|
Post by peacefulheart on Jun 17, 2014 17:43:48 GMT -5
I can answer for ph and would, except my feeding tube unhooked from my gills and I can't find it in all of this muck in which I am immersed. When I find it, I'll answer for her - we are all connected you know. Sharon - How is it that Christians can add words to verses? If you truly live by that verse, John 3:16, how can you condemn homosexuals? That biblical 'fact' has already been changed by people like you; " . . . whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life, except for homosexuals who act on their love for each other." You and people like you have already changed the verbiage because you hate that which you do not understand. (Don't tell me you don't hate them; condemning someone to 'hell' is hating them.) Picking and choosing verses that fit your mood for the day is not how that book is supposed to work. People constantly accuse bible bashers for picking and choosing verses for argument. Who do you think taught them that? Bible thumpers have the corner on the market in that arena. Either you believe that verse or you don't. It is a black and white matter. There is no gray area if you take the words for their meaning exactly as they are written. Whosoever - anyone, not whomever you choose. It does not say, " . . whosoever attends a specific church . . " Very well put!!!
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jun 17, 2014 19:10:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 17, 2014 21:26:59 GMT -5
clearday, You are correct on this. It hit home for me on the topic of being gay, because of my family member. I had always wondered if it was a choice (in my ignorance) or if they were born that way, but never had asked any gay people that I knew (co-workers)...I thought it was a little too much 'In their business' to ask. When my family member told me they were gay, I started thinking about it more. I started asking other gays(that I became closer friends with) about how old they were when they realized they were gay. My conclusion on the topic, is that it is absolutely not a choice, therefore shaking my faith in the words of the bible on the topic. I am not sure it is as cut and dried as you have indicated. While there have been areas on different chromosomes that are linked to homosexuality other factors seem to play a greater role. While these genes are a factor they are not completely determinative. It may well be that in some cases the person does, at some point in their life, decide that a homosexual relationship meets their needs. And this may change at different points in their life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2014 21:44:28 GMT -5
If you take the bible as your authority then you don't concern yourself about chromosomes, genes, psychology, social attitudes and the like. The bible says we live inside a natural human body, and are given a human nature. That nature can be homosexual, it can be pederast, metrosexual, spornosexual or any other sexual preference you like. Our natures are full of pride, wrath, envy, deceit, folly etc.. But the WHOLE POINT of the scripture is that WE MUST SURRENDER THAT NATURE. The things said to be "wicked" in the bible are not wicked just because they are in our nature, they are wicked because they don't belong to God's nature.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 17, 2014 23:03:19 GMT -5
If you take the bible as your authority then you don't concern yourself about chromosomes, genes, psychology, social attitudes and the like. The bible says we live inside a natural human body, and are given a human nature. That nature can be homosexual, it can be pederast, metrosexual, spornosexual or any other sexual preference you like. Our natures are full of pride, wrath, envy, deceit, folly etc.. But the WHOLE POINT of the scripture is that WE MUST SURRENDER THAT NATURE. The things said to be "wicked" in the bible are not wicked just because they are in our nature, they are wicked because they don't belong to God's nature. Where in the world do you get the idea that God's nature isn't about pride, wrath, jealousy and anger? He is all of those things and more, especially in the OT, and he even admits to some of them. If he can be those things why is it wrong for humans to be those things?
|
|
|
Post by peacefulheart on Jun 17, 2014 23:20:47 GMT -5
clearday, You are correct on this. It hit home for me on the topic of being gay, because of my family member. I had always wondered if it was a choice (in my ignorance) or if they were born that way, but never had asked any gay people that I knew (co-workers)...I thought it was a little too much 'In their business' to ask. When my family member told me they were gay, I started thinking about it more. I started asking other gays(that I became closer friends with) about how old they were when they realized they were gay. My conclusion on the topic, is that it is absolutely not a choice, therefore shaking my faith in the words of the bible on the topic. I am not sure it is as cut and dried as you have indicated. While there have been areas on different chromosomes that are linked to homosexuality other factors seem to play a greater role. While these genes are a factor they are not completely determinative. It may well be that in some cases the person does, at some point in their life, decide that a homosexual relationship meets their needs. And this may change at different points in their life. With all due respect rational, I disagree! I'm not talking about, "Areas on different chromosomes that are linked to homosexuality, or other factors playing a greater role." In my opinion, after talking with various gays, the ones (at least that I have talked to and are friends with) that, "At some point in their life, decide that a homosexual relationship meets their needs," are the ones that have always been gay, but feared letting it be known that they were gay and later let it be known and started relationships with those they were actually attracted to! Some were married for years and had children, before letting it be known. It wasn't as tolerated back then as it is today...not to say it is fully tolerated yet. I personally know two men that were married with children and afraid to let it be known. There may be those that 'experiment,' and I know there are bi-sexuals who are attracted to both sex genders....this may be the ones you are referring to that "May change at different points in their life?" That DOES make sense to me if that is what you are referring to. -ph-
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 17, 2014 23:23:14 GMT -5
Where in the world do you get the idea that God's nature isn't about pride, wrath, jealousy and anger? He is all of those things and more, especially in the OT, and he even admits to some of them. If he can be those things why is it wrong for humans to be those things? Even parts of the decalogue support these human traits in god.
|
|
|
Post by peacefulheart on Jun 17, 2014 23:48:42 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing the link.
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Jun 18, 2014 10:18:02 GMT -5
Bert, do you know the definition of metrosexual?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jun 18, 2014 10:52:27 GMT -5
I can answer for ph and would, except my feeding tube unhooked from my gills and I can't find it in all of this muck in which I am immersed. When I find it, I'll answer for her - we are all connected you know. Sharon - How is it that Christians can add words to verses? If you truly live by that verse, John 3:16, how can you condemn homosexuals? That biblical 'fact' has already been changed by people like you; " . . . whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life, except for homosexuals who act on their love for each other." You and people like you have already changed the verbiage because you hate that which you do not understand. (Don't tell me you don't hate them; condemning someone to 'hell' is hating them.) Picking and choosing verses that fit your mood for the day is not how that book is supposed to work. People constantly accuse bible bashers for picking and choosing verses for argument. Who do you think taught them that? Bible thumpers have the corner on the market in that arena. Either you believe that verse or you don't. It is a black and white matter. There is no gray area if you take the words for their meaning exactly as they are written. Whosoever - anyone, not whomever you choose. It does not say, " . . whosoever attends a specific church . . " ID10, I have NO idea why you're romping on me and saying such things as I condemn homosexuals to hell...for I haven't....I can't say I understand about homosexuals entirely but I've worked side by side with them and have appreciated some of them for their outlook on our experiences side by side. So where in the heck do you come up with such an idea? I was really asking CD IF that one verse that is so uniformly used within the Christian community could be "changed" in such a way of understanding that we would have an earth shaking experience because of it!
|
|
|
Post by faune on Jun 18, 2014 17:51:57 GMT -5
I agree, and I didn't mean to come off as snarky. From reading your posts it seems you have a lot of the same thoughts and questions that I do. I guess I was just trying to figure out why this is the one issue that shakes your faith. If you believe other faith-shaking atrocities recorded in the bible are just the result of men writing things that aren't necessarily true...why couldn't you have that same belief for the gay issue? There are things written in the bible that I feel are horrible and barbaric, unfair, unbelievable....I could go on and on. Most of the things I see as being just human evilness, some of the things I wonder if they were actually "God's words," or tampered with as mans will not God's. However, the one thing that shakes my faith, "If" it were indeed all God's word untampered with is the question I started the thread with about gays. Peacefulheart ~ Obviously, you've read the O.T. books of the law and the prophets and have noticed the same thing as others on TMB? Honestly, some of the things found in Leviticus and other O.T. books are so barbaric and cruel that it gives the impression that God was some kind of psychopath with a short fuse. How many parents today would take their rebellious child out for a public stoning in keeping with this law, yet they embrace the same judgment regarding homosexuals? Also, let's not forget to mention the horrible way in which women were treated and considered as a man's property to do with as he saw fit. Since homosexuality is something that has been around with since early civilization, I would guess God had something to do in its creation, too? Honestly, I can't imagine any loving God creating somebody differently just to be labeled as damned? Such inhumanity seems more in tune with man's depravity and warped opinion about God in general, which makes it hard for me to take the O.T. laws seriously. There are also so many discrepancies and downright contradictions found throughout the Bible, that I can't help but rationalize that man played a major part in altering scriptures to suit their own beliefs at a particular point in time? After reading a number of books on the historical Jesus and early Christianity, I can see that it's definitely a possibility that the Bible was tampered with and changed to suit the purposes of organized religion, which has also been proposed by numerous Bible scholars and historians of ancient times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2014 4:13:18 GMT -5
Bert, do you know the definition of metrosexual? Wiki sums it up, " ... he (Metro man) has clearly taken himself as his own love object and pleasure as his sexual preference."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2014 8:00:57 GMT -5
There are things written in the bible that I feel are horrible and barbaric, unfair, unbelievable....I could go on and on. Most of the things I see as being just human evilness, some of the things I wonder if they were actually "God's words," or tampered with as mans will not God's. However, the one thing that shakes my faith, "If" it were indeed all God's word untampered with is the question I started the thread with about gays. Peacefulheart ~ Obviously, you've read the O.T. books of the law and the prophets and have noticed the same thing as others on TMB? Honestly, some of the things found in Leviticus and other O.T. books are so barbaric and cruel that it gives the impression that God was some kind of psychopath with a short fuse. How many people today would take their rebellious child out for a public stoning in keeping with this law, yet they embrace the same judgment regarding homosexuals? Also, let's not forget to mention the horrible way in which women were treated and considered as a man's property to do with as he saw fit. Since homosexuality is something that has been around with since early civilization, I would guess God had something to do in their creation, too? Honestly, I can't imagine any loving God creating somebody differently just to be labeled as damned? Such inhumanity seems more in tune with man's depravity and warped opinion about God in general, which makes it hard for me to take the O.T. laws seriously. There are also so many discrepancies and downright contradictions found throughout the Bible, that I can't help but rationalize that man played a major part in altering scriptures to suit their own beliefs at a particular point in time? After reading a number of books on the historical Jesus and early Christianity, I can see that it's definitely a possibility that the Bible was tampered with and changed to suit the purposes of organized religion, which has also been proposed by numerous Bible scholars and historians of ancient times. While I expect extensive editing is quite true, that implies that the unedited version would be better. Maybe it would be worse? When someone encounters a truth that contradicts the bible, it's not so much the truth that shakes them up, it's the idea of biblical inerrancy that gets a faith-shaking. They realize from personal experience that something significant in the bible isn't true. Some people work around that with ideas of "Dispensationalism" or "Progressive revelation" in order deal with writings they can't justify, and that still leaves them with an inerrant bible. The alternative view is too much for a lot of people to handle: that the bible is a collection of (edited) writings over time which reflect the beliefs and experiences of those writers. I think that only when viewed like that, that real value can be extracted from the bible without having to get distracted by the brutal depictions of God and ideas attributed to God which don't reflect a deity that is merciful, or even just for that matter. Yes, we have to pick and choose what is valuable and what is not, but that's why we have a brain and free will.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Jun 19, 2014 9:09:38 GMT -5
Peacefulheart ~ Obviously, you've read the O.T. books of the law and the prophets and have noticed the same thing as others on TMB? Honestly, some of the things found in Leviticus and other O.T. books are so barbaric and cruel that it gives the impression that God was some kind of psychopath with a short fuse. How many parents today would take their rebellious child out for a public stoning in keeping with this law, yet they embrace the same judgment regarding homosexuals? Also, let's not forget to mention the horrible way in which women were treated and considered as a man's property to do with as he saw fit. Since homosexuality is something that has been around since early civilization, I would guess God had something to do in its creation, too? Honestly, I can't imagine any loving God creating somebody differently just to be labeled as damned? Such inhumanity seems more in tune with man's depravity and warped opinion about God in general, which makes it hard for me to take the O.T. laws seriously. There are also so many discrepancies and downright contradictions found throughout the Bible, that I can't help but rationalize that man played a major part in altering scriptures to suit their own beliefs at a particular point in time? After reading a number of books on the historical Jesus and early Christianity, I can see that it's definitely a possibility that the Bible was tampered with and changed to suit the purposes of organized religion, which has also been proposed by numerous Bible scholars and historians of ancient times. While I expect extensive editing is quite true, that implies that the unedited version would be better. Maybe it would be worse? When someone encounters a truth that contradicts the bible, it's not so much the truth that shakes them up, it's the idea of biblical inerrancy that gets a faith-shaking. They realize from personal experience that something significant in the bible isn't true. Some people work around that with ideas of "Dispensationalism" or "Progressive revelation" in order deal with writings they can't justify, and that still leaves them with an inerrant bible. The alternative view is too much for a lot of people to handle: that the bible is a collection of (edited) writings over time which reflect the beliefs and experiences of those writers. I think that only when viewed like that, that real value can be extracted from the bible without having to get distracted by the brutal depictions of God and ideas attributed to God which don't reflect a deity that is merciful, or even just for that matter. Yes, we have to pick and choose what is valuable and what is not, but that's why we have a brain and free will. Clearday ~ From my own study of how the Bible was assembled, I can't help but rationalize that there was some editing of both the O.T. and N.T. along the way? The investigative work of modern day Bible scholars have also shed new light on this possibility. When you take this into consideration when reading the Bible, it makes such things as you read in the O.T. law books less shocking and more in line with the times in which these people supposedly lived, IMO
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2014 9:29:32 GMT -5
While I expect extensive editing is quite true, that implies that the unedited version would be better. Maybe it would be worse? When someone encounters a truth that contradicts the bible, it's not so much the truth that shakes them up, it's the idea of biblical inerrancy that gets a faith-shaking. They realize from personal experience that something significant in the bible isn't true. Some people work around that with ideas of "Dispensationalism" or "Progressive revelation" in order deal with writings they can't justify, and that still leaves them with an inerrant bible. The alternative view is too much for a lot of people to handle: that the bible is a collection of (edited) writings over time which reflect the beliefs and experiences of those writers. I think that only when viewed like that, that real value can be extracted from the bible without having to get distracted by the brutal depictions of God and ideas attributed to God which don't reflect a deity that is merciful, or even just for that matter. Yes, we have to pick and choose what is valuable and what is not, but that's why we have a brain and free will. Clearday ~ From my own study of how the Bible was assembled, I can't help but rationalize that there was some editing of both the O.T. and N.T. along the way? The investigative work of modern day Bible scholars have also shed new light on this possibility. When you take this into consideration when reading the Bible, it makes such things as you read in the O.T. law books less shocking and more in line with the times in which these people supposedly lived, IMO I think we can say it is a fact that the bible was edited. The Johannine Comma is proof of that in which a phrase was added to support the trinity concept. Definitely, the bible in general is a reflection of society at the time, and the concepts of God and what they thought "God's will" was at the time. When we look at the bible in that light, it all makes a lot of sense. Read: "God said" to mean "we think this is what God would say" and it all fits together very well. Otherwise, the bible has problematic passages throughout that is not helpful to any literalist.
|
|
|
Post by peacefulheart on Jun 19, 2014 13:28:34 GMT -5
There are things written in the bible that I feel are horrible and barbaric, unfair, unbelievable....I could go on and on. Most of the things I see as being just human evilness, some of the things I wonder if they were actually "God's words," or tampered with as mans will not God's. However, the one thing that shakes my faith, "If" it were indeed all God's word untampered with is the question I started the thread with about gays. Peacefulheart ~ Obviously, you've read the O.T. books of the law and the prophets and have noticed the same thing as others on TMB? Honestly, some of the things found in Leviticus and other O.T. books are so barbaric and cruel that it gives the impression that God was some kind of psychopath with a short fuse. How many parents today would take their rebellious child out for a public stoning in keeping with this law, yet they embrace the same judgment regarding homosexuals? Also, let's not forget to mention the horrible way in which women were treated and considered as a man's property to do with as he saw fit. Since homosexuality is something that has been around with since early civilization, I would guess God had something to do in its creation, too? Honestly, I can't imagine any loving God creating somebody differently just to be labeled as damned? Such inhumanity seems more in tune with man's depravity and warped opinion about God in general, which makes it hard for me to take the O.T. laws seriously. There are also so many discrepancies and downright contradictions found throughout the Bible, that I can't help but rationalize that man played a major part in altering scriptures to suit their own beliefs at a particular point in time? After reading a number of books on the historical Jesus and early Christianity, I can see that it's definitely a possibility that the Bible was tampered with and changed to suit the purposes of organized religion, which has also been proposed by numerous Bible scholars and historians of ancient times. Yes faune, I can't believe some of the laws they had. And...you are right, nobody keeps those laws today. It really makes you feel like there were two Gods they were referring to from the old testament to the new! There is bound to be some differences because of different peoples accounts of what happened. For instance... In the Gospel of John, Jesus was NOT recorded as saying, "Today you will be with me in paradise," to the man hanging on the cross next to Him, and in at least one other Gospel writers account, it was recorded that He said that. However, the entire tone and intent of the God in the OT to the God in the NT is soooo very different. -ph-
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 19, 2014 15:20:50 GMT -5
Has anyone ever wondered why God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all male? Why is there not a Goddess in that mix?
|
|
|
Post by Persona non grata on Jun 19, 2014 16:01:42 GMT -5
Has anyone ever wondered why God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all male? Why is there not a Goddess in that mix? Ahhhh, but Wisdom is always referred to as female.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 19, 2014 17:16:13 GMT -5
Has anyone ever wondered why God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all male? Why is there not a Goddess in that mix? Ahhhh, but Wisdom is always referred to as female. So there is no wisdom in the trinity because it is all male? Interesting. The Gnostics had a word for the divine feminine which was Sophia. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophia_(Gnosticism)
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 19, 2014 18:30:48 GMT -5
Has anyone ever wondered why God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all male? Why is there not a Goddess in that mix? Ahhhh, but Wisdom is always referred to as female. Has anyone ever wondered why God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all male? Why is there not a Goddess in that mix? Ahhhh, but Wisdom is always referred to as female. ehum.., Well if Wisdom is female but God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are male; then the Trinity isn't very wise eh?
So what's new? I knew that a long time ago!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jun 19, 2014 21:18:32 GMT -5
As God was first recognized by the children of Israel, the men were the only ones allowed at their church gatherings or even other gatherings. I think I heard sometime ago that even in the beginning that the women and children were not allowed to go to the synagogues in their home cities or towns. I think they were allowed to go to the outer court of the Temple.....but it has always been a "man's" world in reading the bible! Even in the days of Paul when he was to write that women were to keep quiet in the mtgs. and ask their husbands at home or learn from their husbands in their own home!
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Jun 21, 2014 17:37:43 GMT -5
I can't believe some of the laws they had. And...you are right, nobody keeps those laws today. It really makes you feel like there were two Gods they were referring to from the old testament to the new! There is bound to be some differences because of different peoples accounts of what happened. For instance... In the Gospel of John, Jesus was NOT recorded as saying, "Today you will be with me in paradise," to the man hanging on the cross next to Him, and in at least one other Gospel writers account, it was recorded that He said that. However, the entire tone and intent of the God in the OT to the God in the NT is soooo very different. No one yet has clearly or rationally explained the difference to me. I find it amusing that some simply don't bother to reconcile the two. A female pastor friend of mine says hers is a New Testament church and that she does not preach from the Old Testament. Okay... But it's not like you can throw the OT away and forget about it.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 21, 2014 20:16:43 GMT -5
I can't believe some of the laws they had. And...you are right, nobody keeps those laws today. It really makes you feel like there were two Gods they were referring to from the old testament to the new! There is bound to be some differences because of different peoples accounts of what happened. For instance... In the Gospel of John, Jesus was NOT recorded as saying, "Today you will be with me in paradise," to the man hanging on the cross next to Him, and in at least one other Gospel writers account, it was recorded that He said that. However, the entire tone and intent of the God in the OT to the God in the NT is soooo very different. No one yet has clearly or rationally explained the difference to me. I find it amusing that some simply don't bother to reconcile the two. A female pastor friend of mine says hers is a New Testament church and that she does not preach from the Old Testament. Okay... But it's not like you can throw the OT away and forget about it. Exactly annan, the OT God is supposedly the same God as the NT god and if you believe in the Trinity, Jesus was also part of the OT because he was forever also. How they can reconcile the Trinity of the OT with the Trinity of the NT is interesting for sure. Did God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit all of a sudden see the error of their ways and become about love instead of war? My parents used to reconcile the two by saying the OT wasn't real, but types and shadows of that which was to come. Whatever the heck that means.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 21, 2014 22:57:08 GMT -5
I can't believe some of the laws they had. And...you are right, nobody keeps those laws today. It really makes you feel like there were two Gods they were referring to from the old testament to the new! There is bound to be some differences because of different peoples accounts of what happened. For instance... In the Gospel of John, Jesus was NOT recorded as saying, "Today you will be with me in paradise," to the man hanging on the cross next to Him, and in at least one other Gospel writers account, it was recorded that He said that. However, the entire tone and intent of the God in the OT to the God in the NT is soooo very different. No one yet has clearly or rationally explained the difference to me. I find it amusing that some simply don't bother to reconcile the two. A female pastor friend of mine says hers is a New Testament church and that she does not preach from the Old Testament. Okay... But i t's not like you can throw the OT away and forget about it. Right, -neither do I see how you can just throw the OT away.
Some people try to rationalize that Jesus full filled the OT laws, therefore his doing so reconciled the OT and NT & thus making the OT no longer valid!
But to me, the very fact that Jesus supposedly believed that he needed to full fill the laws, must have been because he considered laws of the OT valid !
Other wise, why didn't Jesus just denounce the OT laws for being what they really were, -highly immoral & horrible!
|
|
|
Post by eyedeetentee on Jun 22, 2014 14:29:53 GMT -5
I can answer for ph and would, except my feeding tube unhooked from my gills and I can't find it in all of this muck in which I am immersed. When I find it, I'll answer for her - we are all connected you know. Sharon - How is it that Christians can add words to verses? If you truly live by that verse, John 3:16, how can you condemn homosexuals? That biblical 'fact' has already been changed by people like you; " . . . whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life, except for homosexuals who act on their love for each other." You and people like you have already changed the verbiage because you hate that which you do not understand. (Don't tell me you don't hate them; condemning someone to 'hell' is hating them.) Picking and choosing verses that fit your mood for the day is not how that book is supposed to work. People constantly accuse bible bashers for picking and choosing verses for argument. Who do you think taught them that? Bible thumpers have the corner on the market in that arena. Either you believe that verse or you don't. It is a black and white matter. There is no gray area if you take the words for their meaning exactly as they are written. Whosoever - anyone, not whomever you choose. It does not say, " . . whosoever attends a specific church . . " ID10, I have NO idea why you're romping on me and saying such things as I condemn homosexuals to hell...for I haven't....I can't say I understand about homosexuals entirely but I've worked side by side with them and have appreciated some of them for their outlook on our experiences side by side. So where in the heck do you come up with such an idea? I was really asking CD IF that one verse that is so uniformly used within the Christian community could be "changed" in such a way of understanding that we would have an earth shaking experience because of it! Because of all of your previous posts.
|
|
|
Post by selah on Jun 22, 2014 16:06:31 GMT -5
"As far as the bible goes, it was just written by people who hadn't gotten there yet either." - Clearday
Amen
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jun 22, 2014 16:29:44 GMT -5
I can't believe some of the laws they had. And...you are right, nobody keeps those laws today. It really makes you feel like there were two Gods they were referring to from the old testament to the new! There is bound to be some differences because of different peoples accounts of what happened. For instance... In the Gospel of John, Jesus was NOT recorded as saying, "Today you will be with me in paradise," to the man hanging on the cross next to Him, and in at least one other Gospel writers account, it was recorded that He said that. However, the entire tone and intent of the God in the OT to the God in the NT is soooo very different. No one yet has clearly or rationally explained the difference to me. I find it amusing that some simply don't bother to reconcile the two. A female pastor friend of mine says hers is a New Testament church and that she does not preach from the Old Testament. Okay... But it's not like you can throw the OT away and forget about it. The reason the OT has been preserved in the "Holy Bible" is because it was the Roman Church's foundation for an intermediary between himself and god -- it made the clergy inevasible. It's only a very modern phenomenon that Catholics talk about a "personal" savior.
|
|
Sky
Junior Member
7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.
Posts: 67
|
Post by Sky on Jun 22, 2014 16:51:42 GMT -5
How can anyone walk upright in Spirit and Truth and be ruled by their flesh?
|
|