Thread For Christians Only.

[charles cure]

You are hasty, indeed.

If one interpreted with only their own perception, knowledge, and wisdom, with no other, or viewpoint, what would that result in?

If the president didn't listen to his cabinet, but instead made decisions based on his own interpretation, all the time, where would we be. Greater wisdom comes from realizing that many people know more than yourself, and that if you listen to others as well as yourself, you can accomplish greater things, than with only your own perception, knowledge, and wisdom are capable of.

It is the same with interpreting the scripture. You must listen to God, other people, cultural influences including history, and other scriptures to support your interpretation as accurate. Otherwise your interpretations are speculation.

Now, it is true that we must first perceive the evidence with a critical mind, and so the end result is subjective to one's perception, but you are better off listening to others, because of this problem.

the bigger problem here is that you are using scripture to justify scripture. that means that the truth or falsity of any segment of scripture depends on whether you think that the scripture itself has any authority or veracity. since i believe it doesnt, than no part of scripture can be used to "prove" any other part of scripture.

what youre talking about isnt like the president listening to his cabinet and making decisions based on the informed opinion of others, its like him haveing an intense internal monologue with himself trying to justify his actions by acknowledging that he has acted the same way before.

thats a ridiculous premise, thats like me saying:

All pigs are really elephants.

and then three hours later, i get into an argument with someone about whether pigs are really elephants or not and then i say:

all pigs are really elephants because i said that earlier today.

it doesnt mean anything except that i have reaffirmed my own belief. my claim could still be utterly unrealistic and stupid.

 

[jayleew]

the bigger problem here is that you are using scripture to justify scripture. that means that the truth or falsity of any segment of scripture depends on whether you think that the scripture itself has any authority or veracity. since i believe it doesnt, than no part of scripture can be used to "prove" any other part of scripture.

Right, that is why one cannot interpret scripture with only scripture. That is a fatal mistake Christians make. That kind of interpretation is a black and white view of God's ideas, which is silly to assume we can know what God is thinking.

what youre talking about isnt like the president listening to his cabinet and making decisions based on the informed opinion of others, its like him haveing an intense internal monologue with himself trying to justify his actions by acknowledging that he has acted the same way before.

That is what MW was arguing, and I replied, countering her assumption that I was inferring that that is how scripture should be interpreted. You are hasty too. Words are not the best form of communication.

You just said the same thing I did. Here's what I said:

It is the same with interpreting the scripture. You must listen to God, other people, cultural influences including history, and other scriptures to support your interpretation as accurate. Otherwise your interpretations are speculation.

What was the last thing I listed?

I am saying the same thing you said when you presented the idea of the president having a monolgue with himself.

 

[charles cure]

Right, that is why one cannot interpret scripture with only scripture. That is a fatal mistake Christians make. That kind of interpretation is a black and white view of God's ideas, which is silly to assume we can know what God is thinking.

That is what MW was arguing, and I replied, countering her assumption that I was inferring that that is how scripture should be interpreted. You are hasty too. Words are not the best form of communication.

You just said the same thing I did. Here's what I said:

It is the same with interpreting the scripture. You must listen to God, other people, cultural influences including history, and other scriptures to support your interpretation as accurate. Otherwise your interpretations are speculation.

What was the last thing I listed?

I am saying the same thing you said when you presented the idea of the president having a monolgue with himself.

right except the problem is that history doesnt support scripture for the most part, not in an evidenciary way at least, and what other cultural influences are there in the west that havent been at least in part shaped by the hand of the judeo-christian ethic. thats the point i was making. scripture cant really be justified by any other means other than itself.

 

[Hapsburg]

Does being bitter,angry and cynical make you happy, does it contribute to the quality of your life?

I'm in Sophomore year of high school, OF COURSE PUTTING PEOPLE DOWN MAKES ME HAPPY!!

PS- I am not cynical, I am wary.

PPS- I am not an athiest, I am an agnostic leaning towards Deist, until science figures out what happened before the Big Bang.

 

[Hapsburg]

sounds like hasbeen again.

Bitch, why the fuck would I make a clone account? Only coward-ass retards like you make clone accounts.

 

[Angelic Being]

Truthfully, I'm not here to learn about your brand of Christianity. I'm mostly here cos it's funny. But I think I asked you a fair question and truthfully, you didn't give me a fair answer. You pretty much blew me off and suggested that I read the Bible.

or you can simply read my previous posts- you might find your answer there.

thanks.

 

[Angelic Being]

Also, thankfully such sinners will always be a minority - ha!ha!

Oooooo... I hate to rain on your parade, but if your narrow view of religious intolerance is the meter on which we can guage the size of such a group, it would immense, far surpassing the size of your group by many, many millions of sinners.

yes, there are many sinners but there are few that SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.( just goes to show that "The Creator knows you and i better then most of us care to acknowledge")

if misguided Christians and atheists stop their yapping and blaming The Creator for all the woes that "we" cause on ourselves, then maybe that energy thats used for blaming and yapping could be used in trying to understand The Creator.

get your facts straight.

thanks.

 

[Angelic Being]

Since Jesus is God's son, I would have to say Jesus. Since Paul was not God, nor God's son, it would be called slander. By definition, one can only blaspheme against an entity which they revere.

Much of the scripture is used to define other scripture because we assume the author's were God's prophets and scribes, since their writings echo the history of God's character. That is why you find Christians using other scripture to define other scripture. It is the best practice of interpretation. It would be horrible if they interpreted the scripture based on their own perception, knowledge, and wisdom.

just as "The Father and The Christ" are "one",, so too is "The Christ and Apostle Paul" , so when paul speaks, he is speaking the words of The Christ and therefore the word of The Creator.

your argument is null and void.

thanks.

 

[KennyJC]

then maybe that energy thats used for blaming and yapping could be used in trying to understand The Creator.

Yes, that would be science. As 'God' created the universe, the only way to understand God is to understand the universe. Not reading some book that was written before people knew what a universe was. I understand God better than you do.

 

[Angelic Being]

i cant believe this thread is still going. what the fuck.

and i cant believe that you actually think anyone here gives a sh.... about your opinion.

thanks.

 

[charles cure]

and i cant believe that you actually think anyone here gives a sh.... about your opinion.

thanks.

if they dont give a shit about mine what makes you think the give a shit about yours? and you can swear dude god wont strike you down. trust me.

 

[Angelic Being]

What is perfect? What is your perceived definition of omniscient? Why is it necessary to have omniscience to be perfect?.

it is necessary but not in the way that you think it needs to be - perfection means omniscence( i dont like this word because it has alot of philosophical conotations to it).

After some thought about some of the events recorded in the Bible and visiting the definition of omniscient, I think we are thinking 3 dimensional, as if there is only one future. Omniscience is defined as having infinite wisdom, or knowing all things. With that basic definition, God IS omniscient. But, do we define it as knowing all futures, or just all things? You and I were thinking all futures..

it is simple - IF HE WANTS TO, HE CAN DO IT - BEING ALL KNOWING, HE KNOWS WHEN THE NEED ARISES TO DO SO AND 'LOOK INTO THE FUTURE'

From examples in scripture, God is not omniscient in the sense that the future is a finite thing, as we're perceiving the term omniscient. One who is omniscient can know the future today, but if something were to change today, does that not alter the future?.

Can you clarify what Scripture? just give an outline of the verses.

Bear with me: Let's say God made Adam and Eve and made them in his image, nearly perfect, but not Gods. God, with his ability to discern the future based on today and the hearts of Adam and Eve, saw that things were good and would go on forever this way. Everything was perfect, but God wanted Adam and Eve to have COMPLETE free will (including to reject God), so he gave them the choice to be "bad". So, he spent time with Adam and Eve in the garden every evening and everything was perfect. Then one day, unbeknownst to God at the time, Adam used his free will to disobey..

in fact Adam and Eve were perfect - having being Created by HIS OWN HANDS.

Scripture says that God came down and called to Adam, he didn't know where they hiding. So, he used his power to discern where they were and asked, "Why are you hiding and why are you dressed like that?" "Who told you that you are naked?" Then, God saw the betrayal of all his creation and knew the future of them all from that day. Then, he told them what they would do for the rest of their lives, and how things would be since they chose to live imperfectly. Basically, he said, "life is going to suck without me, but if that is what you want, do as you please." .

before The Creator even came down, HE had known that the two had failed - whats described in Genesis is THE WAY A FATHER (IN FACT THE FATHER) WOULD ACT WHEN DISSAPOINTMENT OVERCOMES HIM, WHEN HI'S TWO SPECIAL CREATIONS FELL INTO THE TEMPTATION OF THE devil - did you know that had Adam taken full responsibilty immediately after being questioned - events after that would have been different.

The point of the story is that God knows the future, today, but the future is not an intangible thing because we have free will. He does not know what we will choose, ultimately. Is that omniscience? Not in the intangible way you perceive the future to be..

you are correct but dont use - 'ultimately'.

By definition, God is omniscient; but, if you attach connotations to the word that all knowledge means all futures as well, then God is not omniscient. God knows the future, today; but, we have the free will to change tomorrow, and even change God's mind after he examines the future of our decision.

this is dangerous speculation and in fact must never be said - i urge you to take back this statement because it is raelly one of folly.

dont even go there.

thanks.

 

[Angelic Being]

You are hasty, indeed.

If one interpreted with only their own perception, knowledge, and wisdom, with no other, or viewpoint, what would that result in?

If the president didn't listen to his cabinet, but instead made decisions based on his own interpretation, all the time, where would we be. Greater wisdom comes from realizing that many people know more than yourself, and that if you listen to others as well as yourself, you can accomplish greater things, than with only your own perception, knowledge, and wisdom are capable of.

It is the same with interpreting the scripture. You must listen to God, other people, cultural influences including history, and other scriptures to support your interpretation as accurate. Otherwise your interpretations are speculation.

Now, it is true that we must first perceive the evidence with a critical mind, and so the end result is subjective to one's perception, but you are better off listening to others, because of this problem.

but in fact you are about to see the emergence of Spirit Filled people like me - who will be helped by The Holy Spirit - to bring back the true teachings of The Holy Scriptures, and of The Christ - soon all false doctrines will be exposed for what they really are - the work of the devil.

thanks.

 

[Angelic Being]

yeah but theres scriptural and real life instances of God not giving a shit at all about prayers and ingnoring people and leaving them to suffer and die. i think taking that into consideration the full picture seems more like we are at the mercy of God's arbitrary whims, and whether he changes his mind or not depends probably more on whether hes in a good mood.

this is an old issue that has already been solved on this thread or in my previos thread - now take your whining self and get off this thread - because that is really outdated behaviour..

 

[charles cure]

this is an old issue that has already been solved on this thread or in my previos thread - now take your whining self and get off this thread - because that is really outdated behaviour..

wow youre convinced that you have solved this issue with a thread on a message board. well shit, lets inform the vatican because you my friend are the answer to their prayers.

by the way, i would probably have just gotten sick of this thread after the last post, but now because i know you dont want me here, i'm going to do my best to continuously goad you into acting like the asshole that you are until your thread gets locked or maybe you get thrown off.

 

[Angelic Being]

right except the problem is that history doesnt support scripture for the most part, not in an evidenciary way at least, and what other cultural influences are there in the west that havent been at least in part shaped by the hand of the judeo-christian ethic. thats the point i was making. scripture cant really be justified by any other means other than itself.

and tell me - when will you justify your fairytale baboon ancestor- the fossils of which you are still searching for?

picture this - youre all sweaty and dirty digging a pit searching for that elusive fossil when all of a sudden the whole planet is covered in a white light and The Christ is "seen" coming for His people - that would really suck.

let me tell you something - science, not once, did it ever deny the The Creator =- it was disillusioned misguided people who had suffered emotional traumas that decided to "blame GOD" - and use science to justify their claim that there is no GOD.

 

[Angelic Being]

Yes, that would be science. As 'God' created the universe, the only way to understand God is to understand the universe. Not reading some book that was written before people knew what a universe was. I understand God better than you do.

oh, here we go again.....

 

[(Q)]

yes, there are many sinners but there are few that SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Sorry again to have to correct you, it seems to be an endless task.

There are millions of people who openly defy your holy spirit as blasmephous according to their own religion. In fact, there are more people on the planet who would acknowledge your holy spirit as they would a dog turd.

Your holy spirit is a mere featherweight in the ever expanding theater of gods.

 

[Angelic Being]

wow youre convinced that you have solved this issue with a thread on a message board. well shit, lets inform the vatican because you my friend are the answer to their prayers.

by the way, i would probably have just gotten sick of this thread after the last post, but now because i know you dont want me here, i'm going to do my best to continuously goad you into acting like the asshole that you are until your thread gets locked or maybe you get thrown off.

i think you need to get an adult role model, because your reply is simply childish and duncy.

nothing personal.

 

[Angelic Being]

yes, there are many sinners but there are few that SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Sorry again to have to correct you, it seems to be an endless task.

There are millions of people who openly defy your holy spirit as blasmephous according to their own religion. In fact, there are more people on the planet who would acknowledge your holy spirit as they would a dog turd.

Your holy spirit is a mere featherweight in the ever expanding theater of gods.

and there are millions of people out there who would bit the c... out of you if they found out that you were speaking for them.

lesson: speak for yourself (because you obviously will always do??????)