way to God, by example. Living in communion with God through the spirit. ie “this is eternal life that they might know you the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” and
John 4:24
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
Jesus as the way is about living as he lived rather than focusing on his death.
Note the section I bolded. The last syllable of your screen name indicates you fit in this category.

This is incredibly inadequate as proof. It doesn’t even indicate strongly in that direction. My brother sent me a book titles “Know the Truth” It contained a large section about Jesus’ relationship to the OT scriptures. Very interesting and helpful. The problem is that the conclusions reached are strained logic at best. They are forced in order to support preconceived notions. It is not at all obvious that Jesus felt about the OT the way his peers did. It is obvious he understood their beliefs.
That doesn’t even approach the subject of the NT and it’s history which is much more relevant to Christianity. I asked you to provide any passage indicating it was God’s plan that we have one final authoritative compilation of scripture to reveal his will. You have not. Why? Because you cannot. It doesn’t exist. It is man’s tradition.
My beliefs about the Bibles errors are not a whim. They come from my own search for the truth and an unwillingness to accept popular opinion and tradition as truth. They come from a lot of reading on all sides of the issue and an honest examination of the evidence available along with belief in the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Does that make them bulletproof? Of course not. The search goes on, but I have no desire to regress and embrace concepts I felt led to abandon.

Even though you claim my beliefs are completely outside what Christ taught I can back them up from the book you consider to be without error. What I try to do is seek love and truth within myself with the help of the HS, and then live accordingly. To know God and Jesus and worship in spirit and in truth. How far outside Jesus teachings am I?
I don’t mind sharing my opinions and beliefs {pretty obvious} but I don’t pretend to know what is the right path for everyone else, other than the generalization of seek love and truth. My advice to all believers
James 1:5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him.

Although I have expressed some strong feelings and beliefs I hope I have not been antagonistic. There is no animosity intended. You must be true to yourself and your own beliefs. I respect that. I only encourage you to make sure that truth is your priority, and not tradition.

177

[QUOTE=badchad]
I agree with that. Stuff like there is an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being who created the earth and loves us. I mean come on; who in there right mind would take that literally.
[/QUOTE]
Ben Franklin on beer?

178

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I asked you to provide any passage indicating it was God’s plan that we have one final authoritative compilation of scripture to reveal his will. You have not. Why? Because you cannot. It doesn’t exist. It is man’s tradition.

[/QUOTE]

Frankly, I find your position on this to be illogical, incomprehensible, and quite indefensible. It’s a similar argument used by those who try to deny the Trinity on the basis that the word “Trinity” isn’t found in the Bible. Similary, you deny that the Bible is the Word of God by requiring it to contain some specific wording of your choosing while ignoring the dozens of verses which verify the concept but with different words. And similar to those who deny the Trinity, you will accept nothing less than some exact phraseology like , “there is one collection of works called the Bible that has been assembled and it is the Word of God”. Further, you have set aside many of the verses which clearly state that concept by claiming that they are somehow really referring to some spiritual concept of the Word, not the written Word. Even a passage that you yourself quoted contains a clear contradiction of your beliefs ie Matt15:6, “For the sake of your tradition, you have set aside the Word of God” Jesus had just quoted to them the written Word of God which is found in Ex20:12, Deut5:16,Ex21:17 and Lev20:9 by saying in verse 4, “For God commanded, Honor your father and your mother, and, He who curses or reviles or speaks evil of or abuses or treats improperly his father or mother, let him surely come to his end by death.” Jesus thus quoted from, and directly declared that the written collection of the books of Moses to indeed be God’s Word.
Your entire position is just so bizarre and indefensible to me that I can’t even comment further; like your saying that just because a book might be inspired by God, doesn’t mean it’s without error (apparently your concept of God makes an allowance for Him to make a mistake now and then). The only thing I can add is that I think you genuinely believe what you are saying and aren’t just throwing these things out for the sake of argument. Probably your experience in the LDS church with the “scriptures” that they claimed to be God’s Word has led you to throw out the baby with the bathwater - but the Bible wasn’t contrived by man. Sorry, but I’m just not the right person for you to process your belief system with.

179

The Bible never once calls itself, as presently constituted, “the Word of God.” The term is used, first and most specifically, for Jesus Christ Himself (cf. John 1, I John 1). Then for God’s teachings at work within the person, changing his interior life. Then for utterances by God contained in Scripture. And occasionally, I think twice or three times, for the Tanakh (Protestant OT).

Now, if you choose to interpret those passages as referring to the 66-book leatherbound collection we have today, that’s your privilege. But make no mistake that you’re hanging your own opinion in place of the actual content of the Scripture.

While we’re on the subject, what’s the context of John 14:6? Why did Jesus say it?

180

[QUOTE=Bible man]
Frankly, I find your position on this to be illogical, incomprehensible, and quite indefensible. It’s a similar argument used by those who try to deny the Trinity on the basis that the word “Trinity” isn’t found in the Bible. Similary, you deny that the Bible is the Word of God by requiring it to contain some specific wording of your choosing while ignoring the dozens of verses which verify the concept but with different words. And similar to those who deny the Trinity, you will accept nothing less than some exact phraseology like , “there is one collection of works called the Bible that has been assembled and it is the Word of God”. Further, you have set aside many of the verses which clearly state that concept by claiming that they are somehow really referring to some spiritual concept of the Word, not the written Word. Even a passage that you yourself quoted contains a clear contradiction of your beliefs ie Matt15:6, “For the sake of your tradition, you have set aside the Word of God” Jesus had just quoted to them the written Word of God which is found in Ex20:12, Deut5:16,Ex21:17 and Lev20:9 by saying in verse 4, “For God commanded, Honor your father and your mother, and, He who curses or reviles or speaks evil of or abuses or treats improperly his father or mother, let him surely come to his end by death.” Jesus thus quoted from, and directly declared that the written collection of the books of Moses to indeed be God’s Word.
Your entire position is just so bizarre and indefensible to me that I can’t even comment further; like your saying that just because a book might be inspired by God, doesn’t mean it’s without error (apparently your concept of God makes an allowance for Him to make a mistake now and then). The only thing I can add is that I think you genuinely believe what you are saying and aren’t just throwing these things out for the sake of argument. Probably your experience in the LDS church with the “scriptures” that they claimed to be God’s Word has led you to throw out the baby with the bathwater - but the Bible wasn’t contrived by man. Sorry, but I’m just not the right person for you to process your belief system with.
[/QUOTE]

I noticed you found some reason to avoid answering my direct questions again. That seems to be a pattern with you.

I didn’t ask for any specific phrase or wording. You and many others hold the belief that the Bible is the final authoritative revelation of God’s will. You believe it was God’s plan that we have this collection don’t you? All I’m asking is for some reasonable scriptural reference to support the belief that you and many other Christians hold. {fortunately not all}Even something that strongly hints at it would be nice. as in “this verse *implies * God’s plan concerning the Bible” Since you seem to dismiss anything else as scripture how about a passage even hinting when inspirational writing that resulted in scripture would end.
I repeat. You can’t provide one because they don’t exist. Those beliefs are based entirely on the traditions of man.

Concerning Mat. 15. My example shows that Jesus warned against replacing the spirit of the law with the traditions of man. Religious tradition and dogma will never be an acceptable substitute for the true spirit of what Jesus taught,
We must worship God in spirit and truth remember?
I don’t deny that the term “word of God” occasionally and in that chapter refers to the written word. What I specifically said was that two of the verses you used referred to the inner voice as the word of God rather than the written word.

I never claimed or implied that God can make an error. My claim is that the nature of inspiration doesn’t mean that the resulting writing is inerrant. That is another assumption without support and a religious tradition that has usurped the truth.
You yourself acknowledged that the Holy Spirit is the prime interpreter of the Bible . You said people interpret it differently and incorrectly.

and

yet when it comes to considering the men that were the authors of the NT, the many scribes who copied and changed the originals, the translators, and the men who selected which writings would be declared scripture, you contradict your own statements in order to support your irrational tradition. Yet I am the illogical one.