Christians Preferred: Are only Literalists True Christians™?

[YoursTrue]

Actually my version of God does exist and is active in Creation. Your version of my God does not exist and that I agree with that.

I was listening to an interview with a minister who wrote a book and he was talking about one's God, meaning that a person needs to understand his God. The minister believed in Jesus. So it made me think that the jews and Christians basically had one particular God, the nations around them worshipped other gods. What do you think about that?

 

[YoursTrue]

Will do the read.. but certainly no space to
" as a literal day context...

But I see the Jesus stories as historical. As Paul said, 1 For been what I said. (Through my lack of capacity.

That is why I believe in Einsteins theory of relativity where light and time are important and thus a day can be so much longer that the 24 hours we call a day.

How about the possibility that the word day could be used to encompass light and darkness or a set period of time with a beginning and an end?

 

[ElishaElijah]

I was listening to an interview with a minister who wrote a book and he was talking about one's God, meaning that a person needs to understand his God. The minister believed in Jesus. So it made me think that the jews and Christians basically had one particular God, the nations around them worshipped other gods. What do you think about that?

I use believer or unbeliever, either a person believes/trusts that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, that God came as a man, lived a sinless life, died on the Cross/tree, rose from the dead and will return as the Scriptures say. Receives that gift of salvation and is born again of the Holy Spirit or they don’t believe that, reject the gift God offers and go a different way and are an unbeliever. Mainly because God offers salvation to every human being no matter where they are from. The gospel is to the Jew first then the Gentile.

“Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭17:29-31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[YoursTrue]

Abiogenesis, is about how life began. Evolution, is about speciation, or how animals diversived in the ways that we see today. Why are there the species that they are, and what the process that made them that way.

The TOE deals only with what happened, after it all got going. It is not that field to look into abigenoses, as it is outside that question. So is the best egg batter to use for a recipe. While fascinating, it doesn't relate the focus of that field of research.

Why do you think it should include it? I don't understand that reasoning. Do you think that the ToE should be a scientific examination of whether or not there is a God that started it all? Should that be the focus of science for you? Examining whether or not God exists?

And yes, I believe the Bible too when it says, "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." What science shows us, is how He did that, and is doing that.

It may be that God used similar elements to form the type of living beings there are. We have no proof that all things just "happened" without divine guidance. (Remember-- I said there is no proof that "all things" just happened to happen.) For instance, God allows many things to happen. It does not mean He programs every step either of natural course, or biologically. DNA or similar looking life forms are not proof that evolution happened to happen. It is proof that DNA can be similar. Or that chimpanzees have arms and legs and possibly facial characteristics that remind one of themselves. But chimps usually recognize chimps, humans, generally speaking, do not recognize chimpanzees as humans.

 

[YoursTrue]

I use believer or unbeliever, either a person believes/trusts that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, that God came as a man, lived a sinless life, died on the Cross/tree, rose from the dead and will return as the Scriptures say. Receives that gift of salvation and is born again of the Holy Spirit or they don’t believe that, reject the gift God offers and go a different way and are an unbeliever. Mainly because God offers salvation to every human being no matter where they are from. The gospel is to the Jew first then the Gentile.

“Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭17:29-31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

I can't say that God ever was a baby. The Bible does not lead me to conclude that. It does lead me to conclude that Jesus was in heaven WITH God before he left heaven and lived as a man, completely as a man untill he died. Not God in human form.

 

[YoursTrue]

I use believer or unbeliever, either a person believes/trusts that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, that God came as a man, lived a sinless life, died on the Cross/tree, rose from the dead and will return as the Scriptures say. Receives that gift of salvation and is born again of the Holy Spirit or they don’t believe that, reject the gift God offers and go a different way and are an unbeliever. Mainly because God offers salvation to every human being no matter where they are from. The gospel is to the Jew first then the Gentile.

“Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭17:29-31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Again, for a person to know God does not mean that every depiction, vision, dream that someone has necessarily comes from God, even if the person says it does. Let's take, for instance, the Egyptians during Moses' time. They had their gods. Notice Exodus 12:12: - "On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD."
So the gods of Egypt were not the God that spoke to Moses. What do you think about that?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Again, for a person to know God does not mean that every depiction, vision, dream that someone has necessarily comes from God, even if the person says it does. Let's take, for instance, the Egyptians during Moses' time. They had their gods. Notice Exodus 12:12: - "On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn of both people and animals, and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD."
So the gods of Egypt were not the God that spoke to Moses. What do you think about that?

Every vision, prophecy, dream, thought needs to be tested by Scripture to see if it’s from God or another source. If it contradicts Scripture or Gods character it’s not from God. This is written in Scripture on how to tell true from false prophets.
Also was interesting that the magicians in Egypt only added to the misery on the first 2 plagues and said this on the 3rd:
“Now the magicians so worked with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not. So there were lice on man and beast. Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, just as the LORD had said.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭8:18-19‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[metis]

God's words are recorded to an extent in the Bible. Not all of them, of course. I'm sure He spoke many more words than those in the Bible. All scripture is inspired of God. That's what the Bible says. 2 Timothy 3. Do circumstances affect the understanding of them? Of course they do.

You didn't answer my question in regards to the Bhagavad Gita and why that is or is not "inspired by God".

 

[metis]

I disagree. I'm not claiming to be perfect. Beauty, for instance, can be evaluated by unperfect beings, I think.

Sorry to say, but that's illogical. How could one know X is perfect unless they had perfect judgement?

I don't know.

IMO, that's a better answer, as this approach admits our limitations, which we all have. Plus, there's a bug difference between "I believe X is perfect" versus "X is perfect".

Probably like you, I read the Bible daily, but I cannot claim it is perfect because, #1, I ain't perfect and; and #2, I frankly couldn't tell if anything is perfect since I'm not omniscient. But what I do know is that the Bible is a great inspiration to me, this imperfect guy.

 

[Kenny]

How about the possibility that the word day could be used to encompass light and darkness or a set period of time with a beginning and an end?

I suppose it could be possible.... My point is we really don't know how much a day was when God was creating before the sun and the moon existed by which we determine our time,

 

[YoursTrue]

Every vision, prophecy, dream, thought needs to be tested by Scripture to see if it’s from God or another source. If it contradicts Scripture or Gods character it’s not from God. This is written in Scripture on how to tell true from false prophets.
Also was interesting that the magicians in Egypt only added to the misery on the first 2 plagues and said this on the 3rd:
“Now the magicians so worked with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not. So there were lice on man and beast. Then the magicians said to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of God.” But Pharaoh’s heart grew hard, and he did not heed them, just as the LORD had said.
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭8:18-19‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Again -- there was a particular God for the Israelites. The God of Israel was not the god of the nations. But there were (are) other gods besides the one True God. John 17:3 - "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." So there is only (according to Jesus), an ONLY TRUE GOD. The Egyptians had their gods, they were not the God of Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Although of course, this ONLY TRUE GOD could reach whomever He wants to, as in Pharaoh's case. But Egypt at that time had other gods.
15 Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt (thoughtco.com)

 

[YoursTrue]

I suppose it could be possible.... My point is we really don't know how much a day was when God was creating before the sun and the moon existed by which we determine our time,

And I tend to agree with that. On the other hand, I doubt that God needs light to see things.
"This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:15)

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry to say, but that's illogical. How could one know X is perfect unless they had perfect judgement?

IMO, that's a better answer, as this approach admits our limitations, which we all have. Plus, there's a bug difference between "I believe X is perfect" versus "X is perfect".

Probably like you, I read the Bible daily, but I cannot claim it is perfect because, #1, I ain't perfect and; and #2, I frankly couldn't tell if anything is perfect since I'm not omniscient. But what I do know is that the Bible is a great inspiration to me, this imperfect guy.

It is possible that insertions have been made to clarify some things. And, there are things that scholars have been pressed to explain. But the basic message and frankly, the details (check out the wandering for 40 years -- very, very clear and descriptive) can be so clear that there is little doubt in my mind that the book(s) is accurate and true.

 

[YoursTrue]

You didn't answer my question in regards to the Bhagavad Gita and why that is or is not "inspired by God".

If you read Paul's words, also Jesus, they kind of make it clear that there is only one TRUE God. Remember? Hey, look, I can't help it, that's what the Bible says they said. Jesus: John 17:3 - (English Standard Version) "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.)
Let's go back to the account of the Israelites in the wilderness. It wasn't like they weren't passing through territory where the non-Israelities were worshipping other gods. Also, there are false inspired messages, aren't there? You should know because you read the Bible a lot. I'm not a betting person, I don't go to the racetrack or casinos and put money down. But I wonder if you think the account about Jesus is a myth too? ?

 

[YoursTrue]

You didn't answer my question in regards to the Bhagavad Gita and why that is or is not "inspired by God".

I am not that familiar with Hinduism and its traditions. You, as the teacher, may well be more familiar, so I am interested in your opinion. I think that generally Hindus do not believe in violence towards humans and animals, although cultures within may differ in application or revelation.

 

[thomas t]

Sorry to say, but that's illogical. How could one know X is perfect unless they had perfect judgement?

when you say it's illogic, the onus is on you to prove your point. A question is by no means a substancitation of a claim.

Probably like you, I read the Bible daily, but I cannot claim it is perfect because, #1, I ain't perfect and; and #2, I frankly couldn't tell if anything is perfect since I'm not omniscient. But what I do know is that the Bible is a great inspiration to me, this imperfect guy.

you say you cannot say the Bible is perfect, since you are too imperfect.
And yet you claimed it is not perfect, see post 19.
This is quite biassed, I think

By the same means you say it is not perfect, I say it is. This is at least my opinion.

 

[metis]

It is possible that insertions have been made to clarify some things. And, there are things that scholars have been pressed to explain. But the basic message and frankly, the details (check out the wandering for 40 years -- very, very clear and descriptive) can be so clear that there is little doubt in my mind that the book(s) is accurate and true.

This is an illogical statement as it is virtually impossible to check the veracity of such supposed events today. Just because something is "descriptive" does not automatically mean that it must be correct.

 

[metis]

If you read Paul's words, also Jesus, they kind of make it clear that there is only one TRUE God. Remember? Hey, look, I can't help it, that's what the Bible says they said. Jesus: John 17:3 - (English Standard Version) "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.)
Let's go back to the account of the Israelites in the wilderness. It wasn't like they weren't passing through territory where the non-Israelities were worshipping other gods. Also, there are false inspired messages, aren't there? You should know because you read the Bible a lot. I'm not a betting person, I don't go to the racetrack or casinos and put money down. But I wonder if you think the account about Jesus is a myth too? ?

Again, you haven't answered the question I asked dealing with the Bhagavad Gita, thus citing what's in the Christian Bible doesn't deal with that.

My point, which you are basically confirming by your skirting around the question, is that you cannot in any logical way provide any objective evidence whatsoever that the Gita is not the "word of God" but the Bible is. Thus, what you are doing is conflating "belief" with "fact".

 

[metis]

I am not that familiar with Hinduism and its traditions. You, as the teacher, may well be more familiar, so I am interested in your opinion. I think that generally Hindus do not believe in violence towards humans and animals, although cultures within may differ in application or revelation.

There are so many variations of Hinduism it's darn near impossible to provide any precise "definition". Not all Hindus buy into non-violence Gandhi-style, nor are all of them vegetarian.

The Gita doesn't deal with either of these, btw, thus more focusing on dedication.

 

[metis]

when you say it's illogic, the onus is on you to prove your point. A question is by no means a substancitation of a claim.

One cannot "prove" one's point when dealing the issue of "logic" since it is a historical issue that took place thousands of years ago that we simply cannot in any way verify one way or the other. Basically, it's largely what is called "hearsay evidence", which almost always is at least somewhat conjectural.

you say you cannot say the Bible is perfect, since you are too imperfect.
And yet you claimed it is not perfect, see post 19.
This is quite biassed, I think

If it has what theologians call "variations" [on many narratives], then logically it cannot be perfect. Thus, it is actually your position, not mine, that is biased because you are making assumptions that you simply cannot in any way substantiate, thus being of what's commonly called "blind faith". However, that does not mean that it is automatically wrong.

By the same means you say it is not perfect, I say it is. This is at least my opinion.

And I fully support your right to have an opinion.

OTOH, as a Christian, I do believe in the direction that the Bible takes us.