Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Joz said:I'm not being a smart alec here, but what do you use as a guideline or standard of measure for living your life & the way you conduct yourself?
)
-Cp said:Psalm 14:1
The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."
And Kipling said, East is east & west is west and ne'er the twain shall meet.Phaedrus said:It's a question of "Authenticity" in the existential sense. "This above all: to thine own self be true" (Hamlet). "Know yourself" (Socrates/Plato). Is your faith real? What is "Real"? What is "Faith"? What are "You"? And for the love of God, what is "Is"?
But where do you think the boundries of society come from? Man is evil by nature; he couldn't have done it on his own.Dr Grump said:I have been taught right from wrong. Those things have been set by society over the centuries - some of those mores etc have come from the bible, some not. I don't need a book to tell me it is wrong to kill, rob, shoplift, drink and drive etc. (Oh, and I don't think you were being a smart alec at all - I actually like engaging in this type of convo without any rancor - unlike, say, somebody calling me a fool...
Joz said:But where do you think the boundries of society come from? Man is evil by nature; he couldn't have done it on his own.
Joz said:But where do you think the boundries of society come from? Man is evil by nature; he couldn't have done it on his own.
Dr Grump said:From various societies - Jewish, Christian, Hindu. And I do not believe man is evil by nature. I think man is capable of just as much evil as he is of good. And it varies from man/woman to man/woman...For every Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin there is a Mohatma Ghandi and Mother Theresa....
and your immortal soul :halo:
Phaedrus said:Hmm, so we've gone from contradictions in the Bible to whether or not man is "Good". I'm tempted to ask what is "Good", but I've been posing too many questions as of late.
To steer things perhaps in the right direction, I'll assert that regardless of whether or not the Bible contradicts itself, the parables contained therein are worth the read : D
People take things too seriously, it's only life :funnyface death
No. You don't get it at all.dilloduck said:I get it--If science or reason can't prove it then it doesn't exist. Correct?
Well then we really haven't anymore to discuss, as this is at the core of Christian belief.Dr Grump said:From various societies - Jewish, Christian, Hindu. And I do not believe man is evil by nature. I think man is capable of just as much evil as he is of good. And it varies from man/woman to man/woman...For every Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin there is a Mohatma Ghandi and Mother Theresa....
Joz said:Well then we really haven't anymore to discuss, as this is at the core of Christian belief.
All I can say is this: .....and all our righteouness is as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6
....For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23
....as by one man sin entered the world and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. Romans 5:12
Man is evil by nature.
Joz said:Well then we really haven't anymore to discuss, as this is at the core of Christian belief.
All I can say is this: .....and all our righteouness is as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6
....For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23
....as by one man sin entered the world and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. Romans 5:12
Man is evil by nature.
See Grump, man is saved by justification. It is the accepting of Christ as the Redeemer. NOT by anything we can or ever will do.
"But we are all like an unclean thing, and all of our righteousnesses are like filthy rags" (Isa. 64:6).Reference Isaiah the prophet summed up the wretched state into which the covenant people of God had sunk. Though they had the boon of receiving the Law from Mount Sinai, though they had come out of Egypt through the Red Sea, they had turned from their Lawgiver. The children of Zion were worshipping false gods (42:17). They were reveling in the dregs of idolatry. So much so, the prophet calls Jerusalem a harlot (1:21) and likens it to Sodom (3:9).
And yet, the people had an illusion of righteousness. Some of them professed to be "holier than thou," even while burning incense on strange altars (65:3-5). But God did not esteem their righteousness to be anything but pollution. He even hated the Sabbaths and feasts that He had Himself ordained (1:13,14). The house of Jacob's apostasy had rendered its best acts of religion unclean. Like the wind, sins were sweeping people away (64:6b).
How appropriate that the prophet would break into such hyperbole as to call this supposed goodness "filthy rags." What better way to call the nation to repentance? In the context of proud Judah's barrenness, the rebuke comes with the force of a thunderbolt.
This is most certainly the way the text should be read. We have all heard that "a text without a context is a pretext." This applies here. The "filthy rags" must be understood historically and with application to the audience: apostate Jerusalem.
This, however, is not the way many Evangelical Protestants applies the famous passage. In fact, in all of the times I have ever heard it quoted - in sermons, study guides, books, Sunday School lessons - I have never once heard anyone interpret the verse in context. References to Isaiah 64:6 are invariably made to mankind in general. The verse becomes a proof-text for the total depravity of man - even of the saints. Many will say that the deeds of even the most profound disciples are nothing but "filthy rags" in the sight of God. And so, the text is made universal and theological, rather than specific and historical.
The Isaiah text has long functioned as support for the "orthodox" creeds and confessions. Calvinism uses it to establish the idea that everything the natural man does is wicked - even good deeds. This helps to set up the dogma of "total inability," the engine which drives the entire Calvinist soteriology.
This is right. But, if their works could be as "filthy rags", then what about the rest of us?jillian said:http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhse/rags.html
Now mind you, I don't know anything about the author, but it was a different perspective.
Joz said:This is right. But, if their works could be as "filthy rags", then what about the rest of us?
I believe this man is wrong.
jillian said:I absolutely respect your belief. I think that type of certainty must be an amazing feeling. Just there are other beliefs as well. I prefer the Lockian view of man...a blank page which is neither good nor evil but has potential for either. I don't think we're created to be evil Through free will we can choose to do good or not do good.
dilloduck said:I still think we're born ignorant--prone to do stupid things until we are taught better.
jillian said:Ignorance isn't the same as evil...although ignorance can certainly lead to evil actions.
We were not created evil. Man chose this way. And freewill still reigns; to do good or evil. We are known by our works, yet they will not save us.jillian said:I absolutely respect your belief. I think that type of certainty must be an amazing feeling. Just there are other beliefs as well. I prefer the Lockian view of man...a blank page which is neither good nor evil but has potential for either. I don't think we're created to be evil Through free will we can choose to do good or not do good.
