[ER]

Originally Posted by figment

now, now, I was only playin devils advocate Thats not MY position!

Ha ha!

[ER]

Originally Posted by Rios929

That doesn't explain why, in that case, we have the desire to do wrong instead of right. You have to go against your desire to do good. You're not choosing from a neutral standpoint.

Well, now we're talking about the deceptiveness of the devil and sin in our lives. We have a desire to love and make love to a husband or wife, but we have an inflated desire to lust. Make sense? The devil makes sin appear very attractive and he inflates our natural desires to encourage us to sin. He's the master of deception and inflation, as a friend of mine once said.

If that's not enough, we as corrupted and selfish men and women will want to satisfy the here-and-now from time to time anyway. As Christians, it's our duty to resist those sinful urges and to confess our sins to God when we fail. He doesn't expect us to be perfect, but He will convict our hearts of our sins when we slip and He wants us to confess (agree with Him about) them to Him.

It's a freedom of choice that God has created us to have, and the devil will encourage us to abuse that freedom every chance he gets.

[Rios929]

Originally Posted by ER

In believing that we have evolved to the point to where we are, I wonder if some of Evolution's pioneers have theorized the way they have in an attempt to prove that God doesn't exist rather than trying to seek Him out to know that He does exist. Life to me would seem to be pointless if I thought that I was the result of a random series of unguided events.

Maybe life is pointless...

I don't know why evolution is being brought up....BTW Darwin believed that a man's religion was a completely private matter and left it completely out of all of his scientific work.

[Rios929]

Originally Posted by ER

It's a freedom of choice that God has created us to have, and the devil will encourage us to abuse that freedom every chance he gets.

So why does God let the devil do this?

I'll go out on a limb and say that most people probably have premarital sex. Does this mean the devil's influence is felt more strongly than God's?

[figment]

Originally Posted by Rios929

Maybe life is pointless...

I don't know why evolution is being brought up....BTW Darwin believed that a man's religion was a completely private matter and left it completely out of all of his scientific work.

What IS science?

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by Rios929

Another thing....Sometimes, we have a natural desire to do what is wrong according to christianity. For example masterbation and pre-marital sex.

Even Christians disagree about right and wrong. Capital punishment, pre-emptive war, birth control, etc, etc. IMO, if Christians in this country understood the whole concept of Christianity it would be a different place. The Beatitudes are a wonderful statement of spiritual thought. Yet I don't see much carry over into practice. Is it because: a) Christians aren't saved by works anyway, so why bother? or b)The Holy Spirit does not have much influence in all that many folk?
I hear a dissonant tone when someone insists that I must accept Jesus as the one and only way to reclaim my place at God's side when even Jesus disciples, the ones who slept by his side, saw him heal and raise the dead, still didn't trust him when he appeared before them after the resurrection. Thomas had to touch his wounds--TOUCH HIS WOUNDS. And yet, billions of souls, two thousand years later are required to take a third person's word for it, or else they lose their shot at eternity? Haven't we all learned by now that God is inclusive? That spirit and inspiration comes in many forms to many different people? Why after thousands of years, countless dead in ignorant wars, do we have to cling to a flag that says this way or no way? Sounds more human than God to me... When I start seeing Christians, en masse, reflecting the life of Jesus and embracing the ideas so eloquently addressed in the Beatitudes, I'll revisit the issue.

[figment]

Originally Posted by Rios929

So why does God let the devil do this?

I'll go out on a limb and say that most people probably have premarital sex. Does this mean the devil's influence is felt more strongly than God's?

I dont know all the reasons for why God allowed/s Satan to tempt people. It started soon after they were placed here according to the Bible.

Of course the devil may get a lot of blame he does not deserve. (the devil made me do it!)


I think the devil has priorities since he has limited powers. He has to focus on real threats. For example, I would not expect him to bother too much with people who dont represent a large number of saved souls.

[figment]

Originally Posted by zenblader

Even Christians disagree about right and wrong. Capital punishment, pre-emptive war, birth control, etc, etc. IMO, if Christians in this country understood the whole concept of Christianity it would be a different place. The Beatitudes are a wonderful statement of spiritual thought. Yet I don't see much carry over into practice. Is it because: a) Christians aren't saved by works anyway, so why bother? or b)The Holy Spirit does not have much influence in all that many folk?
I hear a dissonant tone when someone insists that I must accept Jesus as the one and only way to reclaim my place at God's side when even Jesus disciples, the ones who slept by his side, saw him heal and raise the dead, still didn't trust him when he appeared before them after the resurrection. Thomas had to touch his wounds--TOUCH HIS WOUNDS. And yet, billions of souls, two thousand years later are required to take a third person's word for it, or else they lose their shot at eternity? Haven't we all learned by now that God is inclusive? That spirit and inspiration comes in many forms to many different people? Why after thousands of years, countless dead in ignorant wars, do we have to cling to a flag that says this way or no way? Sounds more human than God to me... When I start seeing Christians, en masse, reflecting the life of Jesus and embracing the ideas so eloquently addressed in the Beatitudes, I'll revisit the issue.

Matthew 7
22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Emphasis mine.

[Rios929]

Originally Posted by figment

What IS science?

Seems like a loaded question

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by figment

What IS science?

Figgy, your gettin a bit esoteric here. God is science! God is life. God created the Universe. God created you, me, the Pope, Hitler and Sadaam. All kinds of wigglies and pointies and wet. Possibly gazillion stars and planets.
Yet, for the Native Americans, ET's, whales and dogs that never even heard of the guy who spent 33 years living and walking on a tiny fraction of planet Earth, they're all on the hook. Just killin time til they are judged unsaved by Grace.

[ER]

Originally Posted by Rios929

So why does God let the devil do this?

I'll go out on a limb and say that most people probably have premarital sex. Does this mean the devil's influence is felt more strongly than God's?

As Figment pointed out, we don't have all the answers. Personally, I believe that one day we'll be able to look back on His works and say, "Oh, now I get it". By reading the Book of Job, though, it's clear that the devil only has whatever authority God has allowed him to have. While he may roam like a roaring lion to seek his next victim, he's only allowed to do so because God permits it. It's my best understanding that He does so to further His works.

The expression "the right thing is never the easy thing" comes to mind. The easy way in dealing with sex is to give in to our desires and lusts. The right thing to do -- according to the Bible -- is to treat sex as something to be shared between a man and a woman who have married. God desires for us to do the right thing while the devil (and his angels) push and encourage us to take the easy way out.

Does all of that mean that the devil is responsible for every sin and/or that his influence is stronger? Well, no. It means that he desires to see us fail, while the Lord encourages us to live a holy life. The difference is that Satan pushes while God leads. If it were the other way around, we wouldn't truly have a free-will, would we?

[figment]

Originally Posted by zenblader

Figgy, your gettin a bit esoteric here. God is science! God is life. God created the Universe. God created you, me, the Pope, Hitler and Sadaam. All kinds of wigglies and pointies and wet. Possibly gazillion stars and planets.
Yet, for the Native Americans, ET's, whales and dogs that never even heard of the guy who spent 33 years living and walking on a tiny fraction of planet Earth, they're all on the hook. Just killin time til they are judged unsaved by Grace.

There is no need to call me names


Have you read Lukes account of the crucifiction? Maybe that would help you understand a very important but often unconsidered facet of Gods Grace. What happended to the dead (those holy people who died before they knew Christ or even had a chance to meet Him?) Where were they? Where had they been? Where were they going? God is not fair, thankfuly for us he does not deal with us on the basis of our deeds. If He were fair I would be hopelessly lost.

[ER]

Originally Posted by zenblader

Even Christians disagree about right and wrong. Capital punishment, pre-emptive war, birth control, etc, etc. IMO, if Christians in this country understood the whole concept of Christianity it would be a different place. The Beatitudes are a wonderful statement of spiritual thought. Yet I don't see much carry over into practice. Is it because: a) Christians aren't saved by works anyway, so why bother? or b)The Holy Spirit does not have much influence in all that many folk?
I hear a dissonant tone when someone insists that I must accept Jesus as the one and only way to reclaim my place at God's side when even Jesus disciples, the ones who slept by his side, saw him heal and raise the dead, still didn't trust him when he appeared before them after the resurrection. Thomas had to touch his wounds--TOUCH HIS WOUNDS. And yet, billions of souls, two thousand years later are required to take a third person's word for it, or else they lose their shot at eternity? Haven't we all learned by now that God is inclusive? That spirit and inspiration comes in many forms to many different people? Why after thousands of years, countless dead in ignorant wars, do we have to cling to a flag that says this way or no way? Sounds more human than God to me... When I start seeing Christians, en masse, reflecting the life of Jesus and embracing the ideas so eloquently addressed in the Beatitudes, I'll revisit the issue.

You're well-enough versed in philosophy and religion and you know enough about the Bible that I occasionally wonder if you're just playing your position to encourage and argument! J/K Hey...great post. What you've asked is a valid question.

Thomas was always skeptical. Aren't we all as humans? Don't we tend to question something that appears to be unbelievable? How often did the people of Christ's time ask for signs and miracles to prove He was God? What did He say to them?

Matthew 12:39 - But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah."

And what did Christ say to Thomas when he finally believed? "You believe because you've seen -- blessed are those who believe and have not seen".

John 20:29 - Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."

Blessed are those who choose to believe in Christ without having to have irrefutable proof. That's just it. Choose to believe and see what happens. That should be the counter to the "Atheist's Wager" -- choose to believe and ask for an increase in your faith and see what happens. Either He will enter your life and will convict your heart -OR- nothing will happen.

Originally Posted by zenblader

Haven't we all learned by now that God is inclusive? That spirit and inspiration comes in many forms to many different people? Why after thousands of years, countless dead in ignorant wars, do we have to cling to a flag that says this way or no way?

How Christ chooses to show Himself to the different people of the world isn't necessarily known. To a Christian who believes that the Bible is the Word of God, though, his/her path is clearly spelled out:

Acts 4:12 - And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."

So either the Bible contradicts itself and, thus, isn't truly the Word, or this is the way God would have it to be.

[figment]

Originally Posted by zenblader

Figgy, your gettin a bit esoteric here. God is science! ...

Not exactly. Simply put, science is mans search for the truth. God does not need science.

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by figment

There is no need to call me names

Sorry figment. Meant no disrespect. I actually like you, but in a good manly sort of way. Not that old Greek goat/boy confusion

[figment]

Originally Posted by Rios929

Seems like a loaded question

If you mean I already had an answer, yes, it was loaded. How could Darwin publicly proclaim certain "truths" and at the same time claim "religion" is a private matter. Kinda smacks of calling people of faith believers of fairy tails.

Today Bible scholars see more clearly than ever before how well the Bible, a book written over many hundreds of years, many hundreds of years ago continues to stand up as science progresses and many of our understandings about science are revised. No book of science has ever been written to match the Bible even though it is NOT a book of science.

I find the evident ignorance (of the Bible) by those who proclaim the fallacies of the Bible to be quite astonishing. Have you ever wondered why people make assumptions like this? It seems to me that they are taking other peoples opinions (who have not read or studied it either) as their own with out personally finding out what the Bible says. I could be completely wrong about this but it would appear to me that this is the case.

[ER]

Originally Posted by figment

If you mean I already had an answer, yes, it was loaded. How could Darwin publicly proclaim certain "truths" and at the same time claim "religion" is a private matter. Kinda smacks of calling people of faith believers of fairy tails.

Today Bible scholars see more clearly than ever before how well the Bible, a book written over many hundreds of years, many hundreds of years ago continues to stand up as science progresses and many of our understandings about science are revised. No book of science has ever been written to match the Bible even though it is NOT a book of science.

I find the evident ignorance (of the Bible) by those who proclaim the fallacies of the Bible to be quite astonishing. Have you ever wondered why people make assumptions like this? It seems to me that they are taking other peoples opinions (who have not read or studied it either) as their own with out personally finding out what the Bible says. I could be completely wrong about this but it would appear to me that this is the case.

Great post.

[figment]

Originally Posted by zenblader

Sorry figment. Meant no disrespect. I actually like you, but in a good manly sort of way. Not that old Greek goat/boy confusion

I like you too and appreciate your continued contributions here. I enjoy discussing these topics and appreciate your easygoing manners.

[Rios929]

Originally Posted by figment

I find the evident ignorance (of the Bible) by those who proclaim the fallacies of the Bible to be quite astonishing. Have you ever wondered why people make assumptions like this? It seems to me that they are taking other peoples opinions (who have not read or studied it either) as their own with out personally finding out what the Bible says. I could be completely wrong about this but it would appear to me that this is the case.

You could say the same thing the other way around. I think most people that believe in the bible are ignorant of what it says. Most people that believe in the bible were born into a family that raised them to do so. All of these people are taking other people's opinions as their own.

You could also say that most people that proclaim the fallacies of science are ignorant to the research, methods, principles, and theories. Obviously "most people" does not mean you....

[figment]

Originally Posted by Rios929

You could say the same thing the other way around. I think most people that believe in the bible are ignorant of what it says. Most people that believe in the bible were born into a family that raised them to do so. All of these people are taking other people's opinions as their own.

You could also say that most people that proclaim the fallacies of science are ignorant to the research, methods, principles, and theories. Obviously "most people" does not mean you....

Great points. Like mine, they may be fallacies of hasty generalization, but worth considering. But that does not imply anything further than some people are lazy.

Science and Scientists have theories which are established and after time become "emotionally" attached to them and the implications they provide. Its hard for them to see them torn down by additional discovery. All of this is provocative, but the fact remains that our understanding of the universe is incomplete.

Many people through the centuries of the Church have made claims that are unfounded, like the earth being flat and at the center of the universe. Their stance was one of expectation and presumption (not scriptural). But they damaged the credibility of Bible scholars. Part of this I think is our human ness that wants to jump in and support OUR position/reputation. Obviously these positions would not be those of an omniscient God

No one wants to be proved wrong and once you do, have you made a friend?

One of my passions is learning and I have a passion for learning about God too. Although I could never repay Him for all the Grace given me, I like to do a small service of witnessing whenever I think I can do it out of love. I am always learning about how to be more selfless. I don’t want to jerk the rug out from under people as much as I want to show them that believing in Jesus and the Bible does not require a dis-joint in reasoning.

[ER]

Another good post Figment.

Rios and Zen, I've probably been more of a bystander in this discussion, but I've still enjoyed your responses. Whenever a discussion comes up about Christ and faith, I respond the way I do because I believe the Bible to be God's Word and my studies and prayers have led me to a peace of mind that I'm doing what I believe God wants me to do. If you believe differently, do you have peace of mind that you're doing what God wants you to do? Or, if you don't believe in God, do you have peace that you're right?

[zenblader]

Originally Posted by ER

If you believe differently, do you have peace of mind that you're doing what God wants you to do? Or, if you don't believe in God, do you have peace that you're right?

I have peace of mind that I'm being what God wants me to be... (Gandhi: "How I live my life, that is what I believe...")
I am human with the weakness that comes with it so I can't always be sure that I'm doing what God wants me to do.

Many of the "critics" of Biblical accuracy are actually Bible scholars and people like myself who grew up immersed in Bible study and Christian schools. Much of the "criticism" is seen as an attack by those who assert that the Bible is an infalllible, accurate portrayal of events and speech. But for most, including me, these are not meant as attacks. I am just applying the same standard to the Bible that I do to any written work. Why? Because, while I do believe that it was divinely inspired, it was still written and interpreted by man. I can't speak for Rios, but during my expanding study of theology and anthropology in the last twenty years I have discovered what many have. That 1) Humans write their bias into "inspired" works no matter how well intentioned. 2) There have been many instances of inspired thought and writing before and after Christ that are non-Christian in origin (yet they bear remarkable similarity to Jesus' teaching) 3) There are millions of non Christians who are at peace with their relationship to God (including me).
So, I can believe in Jesus because his life and teachings resonate with the spirit within me. Just as I can appreciate the Buddha, Zen, some Hindu teachings, Native American mythology, etc. Much of this speaks to and of the same spirit, which I believe we all possess. We are all children of God. Some of us know that and some don't. I believe that God is more inclusive and that many of those who wave the banner saying "This is the way..." are contributors to Jung's comment that Religion is an obstacle to having a religious experience. People all over the planet are expressing and demonstrating God's love with peace and assurance, while still unaffiliated with Christianity in any way. This has been happening since man walked the earth. So have the bad things. Hence the struggle with duality (Spiritual nature with physical existence) Jesus found the knowledge of who he really was. Buddha found the knowledge of who he truly was. We all need to do the same thing.
Finally, this is not something that is easily explained because language is another filter that distorts spirit. The more we talk or write, the more we express our bias rather than our true nature. Jesus worked around it by using parables quite often. Most theological debate ends up in splitting hairs with semantics and interpretation. For instance, a person could quote Bible texts to back a number of opposing assertions. This is what the Pharisees did all the time. They were well versed in the "language" but ignorant of the spirit.
Yeah, I'm more at peace now than I ever have been. You and Figment are showing your peace by the pleasant way you respond to those who may disagree.

[figment]

John 1


The Word Became Flesh

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

Jesus is quite different from anyone else as His claims make Him either a liar, a lunitic or Who He really was.

John 6:35
Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.

John 6:48
I am the bread of life.

John 6:51
I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."

John 8:12
When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

John 10:11
"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.

John 11:25
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies;

John 14:6
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

John 20:31
But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

[zenblader]

Figment,

We're goin' round and round with this one. As I've stated in previous posts regarding "John's" assertion of what Jesus said, I attribute a certain messianic flavor to the interpretation of Jesus words due to those around him who were looking for the Messiah to save and release the Jewish people from it's servitude. The disciples still thought Jesus was there to become King of the Jews, despite Jesus own message. It is entirely consistent with human behavior to "flavor" the dictation so as to address a preconcieved notion. In essence, I am not calling Jesus a liar, I am merely pointing out that the disciples were wrong/biased in their assertions and interpretation time and again during Jesus life, causing Jesus to continuously repeat and explain his message. How much more likely is it that those who penned the Gospels, in some cases decades after his death, unintentionally added a flavor to his words that didn't originally exist? It is very likely. Some would say a certainty. This doesn't even take into consideration the mindset of those who tra