Should we force something into our belief?

[Mickiel]

I suspect that you weren't really paying attention to what I was saying.

My suspicions are proven correct. I'd recommend going back and looking at what I actually said in my post as you managed to ignore it in its entirety and zip onto some sort of axe grinding.

Well, no, that isn't what Jesus was saying. Not least of all because:

A) The idea of atonement and reconciliation with God from sin, death, etc are Christian ideas based upon the Gospel narrative itself. As such the Pharisees did not have a conception of atonement and salvation, or at least anything remotely coming close to the Christian ideas of atonement and salvation which, as noted, are intrinsically bound into the Gospel story itself.

B) The kingdom of God as taught by Jesus is not "heaven" or an otherworldly ever-after. But a fundamental reality of what it means for God to be king, for God to reign, and the parables of Jesus are often, "This is what it looks like when God is king", and according to Jesus in the Gospels that ushering in of God's reign is something not happening "somewhere over there" but right here in our midst. Jesus not only is the Preacher of that kingdom, but the embodiment of that kingdom in His own ministry of reaching out to the poor, the hungry, the marginalized of society, to sinners, tax collectors, and prostitutes.

As such to "shut someone out" of the kingdom is not about saying they are not part of an afterlife reward, but rather that through religious hypocrisy and arrogance many were being shortchanged, turning away the needy, acting as unruly gatekeepers to the things of God who has come for the poor, the needy, the sinner, and the renegade.

Jesus never talks about "Heaven" and "Hell" as modern people conceive them because such ideas, being as modern as they are, are simply not part of the ancient world view in which Jesus shared and was communicating within. And as I sought to point out before, ideas that largely have only come into the Christian tradition rather late, not having their basis in the language and teachings of the ancient Christian fathers, the Creeds, or the many Confessions put forward within Christendom (East and West) for most of these last two thousand years.

If you had bothered to engage my previous post instead of rushing right past it, you would see that this is what I'm getting at.

-CryptoLutheran

Shutting people out of the Kingdom, means simply just that, any way in which you close the door to it; and Christianity has thought of many, many ways to condemn people and shut them out from being with God. And use the bible in doing it. Amazing; use the very word of God to knock humans out of their rightful place in line.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Personalities, Persons, Individuals, however you want to call it. Scriptures have lots of teachings that God is One with Three distinct Personalities. Jesus is called God by the Father, the Father is called God by Jesus. The Holy Spirit is also God.

The technical language of Christian theology is best in the word Hypostasis (plural Hypostases). Latin theologians of antiquity translated it as Persona/Personae from which we get Person/Persons. The problem is that "Person" doesn't exactly capture what was meant by Hypostasis. A point that was controversial even in antiquity when the Greek speaking East took issue with the Latin theologians using Persona/Personae, as these terms had been used to refer to the masks worn by actors in a play. Of course such would have been regarded heretical (Modalistic Monarchianism specifically) and as such the Latin West had to define Persona/Personae in such a way as to make it agree with the Greek use of Hypostasis/Hypostases.

In Greek hypostasis referred to several different concepts. For example the sediment that settled at the bottom of a soup or in a container of fluid was the hypostasis the stuff that "settled under" or "below". In philosophy hypostasis could at times be used interchangeably with the word ousia (substance, nature, or being) and thus hypostasis could mean substance, the nature of a thing.

Out of necessity the ancient theologians of the Church made a definitive distinction between the words ousia and hypostasis. In Trinitarian thought and theology the word "ousia" refers exclusively to God's Oneness and divinity, His absolute and undivided nature as God, His Being. Whereas hypostasis referred to the basic underlying reality of the Three, that is the Father's "Father-ness" or the Son's "Son-ness". That to speak of "The Father" is not to speak of merely an abstraction, or merely a mere descriptor or role of God (such as "Creator" or "King" and so forth) but to speak of that which is, really and actually, Father because He is Father of the Son; and consequently that the Son is really and actually Son as He is Son of the Father--and so on.

Instead of persona/personae another word has also been used: subsistentia, which is more-or-less a more literal translation of the Greek hypostasis into Latin. In English it becomes subsistence; to which we would say there is one Substance (Ousia) and three Subsistences (Hypostases).

I find the use of the word "Person" and "Persons" to be arguably more difficult given the sheer number of assumptions we tend to make linguistically about the word in English.

Given the immensity of confusion surrounding the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, not only among non-Christians but even among Christians, it may be smart if we go back to maybe using the traditional language and, ensuring that we understand it, make clear what our vocabulary means. If just on the basis that there is perhaps no more confusing and bewildering doctrine in Christianity for most people than Trinitarianism.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Mickiel]

Personally I think Christianity got off track with doctrines like the Trinity during the third to 5th centuries, or the " Monastic stage." When theological education was tied to the ascetic and mystical life. During this stage, the church fathers became steeped in Platonic thought. Their heavy reliance on him and other pagan philosophers , like Aristotle, severely diluted the Christian faith. Socrates, Origen, Justin Martyr, the list goes on. When Christianity came in touch with philosophy , it has never recovered from that exposure, and it has been in the bloodstream of Christianity ever since.

The Trinity originated from that historical union. Once Christianity got painted with a pagan brush, that mixed things into a blend of assimilation that began the seduction of the Christian mind. Theology, ( a term which used to describe pagan beliefs), now took a serious left turn in Christianity

 

[ViaCrucis]

Personally I think Christianity got off track with doctrines like the Trinity during the third to 5th centuries, or the " Monastic stage." When theological education was tied to the ascetic and mystical life. During this stage, the church fathers became steeped in Platonic thought. Their heavy reliance on him and other pagan philosophers , like Aristotle, severely diluted the Christian faith. Socrates, Origen, Justin Martyr, the list goes on. When Christianity came in touch with philosophy , it has never recovered from that exposure, and it has been in the bloodstream of Christianity ever since.

The Trinity originated from that historical union. Once Christianity got painted with a pagan brush, that mixed things into a blend of assimilation that began the seduction of the Christian mind. Theology, ( a term which used to describe pagan beliefs), now took a serious left turn in Christianity

To expect Christianity, borne out of a vibrant, busy, multicultural society, to not appropriate and come into contact with all the complexities of that time is a fool's game.

We can speculate all day long what Christian history should have looked like, which is a fun game of "What I want", but it is what it is. Of relevance to me is did the Apostles preserve and proclaim the truth about the Jesus who lived and taught in Roman occupied Palestine? If yes, then did did those with whom they shared their message keep that faith, is it faithfully preserved in the earliest Christian literature--the letters of St. Paul and several decades later, the canonical Gospels? If yes, then did the early bishops and theologians of the fledgling Church hold fast to that faith? Was Ignatius of Antioch faithful to the apostolic teaching? Was Polycarp? Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian, Athanasius, Gregory Nazianzus, Hillary of Poitiers, Basil, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, etc?

I am persuaded. Others not so much.

To complain about the Christians living in a Hellenized world using Greek ideas and Greek thoughts to compliment their message seems fundamentally silly to me. And additionally seems to imagine that Christianity swallowed the entirety of Platonism in one large gulp, which if true would certainly make no sense with just how divergent Christianity has always been from much of Platonism. For one Christianity has always asserted the intrinsic goodness of the material world, and its fundamental reality, and of its ultimate redemption in the coming age at the resurrection--a quite radical difference from the Platonic worldview that the material world is fundamentally un-real and effectively only in imitation of the sublime world of ideas. And that fundamental is the soul's return from whence it came. Christianity has always maintained that the soul belongs with the body, because the body matters, because the body is going to be raised up.

From the Apostles' Creed:

"Credo in Spiritum Sanctum,
sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam,
sanctorum communionem,
remissionem peccatorum,
carnis resurrectionem,
vitam aeternam.
Amen."

"I believe in the Holy Spirit,
The holy catholic Church,
The Communion of Saints,
The remission of sins,
The resurrection of the body (lit. "flesh"),
The everlasting life.
Amen."

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Mickiel]

To expect Christianity, borne out of a vibrant, busy, multicultural society, to not appropriate and come into contact with all the complexities of that time is a fool's game.

We can speculate all day long what Christian history should have looked like, which is a fun game of "What I want", but it is what it is. Of relevance to me is did the Apostles preserve and proclaim the truth about the Jesus who lived and taught in Roman occupied Palestine? If yes, then did did those with whom they shared their message keep that faith, is it faithfully preserved in the earliest Christian literature--the letters of St. Paul and several decades later, the canonical Gospels? If yes, then did the early bishops and theologians of the fledgling Church hold fast to that faith? Was Ignatius of Antioch faithful to the apostolic teaching? Was Polycarp? Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Cyprian, Athanasius, Gregory Nazianzus, Hillary of Poitiers, Basil, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, etc?

I am persuaded. Others not so much.

I am not persuaded; Christianity soaked in things of pagan tradition that Jesus called " The traditions of men", and Jesus called that assimilation " Vain". Christianity absorbed Christmas, Easter, The Trinity, Holloween, The church building, the pastors chair, tax exempt status, stained glass windows, the steeple, the pulpit, the pew, the Sunday morning order of worship, taking the Lords supper quarterly, the contemporary sermon, hierarchical leadership, clergy attire, the choir, the boys choir, tithing ( the original church did not tithe), the usher, infant baptism, the bible college, the Sunday school and the list of things they got from paganism is a lot longer than this.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I am not persuaded; Christianity soaked in things of pagan tradition that Jesus called " The traditions of men", and Jesus called that assimilation " Vain". Christianity absorbed Christmas, Easter, The Trinity, Holloween, The church building, the pastors chair, tax exempt status, stained glass windows, the steeple, the pulpit, the pew, the Sunday morning order of worship, taking the Lords supper quarterly, the contemporary sermon, hierarchical leadership, clergy attire, the choir, the boys choir, tithing ( the original church did not tithe), the usher, infant baptism, the bible college, the Sunday school and the list of things they got from paganism is a lot longer than this.

A few points:

1) The reason why in the modern western world most churches experience a tax exempt status largely has to do with the idea of the separation of church and state. Not all churches are tax exempt, because not every nation adheres to--or at least adheres equally to--a concept of separation of church and state. The idea of a separation of church and state three hundred years ago was almost entirely non existent, or at least there certainly was no nation that put such an idea into practice. The United States of America enshrined in its Constitution by its First Amendment the freedom of religious practice by ensuring that Congress, America's legislative body, be completely unable to legislate religion. As a result the US, as the world's first modern liberal democracy, made church and state completely independent from one another. The State could not control matters of religious practice and doctrine, people from all many number of churches and religious backgrounds could practice without interference from any governmental body, or choose to not worship or practice any religion. Tax exemption for religious organizations is a hallmark of American civil liberty, churches neither pay taxes nor can receive tax money from the state, keeping a clear line of separation between the two.

That isn't paganism, that is a product of modern liberal democracy in order to make sure that Europe's religio-political problems didn't simply continue to happen this side of the Atlantic.

2) Stained glass windows? Really? Perhaps you could point out archeological finds that show that the Parthenon or other ancient Graeco-Roman sites of worship contained ornate windows of stained glass. Because the earliest use in churches comes well with the middle ages long underway.

3) The pew, steeple, pulpit, etc. Again, really? We're going to say that furniture is pagan now? That my reclining chair gets the Almighty's pants all knotted up? Really?

See your list of "pagan things" seems to be just a list of anything you can imagine. My church puts out coffee and cookies in the narthex every Sunday. Perhaps we should put coffee on the list as the devil's drink. And cookies? Lucifer biscuits I say!

Your posts, frankly, are becoming increasingly asinine.

I mean I could point out the simple fact that Christians have always gathered in buildings, originally they gathered in the homes of the more well-to-do members and we even have archeological evidence of ancient villas re-purposed as houses of worship--that means the inclusion of baptismal fonts and areas for gathered liturgical worship. I could point out that the basic form of Christian liturgy has very obvious roots with the ancient worship forums of Judaism, such as Scripture readings, chanting and hymns, that it's very easy to see how the Christian liturgy's ancient division between the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Altar largely follows Synagogue and Temple themes. We could easily discuss how church architecture has and remains different depending on where in the world you are (here's a hint, look up pictures of the ancient church of St. Mary of Zion in Ethiopia). We could look and see how the existence of clergy is evidenced in the writings of the New Testament and all early Christian writings bear evidence of the existence of bishops and presbyters. We could talk about how having an usher, someone to help find you a place to sit, is a matter of common sense practicality. Or as it comes to the taking up of offerings I could point out that in the Acts of the Apostles it says "they had all things in common" and that the Faithful have historical brought in goods--food, clothing, money, etc--in order that the Church could redistribute these to the needy which is the origin of the taking up of offering; and also how in a modern society where churches do not receive money from the government rely on the generosity of the congregation in order that utility bills get paid, that church staff who make it their full time job working for the good of the church also have families to support, needing food on the table and a roof over their head. I could talk about how the Christian feast of Pascha--what in English we call Easter--has been celebrated for just a wee bit longer than there have been Angles and Saxons who may or may not have worshiped a goddess named Eostre (Bede is our only source and he may or may not be accurate). I could point out that Christian baptism is found expressly in the very command of Christ to "make disciples of all nations ... baptizing them" and that we very much find in the early descriptions of the baptism of converts the strange thing where entire households were baptized; also pointing out that the first time we come across anyone even questioning the practice of baptizing young children and infants (Tertullian) he is compelled to acknowledge that it has practically been always done and done everywhere and his entire argument is that he maintained a bizarre belief that a child who receives baptism and then sins later on is doomed to be damned without barely a hope of redemption (not surprisingly Tertullian joined the early Montanist sect, a group led by a self-proclaimed prophet who also made the followers of the sect follow extremely strict moral laws).

I could also mention that most churches celebrate the Eucharist at least every week, and many actually offer the Sacrament every day.

I could do all these things and more, but we both know that you aren't really interested in having a conversation. You have shown zero interest in addressing anything I've said so far, and we both know you aren't about to start now.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[WoundedDeep]

God being Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not absorbed into Christianity, it is part of the early church teachings. "Trinity" is a new term, yes, but the concept of God being Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is not new.

I have a quote here about early Christian apologetics talking about God the Father and His Word, Jesus Christ.

"You will say, then, to me: "You said that God ought not to be contained in a place, and how do you now say that He walked in Paradise?" Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son? Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds, the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, uttered, the first-born of all creation, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His Reason. And hence the holy writings teach us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God," showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him. Then he says, "The Word was God; all things came into existence through Him; and apart from Him not one thing came into existence." The Word, then, being God, and being naturally produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being sent by Him, and is found in a place."

Jesus Christ, the Word, is God, being begotten of the Father. Scriptures fully support this.

 

[Mickiel]

A few points:

1) The reason why in the modern western world most churches experience a tax exempt status largely has to do with the idea of the separation of church and state. Not all churches are tax exempt, because not every nation adheres to--or at least adheres equally to--a concept of separation of church and state. The idea of a separation of church and state three hundred years ago was almost entirely non existent, or at least there certainly was no nation that put such an idea into practice. The United States of America enshrined in its Constitution by its First Amendment the freedom of religious practice by ensuring that Congress, America's legislative body, be completely unable to legislate religion. As a result the US, as the world's first modern liberal democracy, made church and state completely independent from one another. The State could not control matters of religious practice and doctrine, people from all many number of churches and religious backgrounds could practice without interference from any governmental body, or choose to not worship or practice any religion. Tax exemption for religious organizations is a hallmark of American civil liberty, churches neither pay taxes nor can receive tax money from the state, keeping a clear line of separation between the two.

That isn't paganism, that is a product of modern liberal democracy in order to make sure that Europe's religio-political problems didn't simply continue to happen this side of the Atlantic.

!

Your posts, frankly, are becoming increasingly asinine.


I could do all these things and more, but we both know that you aren't really interested in having a conversation. You have shown zero interest in addressing anything I've said so far, and we both know you aren't about to start now.

-CryptoLutheran

Listen, Emperor Constantine gave churches tax exempt status in A.D. 323. He made clergy exempt from paying taxes in A.D. 313, a privilege that pagan priest enjoyed. The blending in of Christianity with paganism, was helped by Constantine and Roman imperialism, as they " Flowed ancient Roman customs into the Christian liturgy ', what the pagans had and did, was transferred into the growing church. Paganism was melded into Christianity, this is why and how they got tax exempt status. Under Constantine , tax exempt status was granted for all church property. Under him, even church architecture changed and was highly influenced by paganism.

And since you referred to my post as becoming increasingly " Asinine", I see no need for such language and insults. And I will not use such an approach toward you in return; I encourage you to refrain from such things. Its just not needed.

Peace.

 

[Mickiel]

I understand that what I believe is not the common belief , but I am not trying to force it down into anyone's belief , or convince anyone of anything; I only bear witness to what I see as truth.

 

[Mickiel]

I understand that what I believe is not the common belief , but I am not trying to force it down into anyone's belief , or convince anyone of anything; I only bear witness to what I see as truth.

Truth is VERY hard to first see, its like a door, once it opens, things start flowing, if its closed, nothing gets through. In Hosea 4:1, 6, " There is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land.' So a whole land, or nation, or groups of people, can just be devoid of the true knowledge of God; when confronted with it, it both looks and sounds weird to them; the closed door! Their already convinced of the way " That seems right."

Vs.6, " My people, ( meaning churches, believers), are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I will reject you!" Here God is rejecting believers, his own people, because they are rejecting his truth. This started over again at Antioch, with the first New Testament churches. Look at " God's churches" in Rev. 2-3rd chapters. Jesus himself speaking about their condition, Rev. 2:4, " I have something AGAINST you, you lost you're first love." That was Ephesus. 2:14-15, now Pergamos, another stage of THE CHURCH OF GOD! Believers, worshippers! Vs. 14, again Jesus, " I have a FEW things against you, ( more than one thing), Vs. 15 " You have people that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which I HATE!"

Here a church of God, believers in God and Christ, are doing things that Christ hates! They don't even know what they are doing, are believing. The church stage called Laodicea , is so messed up, Jesus continues his rejection OF HIS OWN CHURCH, spitting them out of his mouth. In 3:20, Jesus says behold I stand at the door and knock, obviously on the OUTSIDE of this final stage of HIS church!

This stuff is right here in Revelation, being totally ignored by the churches. The truth of what is and will be. Churches of God, running around condemning the world, yet they themselves are accused by Christ , they accuse humanity, yet they themselves are in Apostasy.

 

[Colter]

Oh yes, its man made, so then absolute proof and evidence that God communicated through the writers; in example, the thoughts of the biblical authors are human thoughts, yes, but we believe inspired by God; what other book do you know that has 40 authors, from different places and different times, yet the book has so much cohesion? Its been on the best sellers list for over 400 years running! What other man made book has done that? It was originally written in 3 different languages, on 3 different continents. The likes of which the world has never seen! Explain to me how men could accomplish that back then with no help? Its the most shoplifted book in the world, WHY, you think because just men had something to do with it?

No, this is no delusion, its more to it than human thought; something else tinkered with that book.

That's simple, each author, group of authors, editors and redactors, all had the previous books as a foundation for their own interpretations and writings.

The OT books were redone in Babylon based on previous books already in existence. Some of the books mentioned in the new books disappeared. Its sort of like the bias of the newspaper, things happened but reporting on those events are influenced by the mind of the reporter, the editor etc.

 

[Mickiel]

That's simple, each author, group of authors, editors and redactors, all had the previous books as a foundation for their own interpretations and writings.

The OT books were redone in Babylon based on previous books already in existence. Some of the books mentioned in the new books disappeared. Its sort of like the bias of the newspaper, things happened but reporting on those events are influenced by the mind of the reporter, the editor etc.

I hold no interest in forcing the validity of the bible on you.

 

[Mickiel]

I fact I hold no interest in forcing belief on myself, muchless anyonelse. I don't accept what is believed, because of the number of others who believe it; which is a type of people peer pressure. And the religious peer in this world is stunning. Why should I make myself believe something that my spirit is regurgitating? Like the eternal hell doctrine; I can't believe that God would create a place of eternal misery and pain and crying; okay you may say, " Well its in the bible!" No its not, its a unique fabrication of the bible.

In Rev. 21:4, " And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall BE NO MORE , death, sorrow, crying or pain, ( all the things which would exist in hell forever if it were true), for all these things will PASS AWAY!" How in the world of biblical reason could these things pass away if the Christian hell were true?

Why is Christianity pimping this stuff?

Well there is a very shocking reason as to why; and I believe God is behind it.

 

[Mickiel]

I was once looking at Matt. 24:21, a prophecy of Christ that cancels out the Christian view of eternal hell; " For then shall be Great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, " Nor shall EVER BE AGAIN." Now if this event is what Jesus called the greatest ever tribulation, and that no other tribulation shall ever be as great, then he surely has nothing to do with the Christian eternal hell; he then must know there will be no such thing.

Because no tribulation could be greater than eternal suffering with no end ever.

 

[Mickiel]

I think I see , in one person, the belief here that Whites are God's prime stock in humanity , something that was forced into the belief of Blacks and other people of color who came to America , and forced into the native Americans who were already here.

Why people think God is a respecter of color or races, is a human error; an ugly self righteous error, which still raises its ugly head.

 

[Colter]

Once the elite priestly government of religion establishes it's authority on the scripture (that they wrote) then the members of the religion are forced to believe things, not because they sound true or possible, but because they are in the writings. Like Noah's flood, six day creation or soldiers, take the virgin children for yourselves and kill everyone else!!!!... for starters. And what's bizarre is that the authors of the books didn't claim that their own writings were Gods writings, that developed later among subsequent generations.

 

[Mickiel]

Once the elite priestly government of religion establishes it's authority on the scripture (that they wrote) then the members of the religion are forced to believe things, not because hey sound true or possible, but because they are in the writings. Like Noah's flood, six day creation or soldiers, take the virgin children for yourselves and kill everyone else!!!!... for starters. And what's bizarre is that the authors of the books didn't claim that their own writings were Gods writings, that developed later among subsequent generations.

I agree only in part; but you are correct, that some believers in God who think themselves the elite , and they get that from the bible, because of the way God choose Israel, ( not properly understanding WHY he choose them; to show he will continually forgive a rebellious disobedient people and save them anyway), and of course the biblical drama of " The First fruits", which most groups of believers claim themselves to be. The calling of God is just a matter of time, not race, not gender, not self righteousness; we all have sinned, and Jesus died for that group, us all.

Beliefs have been forced and infracted with confusion. The creation was not " 24 hour days", they were unknown periods of time, each lasting perhaps millions of earth years, we really don't know. A 24 hour human time period is likened to a thousand years with God, which means it is LONGER than we can measure. And Noah's flood did not cover the entire earth, only the populated areas; why would God flood and destroy unpopulated areas of the earth? And the vast majority of the earth then, was unpopulated.

But traditional thinking forces and impacts belief, and things that don't really fit, are then forced to fit.

 

[Colter]

I agree only in part; but you are correct, that some believers in God who think themselves the elite , and they get that from the bible, because of the way God choose Israel, ( not properly understanding WHY he choose them; to show he will continually forgive a rebellious disobedient people and save them anyway), and of course the biblical drama of " The First fruits", which most groups of believers claim themselves to be. The calling of God is just a matter of time, not race, not gender, not self righteousness; we all have sinned, and Jesus died for that group, us all.

Beliefs have been forced and infracted with confusion. The creation was not " 24 hour days", they were unknown periods of time, each lasting perhaps millions of earth years, we really don't know. A 24 hour human time period is likened to a thousand years with God, which means it is LONGER than we can measure. And Noah's flood did not cover the entire earth, only the populated areas; why would God flood and destroy unpopulated areas of the earth? And the vast majority of the earth then, was unpopulated.

But traditional thinking forces and impacts belief, and things that don't really fit, are then forced to fit.

The Bible books are a layer cake of revelation, then human speculation and evolved religion, then more revelation etc.

The Israelites were a "predicted" people, God loves all the earth. Being predicted to inhabit the area of Israel went to their heads, they developed a national egotism and segregated away from the "Gentile dogs." The term "chosen people" is a human creation.

Noahs flood was exaggerated because they could not trace their blood lines back to a much older Adam who incarnate an a populated, evolved earth that is 4.8 +/- billion years old. So the Hebrew authors decided to drown the whole world in it's own wickedness to solve their genealogical problem.

 

[Mickiel]

The Bible books are a layer cake of revelation, then human speculation and evolved religion, then more revelation etc.

The Israelites were a "predicted" people, God loves all the earth. Being predicted to inhabit the area of Israel went to their heads, they developed a national egotism and segregated away from the "Gentile dogs." The term "chosen people" is a human creation.

Noahs flood was exaggerated because they could not trace their blood lines back to a much older Adam who incarnate an a populated, evolved earth that is 4.8 +/- billion years old. So the Hebrew authors decided to drown the whole world in it's own wickedness to solve their genealogical problem.

It most certainly did go to their heads, and its still going to the heads of many modern day believers, who think themselves special in God's eyes. A most powerful alluring temptation, this thought of being " The elect." You hit that nail on the head, it did develop a national egotism, that last until this day. The thought that God is " With you, because of your race or group, or nationality", is a most powerful stimulant. God did choose Israel, but the reasons why are totally misunderstood. It had absolutely nothing to do with their race or righteousness, it had everything to do with their disobedience, THAT is the lesson God was teaching that everyone has missed. That he will forgive a whole nation of disobedience.

And yes, you are again correct, in that the earlier church doctrines and the current doctrines , decided to drown the whole world with THEIR corrupted perceptions on the flood and the creation days. Its almost akin to total blindness, an earth over 4 billion years old, now being forced into 7,000 years of existence , because of the confused religious interpretations of believers. Its stunning blindness, absolutely stunning refusal to see the truth, because it does not fit into your beliefs.

 

[Mickiel]

In Matt. 15:9 and Mark 7:7 Jesus taught that believers were worshipping him in vain, because they made up and taught doctrines that came from men. From Pastors and Teachers and Evangelist in churches. Those two verses are referring to believers in God and followers of Christ, NOT unbelievers. And there is no believer in Christ who would dare to even think this verse is referring to them.

Only "Good things" can be prophesized to them about themselves.