Yes, Calvin's theology. I've debated it before, generally because of a series of mistakes beginning with Martin Luther throwing out the book of Sirach out of the protestant canon. It really doesn't make sense to me though. If God did chose who was going to heaven, then he has already judged us. However this is a serious problem because Jesus is supposed to judge us at the end and Jesus has said that no one knows the day of judgement but the Father. So this implies that Jesus has not judged us. We still have to admit that we can do no good unless if it is the will of God, but it's our choice to recieve Jesus. <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/vbible/search.asp?abbr=Sir&ch=15&bv1=11&ev1=20">Sirach 15:11</a> Deuteronomy 8:2 "Remember how for forty years now the LORD, your God, has directed all your journeying in the desert, so as to test you by affliction and find out whether or not it was your intention to keep his commandments." We clearly see here that God does not know which will follow his commandments otherwise there would be no "find out". Generally though there is an "if" in many of statements concerning Jesus. For example, "If any man hears my voice...". So intent is that we are all chosen by God, but it's our responsibility to recieve him. Jesus died for all of the sins of the world.
A large part of it is. But the whole bit about God talking to the churches are both the present and the past. For instance, the Church Laodicea represents the current church age, that of the backslidden and lukewarm church. The churches prior to Laodicea are past church ages. Eveything after Laodicea is in the future
We still have to admit that we can do no good unless if it is the will of God, but it's our choice to recieve Jesus. Absolutely. It's not that he's already judged us, it's just that he's determined that we will here the word and accept it. Like you said we still have to choose to receive Jesus. But it has already been determined who is going to make the right choice That Deuteronomy verse can be explained like this: He already knows the outcome, but he is talking about everyone else being in on it. Make sense? Once again this is not a life or death matter. As long as you believe in your heart that the only true way to heaven is through Jesus Christ and accept that, you will go to heaven.
I see heart's post has not been addressed yet. Are these really contradictions, or are they just different accounts? If only one is genuine, and the others are traditions, or derived from different hearers, how does it change the report that Jesus died? You might reach different conclusions from each one, and learn something from it. We have three incomplete accounts giving one complete picture. If they were really contradictions, you would have been able to reach different conclusions from each of them... Once again, their is no conflict in what is being said. Matthew, Mark and Luke mention the temptation, and say that Jesus left for Galilee after John (the baptist) was imprisoned. So we have: baptism->temptation->John imprisoned->Galilee->first disciples->miracles No contradiction - just different perspectives. John includes the otherwise insignificant Cana miracle (nobody's life was saved, and the guests did not even know about the miracle) for a reason: it indicates the nature of Jesus' ministry and God's work. Something mundane became something of great worth. Even today, something that seems miraculous is still sometimes referred to as "turning water into wine". The only "Scripture" available at Timothy's time was the Hebrew Bible - probably the Septuagint (70 books). The New Testament was not regarded as scripture at the time. Paul's epistles are inspired by Jesus, and at the same time testify about Jesus, whose life is the "Scripture come alive". We can safely say "all Scripture is God's work, and Jesus did God's work, so both are God's work". The Holy Spirit extends that qualification to all people who believe in Him: insofar we do God's work, we are also "inspired by God", working in the "Spirit of God", etc. A contradiction is where one thing makes another impossible - i.e.when they are mutually exclusive. Discrepancies are not contradictions, and they do not automatically make the accounts invalid - but they do invite further study. I'm sorry that God cannot be simplified in one word, one sentence, or even one book. Unfortunately that is the nature of the God we are dealing with in the Bible. People's opinions are important, but it is more important that the subjected their opinions to God's will. God made quite a few concessions in the Bible, but that does not mean He compromised his integrity. Paul also makes a few concessions, such as divorce, but it is in the Spirit of love and good relations. Remember, he was ministring mostly to gentiles, not Jews who were familiar with God's laws. As for the translations: There are resources at www.searchgodsword.com where you can look up the original Hebrew/Greek texts along with translations. I use it frequently. Accuracy of translation is not such a problem as accuracy of interpretation, and that is why study is important. There was also no opportunity to "inject" any "own beliefs", because we still have the untranslated documents in the languages the authors used themselves. (Manuscript reliability) "Interpretation" is also not so self-evident. The main message of the Bible is simple: Love for God and love your neighbour. That requires no interpretation. What flows from this is God's love for us, and the form of that love. Things move out from the central message in concentric circles that become harder and harder to understand the further you go. Why it seems so complicated is that you approach it backwards, from the most complicated philosophical, critical and scientific positions, back to God. You might as well close your eyes to God, since there is no knowledge that will put you on equal footing with God - that will bring you to Him by your own powers. If you don't believe in God, or that He wants to reach you, you are effectively shutting your ears to Him. Listen to what Paul wrote to the Hebrews: Hebrews 6 1Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so. These "foundations" were established by Christ himself, by God's authority. You can't get to them without listening to Jesus and believing that he was who he claimed to be.
You guy seem to take in anything that is anti cHristian-the Encyclopedia Biblica and others, yet can't accept a word the Bible says. That's not intellctually honest. You're simply using those half-truths which fit your argument. I won't go through all of the "contradtictions" of the Bible that were pointed out9if you feel strongly about one bring up; that was a very long article and I don't remember all of it). I do remember one in particular, the genealogy of Christ. You have two geneaologies, and I have two. That's how many Jesus had; one from his father's side, one from the mother's side. Whats the problem there? And does every author have to mention everything that the previous authors mentioned? Does Paul really have to mention the Sermon on the Mount to prove that Jesus existed? That would a very foolish thing to do. It basically boils down to this. You have to accept that the Bible was written by men through their own personalities but through inspiration of the Holy Spirit. If you don't accept that, there's not much I can do for you.
Thank god someone finally knows what it boils down to. Please dumbass, enlighten us with your stupidity. Now there is a fine plan. I mean, that is exactly what will take the species to the next level. I think we should all be more prone to take eronious information at face value and fail to question it because the questions make me think and thinking hurts a bunch. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Shall we contemplate some analogous comments? Sure, let's do so: "you just have to accept that it wasn't me that took the money even though the amount that my bank account increased is the same amount that you're missing" or "you just have to accept that since that one guy over there said that lobotomy is okay, I'm going to have to shove this stick up your nose" or "you just have to accept that if you send this letter to ten of your friends, you will have riches and wealth beyond your wildest dreams!" or "In the name of the wesleyan god, I proclaim that when I wrote this post, I was inspired by god to do so and he asked me specifically for extra smote." Sounds kind of dumb huh? If you would be so kind as to believe that, I'll get right on finding some more shit for you to believe... Why do you presume that she needs you to do something for her? Man you cultists are a generally thick-skulled bunch.
What I am doing is simply putting forth my views. I try to convince her that my views are correct just like you guys try to convince me that yours are.
Then may I ask, jcarl, why do you "have to accept that the Bible was written by men through their own personalities but through inspiration of the Holy Spirit"? You say you seek out truth. There is no way to know if that is truth. I would presume given my somewhat extensive experience in life that it is in fact exactly NOT true. So I have a hard time believing that you're really interested in truth, dig? That's why I was upset. It's because almost every theist I've ever seen claims they search for truth, but they don't have the cohones for it. Truth is HARD. Truth is BRUTAL. Truth is UGLY. It's also inspriring and beautiful. Please, it's okay to be christian if you have to but don't fool yourself thinking your on the path to truth. Think about how much jesus loves you while you buy into the lie that he is. Think about how anyone who would call you on your stupid bullshit is obviously sent from satan. Wrap yourself in your stupid lies all you need to in order to satiate the emotional wreck that requires you to shelter yourself in such a manner in the first place... but don't think you're seeking truth, because that is the most disgusting lie I've ever heard. I'm speaking truth to you jcarl. do you recognize it as such? you don't even understand what pissed me off in the first place. you don't think you did anything wrong do you? *sigh* okay jcarl. I'll just leave you to your cult of lies.
read "kabbalah for the modern world" by Migene Gonzalez-Wippler. it will answer all your questions. The Bible is a farce so don't take it literally. there is more than meets the eye.
Wesmorris how is anyone going to believe you? Or put it more succinttly, why would any christian believe you? You continue call people who disagree with you "dumb". There is no reason why we should believe you, we look at the fruits and if they are bad then we reject the entire tree. As was written, those who are angry with their brother walk in darkness. So I suggest that you be kind first, and then look for God. No one can see unless they have light. You say that you follow the truth. However who created Truth? Is Truth eternal and has always existed? Then it's entirely subjective to call Truth an eternal God correct? And how can you possibly know Truth. Since you have been born everything that you have learned has been by observation. There is nothing in the world that we are entirely sure upon. Yet you have the vague ability to know what is truth within you?
Look, I presented my opinion, my belief. To my knowledge there was nothing wrong against that, just as their is nothing wrong with you presenting your belief. I might be wrong, and you might be right. And if that's the case, what have I lost and what have you gained? We will both just die and then go off somewhere(or whatever it is you believe) But if I am right, and you are wrong, then you will have willingly damned your eternal soul to Hell, while I would have--as Job said in 19:26 ,"After my skinis destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God. Voltaire, give me exact proof that the Bible is a farce.
again i repeat, read about the Kabbalah. and for the person who said that the truth was within him/her? was wrong. The truth is that there is no truth.
Do you think I expect them to? I figure there's an off chance but come on, you're in a cult. That's pretty serious. It'll take more than my truth and shit talking to change your mind. I suppose there's a possibility that it will plant a seed, but I don't count on it. I figure there's just as much chance that it will backfire and they'll hate non-christians even more. Pardon. I mean your assertions are dumb. Yours in particular oki, are pretty bad. I haven't seen you demonstrate that you can think reasonably. I guess in looking back I do call certain people stupid. My intention is that of a drill seargent. I don't care if your feelling are hurt because truth is more important than that. Well, that and I AM human and I lose my temper a bit when I see so much potential being squandered. I'm not here to win your vote. I want to see the level to which you are self aware. I want to witness your phsychology at work. I want to ask you questions and see what your brain produces as an output to my input. I can appreciate childish simplicity, but not in someone who proposes to "think" or have a defensable argumentative position. I can show you some truth, but it's mostly that truth is relative and reason/logic are the only methods for discerning them in a rational manner. What you don't understand that is your book is irrelavent. Okay, yeah.. that's why I call you an idiot. I remember now. You are. You cite your ridiculous book for everything. You wallow in your limited scope. It's funny. You probably think I'm presumptuous. Hehe. Tell you what, YOU look for god and I'll laugh at you because only your psychosis will find him, idiot. LOL. I talk a lot of shit I know. I find it entertaining. It's hallarious to me that you don't understand the extent of your own fallacy. You think you have the light because your book tells you about the light because you think your book is true because it tells you about the light. GAWD how do you LIVE like that? Ack. I don't know. Depends on what truth is, or what type of truth you're talking about. Every post of yours I can remember follows some deranged substitute for critical thinking that you have apparently convinced yourself is valid. I'll offer you advice that I'm sure you'll ignore: Every time you think something ask yourself "is that true? how I know that? can I be sure that's true from what I know?" and when you're constructing an argument and have written your second sentence ask yourself "is that line supportive or a resultant or somehow sensibly connected to the previous line?" followed by the questions above. When that becomes automatic and fundamental, you're on the path to truth. (admittedly I break both rules a lot, but always feel like an ass for it later (but I've long since accepted that everyone, including me, is an ass in some sense)) Wow, a good question. In short: I have faith in reason. By definition, it is reasonable to have faith in reason. As such, reason is my truth. The path is my truth and all details are subject to the agnosticism that is the resultant of my faith in reason. That's not entirely true (thinking itself changes you, and it is not observation but the processing thereof) but do go on... Man you are just a bundle of hypocracy aren't you? Wow. Do you follow why? You need me to point it out? Indeed. In all likelyhood, you do too, but you reject it in favor of the comfort of your cult's dogma.
I did not say in that post that I know the truth or that Jesus is the truth. In essence, find your own truth but I know for certain that it's not wasting your time calling others idiots. Your general lack of concern for others is astonishing. And from context I was using the scientific "sure". Being peaceful and kind is beneficial even if you don't believe in God. Anyways, you've probably got on a boat without reading all the engineering and construction documents. Take a sentance A and determine if A is true or not. Logical truth. Thinking itself is observation. Your cells observe electrical impulses etc.
You directly implied that god is responsible for the timeless truth of (as you correct me below) logical truth. If you contest that then we have a communication problem. I honestly don't care what you consider to be a waste of MY time. If further think that your attempts to assert some type of authoritative knowledge on me are idiotic. LOL. Hey man, what do you expect? I'm not trying to impress you, I'm running laps. Pardon me if I pass you, you should run faster or expect to be passed. I'm a smartass so depending on how I feel toward you based on whatever social interaction I've had with you, I'm likely to jeer "ha ha" and point like Nelson Muntz somewhat frequently. I don't suppose you care, but what astonishes me is for a "believer" to be so judgemental with such little evidence. Gee, did GOD tell you that I don't care for others? Are you panzy enough to let words really hurt you? I say you FORCE words to make you stronger. I say that I care for you or I wouldn't waste my time responding. I'd say that if you weren't so naive, you might realize that in actuality, I offer you benefit freely as you do me. If you find no value in it, you should depart the exchange. To sum up: Just because you don't think I have concern for others, doesn't mean that I don't. What gave you the impression that I didn't understand that? I'll give you credit for the generality, but you should know from your book that sometimes it's cruel to be kind. Did you not catch the coach comment from before? I am the most me I can be. That is my function. You are in no way forced to deal with it. Yes but I can see the boat floating in the water. Do you think that is debatable or is that the final word? Cells observe? Make sense damn you! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Jenyar, Not much time to respond, but found an interesting site below. I've pasted an interesting comment he had...food for thought. http://atheistedmonton.com/artad7.html Oops..just read the c/p rules.. If you will read the paragraph beginning with: Most unbiased biblical scholars agree that the bible is an unreliable source.
