I have to admit that I’m distressed at the unfriendly welcome you’ve received here.
While it’s not to me to speak for anybody else here or interpret their actions I believe it has a lot to do with the particular brand of “Christian” we’ve been receiving here recently.
We’ve had quite a few ignorant hate mongers, and this may have colored perceptions unjustly.
You seem very kind and sincere and not at all, this other type.
I am sure that when you say mankind is fallen you mean that nobody is perfect. The route you espouse through bettering oneself is through religion. I see nothing wrong with this.
I doubt you believe unbaptised babies go to hell, that God condoned the torture of innocents during the Inquisition, or any other of the “arguments” being attributed to you.
If you read carefully on this board you will find that some of the people attacking you profess no inherent objection to faith in God, or people who have it. Their objection, they claim is with those who seek to “prove” their faith with “scientific” fallacies.
I have seen no evidence that you are attempting to do so (Though this is the only thread of yours I’ve read,) so I find their attacks to be somewhat mean and hypocritical.
They are also a fallacious indictment of Christianity.
If their argument had merit, than one could also argue against science by listing the atrocities of Mendelev and others who tortured in “Science’s” name.
Personally, I find your even attitude and good nature in the face of this hostility rather refreshing. I also think it speaks well for you and your faith. I wish all of our “fundamentalists” (for lack of a better word,) shared this trait with you. Welcome.
Okay, so God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. That raises a number of questions:
If God is omnipotent, how can you claim that he is too holy to tolerate sin? He is all-powerful. He can do anything. Sin is meaningless to that.
If God is omniscient, how can we have free-will? He knows what we’re going to do. He knows all of the “sins” we’re going to commit before we are ever born. He knew Adam and Eve were going to eat the apple before he even created it. Why are they at fault?
If God is omnibenevolent, why does Hell exist? If he truly wants the best for everyone, why roast them in a pit of fire for eternity? Especially given the questions above.
If God is all three of these things, why does evil exist? Why does he let a child murderer torture and kill an innocent little girl? He knows it’s going to happen, he doesn’t want it to happen, and he has the power to stop it. So why doesn’t he?
In the end, it seems impossible for an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god to exist – let alone for the Christian God (with his crucified son, pits of hell, etc.) to possess those traits. So I must conclude that if the Christian god exists, then either he isn’t all-powerful, or he isn’t all-good (and possibly he isn’t all-knowing either).
I would advise that you don’t make assumptions about the time or effort people on this board have spent trying to comprehend your religion. Many of us have spent years/decades trying to understand what drives so many to believe. In fact, most of us have probably really, really wanted to believe at certain times in our lives. How can you come along, exchange three or four messages with me and smugly decide that I do not believe as you do because I have “not taken the time nor the effort to understand it”?
I have sought your God and he has NOT revealed himself to me. Save your ignorant assertions for someone else and try responding to my points instead of speculating about my integrity.
FACT: I have tried (at great length) to believe FACT: I still do not believe CONCLUSION: Your god either does not exist or does not reveal himself to all seekers. If the latter is true and yet he would still condemn me for lack of belief, then he is not a benevolent god.
By His own free choice He chooses to not see when “the blood of Jesus Christ covers their sin”. You have given no reason why it is logically impossible for it to be otherwise. He could have chosen to have our sins covered if we believed the sky was blue. He did not.
Everyone could have received it if they believed in their heart that the sky was blue. So why not do it this way? Anyhow, you say that if a person is incapable of believing that Jesus died for His/Her sins–say a baby–they do not go to Hell. Therefore, a person too poor to give to others would go to heaven, too, right?
I think you and jenkinsfan have been honest and polite in your statements. However–this is Great Debates. I do not comment on simple witnessing (unless the witnessesser is being a jerk, which I would not say of you) but when it turns into a debate, and you try to justify your faith with reasons, i.e. “God cannot abide sin, but if you do X, he can” I will challenge the reasoning if I think I see an error. You’ve fallen into a nest of people who love to argue; don’t be surprised if we do so. I think a good strong debate helps both sides clarify their thoughts and gain appreciation for the “other side”. Welcome to Great Debates, Twin and jenkinsfan.
TWIN: Re : Rom1:27, because of the word 'recompence" as in payment. RE: Rom 1:29 (debate) So is it the literal or interpreted meaning of the Bible? There is no context here that would support your idea. RE: Kosher meat: Acts. 15:20 “… they (must) abstain from… things strangled and from blood”, which to any Biblical scholar is talking about animals killed in the proper, ie “kosher” way. The meat most of us eat is unclean, by this definition.
RE 1Cor7 (no sex) :1"…It is good for a man not to touch a woman". :7 “for I would all men were even as I myself” (ie celibate):37
“Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart…hath power over his own will, and hath decreed in his own heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well” :38 “So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well, but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better”. Paul was saying that ALL sex was bad, but if you absolutely HAD to, sex in marriage was tolerated.
The question isn’t whether the Christian God is a loving father or a petty dictator. Nor is it whether the rules of christianity make sense. The question is whether Christianity is true or not.
Think about it.
If Christianity is TRUE, then we’d better get in line with it, at least to avoid hell. It doesn’t matter how silly it might be, if it is the case then it is the case.
It’s like working for a petty and arbitrary boss. If the boss says “everybody has to wear a propellor beanie to work,” and you otherwise like your job, then you’ll wear the beanie.
On the other hand, if Christianity is FALSE, well then it’s false. Who cares how silly and arbitrary it is, or what you have to do in it?
So this is the question: Is christianity true. I would like to know from the Christians here if there is any non-circular reason they have for believing that Christianity represents the true state of affairs in this universe.
By non-circular, I mean please avoid the following logic.
A: The Bible is the word of god
B: How do You know?
A: It says so in the Bible
(Note: For simplicity’s sake I am avoiding one difficult issue, namely, the eight zillion interpretations of what the Bible actually says. I will assume Jenkinsfan’s and the other Christian posters here as the “correct” interpretation.)
One more point. I am really and sincerely interested in hearing from Christians on this issue. I find it truly baffling but very interesting. I apologize for any fellow non-christians who seem to be a bit testy here. I would really like an answer and will respond as politely as I know how.
Also, come on guys, these people aren’t Pashley or CalifBoomer. Let’s keep it civil.
Good question. The desire not to go to Hell was plenty for me to want to believe. It’s sufficient for the vast majority. Another reason to believe is to work with the assumption that a holy God exists. If he does, then he has given us life on this earth, air to breathe, minds to think with, and instead of living our lives for him, thanking him for his gifts, we are choosing to ignore him. I would not want to go through life shunning my creator.
Just because He can do anything doesn’t mean He will do anything. You have to take all three aspects of Him into account. Yes He is omnipotent, but He is also holy. It is His holiness which prevents his toleration of sin. He hates it. It is an abomination to Him. Lucky for us, we have a way around it.
God knows what we are going to do. However, He is not making our decisions for us. He does give us free will to choose Him or deny Him. While it’s true that He already knows the answer before asking, He still allows us to answer.
This once again brings up the fact of the holiness of God. He really does love everyone. But He hates sin. The only one He felt that was worthy to take away sin was a perfect person. The only person who could do this was His son. Any who believe on Jesus Christ will be saved. God no longer sees their sin. God can accept this. Hell exists because Satan and some angels who Satan tricked rebelled. God created Hell for Satan and the rebelling angels. Matt 25:41 says “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.”
Then we REALLY wouldn’t have free will. We would be a bunch of puppets being controlled, unable to make our own decisions. God wants us to make our own decisions. It’s true that He doesn’t want a child tortured and killed and He does have the power to stop it. But this would take away our free will.
I’m sorry you feel this way. I have tried to reconcile your questions. I encourage you to give God some more thought.
**
quote:
I think that nothing inside you says that this is true because you have not taken the time nor the effort to understand it. This is just my opinion. If you seek God, he will reveal Himself to you. Have you honestly tried to make a genuine attempt to seek God? I am not asserting that you really do believe and are denying it. I am asserting that you have not really tried to believe.**
Ouch. I sincerely apologize for the fact that my previous statement offended you so deeply. It was wrong of me to make assmptions about the relationship between you and God. If I may ask, how have you gone about seeking God. My relationship with God began by reading and studying His Bible and by attending church at a very young age. However, I wasn’t saved until I was 22. What took so long? Well, at first I believed that being a basically good person I could go to Heaven. My mother was a christian, so I felt that I was one, too. It wasn’t until much later that I began to realize that, while I knew and understood that Jesus had lived, had died on the cross, and raised from the dead three days later, I hadn’t truly accepted the fact that it was for my sins that He died.
**
quote:
When “they believe that certain thing”, the blood of Jesus Christ covers their sin. In God’s eyes, we are no longer sinners.**
I can give you no answer why God instituted blood sacrifice for the remission of sins. That’s the way he has always done it. From Adam on down, that’s how he chose to do it. Let’s say he did make it that if we believed the sky was blue, our sins would be forgiven. What about blind people? Sure, others could tell them the sky was blue, but why should they believe them. What about the color-blind people?
**
quote:
He didn’t make it something arbitrary like giving money to the poor, because then, poor people could not be saved. Or children, who are dependent on their parents for money. What if they couldn’t give to the poor? I guess they have to go to hell, too. God made His way of salvation so that everyone could receive it. **
[quote]
Everyone could have received it if they believed in their heart that the sky was blue. So why not do it this way? Anyhow, you say that if a pe
Well, it would get a heckuva lot more people in heaven than “you must beleive that this Guy who lived 2000 years ago was God, born of a virgin, and died for your sins, and you must do this based on the confusing statements of a book written 2000 years ago 40 years after it happened regarding things that weren’t even believed by most people at the time.” If you wanted to get people into heaven, why make it so freakin’ hard for reasonable people like meara and I to believe the thing that has to be believed to get let in?
I’m all for free will, but God seems to be going out of His way to make it tough to believe in this instance. We do not believe based on an act of will. Even if I really, really wanted to, I could not believe that they sky is plaid; the evidence doesn’t support this belief. Nor can I believe that Jesus was God and died for my sins, because I haven’t seen enough evidence to believe. Jews, atheists, pagans and yes, Christians, believe, not by a choice, but based on the evidence they see. Therefore, if they think there is not enough evidence for a premise, they will not beleive. So it seems only fair for God to give a little better quality of evidence, if He really wants people to get into heaven.
What about people who don’t think an account written 2000 years ago can be necessarily be trusted to accurately describe events? What about people who see other religion’s ancient stories, and can see no particular reason why yours should be true, and the other stories are not? If you wish a more all-encompassing belief to believe in, how about “I exist”?
All this talk of which belief you must believe for God to be able to “abide” your sin is pretty much beside the point anyhow; the major thing is, God could have chosen any arbitrary criteria to “allow” himself to abide sin. Indeed, when He was making the rules, He could have set it up so He could abide sin whenever He wished.
Doesn’t make much sense, to me, honestly. If I got to decide who went to Heaven and who did not, I certainly wouldn’t choose to only let in those who believed a certain thing.
If your premise that God had to choose to only abide sin if person believes that Jesus died for his/her sins cannot be supported with reason, then your arguments from that premise need not be true. Therefore they are not very convincing. If you wish to say “God did it this way, and I realize it seems unfair and I can’t provide any reason why it must be so, but I believe it is true,” then I will respect your right to your faith. However, if you try to support it with reason instead of faith, I will argue with you. I haven’t yet seen anything that would convince me that God necessarily had to set things up so that only those that believed in Jesus get into heaven, and I and others have shown why it does not get the maximum number of people into heaven, and it does not get only good people into heaven. It gets in people who believe a certain thing, that’s all, which does not seem to jibe with God’s claimed omnibenevolence.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that She is pink; logically, we know She is invisible because we can’t see Her.
**
quote:
I can give you no answer why God instituted blood sacrifice for the remission of sins. That’s the way he has always done it. From Adam on down, that’s how he chose to do it. Let’s say he did make it that if we believed the sky was blue, our sins would be forgiven.**
God does not want you to rely upon the wisdom of men to get saved. Read the first two chapters of I Corinthians. They will either better explain some things or make you very angry. God wants us to believe in faith. He feels that the fact that we are alive and the creation around us is more than sufficient evidence.
**
quote:
What about blind people? Sure, others could tell them the sky was blue, but why should they believe them. What about the color-blind people?**
I guess you are right. God could have set up forgiveness of sin any way he wanted to.
**
quote:
With the hypothetical examples above, we are believing on something arbitrary. He wanted the forgiveness of sin not to be something arbitrary. He wanted there to be some reasoning behind His choice. The blood of Jesus Christ, a perfect person who had never sinned having the ability to take away sin, makes a sort of sense (at least to me). At least it’s consistent from the beginning. I am not sure we can ever truly understand the nature of God or why He has instituted this form of forgiveness.**
I’m afraid I can’t think of anything else to convince you with. I’ll keep looking for some more compelling reasons to believe. BTW, I want to thank you for your civility in this debate. You have made me think harder about why I believe the things I do and I feel I have become a better Christian for it.
When I asked for reasons I didn’t neccessairily mean logical ones. They can be logical or not as long as they avoid the circular logic I mentioned.
Now you seem to have mentioned two reasons for belief.
1.) Jesus fullfilled certain OT prophecies.
2.) Your own personal feelings.
As for one I am afraid that this is an example of Circular reasoning. Most of the gospels were written well after Jesus died, and were written to prove a point. The only evidence we have for Jesus fullfilling prophecies is from a book (the Bible) which set out to prove that he did so. Also, Its been awhile, but IIRC, some of those fullfillments involved a lot of interpretation and stretching.
2.) Your own faith and personal feelings.
This is actually more interesting to me at least. I would genuinly like to know how you use your personal feelings to decide on the truth of a statement.
For instance, surely you are aware that many people in the world are Moslems, Jews, Buddhists, etc. All these people have faith to a degree. How do you determine whose faith is correct? I mean, even within Christianity, Catholics, Baptists, Quakers, etc. all have vastly differing views of the Bible. This is replicated in other religions of course, ie. Sunni v. Shiite, Orthodox Jew v. Reform, etc etc.
So I seriously ask, How does faith work? How do you use it to come up with such confidence that your belief system is the true one?
I eagerly await your reply. Thank you
To fly! The dream of man and flightless bird alike! -Some general on the Simpsons
Well, darn it, that’s not how it’s supposed to work! The Evil Atheist Conspiracy gives out a Cuisinart to the person who brings the most Christians into Godlessness, and here I sit with no way to puree my ancho chiles and you’re no help at all. Geez, work with me here.
Ok, getting serious:
Why does God alone get special dispensation, that we should not use our wisdom to determine what is true? If I believed in the existence of things based on feelings, I would believe there are boogeymen under my bed. Why should God alone be held to a lower standard of determining if He is true than the boogeymen? It seems that if we choose one thing and refuse to bring our usual judgment to bear upon it, we are going to be likely to make a poor decision. Do you agree that people should be “foolish” when they choose their God? Would you say the same if, in their “foolishness”, they chose the wrong God?
It seems curious, that if God chose such a “un-wise” way to belief so that people could be saved without the wisdom of men, that it does not seem to work very well to get all who could believe to believe. Look at the statistics of religions in the world; unless you wish to argue that the great majority of Japanese or Chinese are refusing to know Jesus, and that Americans are just more holy, you have to admit that the religious beliefs one holds have a great deal to do with the influence of your culture. If avoiding the wisdom of men gives all people the same inherent ability to know Jesus, why don’t we see approximately the same proportions of Christians in every country? I daresay most Japanese and Chinese are aware of Christianity, and even if they were not, are not the very rocks supposed to cry out Jesus’ message?
Most people will believe reasonable things. They can believe that the earth is round or that it goes around the sun, without being forced to believe; there is simply a great deal of evidence for it, so they believe. Yet you say God will not make Himself anywhere near this evident, preferring that we believe Him on faith and very little evidence. Of course, when you throw away your wisdom and your demands for sufficient evidence you may foolishly believe in the wrong God; and if you held any other part of your life to such a low standard of proof, you would likely get yourself killed by having faith that you can walk across a highway and a car won’t hit you because you have a feeling it won’t, or because a book written 2000 years ago said you should.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that She is pink; logically, we know She is invisible because we can’t see Her.
(1) What day did he tell you this?
(2) If that assertion is correct, then ezactly why should we listen to a single word you have to say on the subject?
A) God?
B) Sin?
C) Heaven?
D) Virgin Birth 2000 years ago?
E) God walking on Earth 2000 years ago?
F) Original Sin?
G) Blood of Christ washing away said sin?
H) Ressurrection 2000 years ago?
As beautiful as they are, blooming red roses do not inspire visions of sin or crucifixion or any facet of Christianity for that matter (beyond possibly the existence of a Creator).
Thus while observation might lead one to Deism, or even Theism, I can’t see how it would bring anyone to Christianity.
Apologies for the delay everyone. I’ve been in discussions with my mechanic over my car. Seems like it needs a new engine.
Oh well. Enough about me. We now join your regularly scheduled debate already in progress:
I can see your point. However, I really see no reason why I shouldn’t believe the authors of the Bible were telling the truth. I guess point one is contingent upon faith.
I was brought up in a traditional Christian church, so this had a profound effect on my thoughts on religion. How does faith work? That’s not an easy question to answer. A good start would be to read Hebrews 11. Verse 1 says that “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” I believe that God sent his son to die for my sins on the cross. If I don’t believe this is true, I am wasting my time being a Christian. I Corinthians 15 talks about the fact that if what we believe isn’t true, then we are living in vain. I have faith that my religion is correct because I am unable to reconcile my beliefs with another religion, such as Buddhism, Catholicism, etc. As for differing view within a religion, I believe that those are created due to disagreements between men over different sets of doctrine.
**
quote:
God does not want you to rely upon the wisdom of men to get saved. Read the first two chapters of I Corinthians. They will either better explain some things or make you very angry. God wants us to believe in faith. He feels that the fact that we are alive and the creation around us is more than sufficient evidence.**
I don’t believe that we should be foolish in choosing to follow God. I think it requires faith. The wisdom of men says “There is no God. Men can’t walk on water. Men can’t raise the dead. Men can’t miraculously heal the sick.” It takes faith to believe that any of these can occur. This faith seems like foolishness to men.
You are 100% right in saying religious belief is influenced by culture. We don’t see as many Christians in other countries due to the fact that Christianity is suppressed in those countries. Some countries have a national religion. If you are born in Poland, you are more than likely going to be Catholic. As for the rocks crying out, this points back to the entire Earth being sufficient for man to believe that there is a God. The second half of Romans 1 deals with the fact that God reveals himself to man through creation and that we are without excuse. However, it’s up to Christians to go out and win these souls to Christ. We are the hands of God, doing His work. This generation of Christians is responsible for this generation of souls.
As I have stated, I believe that God thinks that the fact that you are alive and on Earth is sufficient evidence for you to believe in Him. Where did you come from? How did you get here? How did the Earth get here? How did the universe get here? What happens when you die? These are all suitable questions reasoned by people from their youngest years. This leads many to discover God. Not everyone though. Some will say there is no God, claiming insufficient evidence. This is a lack of faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for. The evidence of things not seen.
**
God does not want you to rely upon the wisdom of men to get saved.**
(1) When I read I Corinthians. That’s where the whole wisdom of God is foolishness to men comes from.
(2) Because I am trying to relate to you the wisdom of God to you. You will probably see it as foolishness. This is nothing new. The things that happened in the Bible, all the miracles, a flood wiping out the earth, etc. defy logic. If you approach it from a logical perspective, you will probably be stuck. It requires faith.
Ok, first you say men should use their wisdom, and think that the fact that the universe exists is evidence of God. Then you say, men should not use their wisdom, and it’s all right to believe in a lot of things that we do not have evidence for. I do say “men cannot walk on water” (unless there are rocks directly underneath); if you believe otherwise, try walking across a lake. God is getting special dispensation; you wouldn’t tell your 5 year old cousin to try walking on water, because it is not backed up by the evidence. Yet you’ll believe many things about God without evidence, just because it’s God. If a very ill woman refused to go to the doctor because she believed that she could be cured by crystals, would you approve? If someone told you that they believed that there was an invisible, imperceptible dragon living under their desk, would you accept that? These people believe these things based on faith and a few pieces of subjective evidence. Don’t you wish they’d use a little more wisdom in evaluating their beliefs, though? Picking one thing–say, crystal healing–and holding it to a lower standard of evidence can result in foolish actions even in otherwise sensible people; likely needless death, in my example. Why should allowing God to be held to a lower standard of evidence be any more reliable?
Kind of sucks if you’re Japanese and, while you are aware of Christianity, nobody does a good enough job to convert you. Is it fair for the fate of this person be dependant on whether somebody else is a good enough speaker to convince him/her of Christianity? Should someone be doomed to Hell simply because Christianity is not well-established in his/her country? Why send someone to Hell simply because they were born in Japan and Joe-Bob the missionary is lousy at converting people?
First, Twin; some advice for you: If you really don’t know what you’re talking about, don’t embark on a debate where the rest of the folks actually do know what they’re talking about {Please refer to Proverbs 1:4 :)}. Guadere just showed where you contradicted yourself. That’s evidence that it’s you, and not God, that’s got a hard on with pressing your world-view on others.
Back to this:
Just throwing the book title in there doesn’t exactly count as a good citation, friend. But just to be nice, here are the verses which my Bible’s Topical Guide refers to under the entry “Wisdom” as being in First Corinthians:
I Cor 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to prech the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
That’s talking about Paul’s preaching; not yours. I specifically asked you where God told you and did not ask about Paul at all. And it’s also talking about Baptism not being necessary, apparently.
I Cor 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
This is actually a biblical contradiction, please refer to:
Proverbs 1:2 To know wisdom and instruction, to perceive the words of understanding;
1:3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity,
1:4 To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.
1:5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of undersanding shall attain unto wise counsels:
1:6 To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.
So which is it? Are we supposed to learn from wise men or are we supposed to ignore wise men?
I Cor 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Looks a lot like rhetorical queries here.
1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
For “Greeks” please insert Jesus’ own remark “those for whom I was not sent.” {You’ll forgive the paraphrase of Matthew 15:24, I trust.}
I Cor 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory.
I’m going to have to say that Paul’s using the term “wisdom” to refer to Jesus here.
I Cor 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the spirit.
So Paul’s apparently asserting that God does expect people to be saved by the wisdom of men. How did you get so much more wisdom about God than Paul did?
And not doing a very good job of it, either.
Nope; I see it as incompetence. One of your fellow fundies who used to be quite active on this board accused me of not having any knowledge of the Scriptures and said fundie also admitted to not having read the whole Bible anyway. It was quite amusing to me to see the responses to both of those statements of his; especially seeing as I study the Scriptures often and have read the entire Bible through, cover-to-cover, many times.
Nor are your quite amusing, yet incompetent, efforts. Feel free to haul off and get some education in a seminary, please; seeing as I don’t have such but am doing quite well on both understanding the Scriptures, for what they are, and refuting your assertions.
Very few of the things recounted in the Scriptures actually happened in a factual sense.
You mean “fables?”
There was no world-wide deluge. The evidence is quite clear of that.
Not if you take it as a fable, a story to teach a moral lesson.
Not I, seeing as the Scriptures are moral lessons, not science textbooks. BTW: That’s not even a nice try on your part. You, on the other hand, who appear to think the Bible is a text-book, will be stuck when the evidence proves it not to be. Dare I mention the Deluge again?
No kidding, Sherlock! Faith requires Faith is your only valid assertion. But that’s circular, now isn’t it? Please see above where you were asked not to do such.
Wow, I leave for a few days and the whole board changes!
Gaudere:
**
quote:
As I have stated, I believe that God thinks that the fact that you are alive and on Earth is sufficient evidence for you to believe in Him. Where did you come from? How did you get here? How did the Earth get here? How did the universe get here? What happens when you die? These
are all suitable questions reasoned by people from their youngest years. This leads many to discover God. Not everyone though. Some will say there is no God, claiming insufficient evidence.
quote:
I don’t believe that we should be foolish in choosing to follow God. I think it requires faith. The wisdom of men says “There is no God. Men can’t walk on water. Men can’t raise the dead. Men can’t miraculously heal the sick.”**
I’m not saying that. I’m saying that men should, when asking where they come from, realize that while conventional wisdom says one thing, faith offers truth that confounds convention.
I believe in a God because when I look at the universe around me, all its different life forms, rocks, trees, etc., I cannot accept that it all came into being for no reason. Therefore, I accept that there is a God.
I wouldn’t approve of either of your examples because I see no evidence of either being true. I wish they would use a little more wisdom in evaluating their beliefs. I see no reason to believe in crystals or invisible dragons, though. I’ve seen no evidence.
**
quote:
However, it’s up to Christians to go out and win these souls to Christ. We are the hands of God, doing His work. This generation of Christians is responsible for this generation of souls.**
God allows everyone a chance to accept Him. God uses missionaries in other countries to spread His word. Millions and millions of tracts are distributed in foreign countries in their native language. God is not willing that any perish. I know in my heart that those who truly seek God, even in a foreign country, will find Him. God will find a way.
Monty:
We’ll see who knows what they are talking about and who doesn’t when we’re dead, won’t we?
I’ve already elaborated on my “contradiction.”
**
quote:
Two questions for you, T:
(1) What day did he tell you this?
(2) If that assertion is correct, then exactly why should we listen to a single word you have to say on the subject?
(1) When I read I Corinthians. That’s where the whole wisdom of God is foolishness to men comes from.**
A thousand pardons. Here are the verses I was referring to:
1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish
foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Now let’s look at your verses:
You are correct, sir.
1 Corinthians verse is a paraphrase of Isaiah 29:14. Now look at Isaiah 29:13-14:
29:13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:
29:14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.
To put it in layman’s terms:
The Lord says: “These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men. Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish.”
In other words, Isaiah - and Paul - are referring not to true wisdom, but pseudo-wisdom, held by people who think they know something but actually don’t. This is also referred to as the wisdom of men or the wisdom of the world. Proverbs is not referring to psuedo-wisdom, but
true wisdom. Also known as the wisdom of God.
Fair enough.
OK.
Close enough. The wisdom is the fact that Jesus was the son of God. It says in the next verse that if they had known it, they would never have crucified Him.
Paul doesn’t say that. The verse you are reading is from a set of verses talking about spiritual gifts. Here’s some free advice. When you read a scripture, it helps to know what context it is in. There are a variety of spiritual gifts including wisdom, knowledge, healing, propehcy, etc. These are all gifts from God.
**
quote:
(2) Because I am trying to relate to you the wisdom of God to you.**
Apparently not.
**
quote:
You will probably see it as foolishness.**
I would say you have some scriptural knowledge. However, you don’t (and won’t) have as much as me on your best day. And I haven’t even read the whole Bible. Why? Lets check back to I Corinthians:
2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
It seems like I read somewhere that you said you were not a Christian. Therefore, it’s IMPOSSIBLE for you to know what you’re talking about when it comes to the Bible. BTW, I know it’s a big word and hard to spell, but it’s fundamentalist.
**
quote:
This is nothing new.**
Understanding and thinking you understand are two different things. You have demonstrated through what you perceive to be contradictions in the Bible that you have a long way to go before you understand them.
**
quote:
The things that happened in the Bible,**
And you would know this how?
**
quote:
all the miracles,**
No, I meant miracles. Maybe you’ve been reading Aesop instead of the Bible.
**
quote:
a flood wiping out the earth, etc.**
That sounds like the wisdom of men to me. The wisdom of God is foolishness to you.
**
quote:
defy logic.**
That’s why the parables are in there. Why have one giant parable that contains among the parables, a guy telling parables? No wonder you are so confused about seeing the scriptures for what they are. Well maybe you are right. I guess the Bible is a book of fables. I know my little nephew loves the fable about the tabernacle. His favorite part is where they describe its dimensions, all the curtain hooks, fine twined linen, etc. I don’t know if UBB works anymore, but just imagine a smiley face rolling its eyes here.
**
quote:
If you approach it from a logical perspective, you will probably be stuck.**
Well, the Bible does have a lot of history in it, so I guess it could be a history book.
**
quote:
It requires faith.**
And I didn’t even say that faith requires faith. So let’s see what we have. Misquoting, taking verses out of context, downright rudeness. Why do I get the nagging feeling I’m casting pearls before a swine?
And why do I have a feeling you do much better when you are preaching to the converted? But if we “pigs” have offended you, I apologize. Perhaps you and you alone, out of all the Biblical scholars in the world, have sorted out all the contradictions and discrepancies in the Bible, and have figured out the real meanings of all the verses therein. Perhaps we are not worthy of your great lessons, or of discussing all the nuances that have plagued scholars through the centuries with you.
I guess we all should have realized that you had the answers, and that they weren’t up for debate.
I don’t recall referring to you as a pig, slythe. I made the “pearls before A swine” comment in reference to Monty’s post. I didn’t intend for the entire board to take it personally. I can see I have offended you, and I am sorry. I came off sounding very self-righteous in my last post, but I was a little ticked off. (Note to self: Never post when angry.)
DavidB: Twin said:quote:
We’ll see who knows what they are talking about and who doesn’t when we’re dead, won’t we?
If I got to decide who went to Heaven and who did not, I certainly wouldn’t choose to only let in those who believed a certain thing.