|
Post by rational on Jul 10, 2014 8:15:03 GMT -5
I looked at my heart (well an x-ray of my heart) and it did look a little like someone was starting to write something. The letters I could make out were "DLOCKACE" but the letters were not very clear. Maybe that first character was a B. I don't know. Oh no question, the D was definitely a B and that C was really a G.... Bet you're glad you have me around to help you with these things... You must be just starting out at this heart writing stuff. Once you get the hang of it, you will get entire books written there! My cardiologist will be less than pleased!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 10, 2014 9:49:31 GMT -5
Do the revelations from god change over time? On the other hand why would god write/cause to be written a text that is not crystal clear in it's meaning? Although it is probably convenient to construct your own metaphors to support your belief(s) rather than have to stick to the written text. Oh but Rational, it is crystal clear. It is only contradictory and unclear to those God has not chosen to give the Holy Spirit for guidance. That's why we don't understand something that is so clearly and simply written, straight into the hearts of men by God. IMO, it seems that perhaps God has inspired what looks contradictory messages just to make us notice things and start using our heads and work out what fits our life and our experience and to leave the rest of it alone. But then human nature often wants us to have someone else experiencing the same things we are as far as experiencing the truth found in the bible!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 10, 2014 9:54:09 GMT -5
What I don't understand, with all the gods that ever were and some still around that are older even than Christian, -why do people choose the Christian god over all the other gods? People choose gods for four reasons: (1) Because their parents teach them. (The vast majority of people) (2) Because they are forced to. (3) Because the god(s) meet some human need. (4) For standing in society. The predominance of Christianity in the world is primarily attributed to number 2, and of course number 1 takes care of the rest. And this has been reinforced by the millennia-old teaching that there is only one god. It is also reinforced by the invention of the Christian hell - ironically. People love nothing more than a really good horror show. However, Christians really shouldn't be concerned about "hell" for IF Christians are real Christians they understand that "hell" in the biblical sense is nothing more then the earthen grave one is placed in when one leaves this earthen life! And Christians also believe or should to some degree that eventually their saved souls will be reunited with their bodies which have been renewed or made whole again and this will be the "first resurrection". But then some Christians aren't that clear on what Christians should really understand either and some could care less!
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 10, 2014 9:58:29 GMT -5
Yes, you did. And someone told you that too. did they? Virgo, I think Bob knows what the bible says about this and he's wanting you to tell him that you know it's in the bible also! II Timothy 3: "…15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 10, 2014 10:05:02 GMT -5
hmmm doesn't one have a revelation about going into the work? Well Wally I would say that is the million dollar question ! I used to believe people had a revelation to go into the work, because THAT is what we were told happened ! How many times did we hear this in missions, convention, meetings etc. I no longer believe that ! Just a thought... the workers that have committed CSA did they have a revelation from God to go in the work? Actually, a majority of young workers are more or less pushed into trying the work out simply because of the stress they're put under that is what they should do. And many parents start in on a child for the parents have this thought of how wonderful for them IF they would have a child in the work. Most parents see that parents of workers receive a lot of worker approval and considerations. Actually they often are allowed to be in the workers' meetings with their child who is in the work. But by chance on rare occasion a young worker finds he/she really like being in the work and usually stay with it at least for a number of years! So I'd say "No, people do not get revelations about going into the work. They get constant backhanded hints and other types of pressures, like workers at conv. pleaing for more workers for the harvest field is white and there's not enough workers to reap the harvest, etc."
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 13:21:54 GMT -5
People choose gods for four reasons: (1) Because their parents teach them. (The vast majority of people) (2) Because they are forced to. (3) Because the god(s) meet some human need. (4) For standing in society. The predominance of Christianity in the world is primarily attributed to number 2, and of course number 1 takes care of the rest. And this has been reinforced by the millennia-old teaching that there is only one god. It is also reinforced by the invention of the Christian hell - ironically. People love nothing more than a really good horror show. However, Christians really shouldn't be concerned about "hell" for IF Christians are real Christians they understand that "hell" in the biblical sense is nothing more then the earthen grave one is placed in when one leaves this earthen life! You're right, in a sense. The fact of the matter is that in today's world the only people who believe in the Christian concept/threat of hell are Christians. Hell has been at the core of Christian theology for many hundreds of years. This is what divides "Christians" from "Messianic" Jesus followers -- the messianic message was NOT salvation from an eternity in hell, so in reality real Christians have to believe in hell as they understand it because the concept of "Christ" is about saving of the soul ... from something. Jews didn't/don't have souls. It is a Jewish concept that the "bodies" will be resurrected -- to natural life. But with souls (Greek/Christian concept) they are supposed to become heavenly beings. That is why for Jews, cremation is a no-no because they will need their body when they are resurrected. It's interesting how these two beliefs merged so everything would apply to Christian beliefs. Most modern Christians don't even know that Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ".
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 10, 2014 13:55:58 GMT -5
Most modern Christians don't even know that Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ". Could you tell us a bit more about why Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ" Bob? Does it not mean "anointed of God" for a special role like that of a king?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 16:42:44 GMT -5
hmmm doesn't one have a revelation about going into the work? Well Wally I would say that is the million dollar question ! I used to believe people had a revelation to go into the work, because THAT is what we were told happened ! How many times did we hear this in missions, convention, meetings etc. I no longer believe that ! Just a thought... the workers that have committed CSA did they have a revelation from God to go in the work? sure they could have...just because they screw it up doesn't mean they were not called...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 16:49:52 GMT -5
Most modern Christians don't even know that Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ". Could you tell us a bit more about why Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ" Bob? Does it not mean "anointed of God" for a special role like that of a king? Mat_24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Mar_13:6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Luk_21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them. Joh_17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 10, 2014 17:02:31 GMT -5
Oh but Rational, it is crystal clear. It is only contradictory and unclear to those God has not chosen to give the Holy Spirit for guidance. That's why we don't understand something that is so clearly and simply written, straight into the hearts of men by God. IMO, it seems that perhaps God has inspired what looks contradictory messages just to make us notice things and start using our heads and work out what fits our life and our experience and to leave the rest of it alone. But then human nature often wants us to have someone else experiencing the same things we are as far as experiencing the truth found in the bible! Diffinitely, "something" in us wants to have someone else experience the same things we do because that helps us rationalize that what we believe is true!
The more people we can convince that something is true, the more we can say, "See, -look how many people also agree with me! Therefore what I believe must be true!" (doesn't matter whether it is indeed true of not)
That is the real reason for all that evangelizing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 18:43:49 GMT -5
why do you think that i don't give God credence just because i won't reveal to you what has been revealed to me? why do i have to say anything about what Eldon said? i don't recall this my question to which you replied then i asked did you? you may well want to know what they were but i am not going to tell you because you are going to say that somebody told me that, it seems that you can't belive someone can have a reverlation from God if they fit your criteria i would ask again so how do you tell it was not God who revealled who has reveal things to me?why not? is it because you haven't had any? or is it because you believe God can't give them anymore? or is it you believe that the human is not capable of recieving them? who's eyes do you see those through your eyes or the eyes of God? is God not above the advances of science? and also not to cast your pearls before...............
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 19:40:44 GMT -5
Most modern Christians don't even know that Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ". Could you tell us a bit more about why Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ" Bob? Does it not mean "anointed of God" for a special role like that of a king? The simplest answer is that Jesus would not have done it because he was Jewish, not Greek. "Messiah" is Jewish, and does indeed mean anointed, applying to any king in Israel and any person blessed with the privilege of helping the people of Israel, such as the king of Persia. But it had nothing whatsoever to do with someone being a "literal" son of God. The first three gospels as written can very easily be understood in this manner, making Jesus a prime candidate for execution for treason against the Roman Empire. The other reason is that "Christ" is a Greek word which DOES NOT mean the same thing as "messiah" means in Hebrew. "Christ" refers to one of the many historical figures who were sired by a gods with a human females, lived their lives preparing people to live with the gods, and returning to the gods when he died. Jesus did not speak Greek, and except for the Gospel of John he is not recorded to have referred to himself as the "son of god". The Gospel of John was written long after Jesus died, was written in Greek, and applies Greek/Pagan theology to Jesus "Christ". Christians appear not to know that "Messiah", "Son of Man", and "Christ" do NOT AT ALL mean the same thing. So no, "Christ" does not really mean "anointed of God".
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 19:45:13 GMT -5
i don't recall this my question to which you replied then i asked did you? you may well want to know what they were but i am not going to tell you because you are going to say that somebody told me that, it seems that you can't belive someone can have a reverlation from God if they fit your criteria i would ask again so how do you tell it was not God who revealled who has reveal things to me?why not? is it because you haven't had any? or is it because you believe God can't give them anymore? or is it you believe that the human is not capable of recieving them? who's eyes do you see those through your eyes or the eyes of God? is God not above the advances of science? and also not to cast your pearls before............... I got a written apology from the last worker who spoke to me that way. That was when my wife and I were perverts. Now I am .... oinkkkkk. Gottcha.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 20:02:36 GMT -5
Could you tell us a bit more about why Jesus would never have called himself a "Christ" Bob? Does it not mean "anointed of God" for a special role like that of a king? Mat_24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. [Jesus is not saying he is Christ -- he's saying his imposter is not Christ.]
Mar_13:6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Luk_21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them. Joh_17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Bob_1:2 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. [meaning: I am not Christ, so don't be deceived when someone pretends to be me and tells you that I am.]Wally_2:3 And Wally said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am the savior of American traditions, and the time has come to have them restored: go ye not after them. This doesn't mean that you or anyone claiming to be you is the savior of American traditions.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 10, 2014 20:17:32 GMT -5
Virgo, the whole idea of anyone feeling that they have a a "revelation" from God, simply is not provable.
That is one of the reasons that they use that idea.
No one can or can't prove they did or didn't have a "revelation," especially since if they won't reveal what the "revelation" was!
Really a clever way for someone to believe something that has no validity except in their own mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 21:10:11 GMT -5
I got a written apology from the last worker who spoke to me that way. That was when my wife and I were perverts. Now I am .... oinkkkkk. Gottcha. that makes no sense to me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 22:23:09 GMT -5
Mat_24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. [Jesus is not saying he is Christ -- he's saying his imposter is not Christ.]
Mar_13:6 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Luk_21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them. Joh_17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Bob_1:2 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. [meaning: I am not Christ, so don't be deceived when someone pretends to be me and tells you that I am.]Wally_2:3 And Wally said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am the savior of American traditions, and the time has come to have them restored: go ye not after them. This doesn't mean that you or anyone claiming to be you is the savior of American traditions.the key to that verse is "in my name"... and the rest makes no sense...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 23:10:30 GMT -5
I got a written apology from the last worker who spoke to me that way. That was when my wife and I were perverts. Now I am .... oinkkkkk. Gottcha. that makes no sense to me Which further proves my point.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 10, 2014 23:15:12 GMT -5
Bob_1:2 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. [meaning: I am not Christ, so don't be deceived when someone pretends to be me and tells you that I am.]Wally_2:3 And Wally said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am the savior of American traditions, and the time has come to have them restored: go ye not after them. This doesn't mean that you or anyone claiming to be you is the savior of American traditions.the key to that verse is "in my name"... and the rest makes no sense... That's probably because you don't get the difference between "me" and "in my name".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 23:29:21 GMT -5
that makes no sense to me Which further proves my point. 2 u
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 10, 2014 23:57:57 GMT -5
Which further proves my point. 2 u Now I'm confused! What does 2 u mean?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 11, 2014 5:45:35 GMT -5
Now I'm confused! What does 2 u mean? not sure -- what does it mean to you?
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jul 11, 2014 8:58:21 GMT -5
I got a written apology from the last worker who spoke to me that way. That was when my wife and I were perverts. Now I am .... oinkkkkk. Gottcha. The role of Sex in world religions video. Note: Mature Content and subject mater in this talk by a psychologist. Note: Some may find this video covers a taboo topic, some may be offended by the topic. youtu.be/dFe70QabxvQ
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 11, 2014 16:48:40 GMT -5
Somehow, someone has lost the "tie" of some of the postings...they all make little sense!
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jul 12, 2014 12:44:57 GMT -5
Liberal churches are far less focused on an afterlife and what may or may not happen, and much more concerned about matters of compassion and charity in this life. ----------------------- FYI According to the Economist Magazine the national charitable activities for the RCC was a 2.7% of the $170,000,000,000 budget. www.economist.com/node/21560536
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2014 13:04:49 GMT -5
Liberal churches are far less focused on an afterlife and what may or may not happen, and much more concerned about matters of compassion and charity in this life. ----------------------- FYI According to the Economist Magazine the national charitable activities for the RCC was a 2.7% of the $170,000,000,000 budget. www.economist.com/node/21560536It makes one wonder where the other 97.3% went. It's mindboggling really. A 2007 US study indicated that 10-25% of US church donations went to charitable activities. Liberal churches may or may not be at the high end of that because liberal people tend to give more of their donation money to secular organizations, such as the Red Cross for the Obamas. Conservatives and fundamentalists tend to give more of their charitable donations to their church. So, conservative churches may actually have more money available to do charitable activities and might skew the results in their favour if church activities are the sole indicator of what liberal Christians are doing in that area. For 2x2's, the comparable number is effectively 0% but that doesn't mean they don't do charitable activities. However, it does mean that almost all of it is through secular agencies.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 12, 2014 15:31:31 GMT -5
Liberal churches are far less focused on an afterlife and what may or may not happen, and much more concerned about matters of compassion and charity in this life. ----------------------- FYI According to the Economist Magazine the national charitable activities for the RCC was a 2.7% of the $170,000,000,000 budget. www.economist.com/node/21560536It makes one wonder where the other 97.3% went. It's mindboggling really. A 2007 US study indicated that 10-25% of US church donations went to charitable activities. Liberal churches may or may not be at the high end of that because liberal people tend to give more of their donation money to secular organizations, such as the Red Cross for the Obamas. Conservatives and fundamentalists tend to give more of their charitable donations to their church. So, conservative churches may actually have more money available to do charitable activities and might skew the results in their favour if church activities are the sole indicator of what liberal Christians are doing in that area. For 2x2's, the comparable number is effectively 0% but that doesn't mean they don't do charitable activities. However, it does mean that almost all of it is through secular agencies.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jul 14, 2014 10:31:24 GMT -5
While recent scholarship has helpfully added to the 'emerging' view, I don't think it can be seen as entirely separate from older challenges to prevailing views. I am reading these same things about views on scripture in books that were authored decades ago, but by theologians who have not made it into the popular thinking. I believe they should be credited for opening up space in which discussion has begun to take place. It's not that they need applause or anything, but they have said these things while deeply thinking through past tradition, and I feel much is lost if we simply ignore this deep engagement. I do not see scripture as something handed down from heaven, with a set of unchangeable truths - they must be interpreted for each age and place - yet understanding how God has dealt with people in past ages brings an anchor as well, helping us to not be "blown about by every wind of doctrine." To sharpen the statement a bit: by recent scholarship I don't mean new ideas; I mean new findings. If anything, major ideas like universalism and dissent on Trinitarianism are as old as Christianity. But recent findings in terms of textual analysis and dating and even newly found ancient manuscripts such as the Dead Sea Scrolls have added credence to non-establishment views.
|
|