|
|
|
|
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 7:37:03 AM | For those who don't believe, there is no evidence of God
For those who do believe, evidence of God is everywhere
Physicists will tell you the very act of observing something affects it. If you "see" God in everything, you make God real - for YOU. I've done it... and it's lot of fun. Some people keep it up for a lifetime. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 7:53:33 AM | | Somewhere along the way in this thread I saw one who said they were an atheist post in this thread, but then received no response. Later, I saw the same person ask why they had not gotten response to their post? I've been mulling that over, and I'm wondering. If without belief in God, could/would there then be no sin in that framework? And if there is no sin then that an author would personally know, then it might follow that there might not be a response to one who does not know the very thing they are speculating about? hmmmm.... | |
|
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 8:20:45 AM |
For those who don't believe, there is no evidence of God
For those who do believe, evidence of God is everywhere
Physicists will tell you the very act of observing something affects it. If you "see" God in everything, you make God real - for YOU. I've done it... and it's lot of fun. Some people keep it up for a lifetime.
So true. Even the Bible agrees with that. It says becuase the evidence around us clearly shows there is a Creator, there is no excuse for those who do not believe. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 9:07:47 AM |
For those who don't believe, there is no evidence of God
For those who do believe, evidence of God is everywhere
EXACTLY, mn!
^ gg:
It says becuase the evidence around us clearly shows there is a Creator, there is no excuse for those who do not believe.
What about the area between "believers in a Creator" (which could encompass multiple viewpoints/ realities / even religions!) and "using the Bible to live/ justify a lifestyle" ... ( and if you don't agree with my literal interpretation, you are wrong, period)?
Does your religion allow the belief of reincarnation, for example?
And what's your God's take on these folks?? Are all those believers wrong?
For the record, I'm skeptical to literally believe a book that says because the evidence is all around, I should believe. In my house that could be called a cookbook!  | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 9:36:13 AM | The gap between there being a Creator and determining who that Creator is, certainly is ultimately up to each person alive today.
The evidence for the Bible is stronger, by far, than anything else. If, in fact, there is a Creator, don't you think He would make some kind of effort to communicate to us in a clear and undeniable way? If the Bible is the best there is, wouldn't it make since to consider it at great length? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:29:17 AM |
The evidence for the Bible is stronger, by far, than anything else.
LMAO... NO... sorry - that's just nonsense... I mean... your opinion.
There's no reason at ALL to believe there is a creator. It's a CHOICE to believe this - a choice that requires no reasoning... in fact using reason argues against this choice. Some people choose to believe despite evidence against their beliefs - and visa versa. People are stupid. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:39:58 AM | The evidence for the Bible is stronger than the fossil record? I'm sure the Mullahs in Iran would agree with you on that one, because they too place greater weight on perceived religious authority than they do on verifiable facts.
There is a lot of good in the Bible, some outright nonsense (God abhorring gays when He keeps making them, for instance), some incomprehensible ramblings (Revelation), and some significant omissions and distortions. You say you read it for yourself, and I'm tempted to take you at your word for that. However, there is a distinct difference between the provenance of the Bible and the provenance of, say, the Illiad. Nobody ever tried to prove that Ulysses was God in order to consolidate and legitimize an empire based on the Trojan War myth. The Greek and Roman texts that survived the Christian purges are free of distortion because they were either destroyed outright or regarded as curiosities when rediscovered. If you aren't taking into account the human agendas in your version of the Bible, you are simply drinking the kool-aid. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:49:33 AM | The Bible is a very important book, It is a very good history book, and for believers... much much more.
I for one appreciate the fact that it is available for us to read and study... I do not appreciate the fact that some decided for the history of mankind that only these writings were to be preserved and many others were to be destroyed.
It wasn't enough that those other views, writings and stories were excluded... but they also felt the need to destroy them. I say... what a shame.
I believe that was a huge sin..... To keep the teachings of God, Christ... the ones you didn't believe in away from the rest, in generations to come... The greatest censorship of all time.
People should have the right to choose for themselves. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 12:51:46 PM | Ace, I have no desire for Koolaid. I question far more than most churches will tolerate in their Adult Sunday Schools. I detest the way communion is done by nearly every denomination. There is plenty more that I'm not going to go into here. I accept that some of the reasoning behind the canon needs to be scrutinized. I know there are books missing from the Bible. But I also know that what we do have is very reliable based on the number of texts dating back as far as they do in the multi thousands.
The fossil record itself has no conflict with the Bible. It may conflict with some tradtitional beliefs and all, but there is no conflict with the Bible itself in terms of undeniable evidence made by the discovery of fossils. It's the deniable evidence, such as the dating methods and efforts to make the case for evolution without any consideration for creation, when it is a perfectly viable and much better explanation than evolution is that I have a problem with. I am not alone. There are a growing number of scientists that are beginning to agree. The science of ID is still in it's infant stages, relatively speaking, but the case is extremely strong already.
Jack I sure agree that burning books that disagree with the Bible is a huge mistake. The church as a whole has made some mistakes that make it very difficult to defend. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 1:34:39 PM | But Gg, I'm not saying that burning books that disagree with the bible.... I'm saying books that disagree with ones view point. Who is to say they disagree with the other words of the bible, they may have helped explain some of those words in more detail.
It's like having the alphabet.... and then someone deciding that C, F, H, I, Q, W, and X don't belong.... and to erase them from the face of the earth. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 7:30:27 PM |
If the Creator wants something to survive, it will survive. ...
OK, can't resist. By what means would the Creator do this? Does that included overrriding our free will? He let Moses break the tablets on which His law was inscribed after only one day. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 7:40:08 PM |
Jack, whatever reason they used. I will say this, though. If the Creator wants something to survive, it will survive.
Yeah... he should have kept Noah's Ark around. That would have been SOME proof alright. I think God may have (wait for it...) missed the boat on that one.
So what DID God want to survive that's in the Bible? Anything? Do we have any evidence that the OT was based on something tangible? That it isn't a storybook? I'm thinking there's more "proof" of the Iliad. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 9:26:15 PM | " Do we have any evidence that the OT was based on something tangible? That it isn't a storybook? I'm thinking there's more "proof" of the Iliad."
Archeologists and anthropoligsts use the Bible when researching because they have found it an effective history ..... I wonder, do theyuse he Iliad? | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 10:49:29 PM | Jack, I believe a lot of people want to make more out of it that was intended by God. It's worshiping anything as God that was made by God or something made by man (from something God made), rather than God Himself, as well as any false prophets that set themselves up to be God.
If you were God, wouldn't that be important to you? Don't you want your kids to have only you as their real dad? | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/14/2009 11:01:15 PM | Sure.... But who is to say .... that some prophet is a false prophet?
And what if God didn't want us to put so much stock on.... say a Cross... Wouldn't everyone wearing a cross be doing something wrong?
I understand what God wants..... My question is who here on earth can determine what is false and what is not?
I'm only asking
Let's say that....... what if the Orthodox Christians got it wrong?
Does it mean we didn't learn the true message that Jesus came to tell us? Maybe those who question the Orthodox way is trying to get Gods message back on track?
Again.... I'm only asking | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/15/2009 6:59:54 AM | Sure Jack it's always good to ask. I choose to look in the Bible for answers. Anything else would be just an opinion.
As far as prophets go, Jesus said you will know them by their fruits.
Matthew 7:15-20 (NKJV)
15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
16 "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
17 "Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
19 "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 "Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
What kind of fruit?
Galatians 5:22-23 (NKJV)
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.
As far as wearing a cross is concerned, it's what it represents that is important. It's part of the core beliefs and the purity and simplicity of the gospel, the good news that is indisputable in terms of what Christianity is all about. Without the cross and without the ressurection of Jesus, Christianity is as meaningless as any other religion concocted by man.
As far as the Orthodox or any sect or denomination is concerned, when you read the Bible, do you see the way they do things written in there? That's the question I ask. | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/15/2009 8:05:21 AM |
Matthew 7:15-20 (NKJV)
15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.
16 "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
17 "Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
19 "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 "Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
How is he not talking about TODAY's Christians? It is clear to me at least that the Bible here is talking about FALSE Christians - who would use the Good Word of God to bear the fruit of hatred. I know them by their deeds (their fruit).
See the reference to "sheep's clothing". That's definitely a Christian theme... the "flock". "Christians" who hate in the name of Christ are the "bad fruit" that Matthew speaks of here. Read it for yourselves.  | |
|
| Oct 5th entry in My Utmost for His Highest....defining sin
Posted: 10/15/2009 8:12:16 AM | Maybe Not, all I can say to that is you are right about some Christians, but not all of them. It's the same as lumping all Mexicans into the illegal category. It's completely wrong.
Also, as far as that goes, if you are going to let a hypocrite stand between you and God, they are closer to God than you are. | |
|
|
| Page 5 of 46
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
|
Home
login 
