Prayer Works -- a praise report for my Christian Brethren

[Jenyar]

Reading the Bible, one has to read between the lines ALL the time, in one way or another. And for this reading between the lines, one needs a theology. Which one ...

If you mean with comprehension, that's necessary for any text. You don't need theology to study the Bible, that's how you get theology - Biblical theology.

And if Jesus had been decapitated? Torn to four pieces by four horses? Stoned?

None of those things happened.

But if you mean whether an intact body is necessary for resurection - no, not the resurrection we are expecting, where God gives everyone a glorified body. Christ was an unblemished sacrifice, like the passover lamb, which is why his resurrection could be presented to us in the same form as his death, without any changes.

 

[water]

If you mean with comprehension, that's necessary for any text. You don't need theology to study the Bible, that's how you get theology - Biblical theology.

You need theology to study the Bible. You need theology to get over the discrepancies that emerged via translations.

If you just study the Bible, as it is, in English, for example, then we are predestined and God is wicked. And the Bible is a load of bull.

 

[Jenyar]

Well, this is the impression you give: That there IS no doubt.
That you are sure, that you know, that you have no doubt.

Knowing something, even knowing it without a doubt, is no insurance that one is able to explain it without leaving room for doubt.

Who is responsible for that?

The nature of the subject.

Ever wondered why this happens?

The complexity of love; the vast reservoir of experience it contains below its surface. One may describe the surface in lucid detail without ever knowing how deep it goes. Knowing that it sustains and exists is usually all that is necessary to know, all one needs to trust and enjoy it. But that's no insurance that one can ever explain it in a way that others could enjoy and trust it.

 

[Jenyar]

You need theology to study the Bible. You need theology to get over the discrepancies that emerged via translations.

If you just study the Bible, as it is, in English, for example, then we are predestined and God is wicked. And the Bible is a load of bull.

That's also theology, like it or not. A permaturely formed one, for that's not what the Bible says, but it's one nontheless. One learns by comparing all it has to say, not by highlighting particular parts. If it talks about predestination, then you must find out what form it takes, what its implications and implementations are - not jump to conclusions that aren't justifiable, such as colouring it in with strict determinism.

 

[water]

That's also theology, like it or not. A permaturely formed one, for that's not what the Bible says, but it's one nontheless. One learns by comparing all it has to say, not by highlighting particular parts. If it talks about predestination, then you must find out what form it takes, what its implications and implementations are - not jump to conclusions that aren't justifiable, such as colouring it in with strict determinism.

Mental acrobatics.

 

[Jenyar]

Mental acrobatics.

Only if you're an invalid, an you aren't. Surely you don't expect thousands of years of information to fall into place just for you?

 

[water]

Jenyar,

Knowing something, even knowing it without a doubt, is no insurance that one is able to explain it without leaving room for doubt.

Then why attempt explanations at all?

The complexity of love; the vast reservoir of experience it contains below its surface.

Before, you said:

Love is also simple until you have to explain it to someone.

What is not simple, and what is complex? Love is both simple and complex?

Don't give me such foolish paradoxes.

One may describe the surface in lucid detail without ever knowing how deep it goes. Knowing that it sustains and exists is usually all that is necessary to know, all one needs to trust and enjoy it.

Then I could be taking arsenic as well. All I need is to trust and enjoy it.

 

[Cottontop3000]

Only if you're an invalid, an you aren't. Surely you don't expect thousands of years of information to fall into place just for you?

So let's assume it's NOT going to fall into place for all of us. If it hasn't over the last 2,000 years, or longer, do you honestly think we are going to solve it before Christ comes back, if He does?

Let's agree to disagree until He comes back, if He does, and get on with living, taking all that we know, or think we know, about God or no-god, and using that for the benefit of all our brothers and sisters out there, regardless of whether they agree with our own beliefs.

 

[Jenyar]

Then why attempt explanations at all?

That's the same as saying "why ask for them?".

What is not simple, and what is complex? Love is both simple and complex?

Don't give me such foolish paradoxes.

I can only give you what I have. I think you'll find this paradox in most people who've loved, as you will find it in most poetry, prose and other observations of it.

Then I could be taking arsenic as well. All I need is to trust and enjoy it.

I've noticed some subtle differences between love and arsenic. I for one don't equate the security I find in knowing I'm loved - by people and by God - with taking drugs or poison.

 

[Jenyar]

So let's assume it's NOT going to fall into place for all of us. If it hasn't over the last 2,000 years, or longer, do you honestly think we are going to solve it before Christ comes back, if He does?

This discussion is about knowing something - intimately and experienctially - without it first having to "fall into place" like the last level of a tetris game. What has already fallen in place is sufficient for a solid trust in God.

Let's agree to disagree until He comes back, if He does, and get on with living, taking all that we know, or think we know, about God or no-god, and using that for the benefit of all our brothers and sisters out there, regardless of whether they agree with our own beliefs.

If only it were that simple, but for many people the status quo is unacceptible. Jesus came for those who needed Him, and will return to those who wait for Him. I don't particularly care whether they agree or disagree with my beliefs, but I do care about making them relevant to people who have suffered for the lack of them.

 

[Cottontop3000]

This discussion is about knowing something - intimately and experienctially - without it first having to "fall into place" like the last level of a tetris game. What has already fallen in place is sufficient for a solid trust in God.

You sound like me 17 years ago. Question: Why do you believe in Jesus Christ? Seriously, think about it before you answer. Take a few days, a week, a few years if you need. But let me know when you know.

I am now beyond my intimate and experiential phase with Jesus Christ. You also sound like my 23 year old bother, who is now a missionary in Egypt. Sounds so good, I just want to lap it all up, again. But I don't think I will be so naive and trusting this time around the block. (Tired of being lied to, as a child, even if it was supposed to be for my own good. White lies can be just as bad as a regular, old-fashioned type of lie.)

If only it were that simple, but for many people the status quo is unacceptible.

Which status quo are you referring to exactly?

Jesus came for those who needed Him, and will return to those who wait for Him. I don't particularly care whether they agree or disagree with my beliefs, but I do care about making them relevant to people who have suffered for the lack of them.

That sounds good. I'll be waiting. What can you do for someone like me who has suffered for the having of your beliefs? When I was 18, I was the most joyful, hopeful, naive person in the world. I hope you stay that way. I hope you don't have much of a brain, for your sake.

P.S. You're the third person I've seen here with the same birth date as me.

 

[MarcAC]

God made the match

And picking your nose during the interview would have still secured the job, regardless?

Why do we always look at a "2-dimensional" sitution "1-dimensionally" and err in our conclusions?

We have to act through our free will as God acts through His will.

God "made the match" and Woody did his part to "fit the pieces together".

 

[Mephura]

Mephura:

Good point.

I mean, never mind that the creator of Logic and Reason should be the best at it.

The bible is an egregious study in contradiction.

Contradiction?
I perfer to think of it as the explanations that man's simple mind could handle at the time. If God spoke to us in terms fo particles and such all those thousands of years ago, would it have made any sense?
Yes, to todays mind, it may be full of contradictions, but no more so than many of the great scientific theories from our yesterdays. Hell, even many of the current theories seem to contradict what we see, and what makes sense, but we hold them as being 'right'.

And there is a lot of praying in the world, Mr. Mephura. Which would be no different than running a home with crying children 24 hours for weeks.

We’d incarcerate God- who claims to know all needs at all times- for parental negligence.

Much like the children you describe, mankind must be punished at times. As children grow, so does the freedom they are allowed. When they are young, we must put things to them in ways they understand, and correct them when they are wrong. In the same way, we cannot give them everything they ask for. We cannot give them all the answers. And when they aer older still, we must turn them loose to make their own mistakes, and learn their own lessons. All we can hope for is that what we taught them when they where young was enough to guide them. We can be there to comfort them, but we can live their lives for them. Thus is God.
Which is worse, the parent that keeps a child from playing for fear they will hurt them selves, or the one that is there when needed, to sooth the wounds gained from the experience?

 

[SnakeLord]

Much like the children you describe, mankind must be punished at times.

I disagree. Can I ask if you're a parent?

 

[Mephura]

you can ask, and I could answer.
But, if you are taking issue with that statement, I would ask you two questions:
1) are you a parent?
2) if so, do you mean to say that you never punish your children?
no groundings, no denial of desert, no time outs?
you just let them do whatever they want?

 

[gendanken]

Mephura:
This is going nowhere. I'm already being prayed for and you missed the best parts.
Die.

Jenyar:
I could not resist-

Matthew, being acquainted with the reality of Jesus' birth, saw in the Greek - rather than the Hebrew - translation what truly transpired. There is nothing in the Hebrew that prevents an "alma" from also being a virgin

If Jesus then was born without Joseph's input, finding a correlation for it in scriptures is a secondary substantiation - not a primary motivation. Especially considering that an angel predicted the birth in such terms (Luke 1:35), and Joseph experienced it that way (Matt. 1:19). The scripture's fulfilment would have been incidental if its context wasn't so significant.

I've wasting my time of coure but here goes:

One, you know nothing about Hebrew, can't even read it, so do not tell me what can or cannot prevent the Hebrew word alma from being a "virgin"
There is a reason why the word "virgin'- in almost every language- is concocted and it is a term applicable to men, women, and matter (virgin oil).
There is a reason for the word 'virgin', Jenyar.

Two, when one finds themselves stretching out a "nothing says that...." to reinterpret a very clear statement or question then the question now becomes
Why?

Why do you and all apologists clean up another's mess offering ten different ways to read the same thing? Why go out of your way to reinterpret, misconstrue, and apologize for what to anyone else resembles a contradictory idiot?

It could be because the idiot is your income and you have a vested interest in millions having faith in your Idiot.
It could be because the idiot is related to you and your familial bonds have obligated you as its caretaker.
Or it could be that actually admitting the it IS a babbling, contradictory, willow-minded idiot is a direct reflection on who you are because you believe in its idiocy.
So you don’t.

You’re neither Fallwell nor Graham, so the first one is not you.
You are not John either, so the second one is not you.

Looks like what is left is Number Three, Jenyar, to explain why it is that so many like you run after god like so many mothers cleaning up after toddlers.
You apologize for God as fervently as a mother does her kid picking its nose out in public.
And when others ask you to explain to them something so integral to your character, you cannot explain well because one can never explain well what they do not understand.
And when we do not understand but speak anyway, we Bullshit.

Two- you cannot quote me Mathew or Luke as circumstantial evidence in this matter.
That’s like proving the resurrection occurred based on Christian eyewitnesses.
You’re going to support what Matthew said based on Mathew and then what Mathew said based on Luke and vise versa? Its known that all four fed off each other.
And that’s like proving Deepak is right about AIDS being spiritual by quoting his saying so.

Three:

Only the Egyptian livestock was affected - those belonging to the people who enslaved the Isrealites. It would not be impossible for the Pharoah of Egypt to procure new horses from his subjects to replace the ones that died (and there were plenty of horses in Egypt).

True, but he did not.

Read your bible. Clearly.

Exodus 14 says-

“But the Egyptians pursued after them, all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his army, and overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pihahiroth, before Baalzephon.”- exodus 14: 9

There is no time lapse so appeals to 5th plague is you......running after your toddler again.

Therefore, we have God stating that he has killed all the horses and livestock of the Pharaoh.
And then a measly 3 chapters later this genius has Pharaoh chasing his Chosen People on Pharohaoh’s horses.
Horses.


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus 9:3-6&version=9;
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus 14:9&version=9;

And the words used there are ‘every’ and ‘all’, therefore:

Exodus 9 says all the livestock began to die , but plagues don't generally kill every single animal.

Don’t read too much into it.

We don't have to read between the lines when we speak of sunrise or sunset, do we? Even in this day and age.

…and you’re trying to squirm your way out of this one as well.
Joshua looks up.
In the middle of battle.
And asks his god to stop the sun in the sky.
God stops the sun in the sky. In the dead bloody middle.

All you are doing is trying to explain away your toddler’s bad manners again, like a good Stepford jew.

The body was kept largely intact in a crucifixion, and in Jesus' case not even the bones were broken. Therefore God could raise him just like he was laid to rest, with the wounds healed but still visible (at least until his ascention).

You do realize that criminals were beat and tortured before being crucified yes?

And who you call the ‘messiah’ had both a Jew and a roman trying to crush his skull in for being so meek and pretentious.
Those two traits together really annoy the hell out of people.

Know what, Jenyar? Never thought I’d say it- you being one of the most plausible Christians on this forum-but you really suck at this.



Woody:
Meh.

 

[Mephura]

Mephura:
This is going nowhere. I'm already being prayed for and you missed the best parts.
Die.

I understand, gendanken.
Better to pick on others than to confront that which might lead you to where you truly wish to be. God will be waiting for you..
So will I.

-mephura

 

[SnakeLord]

1) are you a parent?

Yes. Now would you mind answering that very same question that I asked to you?

2) if so, do you mean to say that you never punish your children?

Not once. I have never punished, told off, raised my voice or even looked at my child with a remotely angry expression.

you just let them do whatever they want?

This is where people generally get confused. Although I would say yes, given that my child has the exact same rights as any other human does, I find that by simply explaining what might not be the best possible choices she doesn't bother doing them.

But I tell you what, why not provide a small list of what you would punish your child for and we can progress from there.

 

[gendanken]

No, you do not understand brother Mephura.

You coulda, you shoulda, yadint.
Thread's dead.

 

[Mephura]

Yes, I am a parent. i've also taken on a parenting role in several of my younger cousins.

As for what I would punish them for:
Deliberately hurting another, such as another child. Accidents do happen, but physically hurting another deliberately isn't right.

Stealing from someone.
Failing to follow instructions.

The last of which could be interpreted wrongly, so I will clarify that and a few other points now.

My general strategy is to stop a situation before it begins, if I can catch it.
If something happens, I explain why what they did was wrong. Tell them to not do it again, and then, depending on the circumstances, will either set them on their way, or have the child sit for a while. Generally 10 minutes or so.

In the case of theft, the item is returned, and an apollogy is given. I might then not allow a particular toy for a while. True, this is in a way childish in itself, but it also forces the child to experience the same situation, in a fashion.

As for physical violence, well...
an apollogy is given, and the child will sit for a while. we will also have a talk about why what happened was wrong.

Punishing out of anger, or a lack of patience is never done.

But, as to your statement of "given that my child has the exact same rights as any other human does" is a bit funny.
yes, every human has rights. Those rights are generally supported by laws. And what happens when we break the laws?
Children are children. Perhaps you are in a situation where you can be around your child 24/7 to stop each new situation and calmly explain all the options.
Most of us do have jobs to attend to, and other obligations that require us to be away from our children at least part of the day. I would think that if I can help my child to behave in social situations where other people aren't required to punish my child, it is best for everyone.

I know I don't like the idea of someone else punishing my child in a way that isn't my own. Other people might use methods I don't approve of. I'm sure my child wouldn't like it.