I Am A Good Person, Therefore, I'm Going To Heaven!

[katiemygirl]

No, I'm saying that this seems like an indication that Paul had it wrong. Maybe Paul didn't quite understand the reasoning for Jesus' death, why it was necessary, or what God's will, in this context, actually was.

So you pick and choose certain parts of the Bible to believe and others to disregard. You are leaning on your own wisdom for understanding. That's dangerous.

Paul understood, and he made it clear to those who study with an open heart.

 

[katiemygirl]

I understand all this, but what does this have to do with Jesus' death being absolutely necessary? Btw, I'm not questioning God, I'm questioning Paul's validity.

I've explained in detail the necessity of Jesus' death. From your response, I don't think you do get it.

If you question Paul, you question the majority of the NT, and you question God, in turn.. That's a problem. I'm afraid you and I have no common ground for debate because I accept every word the Holy Spirit spoke through His apostle Paul.

I wish you the best.

 

[2ndpillar]

I hear this all the time. "I'm good, therefore I'm going to heaven."

Really?

I would ask, why did Jesus bother to die on the cross then?

Dear kate,
Actually everyone goes to the grave/pit.

 

[2ndpillar]

So you pick and choose certain parts of the Bible to believe and others to disregard. You are leaning on your own wisdom for understanding. That's dangerous.

Paul understood, and he made it clear to those who study with an open heart.

Dear kate,
Paul is a false prophet best described in Mt 7:15. The basic canon of the bible which closely resembles the one on your desk, was proffered in 367 AD by the bishop of Alexandria, a Roman Catholic bishop, who received his support from the beast with two horns like a lamb, Constantine, who convened your Council of Nicaea, which established your basic creeds, and dogmas. The "Christian" church is founded on the two horns like a lamb, being Peter, the "worthless shepherd" of Zech 11:16-17, and Paul, the shepherd who was called "Favor" for his false gospel of grace. (Zech 11:10).

Your bible contains both the "tare" seed and the "good seed" (Mt 13:24-25). It is a "snare" to call something "holy" before a thorough investigation. (Prov 20:25) Onced snared, one is pulled into the pit.

 

[leibowde84]

So you pick and choose certain parts of the Bible to believe and others to disregard. You are leaning on your own wisdom for understanding. That's dangerous.

The Bible is a collection of books written at different times by various authors, some of which are unknown. For the second time, you are enlisting nothing more than a cop out, as I clearly explained what my intention was in questioning the validity of this specific claim made by Paul. Further, I explained in a previous comment that I did not "pick and choose" certain parts of the Bible. I am not certain about anything claimed in the Bible. Certain things seem more plausible than others. But, I try to explore the history, plausibility, validity, etc. of everything claimed in the Bible to get a better understanding of what the truth actually is.

Keep in mind that when Paul was claimed to have authored his letters, the books that would be chosen to be included in the Bible hadn't been chosen yet. There were 4 gospels out of more than 30 possibilities. To just blindly accept everything in the Bible merely because certain biblical authors claim that it is all the word of God in its entirety without questioning is something I am proud not doing. It is foolish to do so.

 

[leibowde84]

I've explained in detail the necessity of Jesus' death. From your response, I don't think you do get it.

If you question Paul, you question the majority of the NT, and you question God, in turn.. That's a problem. I'm afraid you and I have no common ground for debate because I accept every word the Holy Spirit spoke through His apostle Paul.

I wish you the best.

If God did not inspire Paul's writing, then, obviously, I am not questioning God. And, as I've said repeatedly, that is what I am not sure of. Certainty in this context is merely an illusion based on blind faith. There is nothing wrong with healthy skepticism.

 

[katiemygirl]

The Bible is a collection of books written at different times by various authors, some of which are unknown. For the second time, you are enlisting nothing more than a cop out, as I clearly explained what my intention was in questioning the validity of this specific claim made by Paul. Further, I explained in a previous comment that I did not "pick and choose" certain parts of the Bible. I am not certain about anything claimed in the Bible. Certain things seem more plausible than others. But, I try to explore the history, plausibility, validity, etc. of everything claimed in the Bible to get a better understanding of what the truth actually is.

Keep in mind that when Paul was claimed to have authored his letters, the books that would be chosen to be included in the Bible hadn't been chosen yet. There were 4 gospels out of more than 30 possibilities. To just blindly accept everything in the Bible merely because certain biblical authors claim that it is all the word of God in its entirety without questioning is something I am proud not doing. It is foolish to do so.

The bottom line is we have no common ground for debate. My job is not to prove to you that the Bible is the Word of God.

Blind faith? That is precisely what faith is. It is the confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

 

[muhammad_isa]

...
Blind faith? That is precisely what faith is. It is the confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

In a way, that is true. We cannot physically see Almighty God.

However, when people use the term "blind faith", they are normally accusing someone of believing in something without questioning it. eg. they believe it even if it makes no sense

 

[leibowde84]

In a way, that is true. We cannot physically see Almighty God.

However, when people use the term "blind faith", they are normally accusing someone of believing in something without questioning it. eg. they believe it even if it makes no sense

Would you agree there is nothing wrong with questioning certain things claimed in the Bible by examining the history, historicity, plausibility, context, etc. of those claims?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Would you agree there is nothing wrong with questioning certain things claimed in the Bible by examining the history, historicity, plausibility, context, etc. of those claims?

Of course I would agree..
The same goes for the Quran.

I might not always agree with your conclusions, though

 

[leibowde84]

Of course I would agree..
The same goes for the Quran.

I might not always agree with your conclusions, though

fair enough.

 

[roger1440]

The bottom line is we have no common ground for debate. My job is not to prove to you that the Bible is the Word of God.

Blind faith? That is precisely what faith is. It is the confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

I have faith you can copy and paste. I also have faith a child can do the same.

 

[leibowde84]

I have faith you can copy and paste. I also have faith a child can do the same.

??

 

[roger1440]

??

Opps, I had to edit my post. You weren't suppose to be there.

 

[savagewind]

Paul understood

You know Paul understood, but we do not understand. How do you know this?

 

[katiemygirl]

In a way, that is true. We cannot physically see Almighty God.

However, when people use the term "blind faith", they are normally accusing someone of believing in something without questioning it. eg. they believe it even if it makes no sense

I've never doubted God's Word. I do, however, have many questions about things I don't understand.

Have a good night. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[katiemygirl]

I have faith you can copy and paste. I also have faith a child can do the same.

?

 

[leibowde84]

I've never doubted God's Word. I do, however, have many questions about things I don't understand.

Have a good night. Thanks for the discussion.

I think we are both referring to questioning whether it is in actuality God's word. If we knew it was God's word, then questioning it wouldn't make much sense.

 

[savagewind]

I think we are both referring to questioning whether it is in actuality God's word. If we knew it was God's word, then questioning it wouldn't make much sense.

I know the one called Jesus is the word. I do not know why they can not reason that it wouldn't be fair to all people if God's word was a book.
It would mean that people before the book was done would not have had God's word and many people can not own and read it in their own language.
Of all the people who have ever lived only a very small number will have had God's word to understand it. How is that fair and merciful?

 

[Thief]

Being good or bad has nothing to do with entrance into Heaven.

I believe the peace of heaven is guarded

not all enter