Luke 16: A response to an article.

[Senecharnix]

I wouldn't be so sure about that, my friend.

We have a slew of Prophets that would say different.


Exodus 24:7

King James Version (KJV)


7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient.



Deuteronomy 28:58-59

King James Version (KJV)


58 If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, The Lord Thy God;

59 Then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.




Joshua 1:8

King James Version (KJV)


8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.



Daniel 9:2

King James Version (KJV)


2 In the first year of his reign I Daniel understoodby books the number of the years, whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.



Malachi 3:16

King James Version (KJV)


16 Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon his name.



The fear here concerns the commandments of God, as recorded...in scripture.


You can look through here for further examples.


Continued...

I not only commend you for you presentation but also for your fiery spirit. There is not as much disagreement between us as you seem to suppose. Yet the differences that do exist are vast….

Yes, ignorance is bad. Those who are interested in the truth should research the history of the early Church, the history of so-called Christianity’s development, the history of the Bible, the histories of the various peoples mentioned in the Bible, etc—and do so using diverse sources. Then they should engage their minds, using logical and intuitive thinking, while refraining from indulging in wishful thinking that leads them to believe in fairytale scenarios....

A university in Israel, which is very conservative, conducted a study on the Old Testament. The purpose was to evaluate the integrity of such. Its professors and students studied all sorts of examples of scripture and related literature dating as far back as they could go. Their conclusion: The Old Testament is far from being pristine. Other institutions, both religious and nonreligious, have conducted all sorts of studies on the Bible. They have found it riddled with errors, contradictions, and signs of corruption. I am not going to indulge in a huge debate about this. You have made your view obvious. Now, I am stating mine. One needs to go no farther than the very first page of the Bible to find evidence that it is factually challenged to some great degree. The story of creation as stated in Genesis is a myth borrowed from Summerian and Babylonian myths. The same is true of the flood story. There was no global flood. The Universe and Earth as they are now were not created in less than a week. The Earth is billions of years old an the Universe is many bilions of years older...Even so, I believe the Bible contains an eormous amount of truth. But I know that a lot of what it says is religious propanganda, if not outright nonsense. Some of the cases that you have cited amount to built-in circular arguments. Oh, we cannot argue with what Paul asserts because he was inspired. Since he was inspired, we cannot argue with what he asserts. Very convenient. Never mind that what we have in regard to his epistles are forgeries in some cases. In all cases, the originals were conveniently lost long ago. Thus, we are left with copies of copies of copies. They were under the care of Catholic theologians that I do not trust even a little bit. Their job was to make it seem that the only hope of the faithful is to trust the Church—a paganism-riddled religious mafia. Conveniently enough, they have the epistles of Paul and others asserting the very things that they used to enslave the faithful to their purposes. Oh, you cannot trust yourself and your relationship with God. You have to trust this book and us whom God has appointed to preside as your shepherds. See, it says so right here in this book. It claims the Apostle John wrote the fourth gospel even though he died many years before it was written. It claims Daniel wrote Daniel. Yet even to a halfway astute student of the scriptures can easily determine that two different authors wrote it. Isaiah? It was supposed to have been written by the Prophet Isaiah. Yet three different authors wrote it. Moses is supposed to have written the first five books in the Bible. Not very likely. Never mind that he describes his own death in one of them….

The Bible is far from perfect for the same reason why the Church managed to remain perfect for maybe a few years before she began wandering astray. Satan began exerting his influence on her development soon after she was born and became more and more influential in her development as she aged. Of course, God also influenced her development. But He does not force people to adhere to His opinion and wishes. People developed the Church and people wrote, edited, translated, and transcribed the Bible’s various books and epistles. Some were inspired by God to one or another significant degree. Others were inspired by the Devil to one or another degree. What we have ended up with in the Bible and the reality of Christianity are the products of their interactions….

The bottom line for me is what God, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and decades of observations, research, study, and contemplation have led me to believe and know. Now, you might well think I am merely bragging through what I shall say next. But such is only a prologue for I shall say afterward….

Unless you are a journalist or have been a very adventurous person blessed or cursed to find yourself in all sorts of situations outside what most folks consider normal, I seriously doubt that you have become acquainted with nearly as many different types of folks as I have. I also seriously doubt that you have enjoyed or suffered through nearly as many different types of experiences as I have. The sum of my experiences and acquaintances is that God gave a very thorough education to me, concernong people and life. Nonetheless, I have met and spent time with folks from the very heights of society down to its dregs, including big-name celebrities, superwealthy folks, politicians, international criminals, gangsters, outlaws, run-of-the-mill criminals, assasins, famous murderers, devil worshippers, scientists, etc. Of all the many people that I have known, the most screwed up are the folks are those that just love the Bible, study it regularly, and go to church often. There have been some exceptions--but not many....

You say we do not have the right to judge others. Sure, God never gave me permission to condemn anyone on my own accord. But He has given me the duty to assess, evaluate, and quantify individuals, groups, and nations. Doing so is part of the job that He gave to me...I do not need to look very hard to determine that the vast majority of folks who claim to be Christians are phonies. The evidence is everywhere one looks and can be readily discened if one is committed to honoring truth and shunning deception and nonsense. All of that is beside the fact that the Holy Ones have imparted revelations and insights to me suggesting just what I have asserted. They are extremely unamused by the reality of so-called Christianity and most of its adherents. Sure, there are a few children of God in most churches. But they are outnumbered greatly by children of the Devil posing as Christians. If that were not true, America would not be a harlot committed to transforming everyone but the wealthy into idol-worhipping debt-slaves. She would also not be playing god and bullying other nations. Her peoples would not be eager to continue raping, pillaging, plundering, engineering, and paving our world to death for the sake of pride, vanity, greed, materialism, hedonism, expedience, and convenience. Nearly everywhere that so-called Christianity prevails, the people tend to be self-righteous, materialistic, bigoted, and more or less hostilly ambivalent toward the welfare of nature and our fellow creatures. In other words, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. God is way beyond disgusted with the vast majority of folks who claim they are Christians. Bible-thumpers are not an exception to that but rather among the main irritants that disgust Him….

It all boils down to what I was trying to convey way back when this little debate began. God dwells in the hearts of the true children of God. With Him (and the help of the Holy Spirit--the true Word of God), they have all that they need. It is as simple as that. Indeed, He is a god of the heart—not of a book no matter how wonderful it is….

 

[Senecharnix]

Which simply means there were more Christians who could receive the gospel from the original witnesses and pass on their first-hand information to the next generation.

That establishes a very credible transmission of apostolic teaching.

Everything in the NT, except for Revelation, was written within 30 years of Jesus' death.

And with a promise from Jesus that he would enable them to recall and understand all things correctly (Jn 14:26, 16:13-15; Lk 24:48-49), there is no basis for all this attempted discreditation and revisionist history regarding the NT, just to justify rejecting its authority in favor of your own.

Paul's letters were circulated throughout the churches.
It matters not that believers didn't have them in their hands, when they heard them in their assemblies.

Irrelevant when they were hearing it read in their assemblies.

Belief in the word of God as God-breathed and its authority is a cult now?

Sounds like the Garden: "Hath God said?"
And so it continues. . .

That adds up to nearly a two-millennia Dark Ages.
That's a lot of conjecture and revisionist history.

Why would it be weird when believers had access to Scripture from the teaching they received in their assemblies, the same way young children are taught the Scriptures at home.

The only thing weird is your truncation of NT history.


So the word of God, breathed out from the very breath of God is simply literature that has been deified. . .

The God-breathed writings of the Bible are as close to the mind of God as you can get on this earth.
It's sad that you don't appreciate that.

Perhaps (?) you are unaware of the only way anyone knows that the Bible is the truth of God.

The powerful witness of the Holy Spirit bearing testimony to the spirit of the believer gives certainty that the Bible is the word of God, breathed out from the very mouth of God.

You won't get any closer to the mind of God than that on this earth.

Since Satan masqeurades as an angel of light, filling with agreeable knowledge, light and spiritual expereince, how do you know what spirit is influencing you, when the word of God is the only rule God has given for measuring the spirits?

This question still remains unanswered by you, and all the fancy footwork trying to establish illiteracy, and a necessary consequence of total ignorance regarding the word of God, is pure conjecture and revisionist history to avoid answering the question.

And where do you find the word "relationship" in Scripture?

"Hath God said?" (Ge 3:1)

In the faith,
Clare

You are are far too smart, enligtened, knowedgeble, insightful, open-minded, and reasonable for the likes of me to continue wasting time, effort, and energy contending with. So, I will leave you to your monumental superiorty. But I am confused by how someone so God-breathed and learned as you are consistently fails to get any assertions right....

Shalom....

 

[timewerx]

The deceiving spirits are more powerful to the masses at the moment for they can deceive a much greater number of people, than the Holy Spirit can make disciples.

Early in my life, at the age of 13, the Holy Spirit has established in me a most rudimentary way to test beliefs and to test people. True Christians from false Christians, you get the idea...

...If the belief is popular, if many people are following it, if it's easy, pleasure-causing, it's probably evil!

Note it is not limited to religion but established traditions, secular behaviors, and any structured systems in the human society.

It is compliant with the Gospels - "only few will find the gate that leads to life". And I have not read the bible yet during the time the Holy Spirit began teaching me many things.

By the time I first read the Gospels in the bible, I already knew most of the teachings of Jesus.

I don't know why some Christians couldn't believe that the Spirit alone (with no mention of scriptures, nor a human teacher) can teach you practically the whole Gospels and more while the bible itself mentioned that it is entirely possible. Quite ironic, isn't it?

 

[P1LGR1M]

Well, He doesn't trouble my sleep. I have the comforter, which is the spirit of truth. Not the made up one, but the real one

I don't worry about demons or dragons or wondering when bronze age prophesies are going to come true, or any other nonsense. Create flies or not, my God is bigger.

Now, I do agree with you on one thing, so take comfort in knowing that it must be true if I agree...... God works through people. God is the guy saying "No, I am not going to hide these atrocities". God is the guy (or gal, just sayin) who is looking for the best in everyone, out there taking care of business everyday, makes sure the litter goes in the bucket, the blanket goes to the cold, and food goes to the hungry.


This is the creed that I follow. You might agree or disagree with it, but I won't care, because it is true in every way important:



I could ask Sophia to haunt your dreams, but it wouldn't do anymore good than your veiled premise of power. She is an elusive dame, and doesn't visit the bed of just anyone.

Just a few observations, Soulgazer:

Why would you claim the Comforter? Would you not have to cede a biblical doctrine in order to do so? In your description of the Comforter it sounds similar to the understanding as set forth in scripture.

As far as God supplying needs, we do not see this in the world. You make a fantastical claim which atheists use as proof there is no God. People go hungry. People freeze to death, starve to death, suffer great catastrophe, both natural and man-made. Wars are fought, and "innocents" die. And while I agree there is much charity work going on through people that have a desire to help the less fortunate, there is much in this cursed world that is terrible.

And, I did not ask the Lord to "haunt your dreams." What I was referring to, my friend, is that the Spirit of God can and will convict you concerning His word. And I believe that He does this for all. It will be reliant on your exposure to His word, which you run from, and His moving you toward a perspective which is quite different from the education you have provided for yourself.

God bless.

 

[dollarsbill]

Where do you find that in Scripture?

Good question.

3 John 1:2 (NASB)
2 Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.

 

[dollarsbill]

Too bad no one here seems to believe the teachings of Yeshua when he clearly tells us that the man is in charge of his house; like a porter who watches the door, or like a treasure in an earthen vessel.

Not sure how you mean that. In charge?

 

[dollarsbill]

Wealth becomes bad if you use it to buy but not limited to nice house, nice car, hobbies, etc.

Buying a new car or house is sin?

 

[P1LGR1M]

I not only commend you for you presentation but also for your fiery spirit. There is not as much disagreement between us as you seem to suppose. Yet the differences that do exist are vast….

Yes, ignorance is bad. Those who are interested in the truth should research the history of the early Church, the history of so-called Christianity’s development, the history of the Bible, the histories of the various peoples mentioned in the Bible, etc—and do so using diverse sources. Then they should engage their minds, using logical and intuitive thinking, while refraining from indulging in wishful thinking that leads them to believe in fairytale scenarios....

Hello Senecharnix, I was going to respond in more of a paragraph, lol, but, as I read through it trying to break it up, I am compelled to break it down, rather, lol.

Sorry, it is just natural to want to address it in more detail, so bear with me.

In this statement you imiply that those that embrace a more literal view of scripture and see it as the preserved word of God can benefit...from secular teaching. Which is contrary to a very simple precept which threads it's way consistently through scripture, from beginning to end: separation from the world and the world system.

In your testimony as, I guess, a journalist (and no, I don't look at is as bragging, but rather part of the basis for your belief), you express experience with a number of different groups and peoples, which I would agree, helps to give insight into people and helps us to understand human nature, and in fact helps us to have a compassion for others.

But, let me suggest something to you which you may or may not agree with: as a journalist I am sure you are familiar with Stockholm Syndrome. If you are, I could stop there and give you room to consider this in light of the context of this conversation.

But I will comment briefly so that those not aware (should others read this) will understand this basic point: even in everyday life, people have a tendency to overlook the sins of others. Our relationship to a person, if it is close, will likely influence the amount of sin we are willing to overlook. If one sins against us who is not a close aquaintance, we are more likely to readily condemn that person for their sin (and I use the term sin because it is descriptive of every kind of evil, from the least to the greatest) and demand justice. But if we are closely associated with that person, we might be more inclined to justify their sin, giving excuse for that person because...we love them.

In our relationship with the world, and the world system, Senecharnix, we are at risk of that same thing. I think that across America there millions that have condoned evil such as the murder of the closest thing the world has to innocence, that is the unborn child, because they have reasoned away the sheer wickedness of such practice.

Why? Because this is a minor issue...compared to others.

Going back to your statement, you state that you suggest that people go to "diverse sources" to learn truth. For me, my friend, that is like saying to a child "You need to put your hand in the fire to learn about the effects of fire on flesh." I will rather warn people that, while we can look at the history of the Church and consider past events, we have to keep in mind that because a person or a group says "I am Christian," does not mean they are. When talking to atheists who use the Catholic Church (and their actions), as you do, as a display of evidence that scripture and "christians" are evil (and yes they say that), it comes down to a more thorough examination of the data, which, if followed through (and no-one ever does, they get mad and say things like, "I will no longer waste my time talking to someone so blinded," or some such comment), will result in measuring the teaching of scripture to the actions of those who supposedly represented Christ and the teachings of scripture.

The first problems we are going to run across is the interpretation of the doctrine. "Certain Catholics did this. They claim they did it in the name of God. Therefore, they did what God taught and it is evil."

Do you see the syllogistic manner by which God, scripture, and Christianity as a whole is condemned?

Now the formula should rather runs like this:

Certain people did this.

They say they did it in the name of God (were commanded by God through scripture).

We have looked at the teaching of scripture and found they were contrary to what scripture actually teaches.

We will therefore recognize that all actions should first be measured against the teaching of scripture, then we can, on an individual basis...judge whether one's actions and beliefs actually represent the teachings of scripture.

If this were done, we could then analyze Church history without bias and make determinations which are more representative of the revelation God has provided to man concerning Himself.

All I ask, Senecharnix, is for you to consider whether or not you have actually been taken hostage by the world system, and have succumbed to Stockholm Syndrome. Do you reject the world system in your life? Do you understand that we are strangers and pilgrims in this world, and do not belong to it...if we are God's children?

It is a certainty that we have to be in it, and we will be tempted by it, but knowing this, we can set the course for disassociation, and instead of coming to a place where by reasoning we begin to overlook the sin which is the world system, and begin to justify both it and the evil that is perpetrated by it, we remain vigilant to call good good, and evil...evil.

Okay, I will try to keep the rest of this response more brief. But I cannot make any promises, lol.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

A university in Israel, which is very conservative, conducted a study on the Old Testament. The purpose was to evaluate the integrity of such. Its professors and students studied all sorts of examples of scripture and related literature dating as far back as they could go. Their conclusion: The Old Testament is far from being pristine. Other institutions, both religious and nonreligious, have conducted all sorts of studies on the Bible. They have found it riddled with errors, contradictions, and signs of corruption.

Imagine that, lol.

I am always amazed when people offer up secular institutions as legitimate resources of truth. The natural man can no more understand the spiritual things of God than moths can understand fire.

How many Christian scholars have you read, Senecharnix? It is funny that there is a majority conclusion among Christian Scholars that 99.99% of scripture has been recovered, and that in all manuscript evidence there is 0% of major doctrine that is in question, yet, those that are clearly hostile to God are given as a reference and resource.

We could say that this is again circular argument, and of course Christian Scholars are going to say that, but, this does not take into account that within the sphere of Christian scholarship we still see debate about the interpretation, showing that at least they are honest about their conclusions on that plane being different. But the data is agreed upon.

Now we look at history itself: do we suppose that somehow burning people to death is commanded by scripture? Please show me that one. Do we suppose that God intended for people to simply follow religious rulers? Or do we know that God intended His word to improve the lives of men? Did God intend for His word to be kept from people, or did He intend that all men both hear and understand His word? Did He intend that there be a religious elite that would control people, or did He intend for all people to recognize that He is KING, and mankind is, on a level playing field, equally separate from Himself?

So we do not rely on men to tell us, Senecharnix, and that goes for both sides (the world and Christianity), but we rely on God to instruct us according to that which He has revealed. And when the conclusion is reached that God has not revealed to man that which He wants man to know of Him, that is where man steps into error. Rejection of scripture is simply an excuse most men give that they can live as they please. They establish their superiority, and it is always a religious effort, regardless of whether man accepts the internal witness of God or not.

I am not going to indulge in a huge debate about this. You have made your view obvious. Now, I am stating mine.

Fair enough.

Usually, "debate" for me consists of interpretive efforts. I view this more in the vein of discussion, as there is really little that can be analyzed other than our opinions. "Ibeleieve this, you believe that," lol.

And just as your experience in the field, Senecharnix, even so I look at this as experience into the heart of another, which is the supreme mission field. Until I get to know you, I will not be able to understand you. When I talk to athiests, it is vital to understand their background, because their experience will have helped to shape them into the person they are. Sometimes, when that experience is examined, we can then break through the established belief system and get to the heart of things. For example, there are many who hate God because their parents were "christians" yet they were horrible people. It is ironic when the actual "christian beliefs" of their parents are examined and shown to be in error...guess who they defend?

Their parents...and their parents' doctrine.

Because if their parents are shown to be in error in their doctrine, it strips away the basis for their hatred of God. Understand?

One needs to go no farther than the very first page of the Bible to find evidence that it is factually challenged to some great degree.

One need not go farther than the very first verse, actually, to determine if anything that follows is reasonable. If one believes that God created the heabvens and the earth, one will not question things that would be, in comparison, rather simple for God. Such as creating the heavens and the earth in six days; a global flood; parting the sea, et cetera.

The story of creation as stated in Genesis is a myth borrowed from Summerian and Babylonian myths.

All knowledge concerning God goes back to Adam's relationship with God, where there was sound knowledge.

As man, in his fallen condition, multiplied and spread across the earth, he began to, because of his fallen nature, corrupt sound knowledge and to walk according to his own nature, and to do that which is right in his own eyes.

We see this even at the very beginning in Cain. There was obvoiusly a prescribed sacrifice offered, he rejected that and did it...his way. This led to further sin, and his rebellious nature led him to murder.

So it is natural (no pun intended) that man would have a multitude of gods, because they, like Cain, did not preserve the knowledge they had, and refused to pass that knowledge down to their children.

Secular scholarship looks at the evidence of history and interprets it as the Hebrew scriptures borrowing from others, when it is obvious that there was a general knowledge that was corrupt through sin, but general knowledge that had aspects of similarity because there was a shared base of information. That is why so many cultures have a flood "mythology."

The same is true of the flood story. There was no global flood.

Because scientists reject the notion, right?

And of course their knowledge and motives are beyond reproach.

The Universe and Earth as they are now were not created in less than a week. The Earth is billions of years old an the Universe is many bilions of years older...

As I have said before, while I find these conversations interesting, they usually consist of link-pong. You have a basis which consists primarily of atheistic researchers and thier conclusions, whereas I am willing to take it on faith that God gave a better account of ancient events.

You claim a belief in God yet you appeal to those that reject God. Very curious. But if we look at the scripture, and recognize God's power, we have little trouble seeing how man might corrupt truth.

That is, after all, the very basis for your entire argument against scripture.

Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

Even so, I believe the Bible contains an eormous amount of truth. But I know that a lot of what it says is religious propanganda, if not outright nonsense.

And I would say that just like current events, the facts are turned into propaganda, and if we examine the facts we will see how it is the interpretation of events that is in error...not the events.

Some of the cases that you have cited amount to built-in circular arguments. Oh, we cannot argue with what Paul asserts because he was inspired. Since he was inspired, we cannot argue with what he asserts. Very convenient.

It is a matter of faith: that God has revealed to man His will and that He has preserved what He revealed in Holy Scripture.

If one does not have faith that the same word by which he came to faith through is worthy of acceptation, then one has nothing to bse that faith on.

If Paul's teaching concerning salvation is accepted, then Paul's teaching concerning the behavior of the Christian should be accepted as well. If Paul's teaching contradicts what God has previously said, then we might have cause to question whether he wrote under inspiration, or his teachings are spurious.

Never mind that what we have in regard to his epistles are forgeries in some cases.

Funny, but I have never heard of a Christian Scholar coming to this conclusion.

In all cases, the originals were conveniently lost long ago.

And Scholars are in major agreement that 99.99% has been reclaimed.

Thus, we are left with copies of copies of copies.

No different than with the Hebrew scriptures.

Yet there is no belief that they were not copied meticulously and that they have by and large there is no reason to think they have been corrupted and most importantly...the manuscript discrepancies do not affect the teaching within.

It is like translational differences...one can read most of them and still come to the same conclusions as to what is being taught.

They were under the care of Catholic theologians that I do not trust even a little bit.

I use to be very anti-Catholic, until I started to meet them and discuss their personal beliefs. Just as you set forth your experience among people as a basis for your understanding, so do I. Ihave come to realize that there is no set "right group" or "wrong group" (among believers, that is) but we have a landscape of believers that are at different stages of growth as they seek to learn about God through both study and the inworking of the Holy Spirit. Do not confuse that to mean I do not also recognize that there is sound doctrine and erroneous doctrine...I do. And there is much in Catholic doctrine that I find in error, and there is much in Catholic practice that I also see to be in error. But, I can see that even in the fellowship I attend, which I attend because I believe their doctrine is closer to sound doctrine than other groups. But htat does not mean, just like with Catholics, that all of the people there understand the doctrine this faith teaches. I have said many times, there are people in certain groups that do not know enough about the doctrine their professed faith teaches to either be damned or saved.

It works both ways.

So what do we do? We examine scripture and compare the doctrine and practice of both the groups and the people within those groups and see how it conforms to the doctrine of God.

I might be able to say, "I am opposed to Catholic doctrine and consider it a religion with many faults, even though it has tenets which I am in agreement with," but I will not say "Every Catholic is in error and doomed to Hell," lol.

I have talked with Catholics that have a better testimony than some that have a better doctrine, in that, they have resembled Christ in their behavior closer than some who though I would agree with their doctrine, I would rebuke for their...behavior.

Their job was to make it seem that the only hope of the faithful is to trust the Church—a paganism-riddled religious mafia.

And I think there is much we could condemn in the history of the Catholic Church. But then, there is much we could condemn in Christendom whether it is historical or modern. It disgusts me that the world can take those that claim to be Christian and claim to teach the Doctrines of God and use them to illustrate that Christianity is ridiculous. Charismatics are a ready resource for the world to mock and ridicule and blaspheme God. The failures of the men that people place thier trust in, rather than God, also displayed to illustrate hypocrisy and bad practice among so-called Christians.

Conveniently enough, they have the epistles of Paul and others asserting the very things that they used to enslave the faithful to their purposes.

Okay...lets look at their doctrine.

It is easily enough examined in light of what scripture teaches.

That is where the work is done, Senecharnix.

Oh, you cannot trust yourself and your relationship with God. You have to trust this book and us whom God has appointed to preside as your shepherds.

And it is when the implication that men have to trust...men, comes into the picture that we see a departure from faith unto religion.

There is no question that God has established leadership in the body. He established leadership in the first institution He created, which is the family. So to condemn leadership as a whole is as in error to condemn all who belong to a particular group.

Even in the world system we see leadership which for the most part, is necessary. It is good to have police officers, for instance.

While as believers we are called to give honor to those that minister the word, we do not replace the authority of God and His word with service to those who have charge of us. We are to measure the teachings and direction of the established leadership according to the doctrines of God, and when we find discrepancy between what they teach and what God has taught us, we are to remove ourselves from their influence.

But we do not disregard that scripture teaches there is to be leadership. Else, we would have exactly what we see here on this forum: every man teaching his truth, rather than teaching the truth of God.


Continued...

 

[Soulgazer]

Just a few observations, Soulgazer:

Why would you claim the Comforter? Would you not have to cede a biblical doctrine in order to do so? In your description of the Comforter it sounds similar to the understanding as set forth in scripture.

Which came first, the comforter or scripture? Scripture can be altered, the comforter cannot.

As far as God supplying needs, we do not see this in the world. You make a fantastical claim which atheists use as proof there is no God. People go hungry. People freeze to death, starve to death, suffer great catastrophe, both natural and man-made. Wars are fought, and "innocents" die. And while I agree there is much charity work going on through people that have a desire to help the less fortunate, there is much in this cursed world that is terrible.

It is our job to fulfil those needs, to bring the peace, to aid those that are victims. If it is not getting done, are we going to blame the boss or ourselves?

And, I did not ask the Lord to "haunt your dreams." What I was referring to, my friend, is that the Spirit of God can and will convict you concerning His word. And I believe that He does this for all. It will be reliant on your exposure to His word, which you run from, and His moving you toward a perspective which is quite different from the education you have provided for yourself.

God bless.

And I am doing the best that I can to get you to put done the mythology and actually listen to His word. God is not dead my friend. He didn't suddenly stop talking because some priests two thousand years ago decided that He had nothing more worth hearing.

 

[P1LGR1M]

See, it says so right here in this book. It claims the Apostle John wrote the fourth gospel even though he died many years before it was written.

It is not just the internal claims but the tradition passed down in the church as to who penned what.

It is also the claims of certain people as to the date of the books.

I personally believe that all of the books were written before the close of the first century. Can I prove that? No. Do I need to? No. It makes little difference. I was not there, nor were those that claim different dates. Usually, the dating of a book can be seen to tie directly to the person's theological position: it was written at this time because what I believe would be in error if it was not.

But for me, the doctrine I hold to is not affected by the date of the writing.

It claims Daniel wrote Daniel. Yet even to a halfway astute student of the scriptures can easily determine that two different authors wrote it. Isaiah? It was supposed to have been written by the Prophet Isaiah. Yet three different authors wrote it. Moses is supposed to have written the first five books in the Bible. Not very likely. Never mind that he describes his own death in one of them….

Think about it Senecharnix: if men wanted to try to make something authentic, wouldn't the interjection of Aramaic actually be opposed to that? Consider the racist attitude of Israel, who considered themselves above all nations. That is just one instance that I think gives credence to the belief that while man may have had his finger in the pie, it is God that brought about the end result.

We see many instances where other than the writer named in the book is used in the actual writing. I see no reason to make that a reason why scripture is not a valid source of truth, or that ultimately God was the Author.

The Bible is far from perfect for the same reason why the Church managed to remain perfect for maybe a few years before she began wandering astray.

Why would you think the Church was perfect...at any time?

When scripture is clear that perfection is in truth, in this body, impossible...due to the fact we remain in unredeemed flesh, which is subject to temptation.

This is the error of many: they feel that there was a "true church" which was lost, yet, they have rediscovered it.

THis is nothing less than the very thing we just talked about: it is intent of those that say "I have the real thing" to be empowered through "better knowledge."

This is why the Bible student has a distinct advantage over people that tend to be religious rulers rather than a spiritual people under the direction of God...because they are skeptical of man because they know that man is fallible.

Satan began exerting his influence on her development soon after she was born and became more and more influential in her development as she aged.

Just not true.

Jesus Christ builds His Church, Satan builds his. Let's not confuse the two, and imply that Christ is not able to accomplish that which He said He would do.

Throughout the history of Christendom, that visible organization that is mutli-faceted, there has been the Body of Christ, the Church. Where secular historians make thier fatal mistake is by not being able to discern and distinguish between the two.

And my friend, if you do not do the same, you will make the same mistake.

Of course, God also influenced her development.

No...God did not "influence" the building of the Church, He orchestrated it and managed those He drew.

It is true Satan mounts his attack on the Body of Christ and there are times when true believers fall into sin, but there is no reasonable basis to believe that the Lord somehow lost control of His Church.

But He does not force people to adhere to His opinion and wishes.

True in part, Senecharnix, but He does influence His people through a number of ways.

What would be better to point out is that He does not give man liberty to proclaim their own truth. There is the truth, and then there is man's opinion of truth.

And sometimes, God forces a man to learn the truth in ways he does not enjoy. And one truth that man needs to learn here in this body is that there are consequences for rejecting the Spirit of Grace and that those consequences are everlasting.

People developed the Church and people wrote, edited, translated, and transcribed the Bible’s various books and epistles.

It is true we see man's fingerprint, and there are passages that have to be examined in light of manuscript evidence, but again, we can look at the teaching within and come to conclusions we can be sure carry the will of God for man.

Consider just the issue of translating truth from one language to another. Within that exercise there is much room for confusion, yet, by God's grace we can receive the truth which might be represented in different cultural concepts, metaphor, et cetera and examine the truth itself and come to the same conclusions.

Some were inspired by God to one or another significant degree. Others were inspired by the Devil to one or another degree. What we have ended up with in the Bible and the reality of Christianity are the products of their interactions….

While I would say that there are interpretations inspired by Satan, even Satan is beholden to corrupt that which God has given man. Satan did not help create scripture, contrary to what some might want to think.

This is again, just an excuse for men to pick and choose what aspects of the commandments of God...they will adhere to.

And that is the height of convenience.


Continued...

 

[dollarsbill]

Which came first, the comforter or scripture?

Where did you hear about the Comforter? The NT maybe?

 

[Clare73]

So how did you know who the someone was that died for us?

I've lost recollection.

Thanks, timewerx,

From what you say below, it appears you learned it from the Bible.

So it seems to me we do need more than the Holy Spirit to give us knowledge of God in Jesus Christ.

We need God's word written to inform our faith.

The only way I can recognize him is by his teachings, ideas, concepts. He matched perfectly the character of Jesus in the Gospels only.

It's right there in your bible. The sheep recognize Jesus by his voice... In essence, in what he's teaching. It is not mentioned, they recognize him by his name.

how do you know what spirit is influencing you?
What objective rule do you have for measuring them?

Lying spirits can pass a test question.
A much more thorough rule is needed for an accurate measure of spirits.

Quite easy, I test every word, every sentence, the whole message in fact, from start to finish.

What is the objective measure that you use?

Honestly, I had mistakes early on. I did not have the proper criteria to test the spirits. All it took was my never-ending desire to know the truth, until now that God created powerful circumstances in my life to teach me, in discernment and understanding.

Most of these things God taught me are in the Gospels. You can use the Gospels as a criteria but I wouldn't count on it to solely depend on, since the Holy Spirit teaches more but still compatible with the Gospels.

So you accept from the Bible what agrees with what you have been shown.

But you do not accept what you see as disagreeing with what you have been shown.

However, the whole NT is in agreement with the rest of Scripture.
It is lack of understanding that causes us to think it is not.

There is much that Jesus could not reveal before his death, regarding his sacrifice of propitiation
which completely remits the sin of those who believe in him (Jn 3:18, 36), thereby reconciling them to God
through faith in Jesus (Jn 3:16, 36a) and in his work on the cross (Ro 3:25),
because there was yet no basis of his sacrifice on which to reveal it.

By not accepting all of the NT which completes God's revelation, you are open to deception in vital matters to salvation, where the rest of the NT is the rule God gave us to measure the spirits regarding these vital matters.

I'm wondering if you are using some other system of spirituality as the basis for measuring the truth of the NT epistles.
I'm wondering if you are simply adding Jesus to that system, in a way that conforms to that system.

In the faith,
Clare

 

[Clare73]

Which simply means there were more Christians who could receive the gospel from the original witnesses and pass on their first-hand information to the next generation.

That establishes a very credible transmission of apostolic teaching.

Everything in the NT, except for Revelation, was written within about 30 years of Jesus' death.

And with a promise from Jesus that he would enable them to recall and understand all things correctly (Jn 14:26, 16:13-15; Lk 24:48-49),
there is no basis for all this attempted discreditation and revisionist history regarding the NT, just to justify rejecting its authority in favor of your own.

Paul's letters were circulated throughout the churches.
It matters not that believers didn't have them in their hands, when they heard them in their assemblies.

Irrelevant when they were hearing it read in their assemblies.

Belief in the word of God as God-breathed and its authority is a cult now?

Sounds like the Garden: "Hath God said?"
And so it continues. . .

That adds up to nearly a two-millennia Dark Ages.
That's a lot of conjecture and revisionist history.

Why would it be weird when believers had access to Scripture from the teaching they received in their assemblies, the same way young children are taught the Scriptures at home.

The only thing weird is your truncation of NT history.

So the word of God, breathed out from the very breath of God is simply literature that has been deified. . .

The God-breathed writings of the Bible are as close to the mind of God as you can get on this earth.
It's sad that you don't appreciate that.

Perhaps (?) you are unaware of the only way anyone knows that the Bible is the truth of God.

The powerful witness of the Holy Spirit bearing testimony to the spirit of the believer gives certainty that the Bible is the word of God, breathed out from the very mouth of God.

You won't get any closer to the mind of God than that on this earth.

Since Satan masqeurades as an angel of light, filling with agreeable knowledge, light and spiritual experience, how do you know what spirit is influencing you, when the word of God is the only rule God has given for measuring the spirits?

This question still remains unanswered by you, and all the fancy footwork trying to establish illiteracy, with a necessary consequence of total ignorance regarding the word of God, is pure conjecture and revisionist history to avoid answering the question.

And where do you find the word "relationship" in Scripture?

"Hath God said?" (Ge 3:1)

You are are far too smart, enligtened, knowedgeble, insightful, open-minded, and reasonable for the likes of me to continue wasting time, effort, and energy contending with. So, I will leave you to your monumental superiorty. But I am confused by how someone so God-breathed and learned as you are consistently fails to get any assertions right....

Shalom....

Good choice.

In the faith,
Clare

 

[P1LGR1M]

The bottom line for me is what God, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and decades of observations, research, study, and contemplation have led me to believe and know.

And this you are responsible for...before God.

I just wonder how much of research and study involves the very scriptures you rail against. How much of it was rather reading the conclusions of others and then opting for the one that agreed with your spirit.

There is a difference between examining conclusions and actual research and study.

Now, you might well think I am merely bragging through what I shall say next. But such is only a prologue for I shall say afterward….

Again, I recognize the need for observation of people, it is a good way to learn human nature. Unfortunately we will be forced to see patterns that can be found in all men.

And it will lead us back to one great truth taught in scripture, which is man is a fallen creature, and that evil is..natural for him.

Unless you are a journalist or have been a very adventurous person blessed or cursed to find yourself in all sorts of situations outside what most folks consider normal, I seriously doubt that you have become acquainted with nearly as many different types of folks as I have.

It is easy for us to say, "My experience is better than yours, so you should listen to what I have to say."

However, the Holy Spirit does not, I believe, lead man to glorify himself, but will always accomplish glorifying God, and revealing man's limitations.

Just as the Catholics you rail against glorified themselves, their knowledge, and their authority, keep in mind that it is easy for all men to do the same thing. We have the mistaken notion through delusions of grandeur that we are somebody people should listen to, lol

That is all of us, my friend.

I also seriously doubt that you have enjoyed or suffered through nearly as many different types of experiences as I have.

Who knows? I usually do not offer my experience as validation of the doctrines found in scripture. So I usually do not get into experience comparison.

Those who base their beliefs on experience, whether it is experience alone or just a healthy dose of it, usually fail to hold good practice and doctrine. And when their understanding of scriptural doctrine is examined, this is more readily apparent.

The sum of my experiences and acquaintances is that God gave a very thorough education to me, concernong people and life. Nonetheless, I have met and spent time with folks from the very heights of society down to its dregs, including big-name celebrities, superwealthy folks, politicians, international criminals, gangsters, outlaws, run-of-the-mill criminals, assasins, famous murderers, devil worshippers, scientists, etc.

I think it was this that made me think of Stockholm Syndrome. Yet I would suggest to you that in view is your opinion based upon experience with these people. We could spend time with radical muslim terrorists who plan to strap on a bomb and kill many people and come to a certian understanding of their actions, but the bottom line would be...they would still be committing an evil act.

Of all the many people that I have known, the most screwed up are the folks are those that just love the Bible, study it regularly, and go to church often. There have been some exceptions--but not many....

Well, I do not think you take into consideration the maturity level or the knowledge level of the individual. A mature believer that understands God's word based upon sound hermeneutics usually cannot be condemned. Of course, maturity also applies to their practice, so we understand that knowledge itself does not equate to maturity.

You say we do not have the right to judge others.

On a salvific level, no, we do not.

We can inspect fruit and make our determination, and it is natural that we will inevitably judge, but we should be careful that we do not either presume to make a final decision or that we fail to exercise diligence to combat erroneous doctrine and practice.

Sure, God never gave me permission to condemn anyone on my own accord.

Glad to hear that.

But He has given me the duty to assess, evaluate, and quantify individuals, groups, and nations. Doing so is part of the job that He gave to me...I do not need to look very hard to determine that the vast majority of folks who claim to be Christians are phonies.

In other words, God put you in a place to determine right and wrong in the affairs that take place in the world system, illustrated by the people you list above.

Sorry, Senecharnix, but if you say that God has led you to comend the world and condemn His Church...we do not serve the same God and you definitely have had revelation that seriously contradicts the teaching of scripture.

Of course, we have to further distinguish those that claim Christianity yet are part of the world system themselves, but all in all, I cannot look at this and see it anything but worldly perspective.

When we look at the Lord's interaction amonmg men, it is true that He ministered amoing the common man, but at no time did He commend sin, but condemned it. We also must condemn sin rather than commend it.

That you feel you have been placed in a position to sit in Christ's place as judge of the Church...apart from His word, should give you pause for consideration.

The evidence is everywhere one looks and can be readily discened if one is committed to honoring truth and shunning deception and nonsense.

This is true. But what is the basis for our discernment? The conclusions of historicists? Scientists?

Do we not examine the doctrine of those that say they belong to Christ and by that discern good from evil?

All of that is beside the fact that the Holy Ones have imparted revelations and insights to me suggesting just what I have asserted.

What "holy ones" do you refer to? Angels?

I am afraid that angels have been known to be influential in men's lives, and not for their good.

They are extremely unamused by the reality of so-called Christianity and most of its adherents.

Fortunately for me, I worry little about the concerns of Angels, whether Holy or fallen.

It is what concerns God that I try to focus on.


Continued...

 

[P1LGR1M]

Sure, there are a few children of God in most churches. But they are outnumbered greatly by children of the Devil posing as Christians.

I think that depends upon the fellowship, actually. And the fellowship is, whether they understand it or not, greatly influenced by those that minister the word of God to them. If there is a godly minister, it will effect sound doctrine and practice among the fellowship. If it is ungodly administration, that too will be in evidence.

Each congregation has to be examined, starting with the doctrine held to the practice of the members. When doctrine is sound, it is usually evident in the lives of the fellowship.

But what is favorable in the lives of nominal Christians is that hopefully, the word of God will be effected in their lives through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He is the one that changes hearts and lives, all we can do is change minds. And the changing of the mind is a human effort, whereas the changing of the heart is the work of God.

If that were not true, America would not be a harlot committed to transforming everyone but the wealthy into idol-worhipping debt-slaves.

Well, you can thank many on your list above for the decline of America.

I view the result of this election to signal God's withdrawal of mercy to this nation. That may sound like a gloom and doom belief, but America has steadily spit in God's face and glamorized sin. Television and movies are one of Satan's greatest tools.

She would also not be playing god and bullying other nations.

Just wait, because already she is in the process of fnalizing her selfishness in withdrawing from any work that does not benefit her. I did not see it, but I heard that there were people saying that we should have nothing to do with Israel. I expect that to gain greater popularity, and this will be one way in which the stage for true war will be set.

The American spirit has long had within it a facet of protector of the weak, and we have helped the world more than we have hurt it.

We are the first ones to deliver aid in catastrophe, but, I think that even this is changing in the new America. There are many that hate America now, but I believe that this hatred is not far from being truly justified.

Her peoples would not be eager to continue raping, pillaging, plundering, engineering, and paving our world to death for the sake of pride, vanity, greed, materialism, hedonism, expedience, and convenience.

Do you live in a house, Senecharnix? Do you drive a car on paved roads? Go to El Slavador and see if you would like to live there.

I am not impressed with speech like this, because behind it is, I feel, a bit of hypocrisy. Stop dirving on paved roads...boycott them, and protest them. Stop shopping in grocery stores...grow your own food organicly.

Stop using the internet...

Nearly everywhere that so-called Christianity prevails, the people tend to be self-righteous, materialistic, bigoted, and more or less hostilly ambivalent toward the welfare of nature and our fellow creatures.

So you equate the evil in America (and elsewhere) to...Christianity?

Funny, but the America I see today has a growing attitude of hostility towards Christianity. By your condemnation of America...things are really starting to look up!

Right?

Those poor democrats at the DNC...having God forced upon them even though they voted Him down...tsk, tsk, tsk.

In other words, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. God is way beyond disgusted with the vast majority of folks who claim they are Christians. Bible-thumpers are not an exception to that but rather among the main irritants that disgust Him….

And "pudding" is a good term to bring up when we look at the mush that is people feed on today.

America will make her bed, and what is unfortunate is that there will be those that will also have to lie in it.

But, bible thumpers will continue to do that which they are instructed of God to do, whatever the capacity they are called to that in.

It all boils down to what I was trying to convey way back when this little debate began.

I seem to remember that you would not waste your time. I am glad you have changed your mind, Senecharnix, really. Just because we do not agree does not mean we cannot talk about our beliefs.

It might have been forgotten but the OP was "Why do some people not believe there is a Hell." One side offers up what amounts to secular scholarship to dismiss the record of scripture, the other simply offers up scripture.

That is why scripture must be attacked: discredit the source...discredit the belief.

Right?

It is funny that if a man taught something using concepts to illustrate them, they will be embraced. But if the Lord teaches judgment using concepts of continual miserable existance...they are reasoned away.

Well, not funny, but sad.

God dwells in the hearts of the true children of God. With Him (and the help of the Holy Spirit--the true Word of God), they have all that they need. It is as simple as that. Indeed, He is a god of the heart—not of a book no matter how wonderful it is….

And you see, I view God as the same God in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I can talk of Him as being One. I do not see the Spirit as a force God uses, but God. I do not see the Word as some spiritual force of instruction, but God. He does come to make His abode with those He saves, and we can thank scripture for that knoweldge, and see it in the lives of men, starting first with our own. If one does not begin to recognize sin in their lives and come under conviction of that sin and yield to God's leading them to put away that sin, then salvation could very well be questionable, and thrown into that category you speak of.

Discerning good and evil is a far cry from commending evil, and condemning good. I doubt you will see that your judgment concerning...

folks from the very heights of society down to its dregs, including big-name celebrities, superwealthy folks, politicians, international criminals, gangsters, outlaws, run-of-the-mill criminals, assasins, famous murderers, devil worshippers, scientists, etc.

...lacks a recognition of evil but instead displays a willingness to glorify the world because it helps to villify those that claim to adhere to revelation from God. It lacks an understanding that those that come into relationship with God, while positionally have been saved, in practice are faced with remaining in unredeemed flesh and in need of growth just as much as the newborn infant.

You can find compassion for these people yet not recognize some basic facts concerning the People of God, and where they fit in in this world.

Which is, in fact...nowhere. God does not lead men to conform to the world nor make excuses for them. Sin is sin, and it is sin we primarily battle. If we can get to the point where our sin hinders us less than it once did, and can be used of God in leading other men away from the world system and to God, we will do well.

Okay, long response, I know, but I do appreciate your honesty and candor, Senecharnix. Look forward to speaking with you further.

God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Which came first, the comforter or scripture? Scripture can be altered, the comforter cannot. It is our job to fulfil those needs, to bring the peace, to aid those that are victims. If it is not getting done, are we going to blame the boss or ourselves?
And I am doing the best that I can to get you to put done the mythology and actually listen to His word. God is not dead my friend. He didn't suddenly stop talking because some priests two thousand years ago decided that He had nothing more worth hearing.

I know you think that this makes sense, my friend, but the truth is, there is a point in time where the Comforter is said to come. According to scripture that is the Day of Pentecost.

We also see parakletos used in 1 John where Christ is said to be our advocate.

So to answer your question...

Which came first, the comforter or scripture?

...we can say that the Hebrew scripture preceded the ministry of the Holy Spirit in which He is called the Comforter, and that the New Testament scriptures followed that blessed event.

But what we cannot escape is your adherence to a concept taken from the very scriptures you rail against, once again, I am sorry to say, showing the hypocrisy of your position.

And it is the Comforter that illuminates the word of God in the hearts of men, that they understand the doctrines presented in the word of God, and not be left to themselves to pursue religious efforts. He not only gives understanding, but the ability to conform to that knowledge.

As far as trying to present a case that God is still giving new revelation to man, well, that is your call. I would only suggest that you try to compare that "new revelation" with what God has already said, and see how it lines up in a balancing of the whole counsel of God. All new revelation offered by men can be scientifically examined in light of scripture, and if the scholar is honest, the discrepancies should be fairly apparent.

Call me old fashioned, but I try to live my life according to what God has said, not trusting what He might have said.

God bless.

 

[Senecharnix]

Hello Senecharnix, I was going to respond in more of a paragraph, lol, but, as I read through it trying to break it up, I am compelled to break it down, rather, lol.

Sorry, it is just natural to want to address it in more detail, so bear with me.

In this statement you imiply that those that embrace a more literal view of scripture and see it as the preserved word of God can benefit...from secular teaching. Which is contrary to a very simple precept which threads it's way consistently through scripture, from beginning to end: separation from the world and the world system.

In your testimony as, I guess, a journalist (and no, I don't look at is as bragging, but rather part of the basis for your belief), you express experience with a number of different groups and peoples, which I would agree, helps to give insight into people and helps us to understand human nature, and in fact helps us to have a compassion for others.

But, let me suggest something to you which you may or may not agree with: as a journalist I am sure you are familiar with Stockholm Syndrome. If you are, I could stop there and give you room to consider this in light of the context of this conversation.

But I will comment briefly so that those not aware (should others read this) will understand this basic point: even in everyday life, people have a tendency to overlook the sins of others. Our relationship to a person, if it is close, will likely influence the amount of sin we are willing to overlook. If one sins against us who is not a close aquaintance, we are more likely to readily condemn that person for their sin (and I use the term sin because it is descriptive of every kind of evil, from the least to the greatest) and demand justice. But if we are closely associated with that person, we might be more inclined to justify their sin, giving excuse for that person because...we love them.

In our relationship with the world, and the world system, Senecharnix, we are at risk of that same thing. I think that across America there millions that have condoned evil such as the murder of the closest thing the world has to innocence, that is the unborn child, because they have reasoned away the sheer wickedness of such practice.

Why? Because this is a minor issue...compared to others.

Going back to your statement, you state that you suggest that people go to "diverse sources" to learn truth. For me, my friend, that is like saying to a child "You need to put your hand in the fire to learn about the effects of fire on flesh." I will rather warn people that, while we can look at the history of the Church and consider past events, we have to keep in mind that because a person or a group says "I am Christian," does not mean they are. When talking to atheists who use the Catholic Church (and their actions), as you do, as a display of evidence that scripture and "christians" are evil (and yes they say that), it comes down to a more thorough examination of the data, which, if followed through (and no-one ever does, they get mad and say things like, "I will no longer waste my time talking to someone so blinded," or some such comment), will result in measuring the teaching of scripture to the actions of those who supposedly represented Christ and the teachings of scripture.

The first problems we are going to run across is the interpretation of the doctrine. "Certain Catholics did this. They claim they did it in the name of God. Therefore, they did what God taught and it is evil."

Do you see the syllogistic manner by which God, scripture, and Christianity as a whole is condemned?

Now the formula should rather runs like this:

Certain people did this.

They say they did it in the name of God (were commanded by God through scripture).

We have looked at the teaching of scripture and found they were contrary to what scripture actually teaches.

We will therefore recognize that all actions should first be measured against the teaching of scripture, then we can, on an individual basis...judge whether one's actions and beliefs actually represent the teachings of scripture.

If this were done, we could then analyze Church history without bias and make determinations which are more representative of the revelation God has provided to man concerning Himself.

All I ask, Senecharnix, is for you to consider whether or not you have actually been taken hostage by the world system, and have succumbed to Stockholm Syndrome. Do you reject the world system in your life? Do you understand that we are strangers and pilgrims in this world, and do not belong to it...if we are God's children?

It is a certainty that we have to be in it, and we will be tempted by it, but knowing this, we can set the course for disassociation, and instead of coming to a place where by reasoning we begin to overlook the sin which is the world system, and begin to justify both it and the evil that is perpetrated by it, we remain vigilant to call good good, and evil...evil.

Okay, I will try to keep the rest of this response more brief. But I cannot make any promises, lol.


Continued...

Truth is truth. It has many sources. If God has blessed one with a discerning spirit, one can readily discern truth in diverse places and find it in assorted ways. It is extremely cynical to imply that all scientists and scholars are stupid liars who bend the facts to make Christianity look bad or to make the Bible look as if it plays very loosely with the truth. It is also erroneous to assert such implications….

The Catholic Church is not nearly the only problem with the reality of so-called Christianity, friend. The problems with such extend through every church. Evidence of how corrupt most so-called Christians are is obvious. I only pointed out a few examples of how it can be discerned. If I had time, I could write a book on the subject. But I have covered the basics elsewhere in this forum. I am weary of repeating myself in this matter. Others here have noticed the same evidence. The deal, my friend, is that a person must want to seek the truth in order to find it….

The bottom line is that so-called Christianity long ago sold its soul and integrated itself into the world system as one of its institutions. The biggest step in that process occurred when it began committng adultery with the Emperor Constantine. But so-called Christianity had wandered off track long before then. Nonetheless, the vast majority of so-called Christians play along with the farce that so-called Christianity has become. There is very little difference between most so-called Christians and the profane—and those differences will do nothing to help the pretend Christians avoid Hell. That leads to the question: How did so many Christians become thoroughly corrupted despite practically worshipping the Bible? The answer is simple. God does not dwell in their hearts despite how much they praise Jesus. The Holy Spirit is far from them….

 

[Senecharnix]

Imagine that, lol.

I am always amazed when people offer up secular institutions as legitimate resources of truth. The natural man can no more understand the spiritual things of God than moths can understand fire.

How many Christian scholars have you read, Senecharnix? It is funny that there is a majority conclusion among Christian Scholars that 99.99% of scripture has been recovered, and that in all manuscript evidence there is 0% of major doctrine that is in question, yet, those that are clearly hostile to God are given as a reference and resource.

We could say that this is again circular argument, and of course Christian Scholars are going to say that, but, this does not take into account that within the sphere of Christian scholarship we still see debate about the interpretation, showing that at least they are honest about their conclusions on that plane being different. But the data is agreed upon.

Now we look at history itself: do we suppose that somehow burning people to death is commanded by scripture? Please show me that one. Do we suppose that God intended for people to simply follow religious rulers? Or do we know that God intended His word to improve the lives of men? Did God intend for His word to be kept from people, or did He intend that all men both hear and understand His word? Did He intend that there be a religious elite that would control people, or did He intend for all people to recognize that He is KING, and mankind is, on a level playing field, equally separate from Himself?

So we do not rely on men to tell us, Senecharnix, and that goes for both sides (the world and Christianity), but we rely on God to instruct us according to that which He has revealed. And when the conclusion is reached that God has not revealed to man that which He wants man to know of Him, that is where man steps into error. Rejection of scripture is simply an excuse most men give that they can live as they please. They establish their superiority, and it is always a religious effort, regardless of whether man accepts the internal witness of God or not.






Fair enough.

Usually, "debate" for me consists of interpretive efforts. I view this more in the vein of discussion, as there is really little that can be analyzed other than our opinions. "Ibeleieve this, you believe that," lol.

And just as your experience in the field, Senecharnix, even so I look at this as experience into the heart of another, which is the supreme mission field. Until I get to know you, I will not be able to understand you. When I talk to athiests, it is vital to understand their background, because their experience will have helped to shape them into the person they are. Sometimes, when that experience is examined, we can then break through the established belief system and get to the heart of things. For example, there are many who hate God because their parents were "christians" yet they were horrible people. It is ironic when the actual "christian beliefs" of their parents are examined and shown to be in error...guess who they defend?

Their parents...and their parents' doctrine.

Because if their parents are shown to be in error in their doctrine, it strips away the basis for their hatred of God. Understand?







One need not go farther than the very first verse, actually, to determine if anything that follows is reasonable. If one believes that God created the heabvens and the earth, one will not question things that would be, in comparison, rather simple for God. Such as creating the heavens and the earth in six days; a global flood; parting the sea, et cetera.







All knowledge concerning God goes back to Adam's relationship with God, where there was sound knowledge.

As man, in his fallen condition, multiplied and spread across the earth, he began to, because of his fallen nature, corrupt sound knowledge and to walk according to his own nature, and to do that which is right in his own eyes.

We see this even at the very beginning in Cain. There was obvoiusly a prescribed sacrifice offered, he rejected that and did it...his way. This led to further sin, and his rebellious nature led him to murder.

So it is natural (no pun intended) that man would have a multitude of gods, because they, like Cain, did not preserve the knowledge they had, and refused to pass that knowledge down to their children.

Secular scholarship looks at the evidence of history and interprets it as the Hebrew scriptures borrowing from others, when it is obvious that there was a general knowledge that was corrupt through sin, but general knowledge that had aspects of similarity because there was a shared base of information. That is why so many cultures have a flood "mythology."







Because scientists reject the notion, right?

And of course their knowledge and motives are beyond reproach.







As I have said before, while I find these conversations interesting, they usually consist of link-pong. You have a basis which consists primarily of atheistic researchers and thier conclusions, whereas I am willing to take it on faith that God gave a better account of ancient events.

You claim a belief in God yet you appeal to those that reject God. Very curious. But if we look at the scripture, and recognize God's power, we have little trouble seeing how man might corrupt truth.

That is, after all, the very basis for your entire argument against scripture.

Continued...

So, you would like to get to know me, huh? I would like to get to know you. What is your story? I went to your page and found only questions….

Alright, here is a truncated bio of yours truly…God played has played a central role in my life from long before it began. I am one of those lucky few whose memory extends back to his earliest days in this life. One thing that I do not remember—because it never happened—is disbelief in God. In other words, I have been His child since way back when. From my earliest days, I received revelatory dreams and visions of the past and future. At first, such amazed me on the one hand and frightened me on the other. I was one of those little troublemakers who said astounding things from a very early age. It was not uncommon for me to have little chats with God. My relationship with Him evolved to the next step on February 4, 1962. The preacher was expounding on the latter half of the Apocalypse of Saint John the Divine aka Revelation when I received my first great vision. I beheld America being destroyed. It was as if I were sitting on the foredeck of a ship cruising into New York harbor at night just as missiles began to rain down on the city, consuming it in a conflagration of explosions and fire. I knew then that America was destined to be destroyed and that Russia and China would kill her. But I also perceived that the destruction would not come any time soon and that it would occur after America became friends with Russia and China. I told some adult about what had been revealed to me. As usual, they thought, This kid needs treatment. Oh well….

God and the other Holy Ones set things up to provide a fantastic education to me. I ended up receiving my basic education in the school system consistently rated as the second best in the nation. I loved to read books related to history and science. I also studied all things biblical. My interests also included sociology, anthropology, and psychology. As other kids flirted, gossiped, and played games, I studied people. Meanwhile, I received visions, revelatory dreams, and insights from God now and then. Later, my education advanced to the stage that God allowed me to flirt and dance with evil and darkness. That is, I found the bad boys and girls to be the most interesting people of all. And so, I began hanging around them whenever I was not being a lone lion roaming my jungle of big thoughts, dreams, and adventure. It was also a real jungle—of a semi-tropical nature. I had great fun in the woods and swamps with my animal friends. I even encountered wild jaguars. None ever threatened me, not even the very large male jaguar that I once came face-to-face with. I have a way with animals that even allowed me to becme the playmate of a wild deer….

Thanks to my fascination with bad boys and girls, I began a continuous adventure during the waning days of my school career that lasted for a couple of decades. During such, I met all of those interesting people that I mentioned, which also includes real life black ops (intelligence and counterintelligence) agents. It also includes my participation in two grand conspiracies involving governments, which conspiracy theorists still speculate about and which I cannot say more about than what I have already mentioned. My education also includes helping black ops agents nail some of my acquaintances, though I did not wish to do so. It also includes me being threatened with death on more than one occasion, getting shot at, almost getting summarily exectuted, and almost getting lynched. Meanwhile, everyone who knew me kept bugging me to become an artist. I never really liked doing the art thing. But I gave it a half-hearted try. As I did so, I worked on the two careers that I knew I had been designed to pursue—that of a writer and what I like to think of as an agent for God. Eventually, a cousin of mine hired me to work as a draftsman/illustrator. My career as such began in 1977 and ended in 1984. During that time, I worked for scientists. Among other things, my job required me to create the types of charts and grafts that you find in science books. You may have even seen some of those that I created. As I did so, I saw for myself evidence of the Earth’s age and the fact that no global flood ever occurred and certainly one did not occur five thousand years ago. Some of those scientists are believers—Christians, Jews, Moslems. But they were honest enough with themselves to admit that they could (and had) disproven any possibility of the global flood recounted in Genesis. By the way, I have a collection of fossils dating back hundreds of millions of years. Such includes imprints of Cambrian lifeforms that died in mud that has since turned into very hard rock. My collection formerly included a mastodon tooth assessed as being one of the youngest ever discovered. [The beast that it belonged to perished during early historic times.] So, my knowledge of the distant past is a hands-on matter….

In February of 1985, my relationship with God began evolving to the next step. I began receiving revelations and insights via a flood of visions, and revelatory dreams. They enlightened me about all sorts of matters. Mostly, though, they reinforced the revelations that blessed me through my first great vision. I began getting serious about writing career during the aftermath and ended up pulling the plug on my art career….

Fast forward to the waning weeks of 1999—I entered yet another period of accelerating mysitical activity that reached its first crest on September 10, 2001. Yes, I received information from God that terrorists were going to attack America. That bit of news started coming to me in visions and revelatory dreams months before 911. God also made it very clear that He was sending the troubles to America to begin the process that will lead to her destruction. But it was not my place to warn the nation about what was at hand…The next crest of the period of accelerated mystical activity arrived a few months after America foolishly invade Iraq. During that period, God inspired me to write all sorts of prophecies. From then until now, I have periodically received revelations and insights through all sorts of mystical experiences…On October 18, 2005, God formally asked me to assume the role that I had been performing informally throughout my life. So, I am writer, a mystic, a seeker of truth, and one of God’s emissaries. But I prefer thinking of myself as an agent or envoy….

The only thing of note to add to this bio is that, at a very early age, I knew that I was supposed to be separated from society in general and women in particular. But I have always been a rebel. And so, I needed to learn the hard way. That led to lots of heartache and much education about the human condition. And so, it was worth all of the trails, tribulations, woes, and nonsense that I suffered through to become who and what I am. Presentl, I live in the middle of nowhere northeast Louisiana on a vast farm, doing my duties, which include taking care of my elderly mother….