The Bible Tells Me So

[YoursTrue]

I would have to say that's true. No matter how hard we try we cannot and do not earn life.
On the other hand, we can try to please God.

And then on the other hand, we need to get direction from God as to what pleases Him. For instance, does fornication please God? Many would say no.

 

[YoursTrue]

A Roman Catholic scholar told me I have no life in me because I don't literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus at least once a year. Even though most Catholics only partake of the wafer and not the wine.

So I studied what they believe and the scripture they use to justify their claim. But when Jesus spoke of eating his flesh and drinking his blood he said that the words he spoke were spirit and life. he said it was the spirit which makes one alive.

Consider this quote from Bibleref.com on John 6:54

"In this passage, Jesus repeatedly compares the means of salvation to eating His flesh and drinking His blood. The context for this analogy is Jesus' claim to be the "true bread from heaven," which is the sole source of salvation for the world. Several times in this section, Jesus will make this comparison, which has already deeply offended the crowd (John 6:43). Some cannot get beyond a shallow specter of cannibalism. Others will reject the idea of a Messiah who is not a conqueror (John 6:51). In the end, all but a small group will choose not to follow Jesus anymore (John 6:66).

The fact that Jesus is speaking in poetic terms here is explicitly proven later in His discourse. Therefore, this passage cannot be taken as proof of the doctrine of transubstantiation, the idea that the modern communion literally becomes the flesh and blood of Jesus. Christ, in His own words, says this is not the case (John 6:63).

Jesus also ties the importance of this claim to the same statement He made earlier: that those who believe will see eternal life (John 6:40). That was in the context of belief in the One sent by God (John 6:27–29). The people should have seen the parallels here, but they are too busy complaining (John 6:41) and fighting (John 6:52) to sense the deeper meaning."

Yukkie wukkie. Can you imagine literal blood coming down from heaven and people drinking it?

 

[Left Coast]

I have seen persons try to complete a puzzle, and, failed. At the end of the exercise, some pieces were damaged, and others were missing. The picture was colorful, but one could see it was not correct.

What was the problem?
Some persons look at a piece, decide it looks like it fit, and even though it does not slip into the slot "perfectly", they force it to fit.
Some have the pieces all over the place, so a piece ends up under their foot, and is swept somewhere, or sticking to the back of their arm, and they carry it somewhere, unaware.
Sometimes, believe it or not, they misplace the box, or use it for other purpose. Then when they get back to the puzzle. "Wait. Did you see the box?"

Whatever the case, there is nothing wrong with the puzzle, but the ones putting it together... 'they are not ready'.

With regard to your question about agreeing, please note that there is no reason to think that people who sit to fix a puzzle has to agree.
However, if say three or four people sit together, and are both organized, and united - that is, they seek to help each other, and they are not proud, insisting on their own way, you could imagine that that puzzle is more likely to come together, and be completed 'perfectly'.

On the other hand, imagine - let's make it more fitting... Imagine a puzzle of a million pieces, and you have, say... how many fifty? I don't know, but it those in the group are not organized. They are not united. They are proud - insisting on their own way "That fit's. That belongs there. Don't you move it." You could imagine the outcome.

Again, the problem is not the puzzle. The problem lies with the persons working on the puzzle.
United we stand... or succeed. Divided we fall... or fail.

I think we may just disagree on how well the analogy works to describe the situation. Christianity has had 2,000 years to work out the puzzle, but are hopelessly divided on how to even begin doing so. If you want to claim the puzzle is able to be solved, that's fine. When you solve a puzzle, no one can say, you didnt solve it. It's self-evident. The pieces either fit together, or they don't. The fact that Christians are as divided as ever on whether the puzzle has been solved, and by whom, suggests the analogy breaks down.

I was actually rushing away, when I responded, so I don't think I properly addressed your question properly.

First though, what do you consider inconsistent?
I don't find God's method inconsistent. See this post

What I consider inconsistent is that there are literally hundreds, even thousands of groups all of whom believe the Bible and read and study it, yet come away with radically divergent views of what the message of the text is.

I'm really not going to read an entire other thread to get your perspective, sorry. I can understand you not wanting to repeat yourself, though. If you want to give the sparknotes version here, you can.

I believe I know what your next question will be, so I will try to be complete at this point.

The scriptures say what is. One of the things it says, is that Jesus Christ is head of the body, and he directs it, as opposed to the imitations that he does not recognize.
We can, and must identify that body, in order to be a part of Christ. (He says that much - Matthew. 7:13, 14, 21-23)

Those who do, have no problem fixing the puzzle, and seeing the picture correctly, because they are organized, and united, by God, due to their efforts to satisfy their hunger, in all humility, and honesty.

Also, the scripture say, the harvesting is taking place, which means that people currently in a religious group, will find the body of Christ, and join it. The same is true of some who are currently Atheists and skeptics.
So that despite the fact that many millions are in confusion, and division, he body of Christ is united, and at the end of the harvest, the confusion and division will come to an end. For Christ says, he will burn all the weeds - that is, completely destroy the imitator, and he will also destroy those who do not know him. (2 Thessalonians 1:6-10)

So, in conclusion, the real question is not really, why does religious division exist... because it's not just in Christianity. The real question is, can we identify Christ's body - the congregation of God.
Why is that the important question?
Because, it's not a question of if persons are guided by God, it is a question of who is guided by God.

This strikes me as a variant of No True Scotsman.

A: Christians aren't divided!

B: Um, here are two Christians. They're divided.

A: Oh, well that one's not a true Christian! True Christians aren't divided.

Do you see the issue here?

Additionally, identifying which group represents the "true Church" is just as vexed a question as any other I mentioned. Christians cannot agree.

If one does not know, they are not excused, because by the end of the harvest, they should have. 2 Thessalonians 1:8
Do I believe that I am right, and all hhe others are wrong?
Of course not. I believe that God's organization - Christ's body - is right, and anything outside that is a mere imitation, and false.
Do I believe they are sincere people in all religions, even though misled, or not showing humility, or hungering for truth? Definitely. That's why JWs go knocking on their doors, even though they might get angry or annoyed.

A little exercise we can carry out...
Most person you see, arguing on scripture, ask them where they worship, or what religion the affiliate with.
If they tell you, they attend any religion, ask them why... see what they say.
They are divided, yet they attend each others services, and most will tell you, it's not the church, or God is in hearts, not buildings, or we are all worshipping the same God, we just have different paths.
What?
I can see you scratching your head. I am with you on that.
That should tell you something. They don't know.
Some would even tell you they don't. They are still searching.

So the mark of a "true" Christian is...one who doesn't attend the services of Christians who disagree with them?

If that's the mark of a "true" Christian...why do so many who read and study the Bible not agree with you that that's what the Bible teaches?

Again, why would God choose a method that he knew would result in such mass disagreement?

That said, would it surprise you to learn that there are other Christians who actually agree with you on this point...but are not JWs?

Yet I'd venture to say you would similarly consider their versions of Christianity, "a mere imitation, and false."

So that litmus test seems imperfect.

I have never read in the Bible, where any disciple of Christ, did not know, or were still searching.
Rather, I read bold statements like this...
Whoever comes to know God listens to us; whoever does not originate with God does not listen to us. By this we distinguish the inspired statement of truth from the inspired statement of error. (1 John 4:6)
It was clear to the fist century followers, and it is clear to Christ followers today.
(1 John 4:1) . . . Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired statement, but test the inspired statements to see whether they originate with God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

We can know.

Yet bizarrely, even among the Christians who, again, fully agree with you that "we can know,"...you're hopelessly divided on what it is you can know.

Sorry to be so long. I didn't mean to. Just wanted to be clear, and hopefully final.
If you have other questions, not answered in this post, feel free to ask.

Not a problem, you've been longer before.

 

[LightofTruth]

That's not the only view you have, though. By "your understanding," I meant your set of beliefs about what the Bible teaches. There are Christian groups out there that teach annihilationism. Yet you're not part of any. So there must be other teachings of those groups you find...unbiblical. We're back to the same problem I outlined in the OP.



Some people, yes. Others relish learning the different teachings and interpretations of various groups. I just find it implausible to reduce the fact that all Bible believers don't agree with you to, "they just haven't studied the Bible." That violates both just intuitive common sense (unless you're the most theologically well-educated Bible believer on Earth) and my own experience.

Well, the doctrine of the trinity, aside from being absurd and unreasonable, is nowhere taught by Scripture. That ought to be clear enough for anyone interested to find it out.

Annihilation (or perishing), according to scripture, is a term that refers to ONLY those who are not faithful to the end. The faithful are to be raised immortal. And not immortal until then.

The Christian groups I know of who understand that most will perish, also believe other ideas which they teach. For example, the JW's understand that man is to seek for immortality, and that it's not something he was created with. But they also believe in a fallen angel who has become a personal devil. I reject that idea. They have it as part of their statement of faith.

Another group rejects that the faithful believer will be raised immortal. I reject that idea.
I reject the idea of infant baptism, of the trinity, and that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot of Revelation.

I have always been open to hear why a person or group believes certain ideas that I don't believe and I don't take that lightly. And I have been, and still am, always open to changing my mind if convinced by Scripture and reason.

 

[nPeace]

I really have to question whether those who claim to study the Bible actually do. It's been my experience with Christian denominations that what they are really being encouraged to do is follow what has already been established as being true and to read and study what those of that tradition teach.
Rather than being critical and questioning those ideas against Scriture.

I have found the same.
Also, from what I have seen, most are comfortable with just "going to church", whether they believe or don't believe the church doctrine.
It becomes like a dinner one gets invited to.

 

[LightofTruth]

Yukkie wukkie. Can you imagine literal blood coming down from heaven and people drinking it?

Not to mention that God has strictly forbidden eating blood. Even the apostles wrote letters to the church against it. (see Acts 15)

 

[LightofTruth]

I have found the same.
Also, from what I have seen, most are comfortable with just "going to church", whether they believe or don't believe the church doctrine.
It becomes like a dinner one gets invited to.

Most are at "church" to feel closer to God. They're not there to be convinced that their church statement of faith can be Scripturally and reasonably proven against opposing ideas out there.

 

[LightofTruth]

I have found the same.
Also, from what I have seen, most are comfortable with just "going to church", whether they believe or don't believe the church doctrine.
It becomes like a dinner one gets invited to.

With all the opposing doctrines out there whose responsibility is it to try and discover which ones are correct?

The RCC would say that their tradition has been responsible. The reason they believe what they do is because they say it 's what has always been believed by them.

The problem with that is that there were false teachers during the days of the apostles who were trying to undo what the apostles had done. And there are still groups out there today who are led by those same false teachers. So the idea that the RCC can rest on its tradition because it claims to have a history that goes back to the days of the apostles doesn't carry any weight. Who's to say that the RCC didn't develop from false teachers?

I think it really boils down to each individual person to seek the truth as contained in the Scriptures of truth. And all the while to consider as much information as they can find.

 

[nPeace]

I think we may just disagree on how well the analogy works to describe the situation. Christianity has had 2,000 years to work out the puzzle, but are hopelessly divided on how to even begin doing so. If you want to claim the puzzle is able to be solved, that's fine. When you solve a puzzle, no one can say, you didnt solve it. It's self-evident. The pieces either fit together, or they don't. The fact that Christians are as divided as ever on whether the puzzle has been solved, and by whom, suggests the analogy breaks down.

I think you missed something. The puzzle has been solved.
There are however, masses of people who think it hasn't.

What I consider inconsistent is that there are literally hundreds, even thousands of groups all of whom believe the Bible and read and study it, yet come away with radically divergent views of what the message of the text is.

How is God inconsistent, by people's actions?
Does a blind man make light disappear, because he can't see it?
Does a wicked man make the light darkness, because he wants it to be?
Does a man who thinks the light is an illusion, cause the light to change its properties?
No.
Because people don't see, or understand something, or are misled into believing something, or are wicked, and deny it, doesn't mean there is something wrong with that something. Does it?

I'm really not going to read an entire other thread to get your perspective, sorry. I can understand you not wanting to repeat yourself, though. If you want to give the sparknotes version here, you can.



This strikes me as a variant of No True Scotsman.

A: Christians aren't divided!

B: Um, here are two Christians. They're divided.

A: Oh, well that one's not a true Christian! True Christians aren't divided.

Do you see the issue here?
Yes. I see the issue.
Some people have accepted, at face value, what is not reality.
Because they believe the imagined reality, the reality is not reality... in their mind.
Do you see the problem here?

Customer : I gave you two hundred dollar bills. Why can't I get my goods?
Clerk : You gave me two hundred dollar bills, but only one is legit.
Customer :I gave you two hundred dollar bills. They are the same. Give me my goods.
Clerk : Sir. You gave me two hundred dollar bills, but only one is fake.
Customer : Repeat..

A.. Christians are divided - not a reality.
A. Here are two Christians - not a reality.
A. Why are Christians divided? What you are seeing are not two Christian. One is an imitation.
A. Repeat... Repeat... Repeat...

Additionally, identifying which group represents the "true Church" is just as vexed a question as any other I mentioned. Christians cannot agree.

Yes. Some do have a hard time accepting that counterfeit does look like the real deal, but in reality, it is not. At this time, I'll let you repeat, until the cops get here.
Additionally, in reality, there are wicked people, who know that they are not honest, but are happy to mislead others. If you read the scriptures I linked,,, Paul called them ministers of Satan.

So the mark of a "true" Christian is...one who doesn't attend the services of Christians who disagree with them?

No. Of course not..How could that be?

If that's the mark of a "true" Christian...why do so many who read and study the Bible not agree with you that that's what the Bible teaches?

Never said it was the mark of a true Christian. Make sure that goes on record as a misinterpretation.
To the question, why do so many who read and study the Bible not agree with you that that's what the Bible teaches? I assume you mean, that those who are in the body of Christ do not fellowship with those not in the body.
Why not ask them? I believe they can speak for themselves.
After all, it's your thread, and you can allow for a slight detour if you want.
What I can tell you though, is only going to be a repeat of what I said previous.
We can know what's there to know. It depends on what we are. Are we humble, hungry for truth, and honest?
That's the ticked, according to scripture.

Again, why would God choose a method that he knew would result in such mass disagreement?

I told you already. Do you want to hear it again?
How well do you know the Bible? Do you know the account in John 6 from verse 22? Why did Jesus, speak in such a manner, knowing that it would cause that reaction? Did you notice that he knew why they were there?
Read his answer at Matthew 13:11-16.
Reminds me of Solomon, when he wanted to get the truth regarding the real mother.
Wisdom is one of God's prime attributes. Only the humble gain access to him. John 6:44

That said, would it surprise you to learn that there are other Christians who actually agree with you on this point...but are not JWs?

What point do you have in mind, because you misinterpreted what I said. So you need to clarify.
Also., counterfeit money actually bears for the most part, the same markings of real money. That's why you have to examine closely, so you don't make the mistake of believing they are the same.

Yet I'd venture to say you would similarly consider their versions of Christianity, "a mere imitation, and false."

So that litmus test seems imperfect.

Huh? Lost. What?

Yet bizarrely, even among the Christians who, again, fully agree with you that "we can know,"...you're hopelessly divided on what it is you can know.

I get it. You're still in the line arguing with the clerk. The cops haven't arrived yet. I'll wait.

Not a problem, you've been longer before.

Okay then. Now that I know I can write you a book...

 

[YoursTrue]

Not to mention that God has strictly forbidden eating blood. Even the apostles wrote letters to the church against it. (see Acts 15)

That is correct.

 

[YoursTrue]

With all the opposing doctrines out there whose responsibility is it to try and discover which ones are correct?

The RCC would say that their tradition has been responsible. The reason they believe what they do is because they say it 's what has always been believed by them.

The problem with that is that there were false teachers during the days of the apostles who were trying to undo what the apostles had done. And there are still groups out there today who are led by those same false teachers. So the idea that the RCC can rest on its tradition because it claims to have a history that goes back to the days of the apostles doesn't carry any weight. Who's to say that the RCC didn't develop from false teachers?

I think it really boils down to each individual person to seek the truth as contained in the Scriptures of truth. And all the while to consider as much information as they can find.

Good question. And I was just thinking about Jesus and his disciples. He taught them. They weren't always so sure. He spent about three years with them and then sent the holy spirit. Now then, that is a very quick analysis of what happened. But my question to you is: what happened after the apostles died?

 

[nPeace]

A Roman Catholic scholar told me I have no life in me because I don't literally eat the flesh and drink the blood of Jesus at least once a year. Even though most Catholics only partake of the wafer and not the wine.

So I studied what they believe and the scripture they use to justify their claim. But when Jesus spoke of eating his flesh and drinking his blood he said that the words he spoke were spirit and life. he said it was the spirit which makes one alive and the flesh profits nothing.

Consider this quote from Bibleref.com on John 6:54

"In this passage, Jesus repeatedly compares the means of salvation to eating His flesh and drinking His blood. The context for this analogy is Jesus' claim to be the "true bread from heaven," which is the sole source of salvation for the world. Several times in this section, Jesus will make this comparison, which has already deeply offended the crowd (John 6:43). Some cannot get beyond a shallow specter of cannibalism. Others will reject the idea of a Messiah who is not a conqueror (John 6:51). In the end, all but a small group will choose not to follow Jesus anymore (John 6:66).

The fact that Jesus is speaking in poetic terms here is explicitly proven later in His discourse. Therefore, this passage cannot be taken as proof of the doctrine of transubstantiation, the idea that the modern communion literally becomes the flesh and blood of Jesus. Christ, in His own words, says this is not the case (John 6:63).

Jesus also ties the importance of this claim to the same statement He made earlier: that those who believe will see eternal life (John 6:40). That was in the context of belief in the One sent by God (John 6:27–29). The people should have seen the parallels here, but they are too busy complaining (John 6:41) and fighting (John 6:52) to sense the deeper meaning."

Very good. I can see that you are a man that analyzes and carefully investigates. That's very good.

 

[YoursTrue]

Most are at "church" to feel closer to God. They're not there to be convinced that their church statement of faith can be Scripturally and reasonably proven against opposing ideas out there.

Again, interesting point, and I am sure many in the various folds of religion are devout. However, Jesus said he would return.
"Will not God bring about justice for His elect who cry out to Him day and night? Will He continue to defer their help? 8I tell you, He will promptly carry out justice on their behalf. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?" (Luke 18)

 

[nPeace]

Well, the doctrine of the trinity, aside from being absurd and unreasonable, is nowhere taught by Scripture. That ought to be clear enough for anyone interested to find it out.

Annihilation (or perishing), according to scripture, is a term that refers to ONLY those who are not faithful to the end. The faithful are to be raised immortal. And not immortal until then.

The Christian groups I know of who understand that most will perish, also believe other ideas which they teach. For example, the JW's understand that man is to seek for immortality, and that it's not something he was created with. But they also believe in a fallen angel who has become a personal devil. I reject that idea. They have it as part of their statement of faith.

Another group rejects that the faithful believer will be raised immortal. I reject that idea.
I reject the idea of infant baptism, of the trinity, and that the Roman Catholic Church is the harlot of Revelation.

I have always been open to hear why a person or group believes certain ideas that I don't believe and I don't take that lightly. And I have been, and still am, always open to changing my mind if convinced by Scripture and reason.

You are a man I would really enjoy talking to, or having discussions... using only the Bible.

 

[nPeace]

Most are at "church" to feel closer to God. They're not there to be convinced that their church statement of faith can be Scripturally and reasonably proven against opposing ideas out there.

Yes. Many a church goer seeks to be close to God, and gain understanding. Many are starved, or thirsty, and seek out a place of worship, hoping to be refreshed, only to be disappointed.
Some leave. Some keep searching.
Many are found - John 6:44. Many are lost, and many are on the broad road to destruction - Matthew 7:14

Good to know you are searching.

 

[Left Coast]

I think you missed something. The puzzle has been solved.
There are however, masses of people who think it hasn't.

That doesn't make sense. If I've solved the puzzle, it's self-evident I've done so when you look at it. There's no debate to be had. No one can look at and say, nope that piece is out of place...if it were, it wouldn't fit and it would be obvious.

So the fact that Christians disagree about if and how it's been solved suggests that the analogy doesn't work here.

How is God inconsistent, by people's actions?
Does a blind man make light disappear, because he can't see it?
Does a wicked man make the light darkness, because he wants it to be?
Does a man who thinks the light is an illusion, cause the light to change its properties?
No.
Because people don't see, or understand something, or are misled into believing something, or are wicked, and deny it, doesn't mean there is something wrong with that something. Does it?

Would you give a flashlight to a blind man to help him see? Would you give written instructions in German to someone who doesn't speak it? I hope not. Similarly, God allegedly gave us the Bible, knowing full well that its message would be wildly misunderstood and there would be massive confusion, even among those who believe the book is accurate, as to its meaning. So he chose a method that inconsistently delivers his message. Why?

Do you see the issue here?
Yes. I see the issue.
Some people have accepted, at face value, what is not reality.
Because they believe the imagined reality, the reality is not reality... in their mind.
Do you see the problem here?

Some Christians (actually, most Christians) would say that person is you.

Customer : I gave you two hundred dollar bills. Why can't I get my goods?
Clerk : You gave me two hundred dollar bills, but only one is legit.
Customer :I gave you two hundred dollar bills. They are the same. Give me my goods.
Clerk : Sir. You gave me two hundred dollar bills, but only one is fake.
Customer : Repeat..

A.. Christians are divided - not a reality.
A. Here are two Christians - not a reality.
A. Why are Christians divided? What you are seeing are not two Christian. One is an imitation.
A. Repeat... Repeat... Repeat...

This is another analogy that doesn't really work. We have clearly understood and defined criteria for determining the authenticity of currency (at least in most countries). Imagine a situation in which thousands of different groups, all claiming to represent the government, all printed money within your country (are you American? I've never asked), and all had different criteria for determining which currency is valid and which isn't. What's a consumer to do?

Yes. Some do have a hard time accepting that counterfeit does look like the real deal, but in reality, it is not. At this time, I'll let you repeat, until the cops get here.
Additionally, in reality, there are wicked people, who know that they are not honest, but are happy to mislead others. If you read the scriptures I linked,,, Paul called them ministers of Satan.

Indeed. Many Christians would say that about the Watchtower.

No. Of course not..How could that be?

No idea, I was replying to your exercise.

Never said it was the mark of a true Christian. Make sure that goes on record as a misinterpretation.

Okay. Then what was the point of the exercise?

To the question, why do so many who read and study the Bible not agree with you that that's what the Bible teaches? I assume you mean, that those who are in the body of Christ do not fellowship with those not in the body.
Why not ask them? I believe they can speak for themselves.
After all, it's your thread, and you can allow for a slight detour if you want.
What I can tell you though, is only going to be a repeat of what I said previous.
We can know what's there to know. It depends on what we are. Are we humble, hungry for truth, and honest?
That's the ticked, according to scripture.

The problem is that you're begging the question that your group is the "true" body of Christ. But all Christians already think, and claim, that they're in the true body of Christ. So we're back to square one. It's no detour, it's the central point of the thread. You, just like every other Christian who disagrees with you, think you've got the real deal. But none of you agree that each other has the real deal, lol. So all the things you claim about them being fake, they claim about you.

Now I thought you said before that the issue with non-JWs isn't that they're not humble (sorry for the double negative). But you've now again said we can know the truth if we are humble, hungry for truth, and honest. Does that mean that anyone who disagrees with you isn't humble, isn't interested in knowing the truth, or isn't honest? If not, then those criteria don't seem helpful to determine who the "real" Christians are.

What point do you have in mind, because you misinterpreted what I said. So you need to clarify.

I was responding to your point that some Christians attend each other's services. You seemed to see that as evidence that they don't know the truth. I was pointing out to you that some Christians agree with you on that point - but they're not JWs.

Also., counterfeit money actually bears for the most part, the same markings of real money. That's why you have to examine closely, so you don't make the mistake of believing they are the same.

I replied to this above.

I get it. You're still in the line arguing with the clerk. The cops haven't arrived yet. I'll wait.

Let me know when they get here.

Okay then. Now that I know I can write you a book...

Oh dear...

 

[LightofTruth]

You are a man I would really enjoy talking to, or having discussions... using only the Bible.

I think many would agree on what constitutes good Bible study. That the Bible is inspired by God and contains doctrines which are to be believed.
I agree with that. However, I disagree that some of those doctrines are a mystery or can't be comprehended by reason. I also disagree that we need to explain those doctrines by adding words and phrases not found in the Bible.
For example, 'immortal soul' and 'Trinity'.
Some think they have discovered something and need to explain it outside of Scripture. I haven't found that necessary. Because the Bible explains itself. A little here and a little there.

 

[1213]

That's quite true. If your view is not that God gave us the Bible to clearly communicate his ideas to us, then the thread is not really directed at you.

I think Bible is given as clear communication. It works well, if person remains in truth, but those who don’t remain in truth, end up in many troubles. But I don’t think that is a fault in the Bible, or in God’s communication.

 

[Left Coast]

I think Bible is given as clear communication. It works well, if person remains in truth, but those who don’t remain in truth, end up in many troubles. But I don’t think that is a fault in the Bible, or in God’s communication.

If I write a letter, and 10 people read it and all come away with 10 different understandings of what the heck I meant, is the issue the 10 people, or is the issue more likely that I could've been more clear?

 

[LightofTruth]

If I write a letter, and 10 people read it and all come away with 10 different understandings of what the heck I meant, is the issue the 10 people, or is the issue more likely that I could've been more clear?

Who would you expect to be the authority on the creation of man?

In other words, if you wanted to read about what is man, and how he was created, where would you go to find out?

I'd suggest you go to Moses because that's where you'll find the answer. he is the one who tells what man is and how he was created.

My question is, why do they not believe Moses?

Do you think Jesus or Paul would or have disagreed with Moses about what is man and how he was created?

I think not.