Zone1 Question for Christians

[zaangalewa]

Are you familiar with the negotiations and political considerations involved when the bible was compiled from seperate ancient texts? How it was determined which would be included, and which would not?

Don't laugh - but I am not really interested in theology. I'm only a normal Catholic, one of more than a billion Catholics, that's all. What I say about theolgy is only born out of the need to have to correct some mistakes which are dangerous today.

 

[zaangalewa]

All of that conforms to the teachings of Christianity, but is really not the point. Avoiding sin, confession, stumbling, and the rest are expected steps along the way to the one immutable requirement for God's forgiveness. Accept Jesus, or go to hell.

You refer here to a totally wrong understanding of the word of Jesus: "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me". Your problem is: You are not Jesus but Jesus decides - only Jesus decides - and you are not able to do so. Your sentence "Accept Jesus or go to hell" is indeed a damned anti-Christian formula. No one is able to follow with love in the heart such a brutal order.

None of the steps coming to that point matter, or change God's determination of whether you receive forgiveness. That is the defining point of Christianity.

?

All flavors of Christianity share that rule. Without it, you are not Christian.

Which rule? Resistance is futile? You will be assimilated? Wrong film, isn't it?

 

[BULLDOG]

For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man’s work.--1 Cor 3:11-14

“Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done.--Rev 22:12

For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.--Matthew 16:27

Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully.--2 Cor 9:6

Do you need more verses? Let me know.

Nope. There are plenty of verses like that. Should I just ignore what Paul said in Roman's? His statement is the exact opposite of what you listed. Wouldn't that make Paul, the author of most of the NT, a false teacher? You might note Paul's opposition to what Jesus taught (this one example is far from his only one) is only one of the many questions professed Christians can't seem to find a reasonable response to.

 

[BULLDOG]

Don't laugh - but I am not really interested in theology. I'm only a normal Catholic, one of more than a billion Catholics, that's all. What I say about theolgy is only born out of the need to have to correct some mistakes which are dangerous today.

Hard to identify mistakes if you can't identify why they are mistakes.

 

[Woodznutz]

I was devoutly Christian until I did a deep study of the bible which presented questions I couldn't find the answers to, and nobody I asked even tried to answer. I wish I could reclaim my faith. Believing in a loving, all knowing God who deeply cared about me personally gave me great comfort in hard times, and I wish I could regain peace that came from the belief that all things would work for the good to them that love God. I conveniently ignored the following part that said only those that were called according to his purpose.

Paul was quite specific when he said there is nothing in human desire or effort to gain forgiveness. God will show mercy or harden who he wants, and nothing we believe, say, or do will have anything to do with his choice. (Romans 9: 16-18) Paul goes on to explain that some people were only created as examples of his glory to be shown to the objects of his mercy. (Romans 9: 19-23) Obviously, those people were created to go to hell, since there is nothing they can believe , or do to change Gods decision on mercy.

Help me out here. Does God offer the chance to go to heaven to everybody, or just his chosen few, and how do you justify what Paul wrote with the idea of a benevolent forgiving God?

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

God is calling only a few in this age. Those called now will minister to the rest of mankind in the age to come. It's all good.

 

[BULLDOG]

You refer here to a totally wrong understanding of the word of Jesus: "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except through me". Your problem is: You are not Jesus but Jesus decides - only Jesus decides - and you are not able to do so. Your sentence "Accept Jesus or go to hell" is indeed a damned anti-Christian formula. No one is able to follow with love in the heart such a brutal order.



?



Which rule? Resistance is futile? You will be assimilated? Wrong film, isn't it?

Go back and read the OP, and then Roman's 9:16-23. I don't have to be Jesus. Paul made that point clear.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

God is calling only a few in this age. Those called now will minister to the rest of mankind in the age to come. It's all good.

You understand stuff. Congrats

 

[BULLDOG]

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

God is calling only a few in this age. Those called now will minister to the rest of mankind in the age to come. It's all good.

Somebody should have explained that to Paul.

 

[zaangalewa]

Your god doesn't love his creations that much is obvious

Who loves you?

 

[zaangalewa]

Hard to identify mistakes if you can't identify why they are mistakes.

I can live with mistakes - not with all mistakes but with many mistakes - because the perfect is not perfect. And the bible of the daily life is for me much more important than any book.

 

[zaangalewa]

Go back and read the OP, and then Roman's 9:16-23. I don't have to be Jesus.

But what if I am Jesus? Or an old Muslim lady is Jesus? Or your dog is Jesus?

Paul made that point clear.

Letter to the Roman community. Written from Paul. Chapter 9 ... 16-23 ... Aha ... But what do you like to say with this words which you don't remember now here in this context?

 

[BULLDOG]

But what if I am Jesus? Or an old Muslim lady is Jesus? Or your dog is Jesus?



Letter to the Roman community. Written from Paul. Chapter 9 ... 16-23 ... Aha ... But what do you like to say with this words which you don't remember now here in this context?

Not sure what you are trying to say with your first sentance. Perhaps a dumb joke that doesn't make much sense to me.
Paul was the self proclaimed Apostle to the Gentiles. He was more responsible for the teachings and beliefs of the beginning Christian church than anyone else. His letters of instruction and visits were seen as direct guidence from God, What more context do you need?

 

[zaangalewa]

Not sure what you are trying to say with your first sentance. Perhaps a dumb joke that doesn't make much sense to me.

How do you know that I am not Jesus?

Paul was the self proclaimed Apostle

Paul was blind[ed] - this became clear to him - and he learned to see new. And yes - he became a messenger of Christ. Still today one of the most famous messengers.

to the Gentiles. He was more responsible for the teachings and beliefs of the beginning Christian church than anyone else. His letters of instruction and visits were seen as direct guidence from God, What more context do you need?

I do not understand what you try to say to me with the words of Paulus in his letter to the Romans chapter 9 verses 16-23.

 

[Blues Man]

Who loves you?

My wife.

 

[Meriweather]

More accurately, you concentrate on that which makes you feel familiar, and all warm and fuzzy while bypassing that which does not fit your focus. That's what cults do.

Not accurate at all. You forget what I said earlier, where a personal experience of God perplexed me about what people were saying about God in the Old Testament. My experience of God is pure love and lovers all seemed to be the exact opposite of what we are told by people of the Old Testament who had their own experiences of God. How could this be!?

I set forth to answer that question, and along the way discovered it was a different language seeing through the lens of a different culture that made my experience of God seem not only opposite, but radically opposite of Old Testament experiences. Turns out, returning to the original language and the original culture taught me that Old Testament people also held a firm insight that God is love.

Seeing God as a monster could mean someone changed changed something in their own life that necessitated thinking of God as a monster. It's not I who am after warm and fuzzy. Not only do I not care for 'warm and fuzzy' I don't need it. Could it be that those who equate 'warm and fuzzy' with having a relationship with God could mean that 'warm and fuzzy' comes to those who find justification for turning from God?

People who choose to turn towards God better expect to be challenged constantly.

 

[Meriweather]

Not sure what you mean by "modern english read though the lens of western culture" Are you saying the bible's meaning is not the same as it once was? Which is the true meaning? Was origonal Christianity based on inaccurate bullshit, but only now seen for it's true meaning, or was the origonal totally correct, and modern Christianity has bastardized those texts? It must be one or the other. It can't be both because they are not the same. .

All it means is that language changes, the meaning and use of words change over time.

Alan Greenspan once said, " ' I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant'"

The same can be true of the Bible: I know we think we understand what we thought the Bible said, but I'm not sure we realize that what we understand is not what was meant."
First of all, we have so much more world history behind us than they had in their time.

It takes tremendous time, tremendous effort to go back through Biblical times and cultures to study (not read) what the original author was saying to his original audience.

 

[Meriweather]

So seeing stars means the dirt doesn't exist? You seem to be enamored with the stars.(again, focusing on the parts you like to the excluson of that which you choose to ignore)

No. It is about choice. (And I see myself as the prisoner who chooses to focus on the dirt.)

Both dirt and stars exist. Which one will we choose to explore. Ironically, you equate me with the stars when it is actually the dirt that interests me more. I enjoy gardening and I can do so much more with dirt that I ever can do with stars. Stars are pretty to look at, but not much use to me.

I see you more as the 'star' prisoner. Nothing more to do than to enjoy the stars (no God) you view.

 

[Meriweather]

Except that Jesus spoke of Hell. A lot. A real lot.

Well, since the word 'hell' did not exist in his lifetime, that is interesting. As I noted before, he spoke of Gehenna (the city dump) when comparing what our thoughts and emotions can do to us; he spoke of the purifying effects of fire.

At the time of Jesus, people held a belief that at the moment of death not all immediately went to the bosom of Abraham. Some might require a time of purification, which was thought not to exceed a year. (Jews note the first anniversary of a loved one's death.) Some believe the parable of Lazarus means Lazarus was in hell, but it may be equally as likely the people of the time were thinking of those going through their year of purification before going to the bosom of Abraham.

 

[Meriweather]

So God set up the entire sacrificial system--including the unblemished lamb and the passover--for just no reason at all. Maybe to make us THINK the Lamb of God on the Cross could accomplish something but according to you, it was more theater to generate an emotional response.

No. Have no idea of how that conclusion was reached.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Seeing God as a monster could mean someone changed changed something in their own life that necessitated thinking of God as a monster

As a 21st century Christian I have NEVER seen God as a "monster.". Those who do have never repented of trying to "go their own way.."

That view of God comes from the Dark Side. But reciting "God is love," endlessly doesn't do away with the MANY WARNINGS Jesus have that "UNLESS YOU REPENT, YOU SHALL LIKEWISE PERISH."

God won't allow anymore Satan's to develop. That is the whole reason we are created flesh and blood. If we make the wrong choices in THIS life, it is simply OVER. Our future is death for the rest of time -- complete non-existence