Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
Really.. are your words corrupted and what about the speaker of them?..
Be honest...
No, they just claim the "eyes" and "ears" and accuse everyone else of not having them.
The history of the great state sponsored churches was to destroy any who disagreed
Last time I checked the Reformed did ther best to destroy Anabaptists.
Exactly!
You seem to have conflated the meme of Holy Spirit guidance..
One of the perceptive things the old dork Freud said that was accurate was . . .
Even a religion based on love would be unloving to those not members of it.
And, Christianity of every brand, flavor has proven it so sooner or later . . . .
The old
IN-GROUP/OUT-GROUP dynamics, evils.
Come on give a little..
= = =
LOL.
Doesn’t seem to be in lots of folks’ DNA . . . particularly from certain regions! LOL.
Actually? I would like to see how you integrated empirical evidence of prehistoric life with that claim.
I don't put man's understanding of science in 2008 above the Holy Scriptures. If we did that, then the Bible would be just another book. It might be tempting to laugh at the world's scientists of 500 years ago, but then we have to wonder what the scientists of 500 years from now will think of scientists today.
As you know, there is an open debate among Christians as to the age of the earth, and whether men walked with dinosaurs. There is also a debate about whether global warming exists and what its cause is if it does exist. I don't happen to agree with the political (oops, I meant scientific) "consensus" on the latter, and am also not inclined to blindly follow what current scientists say on other issues.
We don't have to "believe" in dinosaurs, FK. We know they existed and we know they are not mentioned in the Bible.
That is debatable. While the word "dinosaur" doesn't appear, because it hadn't been constructed yet, there are some references to "things" that "could" refer to what we call dinosaurs. This is from the website Got Questions :
Those who believe in a younger age for the earth tend to agree that the Bible does mention dinosaurs though it never actually uses the word “dinosaur.” Instead, it uses the Hebrew word tanniyn (pronounced tan-neen; Strong’s #08577). Tanniyn is translated a few different ways in our English Bibles; sometimes it’s “sea monster,” sometimes it’s “serpent.” It is most commonly translated “dragon.” The tanniyn appear to have been some sort of giant reptile. These creatures are mentioned nearly thirty times in the Old Testament and are found both on land and in the water.
In addition to mentioning these giant reptiles in general nearly thirty times throughout the Old Testament, the Bible describes a couple of creatures in such a way that some scholars believe the writers may have been describing dinosaurs. Behemoth is said to be the mightiest of all God’s creatures, a giant whose tail is likened to a cedar tree (Job 40:15ff). Some scholars have tried to identify Behemoth as either an elephant or a hippopotamus. Others point out that elephants and hippopotamuses have very thin tails, nothing comparable to a cedar tree. Dinosaurs like the Brachiosaurus and the Diplodocus on the other had huge tails which one could easily compare to a cedar tree.
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with all this. :) My only point was to show it is debatable.
you: Then the Bible cannot be God's words.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. – John 1:1
I [am] he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. - Revelation 1:18
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. – John 8:58
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. – Colossians 3:3
I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every [branch] that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye [are] the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. - John 15:1-5
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. - John 12:48
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. - I Corinthians 2:14
For the word of the LORD [is] right; and all his works [are done] in truth. He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. For he spake, and it was [done]; he commanded, and it stood fast. – Psalms 33:4-9
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. [There is] no speech nor language, [where] their voice is not heard. – Psalms 19:1-3
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.- I Cor 2:9-14
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: - John 10:27
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. – John 6:44
Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. - I Cor 12:3
And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. - John 6:35
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. - John 6:63
Knowing the Scriptures - in whatever translation - is not enough. One must also know the power of God - Jesus Christ.
But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. - I Corinthians 1:24
A thing is true because God says it, e.g. "God said let there be light."
Maranatha, Jesus!!!
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou [art] with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever. - Psalms 23
***As Kosta point out, we are utterly incapable of knowing God’s essence/nature...there is no earthly reason why you should ascribe to the theology of The Church, but before you presume to characterize it, you ought at least to become marginally familiar with it.***
I’m always willing to learn more about Greek theology, K.
Let me point out I agree completely with the following quote from John of Damascus:
“God is... one essence (ousia); and that he is known and has his being in three subsistences... and that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are one in all respects, except in that of not being begotten, that of being begotten, and that of procession....But neither do we know, nor can we tell, what the essence (ousia) of God is, or how it is in all.... It is not within our capacity, therefore, to say anthing about God or even think of him, beyond the things which have been divinely revealed to us, whether by word or by manifestation, by the divine oracles at once of the Old Testament and of the New.”
-The Orthodox Faith 1.4
***To me this [misunderstandings] suggests that we are missing the true area of our differences. THAT, to me, is the interesting area of question. There is SO much misunderstanding.***
I guess I don’t find that so unexpected. Different traditions use different terminology which leads to confusion. Writers don’t show their readers charity in their misunderstandings. Readers don’t show writers charity in their terminology. Writers don’t make an effort to use terminology that translates to a different tradition. Ground motives are left unsaid. Examples and idioms are used that are contextually situated. Concepts are left unpacked without examples. There are myriad variables that lead to misunderstanding. This has always happened. Personally I’m not so interested in these sociological and psychological variables but try to understand them as best i can.
That being said let me respond, in charity, to some of your statements.
As for the whipsaw effect with Transcendence and Immanence the point I’m trying to make is one of starting point. The initial point was that revelation is possible based upon Biblical anthropology. For those who hold to utter transcendence, say like the Greeks and Barth, the only way to know God is through experience. OTOH, someone like Aquinas will start with reason of sense expierence and try to rationalize transcendence. In the first case God is unknowable except by mystical experience and the second case God is knowable through reason based on sense expierence. Instead of starting within ourselves to know God we should always start with the transcendence that became immanent, Christ, through the prophets and apostles as recorded in scripture to filter all facts.
As for the rest of your post it seems your moving toward panentheism or as Barth described it, “God is being in becoming”.
Amen
Nothing could be farther form the truth, FK. Your interpretation neglects the Nohaides. Chances are you never even heard of them, and how they fit into Judaism.
I don't see what relevance your term "Nohaides" has to anything we're talking about. Did "righteous Gentiles" get into Heaven without being saved? If not then Jesus came to save them too, just as Jesus and Paul both say. What does it matter how Nohaides fit into Judaism? The Jews were wrong about many things at that time.
I don't mean it as a cheap shot, but it seems to me that, when the Bible doesn't agree with Protestant theology, it is ignored (cherry-picking). Not only is there nowhere in the Gospels a verse that says Israel includes Gentiles.
Of course I would say it is the reverse. :) Take for example your above in which you admit to cherry-picking your interpretation of the Gospels while throwing out other NT scripture when you can't reconcile them. The Gospels are true AND Paul's writings are true.
St. Paul actually says that Jews are by nature somehow different from Gentiles: "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles" (Gal 2:15)
He means by birth. He doesn't mean that Gentiles have a sinful nature and Jews do not. That would be ridiculous. Here is the word used:
NT:5449 phusis (foo'-sis); from NT:5453; growth (by germination or expansion), i.e. (by implication) natural production (lineal descent); by extension, a genus or sort; figuratively, native disposition, constitution or usuage: KJV - ([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]).
Talk about cherry-picking! :) If Paul taught anything he taught that all men are equally guilty before God, and that all need a Savior, including Jews.
FK: "God intended what happened with the Jews all along."
Nope. He foreknew what choices everyone would make. What we do affects us, not God. God helps those who help themselves.
I know that many people think that God helps those who help themselves, but the truth is that it is the opposite. Again from that Got Questions? website I quoted earlier:
Question: "God helps those who help themselves - is it in the Bible?"
Answer: "God helps those who help themselves" is probably the most often quoted phrase that is not found in the Bible. This is actually a quote from Ben Franklin and it appeared in Poor Richard's Almanac in 1757. In fact the Bible teaches the opposite. God helps the helpless! Isaiah 25:4 declares, "For You have been a defense for the helpless, a defense for the needy in his distress, a refuge from the storm, a shade from the heat..." Romans 5:6 tells us, "For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly."
In terms of salvation, we are all utterly helpless. We are all infected by sin (Romans 3:23), and condemned as a result of that sin (Romans 6:23). Nothing we can do on our own can remedy this situation (Isaiah 64:6). Thankfully, God is the helper of the helpless. While we were still sinners, Jesus died for us (Romans 5:8). Jesus paid the penalty that we were incapable of paying (2 Corinthians 5:21). God provided the "help" that we need precisely because we could not help ourselves.
Apart from salvation, there is perhaps a way that the concept "God helps those who help themselves" is correct. As an example, if you asked me to help you move a piece of furniture, but then just watched me as I moved the furniture for you, I was not actually helping you. I would be doing the work for you. Many Christians fall into the trap of inactivity. Many Christians ask God for help, but then expect God to do everything Himself. They excuse this by pointing to the fact that God will provide according to His will and in His timing. However, this is not a reason for inactivity. As a specific example, if you are in need of a job, ask the Lord to help you find a job - but then be active in actually looking for a job. While it is in His power to do so, it is highly unlikely that God will cause employers to come looking for you!
The last paragraph is like the joke about the guy stranded on his roof in a flood. So, that part is true because it is not salvational. But we WERE talking about salvational issues with the Jews and Gentiles. "God helps those who help themselves" may be the most common form of stating a works-based salvation theology.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.