What It Means To Be A Christian

[Horseman42]

TruthSeeker,

First off thanks for the quick response your posts always give me somthing to think about.

Yes, it is the same God in the New Testament. That's why it is written:

Then my question is why was it right to stone people in the Old Testiment and not in the New? It's still the same God. Why would God issue two different laws? You have to at least admit this is a little confusing. How can God change his mind about things? How do we know he won't change his mind again and make athiesm ok? Why not just tell us what is right from the begining?

It's rather ridculous for God to give us free will and then give us Commands to follow. If we don't follow these commands (or at least some) we go to hell. It doesn't feel much like free will if someone is pointing a gun at our heads.

So you can only be stoned by a righteous person. Since everyone sins, who can stone you? Jesus? God? But they don't, because they have forgiven you.

Right so again why was it ok to stone people before and not now?

No, God is not everywhere in this sense. God cannot live inside you unless you accept so. Also, God doesn't live inside pigs either . In the same way the air is everywhere, God is everywhere. The air goes inside you if you allow so, and so does God.

First off I have to ask what's wrong with pigs? So God only exists in the air or perhaps empty spaces? I'm not sure I follow what your saying?

If you are humble enough to recognize you are a particle of dust compared to the universe, you are perfectly capable to believe in God and, actually, also to know He exists.

So others that may not comprehend God does exist is set to go to hell (or away from heaven). What about people who cannot understand like Retarded people and babies? If you really think about it only a select people believe in God others may not know through no fault of their own. Isn't it obvious that people could be "misguided" it's not really that easy of a decision.

Horseman42

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
He fulfilled the Law in the cross. The Law said that we were sinenrs and that He would come to pay for our sins.

No, the Jews do not believe in original sin. It is a Christian doctrine based upon Paul's writings (Romans 5:12). It was developed by St. Augustine (354-430) as an explanation as to why bad things happen to good people and was not officially accepted into Christian doctrine until the Council of Orange in 529AD. I might add that Augustine could not read the 'original' Greek and based his doctrine upon the Latin Vulgate, which contains a mistranslation of that passage.

Yes, because the Law never fails.

If the laws of the OT never pass away and never fail than how can you conclude that they do not apply to us?

The difference between the "old" commandment and the "new commandment is that we do the "new" because we Love Him, while with the "old" it was an obligation.

I seriously question your interpretation; Jesus was confirming the Commandments here, not saying that they no longer apply. Christ's doctrine was that we need to live by the intent of the laws of the OT rather than simply applying the letter of the law.

Making it easier for you to understand... there is only one commandment: "Love one another".

Please show me where Jesus indicated this.

In the Old Testament, you HAD to do it in order to go to Heaven, because you were under the Law. So in the Old Testament, it was really a commandment. In the New Testament, you don't HAVE to do in order to go to Heaven.

Again, please provide the relevant evidence.

Romans is already New Testament. This passage tells us that those who are under the Law and go against it will perish. Those who are "without" the Law are those who don't accept the Law, don't follow it. But all those who accepted the gift of God shall not perish, but have eternal life in Christ Jesus.

That's funny, I see two conditions stated yet you have introduced a third. If this is what was meant why wasn't it stated that way? Personally, I find that you are simply making shit up.

Those who hear the Law and don't follow it are not just before God, but those who hear it and act on it will be justified. All Christians are already justified by faith. It is also written:

I tend to find most of what Paul (who stresses faith over works) says to questionable in any case but I would ask you who you believe more Paul or Jesus:

John 9:4
"We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.

John 10:37
"If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;

No, working within the context of the Bible, I have to go with James:

James 2:14-17
What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

James 2:20
But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

Those are the Christians

No, Gentiles are anyone who is not Jewish. What is being said is that if one follows the goodness in one's heart one will automatically follow the law, not that the law does not apply or that there is a different law.

That's what happens when you become a Christian. You follow the Law naturally, because He write the Law in your heart; so that you are not justified by the works of the Law, but by faith in Chrit Jesus, the hope of righteousness.

I disagree, see above.

~Raithere

 

[SnakeLord]

Oh my God... You have absolutly no idea what the verses are talking about...

Luckily the bible i'm looking through here actually explains sections. It's obviously them who know nothing about the bible. Even though it's been put together by all the best schollars you know better. But aside from that let's look at your quotes:

31 And Jesus answered and said to them, "It is not those who are well who need a physician, but those who are sick.

You turned this line into bold text and tell me it's about Jesus ressurrection? ehe ok. Jesus went to a big banquet held by Levi, (a tax collector). There were many tax collectors there. The Pharisees and the teachers of the law complained asking why he would eat and drink with tax collectors and 'sinners'. Jesus responded: "It's not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

It's funny that in thousands of years nothing has changed.... we still regard tax collectors as sinners.

It has nothing to do with ressurrection whatsoever.

Hebrews 10:1
"1 For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near."

The verse is talking about the difference between the Old Testament and New Testament. In the Old, you had to be forgiven everytime. In the New, there is no such thing. The verse says that the Law was just a preparation, or in a better word, a blueprint, of the things to come, the New Testament.

Well i'll leave you with your baseless assumptions. It seems you read one line and attribute completely unrelated meaning to it without reading the whole paragraph at least. Hebrews is not talking about old vs new testament- but i need not sit here trying to convince you of that, you make your own interpretations.

No, you don't have the Law in your heart. The Law is just in you mind, that's all. But it is not really deep in you

What the fuck do you know about me? Nada/squat/zero/nothing.

And morals and good things did come from the Law of God.

Hmmm no.

What is the oldest document that talks about morals and law? Moses came up with the very first document about our laws.

The oldest documents talking about morals and law are not found in the bible. You would assume that because you've read nothing else. As for Moses.... He's just a translation of Sargon. Moses in all likelihood didn't even exist.

Those laws were inspired by God. Then, the laws were changed and many more things were added, unfortunatly...

Not according to the people who wrote the original. They were mortal space travellers who gave mankind life from their own blood. Thus when people say we are made in the image of god/s it comes down to dna. With that belief we literally are made in the image of god. (we're not all identical which is why 'image of' instead of 'exactly like').

At least do yourself the favour of reading those original texts, instead of completely fixating on the translated version.

The Jews and the unbelievers need to follow those Laws in order to go to Heaven. All of them. Never brake not even one of them.

Wasn't it you who said there were NO rules? You do like to change your mind quickly.

The light blinded him. It couldn't be a comet. Besides, not only Paul, but two guys that were with him heard Jesus when He was speaking.

Sure it could be a comet.... you seen all of them? But ok.... it was aurora borealis, a ufo, a solar flare... whatever. Alternative suggestions. Ok so there were 2 guys that heard jesus speak.. what's the point? Still doesn't mean he's not a con artist.

You, yourself say that I'm wrong and everybody elease is wrong and that you are right, don't you?

When? That aint my style.... instead i prefer to debate, offer alternatives and seek truth. You've already apparently found your truth so everything else must be wrong. Don't try and turn it round on me k. Thnx.

So... can I call you self righteous, pompous, ignorant asshole? I guess so... if that's the case

You can call me whatever you want... jesus will forgive you, and personally im not too bothered.

You have no love or compassion or anything like that. You are judges and self righteous people. You have nothing of godly in you.

Ehehe ok. It is attitudes like that that cause the problems in the first place. Imagine all these snobby-nosed christians going round telling everyone they have no love, compassion etc cause they aint christian.... It's you who causes conflicts.

It is you atheists that get bits and pieces of scripture in order to find a "contradiction" in it.

Im not an athiest, but there are many many contradictions in the bible. It's not a case of yellow house, red house as you like to state.

What? Now, you are saying that you know it better then I? That's kinda funky...

I didn't say that.... i prefer the original works anyway.

If you doubt, just go ans study Greek and Hebrew...

I can speak Hebrew. I was adopted into a Jewish family, with many relatives in Israel. However i prefer other styles of 'language' like Sumerian, Egyptian hieroglyphs etc..

There are LOTS of space there for mistakes. A little list of possible mistakes:
- an adjective being mistaken by an adverb and vice-versa
- mistranslation caused by a single accent or lack of it in the word
- mistranslation caused by the interpretation of a case (like mistaking vocative for genitive)

I couldn't agree with you more. I've said time and time again the bible is so heavily translated we can't take it as accurately as you do. As such i prefer the original works. However what i do find amusing, as i've already said and you ignored, is that if it's a 'good' sentence it's the word of god, if it's bad it's mistranslation. You can't pick and choose like that.

No. Just because I say the truth, that doesn't mean I have a high ego.

Lol, you have such a high ego.

Not the WHOLE Bible. And I'm pretty sure you haven't read it all either.

Many times. Now do me the courtesy of reading the sumerian texts.

"God" and "gods" depends on the verse. When it is written about "gods", it is talking about false gods.

Well as quick reference lets look at Genesis. Then [the] Elohim, (Gods), said "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness."

It's plural and should be written that way. It was changed through translations and people finally got attached to a monotheistic belief, although that wasnt how it was originally intended.

It is also written that if you don't keep the Law you will get yourself accursed. Who curse who? It is you that curse yourwself by your own actions. Like if you go and sleep with your neightbour's wife and then he kills you. It was you that made him kill you. You bring destruction upon yourself.

O....k. And if he doesn't kill you or even find out, you've had a nice evening of sex with the neighbours wife.

Is it self righteousness to say that we are not rigtheous unless God is in us, that we depend on Him to be righteous? Or is it self rigtheousness to say that you don't need any God in order for you to be righteous and great?

Well the way you lot make him sound i'd consider myself great for even managing to get by without him. You've got it easy under the protection of god.... me, i got only myself but i have never been happier. It is great being able to rely upon yourself. Maybe you should try it.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Horseman42,

Then my question is why was it right to stone people in the Old Testiment and not in the New? It's still the same God. Why would God issue two different laws? You have to at least admit this is a little confusing. How can God change his mind about things? How do we know he won't change his mind again and make athiesm ok? Why not just tell us what is right from the begining?

God didn't change His mind. He is just pretty damn wiser then us and likes when we actually think about His Law...

The Law never changed. Jesus didn't brake the Law. He didn't come to break it, He came to fulfill it. The thing here is that you cannot stone someone unless you have no sin. Then you can judge sinners. But when you are righteous, you actually forgive people because you Love them. So the Law don't really tells us to stone people. The Law brings us the awareness that we are all imperfect, that we are all sinners. In the other hand, Christ brings us the awareness that we are forgiven through Him.

Romans 2:1
"1 Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things."

It's rather ridculous for God to give us free will and then give us Commands to follow. If we don't follow these commands (or at least some) we go to hell. It doesn't feel much like free will if someone is pointing a gun at our heads.

He is not pointing a gun to our heads. First of all, you don't need to follow this Law anymore in order to go to Heaven. The work is already done for you. All that you need is to accept Christ in your heart and then you have it, you go to Heaven.

Second, the Law was created to make us like Him, because the Law is made in His image.

Right so again why was it ok to stone people before and not now?

It wasn't ok. Just read above...

First off I have to ask what's wrong with pigs? So God only exists in the air or perhaps empty spaces? I'm not sure I follow what your saying?

There's nothing wrong with pigs. It is just that God doesn't live in them. And honestly, this is not easy not even for me to understand, so I don't think this discussion on where God is won't go very far. There are way to many variables to take into consideration in this kind of phylosophical discussion.

So others that may not comprehend God does exist is set to go to hell (or away from heaven). What about people who cannot understand like Retarded people and babies? If you really think about it only a select people believe in God others may not know through no fault of their own. Isn't it obvious that people could be "misguided" it's not really that easy of a decision.

I know God since I was baby (or almost that, depending on what you consider a baby). In fact, babies seem to be much closer to God then us (and I have already discussed that in other thread...). Besides, this decision is not that hard. Life becomes easier when you believe that God exists, even if you have blind faith (although I don't encopurage blind faith). I have known God for too long, so I never really experienced not knowing Him, that's why this question is a little hard for me to answer. I hope God someday give me wisdom to answer that, since I don't have the experience.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Raithere,

No, the Jews do not believe in original sin. It is a Christian doctrine based upon Paul's writings (Romans 5:12). It was developed by St. Augustine (354-430) as an explanation as to why bad things happen to good people and was not officially accepted into Christian doctrine until the Council of Orange in 529AD. I might add that Augustine could not read the 'original' Greek and based his doctrine upon the Latin Vulgate, which contains a mistranslation of that passage.

... Where is the "original sin" written?...
Genesis...?
Isn't that the very first book of the Bible, written by the most influencial prophet of the Jews, Moses?

If the laws of the OT never pass away and never fail than how can you conclude that they do not apply to us?

Because the Law is already fulfilled for us. Jesus died on the cross to fulfill the Law for us, He did the work for us.

Romans 8:3-4
"3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. "

I seriously question your interpretation; Jesus was confirming the Commandments here, not saying that they no longer apply. Christ's doctrine was that we need to live by the intent of the laws of the OT rather than simply applying the letter of the law.

Read above. The key thing here is balance. We shouldn't brake the Law all the time, but we shouldn't feel condemn or fear braking the Law either. hen you find a balance between fearing the Law and making it a religious obligation, then you get to the place where Jesus want us to be. He doesn't want us to feel condemned by the Law, neither for us not to follow it, He just want us to follow it naturally. When we get to the point of balance, the Law becomes natural and we are able to follow it.

Please show me where Jesus indicated this.

James 2:8
"8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF," you are doing well."

John 13:35
"35 By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

John 15:17
"17 This I command you, that you love one another.

Romans 13:8
"8 Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law."

1 Thessalonians 4:9
"9 Now as to the love of the brethren, you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another;"

1 John 3:11
"11 For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another; "

Oh... and I finally found this scripture:

1 John 3:23
"23 This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us."

Now, this one tells us that there is another commandment. However, this one you do it only once. Once you accept Christ in your heart, you are a Christian forever. So He command us to do so, but we don't need to do it repeatedly. That's why I said that is not a rule for Christians, it is just the "rule" to become one.

Again, please provide the relevant evidence.

Romans 6:14
"14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. "

And then the passage continues as I said before, telling us why we shouldn't sin although we are not under the Law anymore...

That's funny, I see two conditions stated yet you have introduced a third. If this is what was meant why wasn't it stated that way? Personally, I find that you are simply making shit up.

John 3:16
"16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. "

I tend to find most of what Paul (who stresses faith over works) says to questionable in any case but I would ask you who you believe more Paul or Jesus:

John 9:4
"We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.

John 10:37
"If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;

No, working within the context of the Bible, I have to go with James:

James 2:14-17
What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

James 2:20
But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

Balance. You are not justified by works, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have them. There is a balance to be attained here. You cannot do works by obligation and neither you cannot not do works at all. We are justified by faith, however, faith without works is useless. If you have faith that God forgives you in Christ and you don't accept Christ, your faith became useless and you are not saved anyways. You have faith, but you have to put your faith in action in order for the faith to produce its fruits.

No, Gentiles are anyone who is not Jewish. What is being said is that if one follows the goodness in one's heart one will automatically follow the law, not that the law does not apply or that there is a different law.

You are right. I pondered about it and asked to my pastor. He told me what you have said. We know by instinct what is right and what is wrong. But we do the wrong things anyways, because we are not perfect.

 

[SnakeLord]

... Where is the "original sin" written?...
Genesis...?
Isn't that the very first book of the Bible, written by the most influencial prophet of the Jews, Moses?

Genesis is a translation from Sumerian texts. Moses may very well have written the equivalent written 1,500 years after it's original but he sure did change it to suit his own style.

 

[TruthSeeker]

SnakeLord,

Genesis is a translation from Sumerian texts. Moses may very well have written the equivalent written 1,500 years after it's original but he sure did change it to suit his own style.

Really? Then where are those "Sumerian texts"?

 

[Persol]

I could have sworn I provided you those links last week.

 

[SnakeLord]

Museums all over the world, bookshops all over the world. Seek and ye shall find.

If you mean why isn't it as common as the bible.... well after 2000 years of belief in the bible as 'the word of god' people don't just throw it aside. In fact, just like you, the majority have never read any of it, have never even heard about it. Honestly man just take the time to read some of it..you might even learn some new things.

If you want me to quote some or whatever just ask.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Yeah, alright.... quote some.

 

[SnakeLord]

Sargon: "... My changeling mother conceived me, in secret she bore me. She set me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen she sealed my lid. She cast me into the river, which rose not (over) me. The river bore me up and carried me to Akki, the drawer of water. Akki, the drawer of water lifted me out as he dipped his e[w]er. Akki the drawer of water, [took me] as his son (and) reared me." (2,279 - 2,334 BCE)

Exodus: "... The woman conceived and gave birth to a son. She saw that he was good and she hid him for three months. She could not hide him any longer, so she took for him a wicker basket and smeared it with clay and pitch, she placed the child into it and placed it among the reeds at the bank of the river..." Then: "...the boy grew up and she brought him to the daughter of Pharaoh and he was a son to her. She called his name Moses, as she said, " For I drew him from the water." (1,250 - 1,350 BCE)

Enuma Elish: "When in the heights heaven was not named. And the Earth beneath did not yet bear a name, and the primeval Apsu, who begat them, and chaos, Tiamet, the mother of them both, Their waters were mingled together, and no field was formed no marsh was to be seen. When of the gods none had been called into being, and none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained. They were created the gods in the midst of heaven."

"... Let me put blood together and bones too, let me set up primeval man: Man shall be his name..."

(At least they say primeval man... The bible makes us believe man was hardly different from modern day man. This at least takes into account the scientific accounts of there being cavemen etc)

"... Nintu mixed clay, with her flesh and blood, they heard the drumbeat forever after, a ghost (soul) came into existence from the god's flesh and she (Nintu) proclaimed it a living sign." Later on "... I myself created (it), my hands have made (it)..."

Genesis says this: "The Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life..."

The usage of 'blood' in Sumerian is 'Adom'. The Sumerian for dust/ground as seen in Genesis is Adama. Is it possible that through 1,000+ years of translations, the stories handed down from generation to generation that these words could have ended up as the man you now consider the first man on earth? Adama-Adam....... Gotta admit it does raise a question.

Imagine a being, (mortal creator for this scenario), who makes mankind from his own blood and a mixture of ingredients. Would it be evidential that we are 'made in his image'? As Genesis suggests.

The nephilim from the bible were known as the Anunnaki in Sumerian....

In Numbers 13:33 it says: "There we saw the Nephilim, the children of Anak.."

In the story of Ziusudra, (Noah), the nephilim, (Anunnaki), are present.

"... Nintu was wailing... They are washed up, like a raft on a bank. They are washed up like a raft on a bank in open country! I have seen and wept over them! Shall I (ever) finish weeping over them?"

They were watching the destruction from the mountain tops... You see unlike Noah, the Ziusudra story didn't involve the drowning of the entire planet and all on it. It was the lowlands. The banks of the Euphrates popped. Ziusudra was caught on a barge with some goats, cows etc.... Some people made it to the highlands but he was stuck and sailed off until he came to sea where 'all the horizon was water'. Very interesting story it is... You can buy a book about it here and read some more about it.

Funnily enough nephilim means 'those who have fallen down from above'. The Anunnaki means 'those who from heaven to earth came'.

After Ziusudra landed he built a fire to cook and "... the gods smelt the fragrance, the gods smelt the pleasant fragrance.."

Genesis8:21 "The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma..."

Ziusudra was saved by a raven, in the bible it was a dove.

The bible states Abraham was from Ur, a Sumerian city. In Genesis 22:13 "And Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns..." He sacrificed that instead of his son...

On an archaelogical dig in a temple in Ur, they found this: Here

That is now on display in a museum in philadelphia.

There are so many influences and things we can find if we look to the Sumerians. This is just a teeny weeny part of it. Of course more will be harder to get now they're all bombing iraq :\

Now let's have a quick look at words:

E-Din- means House of purity/righteousness... Garden of the house of purity?? Sounds interesting....

The use and meaning of Din can be seen in modern language- Moujahadin is arabic for a righteous warrior, paladin is righteous/pure champion etc..

The Sumerian god Utu (meaning the [visible] sun) is the same as Shamash in Akkadian. The god name Shamash is the same as the Hebrew word for the sun, Shemesh.

Dumuzi - Sumerian god, used for name of Hebrew month as Tammuz. Crying for Tammuz is mentioned in Bible, Ezekiel 8:12. They were not crying for the name of a month. They were crying in remembrance of Dumuzi the husband of Inanna who was killed and not able to be revived.

There's so many other influences that should be looked at. You can get History Begins at Sumer, by Samuel Noah Kramer.

Hope this was of some enlightenment or help.

 

[TruthSeeker]

SnakeLord,

"... Nintu mixed clay, with her flesh and blood, they heard the drumbeat forever after, a ghost (soul) came into existence from the god's flesh and she (Nintu) proclaimed it a living sign." Later on "... I myself created (it), my hands have made (it)..."

Genesis says this: "The Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life..."

There is a key difference there. God gave us both soul and Spirit, while in the other thing there (whatever you call it) Nintu gave man only a soul.

The usage of 'blood' in Sumerian is 'Adom'. The Sumerian for dust/ground as seen in Genesis is Adama. Is it possible that through 1,000+ years of translations, the stories handed down from generation to generation that these words could have ended up as the man you now consider the first man on earth? Adama-Adam....... Gotta admit it does raise a question.

Well... those are just speculations though. All languages have some words that match and that are similar.

The bible states Abraham was from Ur, a Sumerian city. In Genesis 22:13 "And Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns..." He sacrificed that instead of his son...

He was going to sacrifice his son. However, God stopped him before he did it and blessed Abraham for trusting Him.

E-Din- means House of purity/righteousness... Garden of the house of purity?? Sounds interesting....

Makes sense...

The Sumerian god Utu (meaning the [visible] sun) is the same as Shamash in Akkadian. The god name Shamash is the same as the Hebrew word for the sun, Shemesh.

Dumuzi - Sumerian god, used for name of Hebrew month as Tammuz. Crying for Tammuz is mentioned in Bible, Ezekiel 8:12. They were not crying for the name of a month. They were crying in remembrance of Dumuzi the husband of Inanna who was killed and not able to be revived.

The Hebrews always worshiped many gods despite the fact that God told them not to. Those gods they created and other gods that many civilizations created are referred in the Bible. People used to make those gods. They would make an idol and worship it. They are false gods. That's the reason why God says "I'm the living God" and so on. There is reference for false gods even in the New Testament, particularly in Acts:

Acts 17:22-28
"22 So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects.
23 "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.
24 "The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands;
25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things;
26 and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation,
27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we also are His children.' "

Another reference...:

Acts 19:24-28
"24 For a man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Artemis, was bringing no little business to the craftsmen;
25 these he gathered together with the workmen of similar trades, and said, "Men, you know that our prosperity depends upon this business.
26 "You see and hear that not only in Ephesus, but in almost all of Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away a considerable number of people, saying that gods made with hands are no gods at all.
27 "Not only is there danger that this trade of ours fall into disrepute, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis be regarded as worthless and that she whom all of Asia and the world worship will even be dethroned from her magnificence."
28 When they heard this and were filled with rage, they began crying out, saying, "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!" "


Ancient civilization loved to worship gods. Only Jews worshiped only one God, and even them had a hard time doing so. All those stories of gods are just false gods made by human hands and imagination. God never liked that because He knew that people would get confused and deceived.

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

So you are like heaven's ambassador or something?

 

[Horseman42]

TruthSeeker,

The thing here is that you cannot stone someone unless you have no sin.

It says in Leviticus 24.23

QUOTE]Moses spoke thus to the people of Israel; and they took the blasphemer outside the, and stoned him to death. The people of Israel did as the LORD had commanded Moses.[/QUOTE]

Right so you will have be believe the people that are writen about in the passage above all have no sin? I thought not too long ago in the chapter they were all sinners? This seams like a contradiction.

He is not pointing a gun to our heads. First of all, you don't need to follow this Law anymore in order to go to Heaven. The work is already done for you. All that you need is to accept Christ in your heart and then you have it, you go to Heaven.

Right so now the choice is to accept Christ in your heart or not. If we don't then we go to hell. So therefore God is giving us the choice to choose (because we have free will) and then punishing us if we make the wrong decision. This is what I meant that it seams like we have a gun to our heads.

There's nothing wrong with pigs. It is just that God doesn't live in them. And honestly, this is not easy not even for me to understand, so I don't think this discussion on where God is won't go very far.

Right that's why I choose to believe he's everywhere. You have to agree at least that he can be anywhere he chooses. I'll drop the subject then.

Besides, this decision is not that hard. Life becomes easier when you believe that God exists, even if you have blind faith (although I don't encopurage blind faith).

Right I agree with you blind faith is never a good idea.
It is a very difficult decision how can you say it's not? If a child for example is brought up in China and becomes a devote Buhhdist making a transition over to Christianity would be very, very difficult. Can you not see this?

I know God since I was baby (or almost that, depending on what you consider a baby). In fact, babies seem to be much closer to God then us (and I have already discussed that in other thread...).

Honestly I was thinking more in the terms of the patients I look after at work. Almost all are diagnosed as being MR (mentally retarded). Some of the things they do to themselves or to others are very "sinful". However they all lack the capacity to understand their behaviour, or to except Jesus into their life as you put it earlier. Do they go to heaven or hell apon death?


Horseman42

 

[TruthSeeker]

Dr Lou Natic,

So you are like heaven's ambassador or something?

Huuum... indeed, that's a nice comparison. I've heard that before at church but I never though through this... Why are you asking that?

 

[Persol]

I think he was poking fun at you.

 

[TheVisitor]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the laws of the OT never pass away and never fail than how can you conclude that they do not apply to us?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Truthseaker
Because the Law is already fulfilled for us. Jesus died on the cross to fulfill the Law for us, He did the work for us

====================
====================


No, No, No.........Raithere is right on this one.......

He said:
I seriously question your interpretation; Jesus was confirming the Commandments here, not saying that they no longer apply. Christ's doctrine was that we need to live by the intent of the laws of the OT rather than simply applying the letter of the law.
---------

Jesus didn't come to do away with any of the law, He died for our sins to cover for our mistakes as we strugle and fight , fall and get up again, in the maturing from spirt babes when were born again, untill the maturity of the Christ within us... having our senses exercised in the discernment of good and evil, grown up into the image of the stature of a perfect man, forwit the adoption, unto the manifestation of the Sons of god.
We are his Bride and we are to bring forth Christ in us.
The kingdom of heaven is at hand, and the violent TAKE IT BY FORCE...thats you and I...
There is much we have to overcome in this age.
He says in Rev 3rd chapter...To him that overcomes I will give ect.....
He can't push you through a 6 inch pipe, and pull you out the other end and then say you overcame, you didn't overcome anything....
He leaves a measure of suffering, and obediance to be learned for the development of our character, which is more valuble than fine gold.
He said: Don't you know the saints shall judge the angels.
And we need to have the character of God molded in us.

God said I give you the land (to the Israelites), now you go and take it....and they had to fight those giants for every inch of ground they took.
Same today. It was a type then for our instruction.

Jesus came to magnify the law, and write it on the tables of the hearts of His people, who will worship Him today in spirit and truth.
He opened it up to mean the intent of the law, not just the letter....and to be done "from your heart" without being told you have to....

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
... Where is the "original sin" written?...
Genesis...?
Isn't that the very first book of the Bible, written by the most influencial prophet of the Jews, Moses?

Really? Then please show the passage to me. The term "original sin" is not used once in the Bible. God did indeed punish all of us by casting 'us' out of the Garden of Eden and so forth but there is no mention of sin being automatically assigned to us for one of our ancestors actions.

Romans 8:3-4
"3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

This is once again Paul speaking and so I question it's validity in any case but I still see no mention of original sin. What I do see is the statement that the flesh is weak, therefore God sent his son as an offering; to pay the price of redemption for us. It was not meant as a 'Get out of jail free' card.

He doesn't want us to feel condemned by the Law, neither for us not to follow it, He just want us to follow it naturally. When we get to the point of balance, the Law becomes natural and we are able to follow it.

I think you're close here. I think what he was saying is that because the flesh is weak we are, most likely, going to fail and break the law but even if we do we can be forgiven and redeemed. That is not the same thing as saying that the laws no longer apply.

James 2:8
"8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF," you are doing well."

I think that this was the most important lesson he taught; that if one always acts in love one will be following the law. Further, he was saying that those who follow the letter of the law, yet are against it in their hearts, are hypocrites and are actually breaking the law. As he said (and I'm paraphrasing here), even if you do not fuck your neighbors wife, if you walk around every day lusting after her you are still breaking the law. He was saying that the law is about more than one's actions, it involves one's mind and heart... but he was not saying that it was only about the mind and heart.

John 3:23
"23 This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us."

Please note that these are John's words (or so we assume). What Jesus said was, "John 15:12
"This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you."

Jesus never said, "Believe in me or die/burn in Hell." That was added to the doctine much later on. What he did say was; Believe in me and in what I say, follow the commandments with your heart, and love each other as I love you and you will find Heaven/be rewarded/have eternal life.

And then the passage continues as I said before, telling us why we shouldn't sin although we are not under the Law anymore.

Again, please show me where Jesus says we do not have to follow the law?

You are not justified by works, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't have them. There is a balance to be attained here. You cannot do works by obligation and neither you cannot not do works at all. We are justified by faith, however, faith without works is useless. If you have faith that God forgives you in Christ and you don't accept Christ, your faith became useless and you are not saved anyways. You have faith, but you have to put your faith in action in order for the faith to produce its fruits.

There is a crucial issue here for Christians and it is a source of quite some disagreement, though I think you have resolved it fairly well. It seems that the original apostles and Paul had some disagreements. Paul tends to stress faith while the others tend to stress works/law. One of the primary reasons for this is that Paul was much more involved with converting gentiles. And one of the gentiles' main issues with conversion was circumcision. This is easy enough to understand; "Yea, that all sounds great. How do I join? (long pause) I have to do what?" Paul therefore took the position that circumcision was not mandatory.

Thus we have:

Romans 2:26
So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?

Despite the fact that Jesus pointed out that circumcision was more important than 'technically' keeping the Sabbath:

John 7:23
"If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath so that the Law of Moses will not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire man well on the Sabbath?"

~Raithere

(edited for corrections)

 

[SnakeLord]

There is a key difference there. God gave us both soul and Spirit, while in the other thing there (whatever you call it) Nintu gave man only a soul.

I quoted three lines..... don't be so quick to jump to conclusion. However, either way you're not in a position to label this as any less valid than your story. And like i said considering there's a gap of over a millennium between these two many changes in story would occur.

Well... those are just speculations though. All languages have some words that match and that are similar.

For a time something of this nature will always come across as speculation. You have two choices: Search, and find the answer or just instantly dismiss it.

He was going to sacrifice his son. However, God stopped him before he did it and blessed Abraham for trusting Him.

Uhhh yeah im aware of that, but that's irrelevant to what i was saying.

Makes sense...

And the gods put man to work in the gardens of their 'house of purity' and thus the story was handed down to the bible authors, (badly translated of course).

The Hebrews always worshiped many gods despite the fact that God told them not to. Those gods they created and other gods that many civilizations created are referred in the Bible. People used to make those gods. They would make an idol and worship it. They are false gods. That's the reason why God says "I'm the living God" and so on. There is reference for false gods even in the New Testament, particularly in Acts:

Well, that's your 'belief'. You don't know God told them anything... you only have a book to rely on, in which case it still has no more validity than sumerian texts, ancient indian texts or anything else. You cannot deny the possibility of these other gods simply because you don't know. Ok you heard a voice- it doesn't mean anything- many religious Sumerians heard voices and saw miracles, many religious people from every different belief in the world hear voices and see miracles. It's not an answer to anything. It was God himself who several times throughout the bible refers in plural. "Let us create man in our image, our likeness". He wouldn't say that if he was the only one. He'd say.. "Let me create man in my image, my likeness." If we can attribute the plural terms as either bad translation or handed down Sumerian stories then we need to consider falseness in every sentence thereafter. Until we work out exactly what is translated and from where, what has been changed by 'chinese whispers', what's metaphor etc we cannot claim to know the truth of anything.

Ancient civilization loved to worship gods. Only Jews worshiped only one God, and even them had a hard time doing so.

1 god or a hundred gods is irrelevant. You are no different to ancient people. You adopt their beliefs of worship when it remains there might not even be a god- only thing that states there is are documents of people thousands of years ago who had no science. They did not understand many of the things we now take for granted. You keep yourself in line with shepherds of old because being a modern man is what.... too difficult?

All those stories of gods are just false gods made by human hands and imagination.

Easy as that heh?

God never liked that because He knew that people would get confused and deceived

This story of god is just a false god made by human hands and imagination.

I have always been an open searching 'agnostic'. Simply being on this forum listening to you people is turning me further away from the possibility of there being a god.

 

[TruthSeeker]

TheVisitor,

I seriously question your interpretation; Jesus was confirming the Commandments here, not saying that they no longer apply. Christ's doctrine was that we need to live by the intent of the laws of the OT rather than simply applying the letter of the law.

It was for freedom that He set us free. He set us free from the Law of sin and death. That doesn't mean that we should keep sinning. What I'm saying here is that there is no condemnation fro those who are in Christ Jesus. You may fall, but you are forgiven, because He died for our sins, and His Love covers the multitude of our sins.

The kingdom of heaven is at hand, and the violent TAKE IT BY FORCE...thats you and I...

Well... it is not exactly "violence". It is strenght, perseverance and power, but not exactly "violence"...

He says in Rev 3rd chapter...To him that overcomes I will give ect.....
He can't push you through a 6 inch pipe, and pull you out the other end and then say you overcame, you didn't overcome anything....

God's Love for us have overcomed our sins. Love covers a multitude of sins. Whoever believes in the name of His Son shall be saved. The key is faith. We are saved through faith.

God said I give you the land (to the Israelites), now you go and take it....and they had to fight those giants for every inch of ground they took.

Faith wothout works is deads by itself.

He opened it up to mean the intent of the law, not just the letter....and to be done "from your heart" without being told you have to....

I said that too... Have you ever read all that I said?


...
I don't even quote anymore... I just throw the scriptures in without even saying where they are...