The fullness of the Godhead and salvation

Great Debates
221

So why are you in GD if you don’t want to debate? It’s a pretty cheap stunt to post a malicious, judgemental, and frankly, ill-informed little smear against a whole group of people (including a significant portion of this MB) and then claim that you don’t want to deal with rebuttals.

What bothers you isn’t that the kinds of debates you want to avoid “go nowhere fast,” it’s that you always end up getting pretty soundly spanked.

I’m sorry to be so harsh, and I’ve held back a lot with you in the past, but I’m getting tired of this played out modus operandi that you employ of dropping offensive and hypocritical posts into these religion threads only to run from them when you get confronted. That role you play of “I’m just telling you what the Bible says, these are God’s opinions, not mine” isn’t working. It’s phony. You interpret your Bible the way you want to interpret it just like everybody else. You don’t like gay people for whatever reason so you cherry-pick and interpret the Bible to support your pre-existing prejudice. If you really were just following the words you wouldn’t even be posting here since women cannot presume to teach men. I could also point out that since you are not in your first marriage you are currently living in sin. It could be argued that your current marriage is just as immoral and just as illegitimate as any gay marriage,* and that makes you a hypocrite.

I don’t begrudge you any belief you want to hold and would literally defend to the death your right to hold and to speak them, but for cripe’s sake, His, your in a debate forum. If you’re not prepared to defend your posts, don’t come here.

*Please note: I don’t actually believe for a second that either H4E’ or same-sex marriages are “sinful.” I’m just trying to make a rhetorical point.

222

To give her credit, Diogenes, she does feel that she sinned in contracting that marriage, or at least said that in one post. However, leaving that marriage as a sign of repentance of said sin would not be appropriate, for reasons that both she and Jersey Diamond tried to explain, but which I could not grasp the logic of.

In any case, by her own logic, she’s become a Christian, and so her sins are forgiven, even though she hasn’t acted to “stop living in sin” (by a literalist understanding). Why this standard does not also apply to gay men and women, I’ve not been able to fathom.

His or another who thinks as she does (Reactor?), if you’re around and care to explain the difference, I’d really like to know what your grasp of the differing standards is and why you see them as different. That’s not an invitation to get argued with; it’s a request for clarification of a point you believe that I just plain don’t get.

223

Well, yes, Poly, that was exactly my point. H4E and others often will say that homosexuals can be forgiven but that they first must stop their “sinful” relationships. By her own standards then, His is still living in sin. I’m willing to listen to her justification for this, but in the absence of a coherent (and theologically consistent explanation of her own behaviour, I’m going to assume hypocrisy.

I haven’t flamed H4E before, or really called her out because I’ve always just thought of her as well meaning but naiive in her beliefs, but she doesn’t seem to get that much of what she posts is hurtful to others. I’m hoping that pointing at her own situation will give her some taste of how it feels to be on the receiving end of that kind of judgement. I know I’m not the first person to try this tack and I don’t have much expectation that it will elicit any different response this time than it has in the past, but I guess it’s just a loose tooth I must prod.

224

I got a few things wrong… I appreciate the correction. Maybe the onus isn’t on me, however, to read every other post when you quote my entire post and refer to that only. It sure looked like everything that was said was directed at me, and me only. Isn’t the reason for quoting to save the person reading (and new to the discussion) from reading everything before, surely to be repeated?

Sorry gobear, I thought you were a christian. That makes your responces actually make sence! :slight_smile:
Diogenes…

“You don’t like gay people for whatever reason so you cherry-pick and interpret the Bible to support your pre-existing prejudice.”

Ouch. Are you sure?
You said,

“I have no idea what you’re talking about here. If facts and science contradict the Bible then the Bible is wrong, is it not?”

I guess so, but I wasn’t talking about that. I was saying “If you believe in the bible and what it says is true, then it contains everything essential- like how to be saved, etc (and other like christianese sayings).”

You also said,

" You haven’t actually enunciated a Koranic error, here. Muslims believe that Jesus was born of a virgin."

Yes I know this. But why? As someone said above, “It’s a sign!” Yes, but WHY? What’s the point? Oh look! God went and lay four small clouds on a tiny rabbit and covered them in chocolate for all to see! Why? because it was a sign! ← not make sence. I’m talking about theological error, which is something even you with a college degree seem not to understand (no offence, just saying since you pointed that one out).

Also you said,

"It’s hypocritical to cite Leviticus as a weapon against others if you’re not willing to follow it yourself. "

And again with the not understanding the whole bible in context.

Lastly…

“Does anyone else know more about your beliefs than you do?”

Sorry- tired. Thought you said something more a little different :slight_smile: As I said it was bedtime.
I’m not here to argue, Polycarp. I’ll try and clarify that one… although I’m a little lost as to the details of the whole situation, about names, etc. Could you run over the issue for me?

225

To lay the whole gory story out in detail for you, Reactor, and with the understanding that I’m trying to do accurate, objective reportage here, but inevitably my own views will creep in, so I’ll appreciate correction…

Ever since I joined this board over three years ago, discussions about Christianity and homosexuality have been prevalent on a fairly regular basis in Great Debates.

Several months ago, a lady who posts under the name His4Ever showed up. She has a strong evangelical Christian perspective, and witnesses for her views. This in particular includes the idea that homosexuality is condemned strongly in the Bible (which she regards as to be largely read literally “unless the figurative nature of a passage is obvious”). For reasons I don’t totally grasp, she seems particularly fixated on the idea that she needs to point out the sinfulness of gay sex and the errors of the gay rights movement, from an evangelical perspective.

Now His4Ever is presently happily married, this being her third marriage. Her first marriage was to a man who was very much abusive in virtually every sense of the term. Understandably, she got a divorce from him, and (IIRC) remarried “on the rebound” for companionship and sex. This marriage, being founded not on a mutual love but on her bad judgment in jumping into it, foundered, and they too divorced. She now has a husband whom she loves and who loves her.

In general, nobody here condemns her for these marriages, despite Jesus’s stricture about not obtaining a divorce except in the case of adultery. However, it’s been pointed out to her repeatedly that by the standards she holds gay people to in terms of literalistic application of Bible laws, she herself is committing adultery in living with a man in what she and the state regard as a marriage while her first husband still lives.

Diogenes’ two posts and my response to his first one were in reference to that bit of board history. And I invoked you as someone other than herself who stands on an ethical worldview based on applying the Bible strictures to one’s life as a moral code. As I noted, she somehow regards the proper move, *from her perspective, as remaining in that marriage despite Jesus’s command.

Many of us see what Jesus was speaking against is “divorces of convenience” where a man gets the hots for a new and younger woman and puts away his wife according to Mosaic rules in order to remarry – and that what happened in her life in no way is governed by that command of Jesus, despite its literal phrasing.

But the question is why she is not being hypocritical in considering there to be a “loophole” for her and not looking at the situation of the gay men and women in the same light.

Any insight you might feel led to share will of course be welcomed.

226

That comment was directed at His4Ever and yes, I’m sure. You’ve wandered into the middle of a long conversation here that extends to more than one MB. I’m not just jumping on His arbitrarily.

Ok, that’s why I said I didn’t quite grasp your point. However, in order to maintain a belief that the Bible is literally true and inerrant, doesn’t the Bible have to correlate with observed reality, including known science and history? How do you reconcile a belief in inerrancy if the Bible conflicts with objective fact?

The “sign” was that Jesus was a prophet, was important to God and had to be listened to. For Muslims, the virgin birth was God’s way of getting people’s attention and saying "pay attention to this kid. He speaks my words.

In point of fact, though. The lack of an explicit explanation for a miracle does not constitute an “error,” just a mystery. There are events in the Bible that are not clearly explained either.

I do understand the Christian perspective on Mosaic law. I’m quite familiar with the old covenant/ new covenant stuff, but if you’re going to adopt the view that the law of Moses was wiped out by the crucifixion then it makes no sense to trot it out to suit your own agenda. Either Leviticus is still valid or it isn’t. If your going to cite it as authoritative then you have to take it aall as authoritative. If the old covenant has been rescinded thaen Leviticus is irrelevant.

That’s ok, we’ve all been there. Now, just to clarify, I was inquiring as to how you arrived at your belief in the literal truth of the Bible. What was the process that led to that conclusion?

Just curious, Reactor, is English, by any chance, not your first language? I don’t mean that to be an insult. it’s just a sense I get. Even if it’s not your first language you grasp it quite well.

But if it is your first language, you need to work on your spelling a little bit. :wink:

227

Reactor asked Freyr why he was not a Christian.

Though the question was not directed at me, I will answer why I am not.

Your god doesn’t talk to me. Or if He does, it’s in a language I don’t speak. I’ve only learned to pick up the language in inklings from the good example of my Christian boyfriend. When I was a child, I would sit in the church and observe the presence of your God, a presence I could perceive but could not partake in. The rituals, the means of conveying meaning, none of them speak to my heart. The lessons Christianity would convey it does not convey to me in a way that teaches me; some of the lessons I need to learn from the divine it fails to even approach.

I became an agnostic not through profound disaffection with the teachings of my church, but because your god, if He spoke to me, did so only in Swahili or something. I meandered a while, looking for a path that actually addressed my failings and bolstered my weaknesses, looking for gods that would speak to me in a language I would understand.

I am comforted by a belief in a divine sufficiently powerful to manifest not only in a way that makes sense to me, that can support my weaknesses and promote my strengths, as an individual with many weaknesses and many strengths – but in the huge variety of different ways that other people need, to bolster their weaknesses, to bring their strengths into fullest flower. Christianity is not the path that does the best job at helping me to be the best human being I can be; therefore, I do not follow that path.

I study it; its scriptures, its varying interpretations, its history. I study it to gain the cultural context that enables me to make sense of the things that confounded me as the eight-year-old in the congregation who listened earnestly to the sermons. I study it, attempting to slowly learn its language, and at that I am improving, though I do not know that I will ever be skilled. I study it to be able to respond to the arguments that are rooted there. I study it because I believe that understanding it is essential to understanding the culture that surrounds me. I study it because there are things of value in there, even if they are set in a matrix that holds no meaning for me.

I study it, but it is not mine. I doubt it ever could be; I have made vows otherwise, and even if those vows could be honorably broken, there are underlying paradigmatic issues that can only be resolved by syncretism, not Christianity alone.

(Yep, I test out as a virtuous pagan on the Dante’s Inferno personality test.)

228

It’s great that you do talk with them and discuss your various beliefs. However, do you proselytize them like you’re doing here? I have a feeling if you do, you’d lose a lot of your friends suddenly. And would you like to be proselytized back for every attempt you’ve made to spread Christianity? That’s what would happen if you applied the Golden Rule to your own actions.

And btw, my name is FREYR. There’s only one E! If you’re wondering, it’s Old Norse.

229

I have several reasons for leaving Christianity. I’ve elaborated on them in other threads, but since you’re new here, I’ll try to touch on the main points:

  1. I fundamentally disagree with the philosophical concept of monotheism and see an inherent paradox within the idea of a omnipotent and omniscent god. I view the paradigm of the universe as a battleground between good and evil as outdated.

  2. I fundamentally disagree with the idea of the inherent sinfulness of human nature. Humans are many things; arrogant, stupid and naive, yes. But “sinful” in the sense that Christians use the term, which seems to imply inherently flawed or evil, I think is downright silly.

  3. Dispite the many wonderful Christians on this board, I do believe that most of Christianity sees homosexuality somewhere between an abomination and something barely tolerable. I’m sorry, but I’m not going to belong to a religion who won’t accept me for what I am. I’m also not Martin Luther and I’m not going to try to change the stance of the various Churches on this issue.

  4. In late 1979 or early 1980, I tried being a born-again Christian. It didn’t work. After 3 days of wrestling with this issue, I gave up and walked away from Christianity.

  5. On Yule of '84, I had an ecstatic experience with Freyr of the Vanir during a Wiccan ceremony. On Samhain of '85, I pledge myself to those Gods and walking that path. At this point, I cannot turn back, nor do I want to.

I hope this answered your questions.

230

Okay, I have a lot of question answering to do. I think you’ll find, first of all Diogenes that some of my spelling isn’t a-1 is because I have a keyboard that doesn’t always give me the letter I want (still yet to figure out why this is) and because I’m not Mr English. I’m a self-taught two-finger typer and yes, english is my first (and only, bar a little Greek) language. If you were to ask I’d tell you outright that I’m not a very smart person. I got average grades in school, and have never been to university (similar to your college I believe). Not being brilliant at english or anything else on the face of the planet, I (at times) run my posts through a spell checker. Sometimes I don’t. I appreciate you pointing out that I’m not perfect, but I write for content, not for perfection. Welcome to the internet :wink:

“How do you reconcile a belief in inerrancy if the Bible conflicts with objective fact?”

I don’t, and I don’t believe it does.

"For Muslims, the virgin birth was God’s way of getting people’s attention and saying “pay attention to this kid… The lack of an explicit explanation for a miracle does not constitute an “error,” just a mystery.”

This is why Catholics (on the whole) call salvation a ‘mystery’, because they don’t read their bible’s and understand the explanation for Jesus’ shedding of his blood, through Paul’s explanation in Hebrews. I call it an error, but it’s semantics overall what we call it. The writer of the Koran took the information from the bible, but not the reasoning.

“There are events in the Bible that are not clearly explained either.”

Agreed, but nothing is taken from the Koran (end of story really) and then left unexplained. You’re talking about how we know where the truth lies, so… just pointing this one out.

“but if you’re going to adopt the view that the law of Moses was wiped out by the crucifixion”

This is incorrect. Paul says that by faith we uphold the law. It isn’t wiped out. It’s “nailed to the cross”, yes, but fulfilled by faith in the new. Look man, I understand your stance and reasoning for rejecting the Christian stance (in part at least) but the issue is with sin, not with homosexuality and that’s it. The bible also says that liars will have their place in the lake of fire. If a Christian cites Lev scriptures to support anti-gay whatever, it’s because they don’t have any other way of saying “God hates sin.” We’ve all broken the ten commandments, homosexual or not.

**Lilairen…[\b]

I appreciate you sharing that with me, and the rest of us. You said,

“When I was a child, I would sit in the church and observe the presence of your God, a presence I could perceive but could not partake in.”

This is because the bible says your are an enemy of God by your works, through a lawless life, which is what the bible calls sin. We know of our sin by our conscience (the ten commandments are written on our hearts- that is our minds) and so there is a chasm between God and yourself because of this. You may have sensed something, but the bible says the spirit will testify to you about God when you accept Jesus Christ. Before that everything will seem dumb to you, and you may not feel a thing. The bible says (say that a lot, don’t I?) that spiritual things are discerned by spiritual people, and what’s written in the bible is of a spiritual nature. It’s no wonder Paul the apostle says the cross is foolishness to the those who are perishing.

Try not to study the bible in depth. Try to understand the basics first. Read Romans, John. Listen to the gospel message. Head knowledge is one thing, but heart understanding is another.

Anyway, thanks again for the info.
Freyr…

Thanks for your info too! This is great… I love your passion and directness (is that a word Diogenes?)

“I fundamentally disagree with the philosophical concept of monotheism and see an inherent paradox within the idea of a omnipotent and omniscent god. I view the paradigm of the universe as a battleground between good and evil as outdated.”

What makes it outdated in your eyes?
“But “sinful” in the sense that Christians use the term, which seems to imply inherently flawed or evil, I think is downright silly.”

It doesn’t mean flawed or evil. I means lawless. We have a desire to be lawless against our creator.
“…but I’m not going to belong to a religion who won’t accept me for what I am.”

So if I’m a murderer, or I enjoy killing people, everyone should accept me as I am? Where do you draw the line on that one?
“In late 1979 or early 1980, I tried being a born-again Christian.”

You don’t try anything. You repent from your sin and accept Christ and what he did for you on the cross. I’m sorry you didn’t have an ‘encounter’ with the living God in some way or another, but everyone else I know who is genuinely born-again has had no problems at all with this one. Some people would say you had a false conversion- that you came under wrong pretences.
“On Samhain of '85, I pledge myself to those Gods and walking that path. At this point, I cannot turn back, nor do I want to.”

Well, that’s your choice.

231

Argh- sorry for the big bolded bit.

smacks head

232

Reactor, I don’t subscribe to your religion. I’m not interested in your god, and appealing to aspects of your faith that I rejected long ago as misguided is not going to convince me that I should suddenly give in.

My spirit testifies to me quite happily about my gods. Yours is superfluous to me, and following his dictates and rituals would make me a worse person than I am on a path better suited to me.

My conception of the divine is expansive enough to include guidance to all those who seek it, not just the ones who follow a specific form and a specific ritual. I honestly pity those with a narrow, restricted conceptualisation of the divine, who believe in a god that cannot accept the diversity of its own creation.

I have found my place within the harmonious structure of the universe. The things I have known to be true since I was a child have been given names. My strengths have guidance; my weaknesses are numbered and constrained. I act as I can to serve harmony and correct discord. I am inspired to create beauty and serve love. My heart sings, and I am loved; I have felt my Mother’s strength guide my hand, my Beloved’s will accompanying mine.

That is my witness. It is not to be constrained by bookbindings, because I am alive with the spirit of the divine, which collects no dust. It is my witness, and my truth, and I laugh with the joy of it.

233

I am a dynamic agnostic. I don’t know what I believe, but at this point, I’m pretty sure I believe something.

It is in part because of people like Polycarp and Lilairen that when I do find whatever is at the end of my spiritual path, I will be able to have faith in it.

Their clear examples of people whose faith strengthens them in all ways accomplish more than any number of lifeless outpourings of straight quotes from the Bible.

234

“Reactor, I don’t subscribe to your religion.”

Sorry, I thought you were still looking into it. My mistake.
“My spirit testifies to me quite happily about my gods.”

Well the bible would say that your spirit is of the antichrist, so… that would make sence.
“I honestly pity those with a narrow, restricted conceptualisation of the divine, who believe in a god that cannot accept the diversity of its own creation.”

So you pity me?

He accepts you… but that won’t stop you from recieving what you deserve when it’s judgement day. You want to include everyone, bar those who are exclusive. Like it or not, if you step in front of a speeding 10-ton truck on a highway you’re going to get hurt, and like it or not, the God of the bible (you know the real God who won’t bend to your whims and desires) is exclusive and just as immune to your relative truth as the truck.

“My heart sings, and I am loved; I have felt my Mother’s strength guide my hand, my Beloved’s will accompanying mine… and I laugh with the joy of it.”

And when you have a bad day you swear, and when you get sick you complain, and when it’s your day to die, you wish it were otherwise. God points out we are lawless. Just by listening to your lack of submission to anything other than the creations of your own mind- a blissful amalgamation of everything that makes you happy, I couldn’t agree with him more.

235

ConnieS

“…outpourings of straight quotes from the Bible.”

We do that because we would rather have God say it than us- we can make things up, and add to what we’ve been given. The bible says about itself that it is “sharper than any two-edged sword” (that’s the really sharp Gladius, the roman blade if you were wondering), so we let God have the say as best we can.

“the end of my spiritual path”

The end of everyone’s “spiritual path” is the judgement seat of God. People don’t like that idea (see above) but… I say, work it out asap :wink: You don’t want to arrive there in the state you’re in.

236

Religion is and always has been about more than a book. That’s the whole point. I can get rules by picking up my high school handbook. I refuse to limit my experience of the divine to the equivalent of “no running in the hallway.” If you want to do so, you’re welcome to, but as for me, I can’t convince my spirit or soul or what-have-you that God can be confined within a book.

237

I don’t mean to sound insulting, but you only say what you do because you have a very small amount of knowledge in the area. And by that, I don’t mean you’re a dumbass. Not at all. I mean, you make comments like,

“…that God can be confined within a book.”

When the bible doesn’t even say that (and neither do I for that matter). In fact, the bible says the very opposite. It’s what God has to say to you that’s in the book.

And you also say things like,

“I refuse to limit my experience of the divine to the equivalent of “no running in the hallway.””

When what you’re doing is refusing to listen to your conscience (con means ‘with’ and science means ‘knowledge’) so when you refuse to listen to it you do so with knowledge. Those “rules” the bible talks about are written on your mind. Why? So that no one is without excuse. Let’s take lying for example. Everyone knows it’s wrong. You can try and justify it to yourself, but you know it’s wrong. It’s a little more than a bunch of wacky rules.

Again, enough with the rebellion and selfishness. Do you think people serve God for their own gain? It isn’t about that. It’s all about him, and knowing him restores us.

238

To re-submit my meta-summary of these discussions from the first page:

Anything to add?

Um, Reactor – don’t you understand that, to many non-Christians, that’s exactly what it looks like you’re doing? Just because you have a book of unestablished veracity to support your views doesn’t mitigate against the idea that you believe what you want to believe because you want to believe it.

239

I’m seventeen. Of course I only have a very small amount of knowledge about anything (although, in all fairness, I have more knowledge on some subjects than most adults, but that’s just because I’m a geek). I’m fairly sure, however, that whatever data exists on ConnieS’s spirituality, ConnieS knows more of it than anyone else.

I am not a Christian. I have never been a Christian. The Christian Bible does not speak to my soul.

The problem here is that the Bible (or at least, the Bible as fundamentalists interpret it) has never matched up with my conscience. Does that mean that I was born deluding myself?

One viewpoint might be that yes, because of original sin, I was born deluding myself, and the only way to rid myself of this delusion is to Accept God’s Word And Become Christian. Any experiences suggesting that another religious path might be best for me are wily tricks by the devil.

The great thing about this kind of logic is that one can dismiss everything I say about my own spirituality with it.

240

jr8…

“…you believe what you want to believe because you want to believe it.”

You think? Of couse I want to believe it! I wouldn’t believe it if I didn’t want to. I live a truly blessed life because of it. That’s painfully obvious. And yes, I do realise how I look. I realise that pretty much nothing I say will change anything in the minds of people who are determined to do nothing with their lives. Besides, I don’t remember saying at any particular time the bible right because of X. I just stated what it said. You guys can do with that information as you like because (drumroll please) if I don’t say it, 99% of the people on here will hide behind their rampant apathy and never go anywhere near the bible… you know, even though they spend a large chunk of their lives commenting on it. That’s life, and it’s my job to spread the gospel message and… plain talk to people :wink:

Do I sound like the guy in your meta-summary? In fact man, your meta-thingy is the very reason you think all of these discussions hold nothing of interest. Have you spent even two seconds considering what X (always the bible) says, or did you just sum it all up and forget it?

ConnieS…
“Of course I only have a very small amount of knowledge about anything…”

Fair enough, but before closing the lid on the bible, how about learning what it says in full?
“The Christian Bible does not speak to my soul.”

The bible doesn’t speak to anyone’s soul.
“the Bible (or at least, the Bible as fundamentalists interpret it) has never matched up with my conscience.”

How would you know? Have you read and understood the entire thing?
“The great thing about this kind of logic is that one can dismiss everything I say about my own spirituality with it.”

I can dismiss anything you say just by saying “I dismiss it.” (as lots of people on here say). I don’t need the bible for that. Maybe the devil is playing tricks on you. Maybe it’s just your flesh. I don’t care about that. What I care about are people who make blanket comments about the bible before understanding everything it says. I don’t know what you call it, but I call it foolish.

It’s like saying “That person is a total idiot!” and then getting to know them, and finding out they’re actually a really nice person. You kinda feel dumb when it happens. I’m sure you have lots of ‘spiritual’ ideas and beliefs, as I have beliefs about people I don’t know. Sometimes they aren’t on the mark.