I have also spoken to others whom have stated they were not a believer until they received contact. My best friend's wife made the very same case. I was only using the most widely attested example, Paul. But others claim contact which changes their minds, while not praying for contact prior 
I don't know who you spoke with about this.
I'm just saying that it's not necessary to have God call you directly in order to become a believer, and to have Faith in Him.
Sure, it helps, a lot.
But from what i've seen, heard and read, what strikes me often is that the believers who believe on an experience basis, often have their doctrines a bit off, and discernment seems lacking.
Not to bash any group, but what and who i see people believe and follow in the "miracle denominations" sometimes, while claiming to have had direct contact with God...
But maybe that's not what you meant.
I assume you, like me, can be jealous or feel left behind when hearing testimonies where people meet God.
And quite a few Christians say that you must have a personal relationship with God or Jesus, in order to be saved.
But i don't know if that's true.
It would be impossible to NOT be saved when you do have that personal relationship with God or Jesus, i reckon.
If this method was so effective, you would think He would have contacted a few others, or ALL. But hey, what do I know...?
Only a little.
God's ways are a mystery to us, aren't they?
His thoughts are not (like) ours.
But that is to be expected.
It can be frustrating though.
Not with many. Many claim daily encounters, and at will.
From what i've heard, i don't find it all too credible.
Again, people i have heard speaking of this kind of thing, often are quite off where doctrine and discernment is concerned.
So then i wonder what it's worth, to experience what you hope for, while not even being able to convey the essentials to those who have questions.
But i'm not downplaying the challenge of keeping the faith when there's no personal confirmation from God.
But i don't believe that every believer ought to have the same experiences.
It seems God wants us to believe in Him.
Paul had no other option.
Even Thomas didn't, after Jesus came to him and showed the truth.
But He said: Blessed is he who believes and has not seen.
Read 1 Corinthians 12 too, for consideration.
A faith that is challenged but remains standing none the less, is a strong faith.
You are quoting a book, written by a human.
It's a report.
Yes, reports are written by humans.
If you can provide valid reasons for thinking it's all just made up, be my guest.
Let's play Occam's razor again...
Indeed.
The simple explanation has more value than the complex one.
So here's the simple explanation:
Very important stuff happened and people wrote it down for posterity.
1) Is it more likely there is a God, and this God instructed a human to write down this passage?
2) Or, A human wrote this as a catch-all, to attract or convince the non-believers. And also so that no proof be needed?
Using intellectual honesty, I have to select option 2).
I say important stuff happened and it was written down for posterity.
It's what people do.
Bare in mind there was no large organisation with power on their minds at that time, that found such reports and letters of use for their worldly ambitions.
If anything, they didn't like it at all.
So they persecuted Christians.
So many were killed for their testimony.
To me, after much study, the answer seems simple. Men wrote these texts. Writing stuff like, 'blessed are the ones whom have not seen and still believe.' and 'all non-believers will be cast away.' are good ways to sell your story, and make them indisputable The rest is just pondering the apparent 'illogic' and lack in apparent 'justification' within yourself to reconcile and/or rationalize the conclusions in your own head
There is no evidence for that "conspiracy theory".
It's not plausible for the Old Testament either.
The Jews aren't exactly victorious heroes and devout followers of God in the Biblical history.
God is not happy with how they handled things, or failed to handle things.
There are relatively short periods of time when they did God's will, but in all, they failed.
And so do Christians.
Why would people decide to make up stories that makes themselves look like failures?
Who says anyone owes you anything? Just because humans have the ability to invent intentional agency, does not then make it true somehow. The Bible claims that God is interactive. Well then, interact. Otherwise, there is a lot of us whom will just discard the empty claims.
Like a house built on sand, a wave will wash it away.
Nobody owes me anything.
But i must admit that i kind of feel entitled to get some questions answered.
I was never an atheist, as in believing that God (or however you wish to call the Original Cause(r)) does (probably) not exist.
I was just saying that the phenomenon we call life on earth is pointless if there's nothing afterwards.
It would still have a point if there is a God and we only have this life in the flesh on earth, but it would be pointless for us, because for us there is no result if there's nothing afterwards.
There is no purpose in it for us if this life is all there is.
It would be pointless.
The meaning of life would be reduced to happiness and contention here and now.
Precisely. I've attended many churches here in the states. They only preach messages, which are positive. Heck, even many of my own family members were unaware of the apparent 'horrid atrocities' which are mentioned in the Bible, until I showed them that is . Because quite frankly, most go to church, and await their cherry picked book report. Not all, but you know what I mean. Most have other priorities. And yet, it's ironic that these same people may also attest that Christianity is priority number one.
Attend any adolescent Bible gathering. Cherry picked as well. Makes you wonder. Heck, even traditional school history teaches all angles, not just hand picked selected ones. 'Get 'em while their young' I guess.... Churches seem to 'taylor' they own selective messages often times.
I'm not bashing all churches. But it's ironic that I have seen this in 100% of the many I use to attend.
That's because churches are businesses.
They have to have attendees, members, money to pay employees, maintain the building, pay the bills and make it attractive by various means.
Having said that, i find the horrid bits of the Old Testament quite problematic too.
But, i can understand it was like that when i look for explanations and context and the culture and the norms and values of those days.
But i'm not gonna feign i think it's all swell.
I did learn a lot though, that puts much of it in perspective.
Things you will never learn from people and websites that only seem to be out to horrify you with examples (usually out of context) of how disgusting God is.
One of the things that puts the disgust about God in the Old Testament to rest is when you discover that most of the genocides ordained by God, involved getting rid of Nephilim / giant tribes.
So it's not just the killing of human tribes, it's getting rid of hybrids.
I don't think you'll hear that in church..
But it's in the texts.
But personally, i have a very hard time reading books like 1 Samuel and 2 Samuel.
But then again, i'm living in the age of snowflakes, so it's no surprise i can barely stomach it...
These same statements could be said for the evolutionary tree, completely absent from god like beliefs. 'We all started from a common ancestor and all'. Thus, we are all connected.
Pseudo science new age babble...
(in my always humble opinion )
The Darwinian tree was uprooted long ago.
Nobody disputes mutations and selection has effects on organisms.
But it's still a giant leap of faith to ascribe all aspects of living nature to it.
But that's another discussion altogether.
Me too. But I fear we have strayed SO MUCH off topic, no one else is reading; and will abandon this thread entirely, for which it was originally intended
Maybe, maybe not.
I think many here find it interesting to read your views on the matters, as someone who was a Christian for 30 years, but had to give it up / was unable to keep it up.
Did you already share hen you turned away from it?
(or did i forget...)
You probably know that most of us hope to see you return to God, or at least to your belief in Him.
And hopefully 'for real'.
Not just attending church and trying to be a better person.
My faith stands on the notion that God is my only hope, and the only Person worthy of my trust, even when the distance between Him and me is large in this physical life.
I think there are lots of examples in the Bible of people who acknowledge God as their God without having a personal relationship with Him in their physical lives.
The people God directly interacts with in the Bible have an essential purpose in his Plan.
Probably, yes..
I'm only a decade into it now.
No idea what the future holds.
Yeah, but we have no evidence of 2 million Jews in Egypt. Hence, rendering the claims of an Exodus account, likely unsupported.
Well, in our time, it's very long ago.
But it seems back in Biblical times nobody doubted it.
Possibly the Egyptians denied it not too long after.
They apparently didn't write their failures down too many times...
There are some interesting archeology based reconstructions of the story out there though, but nothing solid afaik.
You are aware that this belief appears in direct conflict with evolutionary theory and abiogenesis right?
I'm not a naturalist.
Naturalism:
the philosophical belief that everything arises from natural properties and causes, and supernatural or spiritual explanations are excluded or discounted.
I'm a supernaturalist, regarding the origins of things.
I see little logic in the idea that the premise for the natural to exist is the natural itself.
I see no logic in the idea that the natural is brought forth by the natural.
In other words, i reject the idea that all of our common space time reality is just a purposeless accident (as in 'not intended').
It's a silly idea, only advocated by those who wish there is no God.
Especially when you look at what we have discovered about living nature.
But again, that's another discussion altogether.
Current evidence suggests neither.
It depends on who you ask.
Bare in mind that the the main stream scientific approach is always naturalistic.
They have the funding, the platform and the sheer number of participants.
And again, like Exodus, people in those days didn't doubt it happened.
The moral argument is huge. I'm not going to go here. Well, maybe a little sighted below.... Let's just say morality is relative and leave it at that
So beating your slave, as long as they do not die within 48 hours, is 'a okay'? What does YOUR moral compass say about that?
20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.'
Property means responsibility also.
This doesn't say it's good to go out and beat your employee / slave at will.
I'm not gonna look it up now, but i gather there are rules for the employer / owner too, whether or not the punishment is justified, and in which case.
44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.
Yes, the favourite quotes of those who want you to hate God...
I don't think it means that they should rule over their slaves ruthlessly though.
>>I'll edit this later and link to a video regarding this slave business.
I think it will put things in the proper perspective.
At least, that's why i put it on my playlist at the time.
Let's evaluate this 'morally'... God is stating it's okay to beat as much as you like, as long as you don't kill them.
No, that's not what it says.
Also, if you are not a Jew, you are kept for life.
This also means responsibility.
It's also written they should treat their slaves well.
But you won't find that in the first hits on a Google search...
Now ask yourself, who wrote this passage? A Jew maybe?
The chance is fairly large that this was written by an Israelite, yes.
Furthermore, setting aside the moral dilemma, seems as though God would not have favored one race of flesh. Just seems absurd.
Deuteronomy 32:8-9 (*According to the number of the sons of God.)
God rules the universe(s), but favors Jews in one period of time. The 'Covenant' excuse is lame quite frankly. People have absolutely no control over what race they were born within.
HE still favours / chooses Israel.
But branches have been cut, and other branches have been added.
Much of the Biblical history seems to be a kind of metaphor that really happened, and alludes to what was / is to come.
the Plan has always been that God is King and Highpriest over his people, in the Holy Land.
Both Jews and Christians are expecting this to become reality.
But i'm sorry too, that the road to this Destination is a very tough one...
The birth pains, apparently...
Studies indicate that women's brains are not inferior in intellect to men. And yet, you have primitives whom write...
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
Paul wrote that, right?
I forget the context, but the verse by itself it's unacceptable in our politically correct yet corrupted day and age...
There are some interesting studies about some possible female Apostles, which got translated as male names.
I can't remember the specifics (as usual).
But you should understand that lower in the hierarchy does not mean inferior.
Or at least, our present day meaning of the word inferior, which i think in Greek only means "placed below", referring to the hierarchy, or rather patriarchy, which is a "bad thing" in our day...
I don't know...
I tend to think many things were better in traditional times, even in the previous century.
Families stayed together, mother was at home with the children, father was the head.
Obviously life was never perfect in any time in history.
But i think things are going down hill now.
Broken homes, kids with problems.
The family is the corner stone of society.
Break it and society will break too.
I'm quite happy to have no children in today's world, nor a wife.
The physical relations would be nice perhaps, but not reason enough for me to pursue a relationship.
