1 Timothy / Genesis 1

[mistmann]

Hope I'm not sticking my neck into a hornets nest But thought I might make a couple of pertinent observations that might help.

Firstly thanks Ginger for ppointing out that Paul was expressing his OWN personal opinion and practice and not declaring it as the word of the Lord. Paul, in a few places made a clear distinction between what was a teaching of the Lord and what was his own personal thoughts. We must also remember that Paul was trying to run the churches in a specific cultural environment. It was more about what was considered respectful versus disrespectful treatment of the things of the Lord in the specific culture. We must remember it was also Paul who said this:

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

As to the Evolution versus creation thing I've been investigating this a lot for my "Reality Bender" videos on YouTube (and now on here too in the Christian Video Forum). The actual words of Darwin in his Theory on the Origin of the Species (It is available as a download from the Gutenberg Project website) is quite fascinating. Darwin himself admits that his theory is AGAINST the evidence but that we should ignore the evidence against it in anticipation we would eventually find some evidence for it. In particular the overwhelming lack of transitional fossils he saw as quite fatal to his theory being true and it should be scrapped if none could be found. He was quite adamant that if his theory were true such transitional fossils MUST exist in abundance. They STILL can't find ANY.

Many world respected scientists, even evolutionist scientists, are now openly questioning the validity of the Theory of Evolution because each new discovery actually points to the Theory being wrong. The rapidly mounting evidence is AGAINST the theory being true, not for it There is in actual fact, not ANY evidence in support of Evolution theory. Whatever little they thought they had has been demolished by subsequent scientific discoveries.

If you want to get a heads up on the reality around Evolution theory and some leads for further investigation many of my "Reality Bender" videos deal with the actual evidence being discovered and how it is actually against the Theory of Evolution and in accordance with the Biblical account.

I have now put links to them all up on the "Christian Videos" Forum where you can discuss any of them with me and others.

Regards
Misty.

 

[Major]

I hate technology... but on-the-other-hand, maybe that was worth repeating three times lol

You said it great and I agree even if you say it again.

You said it great and I agree even if you say it again.

ooops.

 

[Major]

Hope I'm not sticking my neck into a hornets nest But thought I might make a couple of pertinent observations that might help.

Firstly thanks Ginger for ppointing out that Paul was expressing his OWN personal opinion and practice and not declaring it as the word of the Lord. Paul, in a few places made a clear distinction between what was a teaching of the Lord and what was his own personal thoughts. We must also remember that Paul was trying to run the churches in a specific cultural environment. It was more about what was considered respectful versus disrespectful treatment of the things of the Lord in the specific culture. We must remember it was also Paul who said this:



As to the Evolution versus creation thing I've been investigating this a lot for my "Reality Bender" videos on YouTube (and now on here too in the Christian Video Forum). The actual words of Darwin in his Theory on the Origin of the Species (It is available as a download from the Gutenberg Project website) is quite fascinating. Darwin himself admits that his theory is AGAINST the evidence but that we should ignore the evidence against it in anticipation we would eventually find some evidence for it. In particular the overwhelming lack of transitional fossils he saw as quite fatal to his theory being true and it should be scrapped if none could be found. He was quite adamant that if his theory were true such transitional fossils MUST exist in abundance. They STILL can't find ANY.

Many world respected scientists, even evolutionist scientists, are now openly questioning the validity of the Theory of Evolution because each new discovery actually points to the Theory being wrong. The rapidly mounting evidence is AGAINST the theory being true, not for it There is in actual fact, not ANY evidence in support of Evolution theory. Whatever little they thought they had has been demolished by subsequent scientific discoveries.

If you want to get a heads up on the reality around Evolution theory and some leads for further investigation many of my "Reality Bender" videos deal with the actual evidence being discovered and how it is actually against the Theory of Evolution and in accordance with the Biblical account.

I have now put links to them all up on the "Christian Videos" Forum where you can discuss any of them with me and others.

Regards
Misty.

AGREED!

 

[Major]

I am a liberal

I didn't mean to say that you think nothing changes. I'm saying since things change, and since there are truths about things, truth changes.

Sure absolute truth exists, but we don't have it. We only "see a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known"

Truth is what God says it is NOT what we say it is.

You use of this quote........"see a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known" does not apply to whether we absolute truth or not.

Paul was speaking in the CONTEXT of the gifts of God ceasing. The gifts are fragmentary and only a means to an end. Paul's advice was to keep our eyes on the goal and not on the means towards achieving that goal.

 

[Humble_Servant]

You seem to have just told me there are no absolute truths with humans- after I gave the example of child molestation being absolutely wrong.

Bare with me for just a few moments, please....
Several years ago a family and their guests were brutally murdered and two young children were missing from the home. When the children were finally found, the little girl was alive, but the boy had been murdered - both had been repeatedly raped by the man who murdered their parents.

I don't care if this man thought it was okay to murder the adults so he could get the children....I don't care if he thought the children would enjoy what he did to them....I don't care if he was molested and abused as a child.....I don't care if both children had been found alive....it wouldn't change the fact, What he did was absolutly wrong.

Human beings do not possess all knowledge, but we do have absolutes, even here in the physical World.

Now, the reason I said you argue like a liberal is because you take things in circles and reject the idea of anything having any clarity on anything. Everything is subject to something so "there is no absolute right or wrong" "what is wrong for you might be right for someone else" it's all relevant to how one feels or perceives the situation.

Even within your example there are absolutes: Every year that passes, Tommy will absolutely grow one year until he dies.

Don't be discouraged, I used to be very liberal, so there's hope for you, too!

I don't think that everything is so clear. I totally believe in absolute truth. We may even have it right in some places, but not everything is so easy to see what is and isn't absolutely true. I don't think I take things in circles, I think I like to clarify exactly what is being said.

What I don't understand is how you can look at all of the work done that confirms evolution and the big bang, and then just take one bit of knowledge that seems to contradict the theory (which usually isn't the case in the end) and think that the entire theory is debunked, and then turn around and say that the universe was created in 6 days and think that everyone should believe so. This goes back to the difference between science and religion. A scientific theory isn't thrown out because one aspect is debunked. The theory is altered in light of new information (the earlier monkey example works here). However, for a good amount of religious people, if you disprove one aspect of their belief, the entire thing is disproved. If the difference between a religious belief and a scientific theory is understood, I think that brings clarity.

a thought:
A custom in some ancient cultures when dealing with deities is to attain the name of the god, and by knowing the god's name you can harness him to do your bidding. That's why when Abram asked for God's name, He just says "I am who I am", aka, you can't own me... I am beyond you. In revelation 19 The Word has a name written that no one knows. We cannot own Him or contain Him. Dionysius the Areopagite says that our knowledge of God is different than our knowledge of any other thing that is, because He is too much for us to grasp, He is beyond our knowing (which is an act of containment). I consider Jesus to be The Word, and to be The Truth. With this in mind I say "we don't have the truth, we have a relationship with it". He is beyond us, above us, utterly past what we can even perceive to hypothetically understand or contain, and in that utter beyondness is where genuine absolute truth exists. We here have but a shadow of that.

what do you think?

Thanks for your encouragement, but I was once a conservative-evangelical worship pastor. I've since repented, and experienced the Lord's forgiveness for the error of my ways

 

[Humble_Servant]

Truth is what God says it is NOT what we say it is.

You use of this quote........"see a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known" does not apply to whether we absolute truth or not.

Paul was speaking in the CONTEXT of the gifts of God ceasing. The gifts are fragmentary and only a means to an end. Paul's advice was to keep our eyes on the goal and not on the means towards achieving that goal.

The truth is what God says, but the problem is we all have to come to personal understandings of what He is saying, which I shouldn't have to demonstrate, seems to have immensely divergent results.

I understand that the 1 corinthians passage is about the gifts ceasing... but why are they ceasing? Because when the fullness comes, the part is done away with (v10). The gifts exist because the fullness has not yet come, which is consistent with my use of the passage.

 

[Ginger]

Moses asked God what His name is....

We don't all come up with our own interpetations of God's Word. On more than one Catholic thread I have been accused of pretending to pose as several different protestants to deceive and create the appearance that others agree with me.

Comments are made that we agree so colsely we are like clones!!!! That's because God does not change His truth is absolute. I love it because Catholics are always saying protestants can't agree on the meaning of Scriptures. (ie 30,0000 denominations) lol

The basic doctrines of Christianity are written clearly, easy to understand and are agreed upon by all true Christians. Anyone who does not adhere to these basic dsoctrines is not a Christian by definition.

Christianity is a journey. We don't start out with understanding and so we try to understand with what makes sense to our human minds. If we earnestly seek the truth, God will slowly, in His own good time begin to reveal to us what we need to know as we need to know it and when we are ready to accept it.

Herein lies the differenece between Christians and non-Christians: Christians will accept the truth, while non-Christians will continue to deny it.

For both groups, God has promised to allow us to have what we seek, whether that be truth or self-deception.

 

[Ginger]

Humble Servant, one more thing, we all understand God often uses nature/science to accomplish His goals on Earth. We don't discount science....we just keep in mind God created science too.

 

[Major]

The truth is what God says, but the problem is we all have to come to personal understandings of what He is saying, which I shouldn't have to demonstrate, seems to have immensely divergent results.

I understand that the 1 corinthians passage is about the gifts ceasing... but why are they ceasing? Because when the fullness comes, the part is done away with (v10). The gifts exist because the fullness has not yet come, which is consistent with my use of the passage.

I understood your meaning but IMO to use the verse you used is sinply not the basis for that conclusion.

You said......................
"I'm saying since things change, and since there are truths about things, truth changes.

I for one do not accept that. I believe that the truth of God's Word was truth yesterday, today and will be the truth for tomarrow.

Information may change about some subject or another, but the TRUTH is the TRUTH no matter what.
To me that is the basic's. If we allow the information available today through the teaching of The New Age, or the Jehovah Witnesses or the Mormons or the Catholics do we not open the door to allow another way to heaven other than the Lord Jesus Christ???

Sure we do!!!!! The Bible, the Word of God says that heaven can only be obtained by faith in the Lord Jesus for the remission of our sins. But NOW the Mormons tell us that Josheph Smith must also be involved in our salvation and the JW"S tell us that we must be one of the 144,000 and the New Agers tell us that we must work to achieve the HIGHER PLANE of Godhood. Then of course the Catholics teach us that Mary is sinless and is the co-redeamer of the world. NOW...............is that TRUTH of God's Word or it opinions which lead to information about something other than God's Word.????

IF we allow "information" to deside what is TRUTH then we will eventually agree that homosexuality is a diesease and the person who is a homosexual is "aflicted" by it instead of choosing to be part of it. Is that not correct. But the Word of God condemmns the act of homosexuality and in fact calls it MORE that sin by placing the name of it as an "abomination" to the Lord thy God.

I would encourge you and others to give this a lot of prayer and thought.

 

[mistmann]

Humble Servant, one more thing, we all understand God often uses nature/science to accomplish His goals on Earth. We don't discount science....we just keep in mind God created science too.

I see we have similar thinking on a number of things. I often point out to people (atheists especially) that while they think of The LORD as an ancient superstition of primitive people, He is, in fact, the most scientifically advanced being in the universe. If He created it He surely knows, more than any scienist on the Earth or elsewhere HOW it works.

I sometimes challenge the more interested to read Gen 2:21-22 in this way:-

And the LORD anethetised Adam (deep sleep) and surgically removed some tissue from his side. He then used this material to clone another human and genetically alter/ engineer them to create a genetically compatible female.

After all Moses only tells us WHAT the LORD did, not HOW He did it. All science is doing is discovering HOW it is possible what the Prophets and Apostles of the LORD already KNEW to be possible.

 

[Humble_Servant]

Moses asked God what His name is....

We don't all come up with our own interpetations of God's Word. On more than one Catholic thread I have been accused of pretending to pose as several different protestants to deceive and create the appearance that others agree with me.

Comments are made that we agree so colsely we are like clones!!!! That's because God does not change His truth is absolute. I love it because Catholics are always saying protestants can't agree on the meaning of Scriptures. (ie 30,0000 denominations) lol

The basic doctrines of Christianity are written clearly, easy to understand and are agreed upon by all true Christians. Anyone who does not adhere to these basic dsoctrines is not a Christian by definition.

Christianity is a journey. We don't start out with understanding and so we try to understand with what makes sense to our human minds. If we earnestly seek the truth, God will slowly, in His own good time begin to reveal to us what we need to know as we need to know it and when we are ready to accept it.

Herein lies the differenece between Christians and non-Christians: Christians will accept the truth, while non-Christians will continue to deny it.

For both groups, God has promised to allow us to have what we seek, whether that be truth or self-deception.

I totally thought I replied to this a couple of days ago...

I don't know what you're trying to get at. The amount of diversity of opinion amongst Christians is as vast as vast can be. Even amongst the same sect, beliefs can be very different depending on the time period.

I'm kind of losing any sense of what we are talking about. The assumption that if we all listen to God we will all hear the same thing is a very large assumption. Sure God never changes, but can we say the same for humanity? When does humanity not change?

If: God + human = Christianity (relationship), and
humanity is never not changing, then
Christianity is never not changing.

Let me put a number spin on it:

Let's say God = 7 (I hear he likes that number)
and at the time the bible was written, humanity = 3,
you could then say that Christianity = 10 (7+3 = 10)
but, if humanity number is always changing, the sum of humanity and God will never be 10 again.

I believe I posted a link to a reconstruction of ancient hebrew cosmology earlier, and I think it deserves a 2nd look. That's literally how the people in biblical times thought creation was structured. If you want to accept a literal translation of scripture, you have to accept all of it, including that picture.
http://ncse.com/image/ancient-hebrew-cosmology

 

[Humble_Servant]

Humble Servant, one more thing, we all understand God often uses nature/science to accomplish His goals on Earth. We don't discount science....we just keep in mind God created science too.

Science is a man made system at trying to come to as concrete as possible of conclusions as to the natural operation of the universe.
And I would say that fundamentalists do outrightly discount science, because fundamentalism and science inherently contradict each other. Science is tolerated when it doesn't question one of your beliefs, but as soon as it says anything different to your views science is thrown out. That is not a quest for the truth in my opinion, that is the protection of a worldview that gives security. Truth and security are two very different things.

 

[Ginger]

Humble,

I don't know what you're trying to get at. The amount of diversity of opinion amongst Christians is as vast as vast can be. .......
..... The assumption that if we all listen to God we will all hear the same thing is a very large assumption.

Differring opinions same stem from two basis problems:
1. Someone intentionally misinterpreted the Scriptures because they didn't like what it said
2. Someone unintentionally misinterpreted the Bible because they didn't understand what it said

The first leads to the creation of a counterfeit christianity. Like a counterfeit $100 bill, it looks like the real thing, but in reality it is worthless and when you are caught passing them off you end up in prison.

The second has two possible outcomes: first, the person may develop their own personal belief system based on a rejection of God....same result as above. Second, if the person is a child of God, then it is a temporary situation as this person is seeking truth and will eventually accept the truth as God will continue to work in his/her life revealing Himself overtime.

Concerning differring views, all true Christians adhere to the same basic and essential doctrines of Christianity. Any group or person who believes contrary to these basic doctrines, by definition, is not a Christian - no matter how much they insist they are.

For example, someone who denies the real existance of the Judeo-Christian God, is not a Christian, as being a Christian means you believe!

Point: There are no significant differences between different Christian denominations. Which is why it is so easy for us to attend different churches when we move.

fundamentalism and science inherently contradict each other. [/quote]

No they don't. God created everything. Science is a means for us to understand how things work. It is amazing to consider works. He often uses His creation to interact with us, so it is no great wonder, we can explain how something happened.

It is the unbeleiving world that uses science to deny God, when science only continues to prove His existence.

............Science is tolerated when it doesn't question one of your beliefs, but as soon as it says anything different to your views science is thrown out. That is not a quest for the truth in my opinion, that is the protection of a worldview that gives security. Truth and security are two very different things.

He, he, he..... this is actually a funny statement considering whatever we science tells us is an absolute fact today is very likely to be proven wrong tomorrow!!!

When I was in grade school I was taught the Big Bang and evolution were absolutely proven, indisputable facts!!!!

Yet, just the other day, someone told me "we now know, humans did NOT evolve from apes"!!!!!

I'm going to shar4e a little secret with you....if you want to be right, agree with God, eventually God will prove you're right, even tho humans will mock until they discover thru science, what we have always known.

Ginger

 

[Humble_Servant]

Humble,
Differring opinions same stem from two basis problems:
1. Someone intentionally misinterpreted the Scriptures because they didn't like what it said
2. Someone unintentionally misinterpreted the Bible because they didn't understand what it said

The first leads to the creation of a counterfeit christianity. Like a counterfeit $100 bill, it looks like the real thing, but in reality it is worthless and when you are caught passing them off you end up in prison.

The second has two possible outcomes: first, the person may develop their own personal belief system based on a rejection of God....same result as above. Second, if the person is a child of God, then it is a temporary situation as this person is seeking truth and will eventually accept the truth as God will continue to work in his/her life revealing Himself overtime.

Here lies the problem with those problems: how do you know who has interpreted correctly and who has misinterpreted? If our only standard of truth is the same thing we are trying to determine the correct interpretation of, we are left without a proper standard of truth to go by. That's a problem.

Concerning differring views, all true Christians adhere to the same basic and essential doctrines of Christianity. Any group or person who believes contrary to these basic doctrines, by definition, is not a Christian - no matter how much they insist they are.

For example, someone who denies the real existance of the Judeo-Christian God, is not a Christian, as being a Christian means you believe!

Point: There are no significant differences between different Christian denominations. Which is why it is so easy for us to attend different churches when we move.

What about the monophysitism? That's a very different belief than we westerners, and they are considered saved. What about sects that don't hold to a literal reading of Genesis 1?

No they don't. God created everything. Science is a means for us to understand how things work. It is amazing to consider works. He often uses His creation to interact with us, so it is no great wonder, we can explain how something happened.

It is the unbeleiving world that uses science to deny God, when science only continues to prove His existence.


He, he, he..... this is actually a funny statement considering whatever we science tells us is an absolute fact today is very likely to be proven wrong tomorrow!!!

When I was in grade school I was taught the Big Bang and evolution were absolutely proven, indisputable facts!!!!

Yet, just the other day, someone told me "we now know, humans did NOT evolve from apes"!!!!!

Again, just because one aspect of a scientific theory is shown to be wrong, doesn't discount the entirety of the theory. Something being proved wrong is actually a good thing, because that means we have found something more likely to be accurate, with stronger data to back it up. You see, the thing about fundamentalisim is that there is NO DATA to back it up. There has been no scientific work done ever that confirms or denies the existence of God. However, when people are left with the decision to believe in science, which admits its fallibility and is a progressive institution... and what they see religion as: a illogical white-knuckled adherance to some weird stories that MUST be 100% infallible, I don't blame them for choosing science. I'm sure you think that you have no problem with real science, but the fact is that anyone from the outside looking in would see a HUGE problem, and that makes it an either/or situation: either religion, or science.

When I was in grade school I was taught that Genesis 1 was factual, and absolutely proven. Let's say that evolution is only 10% proven, what makes creationism any better?... it's currently holding strong at %0 proven...

I'm actually not 100% sure if the actual science ever did conclude that we evolved from monkeys. I think it might have been an assumption, but never concluded on.

I'm going to shar4e a little secret with you....if you want to be right, agree with God, eventually God will prove you're right, even tho humans will mock until they discover thru science, what we have always known.

Ginger

I do believe I agree with God. I disagree with you.

So, am I not a Christian because I don't believe the things you believe? Who then is God, the true God or your doctrines?

p.s. are you willing to accept that picture as how the universe looks?
http://ncse.com/image/ancient-hebrew-cosmology

 

[Ginger]

The Bible is a collection of many books written by different authors at different times in history. The authors all tell the same stories. That is one way we know the Bible contains accurate information. The books speak of historical events and places that can be verified thru independent sources. They can be scientifically dated to know when each was written. The language can be examined to see if it was indeed written in a specific time and area. In addition, all the books, written by different authors at different times and places, they are in harmony with one another - giving the same account from OT to NT. The OT confirms and authenticates the NT.
So, since the books are authentic and contain accurate historical and geological information, they are able to testify to the truthfulness of their claims about God.

As for an accurate interpretation:
First, We can cross reference from one book to another. This assists in accurate interpretation. Understanding the language is another aid, however, you have to be careful of those who misintertpret to make a Scripture say what they want it to mean.

Second, The Bible promises those who truly seek the truth will find it. AND those who seek fanciful stories will find it. God allows us this freewill choice.

Third, The Bible is very clear an essential doctrines. For instance basic, essential doctrines to the Christian faith are summarized in the Apostle's Creed, but we don't need the creed to know these things as they are clearly spelled out in the Scriptures:

Ibelieve in God, the Father Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord: John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit, Luk 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
born of the Virgin Mary, Luk 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name [was] Mary.
suffered under Pontius Pilate, Luke 23:16 I will therefore chastise him, and release [him].
was crucified, Luk 23:23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. ..24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.
died, Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
and was buried. Luk 23:52 This [man] went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. 53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid.
He descended into hell. Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
etc.

Forth, When someone makes a claim to convince me of something, using a quote to do so, I look up the original document (if there is an English translation available) and read it to see if the quote was accurately portrayed or if it was taken out of content.

For example: Catholics claim Martin Luther said Faith is all that is needed for salvation and works mean nothing. But when I read Luther's writings I discovered that is a false assumption.

1st Luther taught, "...Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!"

"An Introduction to St. Paul's Letter to the Romans,"​

Luther's German Bible of 1522​

by Martin Luther, 1483-1546​

2nd, Catholics say Luther added a word to the Bible to create a new doctrine
If this were true, why don't Protestant Bibles contain that "added" word? - because he didn't add a word. Translating from one language to another in a coherent matter requires using appropriate grammar for that specific language.

While Catholics use a snippet of sarcasm to prove their point, the entire letter from Luther explains that he 1. didn't feel he owed the papists an answer and 2. he explained the need for the word "alone" only in the German as it was appropriate usage.

Luther's letter in context:
"I wanted to speak German since it was German I had spoken in
translation - not Latin or Greek. But it is the nature of our language
that in speaking about two things, one which is affirmed,
the other denied, we use the word "solum" only along with the word
"not" (nicht) or "no" (kein). For example, we say "the farmer
brings only (allein) grain and no money"; or "No, I really have no
money, but only (allein) grain"; I have only eaten and not yet
drunk"; "Did you write it only and not read it over?" There are a
vast number of such everyday cases.......

In all these phrases, this is a German usage, even though it is
not the Latin or Greek usage. It is the nature of the German
tongue to add "allein" in order that "nicht" or "kein" may be
clearer and more complete. ....

We do not have to ask about the literal Latin or how we are to
speak German - as these asses do. Rather we must ask the mother
in the home, the children on the street, the common person in the
market about this. We must be guided by their tongue, the manner
of their speech, and do our translating accordingly. Then they
will understand it and recognize that we are speaking German to
them.

.... So, as the traitor Judas says in Matthew 26: "Ut quid perditio
haec?" and in Mark 14: "Ut quid perditio iste unguenti facta est?"
Subsequently, for these literalist asses I would have to translate
it: "Why has this loss of salve occurred?" But what kind of
German is this? What German says "loss of salve occurred"? And
if he does understand it at all, he would think that the salve is
lost and must be looked for and found again; even though that is
still obscure and uncertain. ..... But a German would say "Ut quid, etc.."
as "Why thiswaste?" or "Why this extravagance?" Even "it is a shame
about the ointment" - these are good German, in which one can understand
that Magdalene had wasted the salve she poured out and had done
wrong. That was what Judas meant as he thought he could have used
it better." - Martin Luther

Following this reasoning, the word "only" is appropriate in the German, but would not be appropriate in English translations - which it is not.

Since Protestant Bibles do not use the word "alone" in the English translations of Protestant Bibles, the whole argument is mute.

In Conclusion, you should be able to see how one can tell the truth from misinterpretation.

However, God has made promises that those who truly seek Him will n ot have to go thru all this work to discover the truth. He speaks to us from within and we will know without tangible proof ....

 

[Humble_Servant]

I'm kind of losing track here... what are we talking about? It seems like you aren't directly responding to anything that I say.

If all we have to do is honestly seek for the truth and God will show it to us, why has fundamentalism not sprouted up in places without a mission sent there first? Sure there have been accounts of people who believed in a diety outside of the tribal deities in their society, and were later told that the deity was Jesus... and I don't discount those testimonies. But if honestly seeking the truth will make you a Christian, why are all the Christians in western society, or missions of western society? Is no one else looking for the truth?

p.s. are you willing to accept this picture as how the universe looks?
http://ncse.com/image/ancient-hebrew-cosmology

 

[Ginger]

I'm kind of losing track here... what are we talking about? It seems like you aren't directly responding to anything that I say http://[/quote

http://[/quote

Sorry, I didn't respond to every comment. I decided to explain how we can discern truth from fiction and what the Bible actually teaches rather than trying to sift thru all the differring human opinions.

It's really quite simple as far as the basic principles are concerned, because they are spelled out clearly.

..........if honestly seeking the truth will make you a Christian, will make you a Christian, why are all the Christians in western society, or missions of western society? Is no one else looking for the truth? http://[/quote

http://[/quote

Seeking truth doesn't make you a Christian.
If you are sincerely seeking truth, NOT if you are sincere in your beliefs or sincere in your desire to accomplish what you believe is right, but if you are sincerely seeking truth, and willing to accept the truth even when it ends up contradicting something you have been sincerely convinced of all your life, you will find the truth.

Many people claim to want to know the truth, but what they really want is to find a way to prove their current beliefs are true.

There are many people who claim to be Christian, but they are not seeking God, some don't even believe God is a real Being. Yet, they claim the title Christian. :-(

So many peudo-christian cults give an appearance that Cristian churches disagree with each other. That is not the case. All real Christian must adhere to the same basic doctrines as these are the fundamental beliefs of Christianity. To change these doctrines is to create a counterfeit religion.

p.s. are you willing to accept this picture as how the universe looks?
http://ncse.com/image/ancient-hebrew-cosmology

LOL You are overlooking a couple of very important things:

1. God didn't draw this picture for the Hebrews
2. No one is claiming the Bible contains all information. The Scriptures were written to reveal God's purpose for mankind
3. An erroneous belief in what the universe or merely the Earth, looks like, makes absolutely no difference to God's plan for us - it has "zero" effect on my salvation or yours!

Ginger

 

[Ginger]

Question:
Where does the Bible say the Earth is the center of the universe?

This is a claim that is often made to prove the Bible contains errors.

The Bible doesn't say we are the center of God's universe. However, in some ways we are!!!! The Earth is the focal point of creation - regardless of our physical position in the universe. In that sense, we are the center of the universe.

Ginger

 

[revlynn]

fundamentalism and science inherently contradict each other.

This is absolutely not true, as is evidenced by the many creation scientists of today, and the many scientists of years gone by who saw science as "thinking God's thoughts after Him."

Science is tolerated when it doesn't question one of your beliefs, but as soon as it says anything different to your views science is thrown out. That is not a quest for the truth in my opinion, that is the protection of a worldview that gives security. Truth and security are two very different things.

If it comes to a choice of throwing out God's Word because it disagrees with science, or throwing out "science" that has been pursued from an atheistic standpoint, then I will stick with God's Word every time.

blessings,

Lynn

 

[Humble_Servant]

Sorry, I didn't respond to every comment. I decided to explain how we can discern truth from fiction and what the Bible actually teaches rather than trying to sift thru all the differring human opinions.

But that's what we have a dispute about... what the bible teaches. Ignoring what I say and retelling what you say won't get us anywhere.

Seeking truth doesn't make you a Christian.
If you are sincerely seeking truth, NOT if you are sincere in your beliefs or sincere in your desire to accomplish what you believe is right, but if you are sincerely seeking truth, and willing to accept the truth even when it ends up contradicting something you have been sincerely convinced of all your life, you will find the truth.

So, we can conclude that those who sincerely seek the truth tend to be located in specific places: aka where Christianity is already established. We can also conclude that most of the Eastern world have not sincerely sought the truth, considering that most of them have not become Christians?

LOL You are overlooking a couple of very important things:

1. God didn't draw this picture for the Hebrews
2. No one is claiming the Bible contains all information. The Scriptures were written to reveal God's purpose for mankind
3. An erroneous belief in what the universe or merely the Earth, looks like, makes absolutely no difference to God's plan for us - it has "zero" effect on my salvation or yours!

1. God did not write the transcripts of the scriptures either, nor did he write the dead sea scrolls, or the apostle's creed. That picture is the visual depiction of what we are given in scripture as to how the world looks. The picture isn't just erroneous, it is erroneous and from scripture.

2. I agree, that is why I am fine believing in a poetic interpretation of Genesis 1, which fits much better with our agreed purpose of the scriptures.