Purveyor of Confusion

[cvanwey]

If such a claimed God exists, seems as though, it is asserted God has the ability to communicate with humans: via the Word, in prayer, other. However:

1. Is God providing conflicting messages to differing humans?

Furthermore:

2. Does the Bible itself appear to give conflicting messages, or is the Bible in perfect unison and harmony? What is written in the pages of the Bible seems to also conflict in areas. Namely, salvation. Ask two Christians, from differing sects, what God deems as necessary for salvation, and the answers will likely conflict. Would it be safe to say humans can blame God for not clearling providing His Words?

3. Thus, how do Christians decide which verses to adhere to, and which to ignore or re-translate? How do Christians decide which verses are not meant to be taken as literal; even if they appear axiomatic in their written intent, which might seem to conflict with opposing verse? Again, namely, the method for salvation.

Thank you in advance

 

[com7fy8]

If such a claimed God exists, seems as though, it is asserted God has the ability to communicate with humans: via the Word, in prayer, other.

There is deeper-than-words communication.

While we submit to God, we are personally ruled in His peace. How He guides us and has us seeing things in this peace is His personal communication in each of us >

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15)

Now any problem with His communication is not God, but the trouble is if we are not being quiet and listening and submissive to discover what He does with us while He shares with us.

Also, His communication includes how His love has us seeing things > the light of His love can show us what no amount of words can tell . . . like to how sunlight can tell you more about a harbor than any human could tell you with words while you do not actually see the harbor.

So, what matters is having light so we see what God's words mean. He can have us experience what He means. Explanation can be enjoyable, but how He has us living in His love is the meaning.

 

[thomas_t]

is the Bible in perfect unison and harmony?

perfect unison and harmony (that's my take). No conflicting messages.
In my opinion, God provided his words clearly.
There are differences in opinion, though. If people make it clear when they interpret by saying "in my opinion", "as I interpret it...", "it seems to me", then there is no problem between Christians having different takes on stances.
Sometimes (professing) Christians get aggressive while debating. It's a shame indeed.
But thanks to God, there is always truth that can be found in the Bible, in my opinion.

Thomas

 

[com7fy8]

1. Is God providing conflicting messages to differing humans?

no

And, like I offer, His main communication is deeper than words. Plus, His word is doing what He means >

"'So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth;
. It shall not return to Me void,
. But it shall accomplish what I please,
. And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.'"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Isaiah 55:11)

From this, I see that God guarantees how His word will do what He Himself means by His word. It is like how Jesus spoke to the stormy sea, and all became so calm. His spoken word does what He produces for results.

So, we can trust God to have His word do all He means in us and our lives. And do not be fooled by how humans are making it look as though it is impossible to get God's word straight > He is doing better than what some number of humans are trying to make it look like our choices are!!

Where there are arguers, all sides could be wrong . . . or incomplete . . . and/or misguiding our attention to side-show issues in what isn't even God's circus, to say the least. The world indeed has plenty of stuff designed to keep our attention away from God and how He does His word with us.

 

[SPF]

1. Is God providing conflicting messages to differing humans?

No.

2. Does the Bible itself appear to give conflicting messages, or is the Bible in perfect unison and harmony?

I think there are some passages that on the surface may appear to give a conflicting message. That's why a Biblical education is important if a person is going to engage in theology. But the Bible is in harmony.

Would it be safe to say humans can blame God for not clearling providing His Words?

No.

3. Thus, how do Christians decide which verses to adhere to, and which to ignore or re-translate?

No passages should be ignored, though all passages need to be interpreted.

How do Christians decide which verses are not meant to be taken as literal

I suppose there are different methods. For me, I assume that the default position is to take Scripture as literal. Then, in looking at the context, we can usually tell whether or not it should not be taken literally. Also, Christians like to say that Scripture interprets Scripture, so we'll rely on other passages that might be more clear to provide insight as to whether or not a question passage should be literal or figurative.

 

[cvanwey]

perfect unison and harmony (that's my take). No conflicting messages.
In my opinion, God provided his words clearly.
There are differences in opinion, though. If people make it clear when they interpret by saying "in my opinion", "as I interpret it...", "it seems to me", then there is no problem between Christians having different takes on stances.
Sometimes (professing) Christians get aggressive while debating. It's a shame indeed.
But thanks to God, there is always truth that can be found in the Bible, in my opinion.

Thomas

Okay, you claim it is. I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

 

[cvanwey]

No.

Okay, you claim it is. I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

I think there are some passages that on the surface may appear to give a conflicting message. That's why a Biblical education is important if a person is going to engage in theology. But the Bible is in harmony.

What institution provides the best Biblical education? And furthermore, what are they teaching, in regards to the tenets to salvation? Is it the Catholics, other, other, other?

No.

Why not?

No passages should be ignored, though all passages need to be interpreted.

Are [you] equipped to correctly interpret all verses, which, on the surface, appear not to align with your own moral assessment?

I suppose there are different methods. For me, I assume that the default position is to take Scripture as literal. Then, in looking at the context, we can usually tell whether or not it should not be taken literally. Also, Christians like to say that Scripture interprets Scripture, so we'll rely on other passages that might be more clear to provide insight as to whether or not a question passage should be literal or figurative.

Okay. Let's start with an axiomatic one, it seems. The Bible makes a flood claim. Is this literal or figurative? And how do you support your conclusion, if not literal? Again, in line with the fact that we first take all verse as literal, until proven otherwise; according to you.

 

[thomas_t]

Okay, you claim it is. I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

We have Romans 10:10.
Greets, Thomas

 

[cvanwey]

We have Romans 10:10.
Greets, Thomas

Yes, the Bible does make such claims. You must confess with your mouth. You must believe He is your savior. You must, even further still, repent as a sinner.

But is this verse, granting even further latitude above, enough?

What about all the humans God deems as 'rich'? And by 'rich', please remember Jesus was a homeless preacher. Thus, I would imagine someone whom owns electronic devices, a car, rent/owns property, has any retirement savings at all, has money in the bank; heck, even a refrigerator stocked with food, might surely be considered 'rich' to Jesus.

Thus, I add, if you profess to be a follower of Jesus. And by follower, I would dare to say a disciple, do [you] adhere to Luke 14:33 as well? If not, why not?

 

[cvanwey]

And do not be fooled by how humans are making it look as though it is impossible to get God's word straight

I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

 

[thomas_t]

Thus, I add, if you profess to be a follower of Jesus. And by follower, I would dare to say a disciple, do [you] adhere to Luke 14:33 as well? If not, why not?

Look, I have many weaknesses. But earthly possessions certainly are not. I do use a refrigerator, my landlady gave me one, but often there is no food in it (but God nourishes me every day). I have a bike, but it might me broken tomorrow. Some clothing, but I don't put my heart in it.
So, at the moment at least, I don't have problems with this one.
My problems is rather dating partners apparently turning away from me because they don't believe me that I will be able to provide for a family... I think God will help me here.

With regard to your question concerning salvation: in my opinion, Romans 10:10 is enough for salvation. Luke 14:33 is going one step further. To be saved is not the same as to be a follower of Jesus, which is more.

Thomas

 

[com7fy8]

I then ask you... What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

All of God's word is related to all we need in order to be saved.

One basic is that Jesus is the way to God.

"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me," Jesus says in John 14:6.

From this, I see, Jesus is our "truth". Truth, then, is not only instructions and words and correct ideas. So, I understand, now, that my way to salvation is not only a matter of things I believe, but how God had us trust in Jesus > Ephesians 1:12 says we "first trusted in Christ".

I would offer > God's grace in us changed us so we came to trust Jesus . . . first for forgiveness of sins and reconciliation with God, through Jesus dying for us on Calvary's cross. Within us, God's grace through faith brought us to trust in Jesus for salvation.

And in trusting Jesus grace has brought us on to submit to Jesus so we are obeying Him personally in us > as Jesus says >

"'Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:28-30)

We personally trusted in and submitted to Christ so now we can continue to trust and submit to Jesus > we took His "yoke", which I understand is His love effecting our character so we can be gentle and humble to submit to His personal leading and guiding in all our ways >

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13)

And Hebrews 12:4-14 is clear how there is correction included in this process > how our Father Himself personally corrects every child of God > Hebrews 12:4-14 > His correction changes us so we share with God in His own holiness, "without which no one will see the Lord."

We have His instructions, yes, but God is the One who in us succeeds in doing all His word with us > by means of "faith working through love" > please consider Galatians 5:6. And my understanding is the working of faith is the grace of God in us succeeding.

 

[SPF]

What is God's objective set of instruction(s) for salvation?

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”

Acts 16:30-31 “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Acts 4:12 “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."

Why not?

Because God is clear enough on what matters and what is important and what it means to be a follower of Christ and live a holy life. It's us fallen people that muddy the waters by going beyond what God has revealed and trying to systematize everything.

Are [you] equipped to correctly interpret all verses, which, on the surface, appear not to align with your own moral assessment?

I'm probably more equipped than most. But I certainly rely on commentaries and other scholars as needed.

The Bible makes a flood claim. Is this literal or figurative? And how do you support your conclusion, if not literal? Again, in line with the fact that we first take all verse as literal, until proven otherwise; according to you.

Well, it is either literal or figurative. If it is literal, it is either global or local. If it is figurative, then well, it's figurative. Frankly though, it doesn't matter to me which it is as it doesn't impact my daily life or my relationship with Christ.

 

[cvanwey]

With regard to your question concerning salvation: in my opinion, Romans 10:10 is enough for salvation. Luke 14:33 is going one step further. To be saved is not the same as to be a follower of Jesus, which is more.

Thomas

So for you, belief and faith is enough. You do not need to be a follower? Is this your final answer?

 

[cvanwey]

And in trusting Jesus grace has brought us on to submit to Jesus so we are obeying Him personally in us > as Jesus says >

We personally trusted in and submitted to Christ so now we can continue to trust and submit to Jesus >

For sake in brevity, I condensed your response; and highlighted key points in red. If I'm to understand your answer correctly, it sounds like, to reach salvation, I need to:

- Trust - "assured reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone or something"
- Submit - "to yield to governance or authority." "to subject to a condition, treatment, or operation"
- Obey - "to follow the commands or guidance of"

Does the above sound reasonable?

 

[cvanwey]

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”

Acts 16:30-31 “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Acts 4:12 “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”

Romans 10:9-10 "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved."

According to your interpretation, it is grace, belief, repentance, and faith; but not works? Is this your final answer?

Because God is clear enough on what matters and what is important and what it means to be a follower of Christ and live a holy life. It's us fallen people that muddy the waters by going beyond what God has revealed and trying to systematize everything.

If someone else where to state the very same thing as you above, but, arrive at an opposing conclusion; such as... "works are required", why have they muddied the waters, or why are they confused themselves?

I'm probably more equipped than most. But I certainly rely on commentaries and other scholars as needed.

This ties directly to a question you may have overlooked, from my prior post to you, via #7:

What institution provides the best Biblical education? And furthermore, what are they teaching, in regards to the tenets to salvation? Is it the Catholics, other, other, other?

*****************

Furthermore, are you sure your own moral intuitions agree with all correctly interpreted passages from the Bible? Care to test this?

Well, it is either literal or figurative. If it is literal, it is either global or local. If it is figurative, then well, it's figurative. Frankly though, it doesn't matter to me which it is as it doesn't impact my daily life or my relationship with Christ.

Not so fast If you deem yourself well equipped, and use appropriate sources, then the question becomes quite simple, it seems...

Was the claim in Genesis, regarding a flood literal or figurative? Depending on how you answer, we may or may not need to address the 'local vs. global' assertion there-after.

 

[thomas_t]

So for you, belief and faith is enough. You do not need to be a follower? Is this your final answer?

yes

 

[cvanwey]

yes

How do you know God does not deem you as rich? Again, from the perspective of Jesus, maybe you are considered rich.

 

[SPF]

According to your interpretation, it is grace, belief, repentance, and faith; but not works? Is this your final answer?

I believe one of the unique aspects of Christianity in comparison to all other religions is that works do not result in Salvation.

Now, what's interesting about that is that for people who think that works are required for Salvation, I'm fine with that. Because whether John believes works are required, or John doesn't believe works are required, the way John actually lives, shouldn't change if he's a follower of Christ.

I think when you look across at the three branches of Christianity, you find the core to be unified. The core being that Christ is God, Christ was born of virgin. Christ lived a sinless life. Christ died on the cross. Christ rose from the dead. Christ ascended into heaven. Christ will at some point in the future, in some way, return to earth. There is unity in that among all three branches of Christianity. And that's what matters.

John may believe that he has to have works accompany his relationship with Christ to get to Heaven, while Jason believes that his works are simply a result of his relationship with Christ - they're both doing good works, and they both have a relationship with Christ.

If someone else where to state the very same thing as you above, but, arrive at an opposing conclusion; such as... "works are required", why have they muddied the waters, or why are they confused themselves?

I think my above answer addresses this. But as you probably want more, I would say they "muddied the water" in the sense that they added something that isn't necessary.

Furthermore, are you sure your own moral intuitions agree with all correctly interpreted passages from the Bible? Care to test this?

Sure, as long as you stick to the NT. I would rather not go off on rabbit trails explaining why you don't understand the OT. So, stick to the NT on this line of reasoning and I'll play your game.

Was the claim in Genesis, regarding a flood literal or figurative? Depending on how you answer, we may or may not need to address the 'local vs. global' assertion there-after.

I don't know whether it was literal or figurative. I haven't put that much effort into studying it. Sorry~

 

[SPF]

How do you know God does not deem you as rich? Again, from the perspective of Jesus, maybe you are considered rich.

I suspect God is able to look at a person from the perspective of that person and make that determination.