Fundamental challenge

[RMDY]

We now have rich other source materials in the Gnostic Gospels.

Gnosticism is the wrong way to learn about Jesus. Gnostism is apostate christianity. Even the apostles were against Gnosticism.

 

[RMDY]

Thank you for your concern, but I disagree with you. I do use the Bible as a source, but not as the word of God. I do not believe the Bible is the word of God. The Bible is an interesting historical source, written by fallible human beings. It must be read like any historical source and analyzed carefully and with critical thinking.

The Word of God is Jesus, yet the words of God are within the bible. Jesus is the word, yet his testimony and teachings are within the bible.
Although some translations are off, the bible itself contains the inspired scriptures of God. Nonetheless, it would be a mistake for you to believe the bible was written by men not inspired by God. After all, do you not believe Jesus teachings about the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit is what seals us, teaches us all things, and dwells within us. In fact, we are commanded to walk in the Spirit and worship in Spirit and Truth. The whole christian life is spiritual, based around living in the Spirit, walking according to the Spirit, having faith in the Spirit, and Jesus himself said the only unforgivable sin was to blasphame the Holy Spirit.

 

[RMDY]

No. I read the work of scholars who have tried to discern what Jesus actually said. The Jesus Seminar scholars have done great work in this area.

Muslims also give a testimony about Jesus as well. Do you use them as a source? They claim Jesus didn't die and is not the Son of God and that the Holy Spirit is the angel Gabriel. They're testimony concerning Jesus is a contradiction to the testimony of the 12 apostles.

 

[Brieuse]

Gnosticism is the wrong way to learn about Jesus. Gnostism is apostate christianity. Even the apostles were against Gnosticism.

It's true that many of the resources cannot be verified, therefore we should be wary of them. However, there is much to learn from things outside of the Bible. But be careful.

 

[sashatheman]

Hello People. First of all i am straight.

I had a discussion with my girlfriend a couple of days back, regarding homosexuals. We both go to a baptist church, however i woulnd't say i prescribe to all the doctorines. Further more the church is calvanistic, to which my girlfriend subscribes to.

Anyway, i found the challenge to be an excellent thing, however after reading through all the pages, i haven't found a single person who actually addressed the challenge. It was basicly a back and force debate between, Ohioprof and a couple of anti-homosexuals posters who argued whether homosexuality is right on not. That wasn't the original intent of the post.

Anyway my girlfriend and i were debating whether homosexuality is a choice a person makes. I was saying it's not a choice, people are primarily born gay, with society and culture only having a slight influence.
She was saying it is a choice, and told me that God would be a liar, if He made people homosexuals and then condemned their action.

I told her, doesn't calvanism teaches that people are predestined to go to hell, what difference would it make if God also predestined homosexuuals to something He condemns. to which she said, who are you to question God. Which ironicly can be asked in return by me, who are you to question God if He creates people with homosexual desires.

Anyway she got upset at me, saying things like 'are we going to teach that homosexuality is good to our future kids?' etc.

I told her that we should teach children, tolerence , and to love all people, instead of concentrating on condeming people on what God consideres a sin. I said, i am not the one to judge homosexuals for their acts, since two consenting homosexual adults, and what they do in private is their business. If God is against it, let Him judge not us.

The conversation ended there basicly, however i would really like to show her and others who are imo misunderstood that homosuxality is not a fad, or a choice etc. The desires are as natural as the attractions heterosexual couples experience for the opposite sex.
It can be argued that when homoxesual people act on their desires they make a choice to follow through, however like i said, i am not the one to judge.

So i would like to meet an ex homosexual person who thinks that their desires were a choice.

 

[Ohioprof]

Gnosticism is the wrong way to learn about Jesus. Gnostism is apostate christianity. Even the apostles were against Gnosticism.

The fact that early Christians took different views of Jesus and of their faith is important, and it should not simply be dismissed. The Gnostic Gospels provide insight into how early Christians thought about their faith. The men in power who chose what went into the Bible and what would be kept out tried to repress and eliminate the Gnostic Gospels, and we are fortunate that they did not succeed in eliminating them. They did manage to impose their version of Christianity on much of the world, but they were not able to destroy all the writings of early Christians who disagreed with their particular beliefs.

 

[Ohioprof]

Hello People. First of all i am straight.

I had a discussion with my girlfriend a couple of days back, regarding homosexuals. We both go to a baptist church, however i woulnd't say i prescribe to all the doctorines. Further more the church is calvanistic, to which my girlfriend subscribes to.

Anyway, i found the challenge to be an excellent thing, however after reading through all the pages, i haven't found a single person who actually addressed the challenge. It was basicly a back and force debate between, Ohioprof and a couple of anti-homosexuals posters who argued whether homosexuality is right on not. That wasn't the original intent of the post.

Anyway my girlfriend and i were debating whether homosexuality is a choice a person makes. I was saying it's not a choice, people are primarily born gay, with society and culture only having a slight influence.
She was saying it's not a choice, and told me that God would be a liar, if He made people homosexuals and then condemned their action.

I told her, doesn't calvanism teaches that people are predestined to go to hell, what difference would it make if God also predestined homosexuuals to something He condemns. to which she said, who are you to question God. Which ironicly can be asked in return by me, who are you to question God if He creates people with homosexual desires.

Anyway she got upset at me, saying things like 'are we going to teach that homosexuality is good to our future kids?' etc.

I told her that we should teach children, tolerence , and to love all people, instead of concentrating on condeming people on what God consideres a sin. I said, i am not the one to judge homosexuals for their acts, since two consenting homosexual adults, and what they do in private is their business. If God is against it, let Him judge not us.

The conversation ended there basicly, however i would really like to show her and others who are imo misunderstood that homosuxality is not a fad, or a choice etc. The desires are as natural as the attractions heterosexual couples experience for the opposite sex.
It can be argued that when homoxesual people act on their desires they make a choice to follow through, however like i said, i am not the one to judge.

So i would like to meet an ex homosexual person who thinks that their desires were a choice.

Let's see if your post brings anyone forward to discuss their experience. It would be interesting to hear them.

 

[RMDY]

The fact that early Christians took different views of Jesus and of their faith is important, and it should not simply be dismissed. The Gnostic Gospels provide insight into how early Christians thought about their faith. The men in power who chose what went into the Bible and what would be kept out tried to repress and eliminate the Gnostic Gospels, and we are fortunate that they did not succeed in eliminating them. They did manage to impose their version of Christianity on much of the world, but they were not able to destroy all the writings of early Christians who disagreed with their particular beliefs.

Men in power? Men in power? At times the early apostles were pushed out of the churches they founded. It is the gnostics who are evil. They cannot call their "gospels" a gospel. For one thing, their gospel is written too late and strays from the truth. Second, gnosticism taught that only a few individuals had a secret knowledge and only a few could have it, which differed from the apostles testimony, whom said that their knowledge was free for all.
And it appears you don't believe the 12 were inspired by God. In fact, it appears as if you don't believe in the Holy Spirit according to what you just confessed----

They did manage to impose their version of Christianity on much of the world

. It appears as if you believe that the 12 were not inspired by God with the power of God behind them and acted to seek their own will. I reject what you say about the 12 and about the gnostics because what you say is a lie.

You don't even believe in a literal resurrection. You talk as if christianity is one big lie fabricated by mere men who claimed they were inspired by God but were not. I've heard your kind of talk before----this sounds like something out of a Divinchi Code movie.

The men in power who chose what went into the Bible and what would be kept out tried to repress and eliminate the Gnostic Gospels, and we are fortunate that they did not succeed in eliminating them. They did manage to impose their version of Christianity on much of the world, but they were not able to destroy all the writings of early Christians who disagreed with their particular beliefs

Ohioprof, you talk as if the 12 apostles as evil, and that they are wrong and the gnostics are right.

 

[Ohioprof]

The Word of God is Jesus, yet the words of God are within the bible. Jesus is the word, yet his testimony and teachings are within the bible.
Although some translations are off, the bible itself contains the inspired scriptures of God. Nonetheless, it would be a mistake for you to believe the bible was written by men not inspired by God. After all, do you not believe Jesus teachings about the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit is what seals us, teaches us all things, and dwells within us. In fact, we are commanded to walk in the Spirit and worship in Spirit and Truth. The whole christian life is spiritual, based around living in the Spirit, walking according to the Spirit, having faith in the Spirit, and Jesus himself said the only unforgivable sin was to blasphame the Holy Spirit.

That's your belief. It's not my belief.

 

[Ohioprof]

Men in power? Men in power? At times the early apostles were pushed out of the churches they founded. It is the gnostics who are evil. They cannot call their "gospels" a gospel. For one thing, their gospel is written too late and strays from the truth. Second, gnosticism taught that only a few individuals had a secret knowledge and only a few could have it, which differed from the apostles testimony, whom said that their knowledge was free for all.
And it appears you don't believe the 12 were inspired by God. In fact, it appears as if you don't believe in the Holy Spirit according to what you just confessed----. It appears as if you believe that the 12 were not inspired by God with the power of God behind them and acted to seek their own will. I reject what you say about the 12 and about the gnostics because what you say is a lie.

You don't even believe in a literal resurrection. You talk as if christianity is one big lie fabricated by mere men who claimed they were inspired by God but were not. I've heard your kind of talk before----this sounds like something out of a Divinchi Code movie.



Ohioprof, you talk as if the 12 apostles as evil, and that they are wrong and the gnostics are right.

I have never called the 12 apostle evil. Nor do I regard the Gnostic Gospels as any more the word of God than the 4 Gospels that men in power happened to include in the Bible. Neither the Gnostic Gospels nor the 4 Gospels that men in power included in the Bible are the word of God. They all provide interesting evidence about what early Christians believed, and how they differed from each other in their beliefs.

 

[RMDY]

I have never called the 12 apostle evil.

excellent I didn't say you did but that was the impression you were giving me.

Nor do I regard the Gnostic Gospels as any more the word of God than the 4 Gospels that men in power happened to include in the Bible. Neither the Gnostic Gospels nor the 4 Gospels that men in power included in the Bible are the word of God. They all provide interesting evidence about what early Christians believed, and how they differed from each other in their beliefs.

How can you include the gnostic gospels as part of the original 4 testimonies of Jesus? The gnostic testimonies were written long after the original ones were. The gnostics don't provide accurate information about Christianity.

 

[Ohioprof]

excellent I didn't say you did but that was the impression you were giving me.

How can you include the gnostic gospels as part of the original 4 testimonies of Jesus? The gnostic testimonies were written long after the original ones were. The gnostics don't provide accurate information about Christianity.

The Gnostic Gospels were not written long after the 4 that were included in the Bible. We cannot be certain exactly when any of the Gospels were written, but scholars have generally reached a consensus about when the canonical Gospels were probably written. The 4 Gospels that are included in the Bible, the canonical Gospels, were probably written around these dates:

Mark: c. 68–73CE
Matthew: c. 70–100CE
Luke: c. 80–100CE
John: c. 90–110CE

Scholars are working to try to determine when the various Gnostic Gospels were written, but they certainly existed at the time of Irenaeus, who attacked them in his writings around 180CE. Most scholars say the Gnostic Gospels go back at least to 140CE, and probably earlier. Harvard Professor Helmut Koester recently suggested that the Gospel of Thomas, although compiled around 140CE, probably includes material that dates back to 50CE, which is around the time of the writing of Mark and earlier than the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John.

Irenaeus, the Bishop of what is now Lyons, France, wrote a detailed refutation of the Gnostic writings around 180CE. That places them close in time to the 4 Gospels that were included in the canon, or Bible. It was Irenaeus who first claimed that the four Gospels that were included in the Bible were inspired by God and were the "true" Gospels, in contrast to the Gnostic Gospels, which he rejected.

The information in the Gnostic Gospels is no less accurate about early Christianity than is the information in the 4 canonical Gospels. Each of the various Gospels presents a different perspective on early Christian thinking and on the life of Jesus.

 

[Uphill Battle]

The Gnostic Gospels were not written long after the 4 that were included in the Bible. We cannot be certain exactly when any of the Gospels were written, but scholars have generally reached a consensus about when the canonical Gospels were probably written. The 4 Gospels that are included in the Bible, the canonical Gospels, were probably written around these dates:

Mark: c. 68–73CE
Matthew: c. 70–100CE
Luke: c. 80–100CE
John: c. 90–110CE

Scholars are working to try to determine when the various Gnostic Gospels were written, but they certainly existed at the time of Irenaeus, who attacked them in his writings around 180CE. Most scholars say the Gnostic Gospels go back at least to 140CE, and probably earlier. Harvard Professor Helmut Koester recently suggested that the Gospel of Thomas, although compiled around 140CE, probably includes material that dates back to 50CE, which is around the time of the writing of Mark and earlier than the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John.

Irenaeus, the Bishop of what is now Lyons, France, wrote a detailed refutation of the Gnostic writings around 180CE. That places them close in time to the 4 Gospels that were included in the canon, or Bible. It was Irenaeus, the Bishop of what is now Lyons, France, who first claimed that the four Gospels that were included in the Bible were inspired by God and were the "true" Gospels, in contrast to the Gnostic Gospels, which he rejected.

and then, does any of the reasoning of Iraneus mean anything to you?

 

[Ohioprof]

and then, does any of the reasoning of Iraneus mean anything to you?

No. He had a particular agenda, and he sought to spread his views and to drive out the views of those who differed from him. He largely succeeded. However, the Gnostic writings were not destroyed, and we are fortunate to have them today.

 

[Uphill Battle]

No. He had a particular agenda, and he sought to spread his views and to drive out the views of those who differed from him. He largely succeeded. However, the Gnostic writings were not destroyed, and we are fortunate to have them today.

interesting thought.

 

[Ohioprof]

interesting thought.

My argument is not that the Gnostic Gospels are the word of God or the "truth," any more than the canonical Gospels are the word of God or the "truth." I don't believe any of these writings are the word of God or the "truth." I think they all represent the writings of different followers of Jesus in their search for the truth, and each of the Gospels presents a different set of beliefs about Jesus.

 

[Uphill Battle]

My argument is not that the Gnostic Gospels are the word of God or the "truth," any more than the canonical Gospels are the word of God or the "truth." I don't believe any of these writings are the word of God or the "truth." I think they all represent the writings of different followers of Jesus in their search for the truth, and each of the Gospels presents a different set of beliefs about Jesus.

and yet you ignore the writings of Iraneus. Tell me, how can you ascertain that the writers of the Gnostic Gospels did not likewise have an agenda? You are playing pick and choose.

 

[Ohioprof]

and yet you ignore the writings of Iraneus. Tell me, how can you ascertain that the writers of the Gnostic Gospels did not likewise have an agenda? You are playing pick and choose.

The writers of the Gnostic Gospels also had an agenda. But they were the losers in the struggle to define Christianity. Irenaeus and those who agreed with him won the battle to define what Christian orthodoxy would become.

As I said, I do not subscribe to the various beliefs of the Gnostics particularly, nor do I subscribe to most of the beliefs of Irenaeus.

 

[BigBadWlf]

Hello People. First of all i am straight.

I had a discussion with my girlfriend a couple of days back, regarding homosexuals. We both go to a baptist church, however i woulnd't say i prescribe to all the doctorines. Further more the church is calvanistic, to which my girlfriend subscribes to.

Anyway, i found the challenge to be an excellent thing, however after reading through all the pages, i haven't found a single person who actually addressed the challenge. It was basicly a back and force debate between, Ohioprof and a couple of anti-homosexuals posters who argued whether homosexuality is right on not. That wasn't the original intent of the post.

Anyway my girlfriend and i were debating whether homosexuality is a choice a person makes. I was saying it's not a choice, people are primarily born gay, with society and culture only having a slight influence.
She was saying it is a choice, and told me that God would be a liar, if He made people homosexuals and then condemned their action.

I told her, doesn't calvanism teaches that people are predestined to go to hell, what difference would it make if God also predestined homosexuuals to something He condemns. to which she said, who are you to question God. Which ironicly can be asked in return by me, who are you to question God if He creates people with homosexual desires.

Anyway she got upset at me, saying things like 'are we going to teach that homosexuality is good to our future kids?' etc.

I told her that we should teach children, tolerence , and to love all people, instead of concentrating on condeming people on what God consideres a sin. I said, i am not the one to judge homosexuals for their acts, since two consenting homosexual adults, and what they do in private is their business. If God is against it, let Him judge not us.

The conversation ended there basicly, however i would really like to show her and others who are imo misunderstood that homosuxality is not a fad, or a choice etc. The desires are as natural as the attractions heterosexual couples experience for the opposite sex.
It can be argued that when homoxesual people act on their desires they make a choice to follow through, however like i said, i am not the one to judge.

So i would like to meet an ex homosexual person who thinks that their desires were a choice.

Very nice post. And thank you for trying to return this thread to its topic.

I will sincerely doubt that you will find an “ex homosexual person who thinks that their desires were a choice” if for no other reason we can’t actually seem to find ANY ex-homosexuals despite the claims of ex-gay ministries that there are hundreds of thousands.

 

[Uphill Battle]

Very nice post. And thank you for trying to return this thread to its topic.

I will sincerely doubt that you will find an “ex homosexual person who thinks that their desires were a choice” if for no other reason we can’t actually seem to find ANY ex-homosexuals despite the claims of ex-gay ministries that there are hundreds of thousands.

Good morning.

I see you are back online. Would you answer my question now please?