I can try to pick it up a bit here, but I, too have time constraints.

The fundamental flaw that's creating a stumbling block, here, is the perception of the Bible as a "religious rule book." Anyone and everyone, Christian, Jewish, or otherwise, who has perceived the Scriptures this way intevitably gets confused.

In nearly every OTHER religion, the object of divine revelation (i.e. their "holy" writings) is a plan or guidebook on appeasing the divine power. "How to live for Allah" or "How to appease Asherah" or "How to make it into Nirvana" etc.

The Bible is unique in this respect. It is NOT a "how to make God happy and get into heaven and live by the rules" book. It is the LONG story of how GOD, and not humanity, can appease and please the one, holy, perfect, just Creator. The whole Old Testament points out how no matter how few or how many rules God gave for loving, pure community, people screwed it up. In fact, all humanity has ever done is kill, rape, maim, and torture one another and the rest of creation. So, just as any good and just god would, God said, "To hell with it."

And yet, something restrained him. That's the ol' John 3:16 thing. God loved us to much to send all of selfish, stinking humanity to hell. So he said, "Look, what if I take the beating you deserve? What if I go to hell for you? Would you trust me then? Would you let me live your life for you, before you screw up everything?" That's where Jesus came in. Now all He asks is that we trust Him and let Him live through us. The end result? He's making a place called Heaven. Those that live with him now get to live with him forever.

That's the whole point. It's not about rules and how to "be good." It's not even about "how to make God happy enough to get into heaven." The whole point is: we can't; but God alive inside of us can; so let him. Make sense?

I just had this debate on the .400 forums but here are some of my highlights.

Jesus was a canabis user so why can't I be?

The Greek title "Christ" is the translation of the Hebrew word Messiah, which in English becomes "The Anointed" D. The Messiah was recognized as such by his being anointed with the holy anointing oil, the use of which was restricted to the instillation of Hebrew priests and kings (See CC#5). If Jesus was not initiated in this fashion then he was not the Christ, and had no official claim to the title.

The ancient recipe for this anointing oil, recorded in the Old Testament book of Exodus (30: 22-23) included over nine pounds of flowering cannabis tops, Hebrew "kaneh-bosm" B, extracted into a hind (about 6.5 litres) of olive oil, along with a variety of other herbs and spices.

Unlike the shamanistic priests and kings of earlier generations, Jesus did not follow the strict Old Testament taboos that limited the holy cannabis oils use to Yahweh's chosen few (Exodus 30:33), but broke tradition and began to liberally use it in both healing and initiation rites.

Through this open distribution the singular Christ, "the Anointed", was extended to become the plural term "Christians", that is, those who had been smeared or anointed. "By rubbing on this divine unction. . . obtained from certain special herbs or plants, they believed they were donning the panoply of God."7


As the New Testament's John explains:

. . . you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. . . . the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him." (1 John 2: 27). L

". . . the Christian, the 'smeared or anointed one', received 'knowledge of all things' by his 'anointing from the Holy One' (1 John 2: 20). Thereafter he had need of no other teacher and remained forevermore endowed with all knowledge (v. 27)

Well I like that attitude, I suspect many Christians would disagree though.

DOLA

This week is my point out silly things in christianity week I think. There are a quite a few more like these.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7

3. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations

4. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27.

Lev = Leviticus

Pretty fun stuff. Because we all know the bible isn't wrong!

This is far and away the best post I've ever seen in a religious thread.

If you love one other person on this Earth, you will live on through their love for you. And they will live on through someone else's love for them. In essence you will never die.

Above everything else Jesus said, he simply said "Love one another." This was his most important message and the one he stressed many many times throughout his life here on Earth.

My own personal beliefs are partly formed from some things I have seen because of what I do for a living. I have seen probably two dozen people in their last seconds of life of whom I have no attachment or preconception of and all I can tell you is that there is something there. I don't know what it is and it would be impossible to explain but it just happens. I believe they are moving on to something else and somehow, someway they know this, but I have no concrete proof or conception of what it is for you unless you saw it yourself.

You will find many doctors and other people who have seen things similar. It can change your life completely.

Heaven questions for any folks who believe in heaven: What is heaven like, is it like Earth in any way? Are winged angels singing religious hymns on clouds? Do people that get accepted into heaven look like they did on Earth or do they all look like Ken & Barbie?

Thank goodness you showed up revrew. Every time one of these threads starts, I think about getting involved. For the most part, though, I just hope that you'll appear because you explain things so much better than I ever could. Thanks.

1. Heaven like Earth? Largely, don't know. We only get glimpses from brief hints given by two people who saw it (Jesus, and John (in the book of Revelation)). Among a few other things, we can glean that it is a place of no more sorrow, no tears, and plently of joy, singing, worship. Furthermore, we can glean that we will know others there, that we will have some kind of "body", that God will be present and seeable. We can glean there is some kind of "river of life, crystal sea, emerald rainbows, etc." though some reasonably suggest these were only John's finite attempts at describing infinite things, a shadow of how cool it will really be. Furthermore, there is an uderstanding that there will be a new earth and new Jerusalem, a BIG city with mansions, where all will live in peace.

2. Winged angels? Again, we know little. We do know that we will be singing, and it will be an awesome concert.

3. Our bodies? We know even less. But here's what the Bible says about it: "New bodies that never grow old, tired, sick, or deformed. Incorruptible."

*These answers are those I gleaned from Scripture, not personal opinion. Of course, these answers only reflect a biblical perspective of heaven. For the "heavens" of other faiths, or other's personal opinions, you will have to see their writings. I only refer to the writings claimed to be breathed and inspired by the Christian God.

I echo the sentiment that Subby's was a very positive message.

I also find it interesting, but not surprising, that when stripped of all the God and heaven references (above), it stil holds an awful lot of water.

God created us to have fellowship with him.

Man was not originally created imperfect. It was when Adam and Eve disobeyed God that they were to be punished from then on.

Can someone explain original sin? Is it an inheritance of your ancestors' sins? Because that's not very fair or just. Is it because you are the product of sex? Because sex for the purpose of procreation between a married couple seems to me to be okay in the eyes of God.

No, no, no. This is patently false. I don't know what your source was for this , but I'd suggest that you at least make an effort to learn about the history and symbolism of Freemasonry before you start spreading lies about it.

dola -

Okay, vexroid's last response seems to imply that my original sin is that Eve screwed up. Is that fair and just that I should be punished for a sin committed by some woman I never met?

I know theologians and professors would get on my case for this...but does it matter? You don't have to worry about being punished for Adam's, Eve's, or your parents' sin. You've got enough of your own to merit punishment. So do I. Right?

Seeing as the Old Testament issue of laws is still a big obstacle for all of you I would like to post on this. You have to understand that most of the OT books were written for the Isrealites and were not only meant to instruct them in God's ways but also Societal ways of that time. They had no laws before this, so some of the books are kind of like their constitution. They followed the books as laws of society and laws of religion. So we pick what God said to conform to him and what God said to conform to societal and distiguish them. Not as a means to differentiate between what we want and dont but to interpret it as religious and societal. Also homosexuality is not just a societal rule because it came from the babylonians yet was still condemned not because of baal but because it was wrong. Still was condemned in the New Testament although the Greeks and Romans used it profusely to unite the men in their armys and bring them closer in relationships so they would fight harder for each other.

But you are constantly being punished for Adam & Eve's sin.

The better answer to that is that Eve had the first chance then when she screwed up it violated the worlds rules and causes us to live in a fallen world. So now yes we are living in Eve's sin but you are born into the world of her sin and you also sin yourself. I dont want to sound holier than thou, because I am trying to come off as anything but that. I battle alot of sin in my life yet am striving to get rid of it, so dont think I that think I am better than you.

I hope I am being helpfull to all of you. Please tell me if im not.

I am referring to an infant that dies shortly after birth. The idea that such a creatures bears any responsibility for any sin is quite simply offensive to me. I can not accept any belief system that includes such a preposterous idea.

nfg22 - just noticed your sig line - "Bid that I may come and die and find that I may truly live"

I recognize that from Brad Olsen of The Waiting singing The Wonderful Cross. Is that where you get that from? Or is it picked up from an older source?

What is the Christian basis for the condemnation of homosexuality again? Is it a biblical passage or an almagam of mores that have been cobbled together over centuries or something else entirely?

Ditto. The idea of enjoying life and respecting what life brings (minus the religious references) is the coda that I try to live my life by. It's worked out well so far.

Yes that is the most moving line of any worship I have ever sung.

This is a topic of speciality for me.As I did a huge report on it.

Backround: Homosexuality originated in Babylon when they worshiped baal. The had sex with eachother to instill their good qualities in eachother and also masturbated from towers so their semen could hit the earth and inseminate it for baal to make feritle. This brings the argument that homosecuality is bad because it has to do with other religions. Yet the Greeks and Romans did it in their armys for reasons I stated earlier. Also in the book of Romans and other NT books it states that homosexuality is against God's will. Sex was meant for a united couple as one that God created to compliment eahother as said in Genesis. Males were not made to compliment eachother.

Earlier there was a discussion about "age of accountability". Now, nowhere in the Bible or Jesus' recorded words do we get the question: "What happens when a baby dies? Well, what happens is..." So KNOWING for sure is tough.

However, there is the story of the death of King David's infant son. He said, point blank, "I will see my son later." This, and a few other instances, have led many to conclude that God must be allowing of infants into Heaven. It's not as ironclad as some other doctrines, but it is reasonable. Some would argue it is ironclad and provable. I, personally, would tend to agree with it.

The statement earlier that "original sin banishes all infants to hell" is a doctrine I'm unfamiliar with. It's possible some churches (where are Catholics on this one?) may take this stance, but I don't see much evidence of this one in Scripture.

btw, nfg--am a big fan of not only that song, but all of The Waiting's stuff. Agree that it's a powerful line.

Didnt know who sung it just sing it in chapel sometimes and love it.

Thanks it was David not Solomon. I knew it was in the OT before Psalms

I've got to go all, but I'll check back later.

I would advise us NOT to get into the homosexual debate. It's not worth trashing a perfectly good thread by bringing up a redflag and then allowing it red herring. Start another thread if you want to get into that. And nfg22, other Christian posters haven't had the wisdom to heed this warning. If you're baited to get into it, start another thread for it.

Later...

It is from biblical passages. Some of them may have been mistranslated and most of the key ones are from Leviticus, but they can be derived from the text. It is still up in the air over whether the Bible truly condemns homosexuality (albeit, most here disagree with that), but there is textual support for the presumed condemnation.

That's interesting. Is there scientific or historical evidence that backs this up?


Can you expand on this point? What is the argument exactly and how do protestant sects and catholics use it to condem homosexuality?

What are the exact passages and what do they say? I don't really understand the "complement" angle. Does this refer to reproduction? Love? Sex?

I am not trying to bait you here. I am just not seeing a cohesive argument and would like some more information.

I agree with that (although I posted without seeing your post).

revrew -

I understand that position. Still doesn't remove the fact that most Christian churches view the newborn as bearing original sin. And that is what's preposterous to me.

Am I the only one who thinks god is bi-polar or a skittso? In the old testiment, he punishes those who defy him. He is a bad ass pist off god, he drops bombs on those who defy him.

In the new-testiment, he is a kinder gentler god. Who loves us all and gives us free will in life. NO smiting there?

Seems like the people who wrote the old testiment, realized it wasn't working well enough, so they wrote a new version to controll the masses.......

I still think that since Jesus was a canabis user and as many people claim, the US is based on Jedeo Christian Principals, I should be allowed to use canabis.

I always thought, that Jesus died to take away that sin and the sins of man.

Another point, Anyone see the Simpsons episode when Homer dove into the Holy Water when Ned Flanders tried to baptise Maggie?

Well, I would disagree with you. This thread was started by ngf22 as a means of trying to provide answers for people who had issues or questions about Christianity. Segregating homosexuality or abortion into a separate thread guarantees a devolution of discussion. Keeping them in here will probably go a long way toward keeping the discussion civil...

I took this out of my paper. But I dont have the references on hand because that is packed away in all my papers. I will look at that if I have more time I need to go to work soon. But it was not biblical or Christian and came from some documents of archeologist.

The argument is that since the homosexuality is religion related(baal) then it is bad because it is tying u into another religion. but that is not true because the greeks and romans were condemned even though they didnt use it religiously. and Jesus also talked about sexual immorality but I dont have that off hand since im not a bible verse expert yet, but I am quite good with ideologys. I will look it up when I have more time.


The compliment angle is that woman was made from man's rib to beone with him. we are to be married and become one in God's eyes. worshiping him together and being uplifting in a spiritual way to eathother. I would love to expand but I have to leave for work thank you all.

Last post before work
Cannabis is not condemned neither are drugs or driking. Problem being your body is the temple of God do not abuse it. If you get addicted and abuse these drugs then it is a problem but drinking sparingly or even cannabis I do not veiw as wrong.

Not read much of Revelation?

By all have a good night...be back at like 11:00 central. to be lynched by all you:p

They disobeyed him because he gave them free will, which is inherently an imperfect creation (hence why they were able to do the fall). Free will itself may be necessary to create a perfect thing, but the use of it is imperfect in the case of humans.

So, we are assuming that god realized the old testiment wasn't working. The rules were to harsh and he made a mistake. So in turn he changed his mind and decided to try a different approach?

Another opinion to toss into the mix...

As humans we are largely driven by our instincts, like any other animal. Yet we have brain power - the power to choose - and that's what keeps us from being just another beast. We know the difference between right and wrong. Yet all too often we succumb to our base instincts, fear being the primary one. We steal, kill, lust, cheat, lie, and so on, because we are inherently selfish creatures still striving for survival in a harsh world.

I think the root message of Christianity is meant to counter those basic instincts. Instead of taking things for yourself, give them freely to others. Do not hurt other people for all the reasons that we humans do - instead, love one another. Help each other out instead of competing with one other in a battle for survival.

I think the notion of "original sin" speaks to this. We are all animals at our basest level. The "default setting" of our species is survival of the fittest, and we will sin by our very nature. The higher road beyond that is the difficult one.

Most, if not all, of your answers in this thread have been flippant and/or snide.

It would work better if you tried to be a little more respectful. If I can do it, you can too :)

So, if one believes in Jesus, yet lives a good life and keeps to high morals...?

I'll take that as a resounding "no".

All you have been doing is baiting people.

We're not forgetting about Jerry Falwell and the baptists, now, are we? "I want you to reach deep into your hearts (and your pocketbooks) and take His hand. Because the Lord told me I need to have the mansion. And the Lord said that I NEED to open my own university."

The point I'm driving at is this. Drugs are very spiritual. Jesus was drenched in a canabis oil then had his visions where god spoke to him. I would imagine me or you might have a vision of god if we were drenched in canabis oil also. The Indians used to use drugs as a way to go on their spiritual journey's.

It is believed that canabis oil may have been used on the Leapors to help treat thier diesese... i.e. no miricles there.

Yes, I have read the book of revelations. Whats your point? Though I will admit, I've been focusing quite a bit of my time on the old testiment. I'm trying to figure out how christians determine what in the old testiment is ok and what is not ok.

Maybe you can help me with that?

druez, are you looking for a justification to use pot? It sounds like you are cool with it on a spiritual level, so why belabor the point? Sounds like your issue is with the American legal system, not Christianity.

If you feel that legitimate questions about fundamental Christian beliefs are baiting then you are way too defensive to even be involved in this discussion.

What about Leviticus? Anybody slaughtered a bull and made a burnt offering lately? My neoghbors always complain about the smell, and my apartment complex threatens to evict me because I don't have the altar 25 feet away from my building. How about the taking of slaves "thou shalt keep bondsmen, and bondsmaids" in Leviticus 25 (I believe)? Can I kidnap a family from out of town that looks like they are Muslims and make them my slaves?

My biggest problem with Christianity (grew up attending a conservative baptist church - i.e., we didn't stand and wave our hands or speak out) is that the entire existence of man is already known to God, being that he is omniscient. So, God knew from the time of creation which humans would be going to heaven and which to hell. WTF? He knew that John Smith would never accept him and that he was doomed to hell before Genesis 1:1 was an ink stain on papyrus.

You can talk about free will all you want, but God already knows everything, so what is the point? It is like running a program that will print out the alphabet. Ho hum. Also, you can mention how "we can't understand all the thoughts of god" but yet we are supposed to determine on our own that without him (an invisible being much like NotMe from Family Circus), we are damned for all eternity?

Also, God is punishing all of humanity for the supposed mistakes of the very first human beings? Sounds like a caring and understanding god. Oh, and did I already mention that God is omniscient and therefore knew what Adam and Eve were up to? God is a good role model for parenting; From god to dad's, make sure you place the bottle of rat poison in the crib with the toddler. Warn them, but leave it there and see what happens, it will be a scream.

God is the Tim Taylor of creators. His entire creation exploded on him. First, Lucifer decides to ditch heaven for his own gig, and thereby create the reason for Hell (which wasn't initially meant for man). He didn't see that one coming? Then, the being created in his image takes up with the snake and damns ALL OF HUMANITY to lives of toil, Microsoft, and eventually HELL. Wow, what a deal. Was god busy setting up the Crab Nebula?

If God is as caring as loving as he is portrayed in the Bible, how could he allow one single human being to suffer for ETERNITY in Hell? We aren't talking a few weeks, or a month or a 100 years. For. Ever.

Must get back to work.

I'm still upset about the Catholic priests and the abuse cases. I'm having a very hard time making sense of the whole thing.

Question: Does baptism alter that equation anywhere?

Baptized - Believed in Christianity - Changed mind - became athiest - Died = I'm going to hell in a handbasket, correct?

It's mainly the Books of Law (I believe that's what they are) that are no longer applicable as they were written for the Israelites.

Hmm, Not many christian leaders would agree with you on that topic. I just like to point out hypocracy when I see it.

We no longer need to make sacrifices because the blood of Jesus covers all of our sins.

Correct, So then why do christians quote the old testiment to set the laws. For instance homosexuality?

Is god all powerfull?

Is god all Knowing?

Is god all good?

Anyone?

I was raised Lutheran, and at least from that perspective I believe that baptism intends to carry a child (usually close to newborn) in Christ from birth through the act of confirmation, which is age 13 in the Lutheran church. Confirmation is the aforementioned "age of decision" or whatever you want to call it, wherein you make your choice to confirm your baptism and life as a Christian.

As for your equation, I think that whole rejection/atheism thing probably screws you over royally, VPI. ;)

No fair quoting directly from the piece on snopes...

God is whatever He says He is.

Obviously, your plan here is to get someone to say "Why yes, God is all of those things!", then you'll come up with a bunch of justifications for why God is *not* those things. The bit you forget is that you are human and God is God. You can't judge the motives or actions of God in their entirety or in context because you have a grasp of neither. You can't see the full picture, only your puny little part. If you assume anything else, you are saying that God is not God, only a sort of super-human entity.

So believe what God says about Himself or not, but don't play stupid, sophomoric pseudo-logical games and pretend to be wise. I may not be a very good Xian, and I may disagree with the fundamentalist contingent on this board quite a bit, but at least most of them make an honest attempt to provide serious answers to serious questions. They deserve at least a little respect for making something as intensely personal as their religious faith vulnerable to public assault.

And if you don't believe in God at all, why work so hard to discredit Him? It's pathological to argue against things you don't believe exist.

I'll take the bait.

Yes
Yes
Yes

The grand old debate. This was one of the main questions asked by the pagans in the early centuries. Celsus asked, If God is perfect, and perfection cannot change, then how is it that God via Jesus suffered?

What I think is at issue here is ontology vs. existentialism. Change as the result of experiences does not change ones being, if anything the being becomes more so (complete/aware). In other words, there is nothing we can do to change are human-ness, despite constant growing and experienceing. ex. children, and thier love, often further complete ones notion of self. it is like this type of love that we give and recieve from God that results in a further enriching by both parties. God gets something out of our love towards Him and our love towards another, that changing does not change the nature of God, or man. God created perfect humans, or humans how could be no more human.


BTW, To fully confuse, I think stubby's quote would make a very nice Christmas card, but other than that.... I think we all know what we should do, it would be a cold day when someone proclaims we should do the opposite of what was said.

BUZZZZZZ. Thanks for playing!

I've been doing a lot of thinking in the last few years of my life regarding this very topic and have finally come to the conclusion that I am a Deist. I believe that there is a higher power, but he was a set-it-and-forget-it god. He created this clambake and went on permanent vacation.

From my understanding (which is more years ago than I care to admit to in Catechism class) the Gospel is the dividing line. Everything pre-Jesus is OT, while everything starting with Jesus' birth is NT. I'll gladly stand corrected if my memory is faulty.

I suggest you read my post at the top of page 3 for some insight on this, but since I didn't have to go as quickly as I thought, I've got time to answer one more.

There isn't any "changing of mind," since the prophets very clearly and verbatim foretold of God's plan in Christ. First, he would give a chosen people a structure whereby following it would create a harmonious and holy nation. But, full well knowing that people couldn't hack it, he had a better plan in mind all along--the plan of indwelling, living inside (through the Holy Spirit--sorry, don't mean to get so "churchy" in my lingo) people and helping them live lives of love.

First, however, he allowed history to demonstrate mankind's complete inability to follow Him or build a godly society on their own. People since Adam have been so goddamned* sure of themselves, He said, "Fine. You want to do it on your own, go for it. Here's how you can do it. Go." That's the Old Testament.

Even today, people are still so goddamned* sure of their own ability to create Utopia without God that He still says, "Fine. Go for it. Do it your own way. I'll give you 7000 years (and counting) to get it right." He's still waiting...

But meanwhile, knowing there are some who will give up self-governance to follow a better way, he provided for it in Jesus. That's the New Testament.

As for his "schizophrenia", much of the warfare in the O.T. was to carve out a territory for his chosen people to live in peace. If you read the stories, however, the Israelites refused to follow his plans. They left the Palestinians alone, rather than conquering them. Then they made alliances with other countries. They totally messed up the plan. And this brought more bloodshed.

God is no less powerful or capable of dealing blows in the New Testament than He is the Old. But He chose to change how he dishes them up. Now that history has proven man will not be ruled from the outside, no matter how big and bad God's threat of punishment, he choses to reign from the inside. Through willing people who relinquish self-governance.

What happened to his wrath? His judgement? He is still mad as hell about every rape, murder, and injury committed. He is mad as hell that Christians don't get off their affluent, lazy behinds and do something about injustice in this world. And he is storing it all up to pour out in a place called hell. The Hitlers will get theirs, oh, yes, they'll get theirs. The only question is, you want a piece of that?

If God really was schizophrenic, we wouldn't have to fear Him at all. We'd all be in "grace time"--do whatever you want! But that wrath is still there. That demand for justice is still there. The great part of it is, he's holding off until as many people as can will allow someone else (Jesus) to take the punishment they've got coming.

It's not schizophrenic; it's simply a step by step story of God's plan to restore humanity. First, he gave us a choice. We chose evil. Then, he allowed us to try to fix it on our own. We messed up again. Then, he said, "Let me help you." That's where we are now. And finally, he'll say, "That's it. I'm wiping this sleazy world of hatred and evil and hurt right out of existence and starting over with a perfect world." That's heaven. That's yet to come (save for those who die now and go early.)

(*use of word "goddamned" intentional, as it's not in vain, but meant in every way.)

I was raised in an Episcopal church...They tend to alter the rules as they go along, so I think I may have a loophole or something I can fall back on :)

I think he meant which parts of the old testatment are worth following and which are not. I.e., there is stuff in there about not counting your nose hairs on Thursdays, and other stuff about loving people or something.

I'm certainly not trying to be contradictory, but can anyone point this passage out for me?

Whoops. My bad. Thanks, Gavel. (Or do you prefer Bone? :) )

I understand what you're saying, but you're saying that to believe im God, we have to feel humanity is as perfect as it will get, and I just can't believe that.

Easy there...stubby is my porn name. I use Subby when I am in dignified company. ;)

...thus his use of "stubby"... :D

Whoops! Didn't see you over there fiddling with the stereo.

My bad. ;)

Heb 7:27 Unlike the other high priests, he (Jesus) does not need to offer sacrifices day after day...He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

Heb 10:1-18 "The Law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming...those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins...and by that will we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all...and where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin."

There are others...

Uhmm...no. You can't reduce the history of the Jewish peoples as a futile attempt at the expense of God's stubborness. Knowing God is a process, one that I think from juddging this thread has still a ways to go. So to say that it was all bad before, then poof, all was set right is a bit much. The process of the Bible is a process of realizing God's love. The problems came in how the show this love and what having this love meant. One big hurdle was getting over the fact that God's love and being obident to His laws does not prevent suffering. This was certainitly put to rest with Jesus (pun). I think it's too much to say that God tried diffrent approaches rather than the Bible is a process of us trying diffrent approaches on God. Also, it seems that the Holy Spirit, which was always present, spoke in the language which would be heard the loudest, whether it be formal rules, exile, or great myths like David, Jonnah and Job.

Sorry Subby.
Easy Mac, I do not mean to say humanity is perfect esp. if you say the actions make the person. I'm saying humans are fully human and God is fully God despite the experiences and change that may occur via time. Going with my metaphor, most humans have never felt the love from their children (God), and are thus not growing as much as they could be. But they are still human, just not even clost to their capcity.

From what I've read into your comments, I think I agree completely. My "synopsis" of "The Grand Narrative" was intentionally painted quickly, with broad strokes. It has taken God 66 books and another 2000 years of history to tell this story. If I try to do it in 3 paragraphs, I'm going to overgeneralize BIG TIME. You caught me on overgeneralizing.

I'm not sure who's to blame for it, but you're right on saying that we have only related to God in part, and then in increasing parts, through history. I didn't mean to imply there was a "boom-it's all good moment". In fact, we're still activley messing up the redemption story (church history--c'mon), and the only boom-it's all good moment is yet to come.

If made this post quite often. This was the best answer I've ever seen. I might not agree with it, but I can definately follow your logic.

I never said I didn't believe in god. I believe in a constant force of the universe. The first "cause". I do not believe there is a god that sits in judgement of us. I do believe there is an universal truth for lack of a better word.

So, I do believe in a higher power, but I don't believe god is has human characteristics or emotions. Which is the number one reason I don't believe the bible. It was written by Humans, to controll humans. The bible is filled full of human emotions and situations.

what caused the first cause?

While Drake might think I might try and descredit god. I am inclined to ask the following questions, or show you the paradox of these answers and as they apply to earth today.

God knows Evil Exists, because he is all knowing.
God wants to destroy that evil, because he is all good.
God is all powerful so he could destroy this evil.

If these statements are true, then evil should not exist. He has the power to destroy it, knows its there and is all good so he must destroy it by your thinking.

I wish I knew. I would imagine this constant force has always been around. The question is what existed at first how can their be a beginning to time, what was before that beginning etc...

I just think its as nieve for us to look at a judging god for all of our answers as it was for the Indians to say hmmm Sun God, or Moon God or Earth god etc....

There is a balance in the universe good and evil are relative.

or is it that the ultimate good can only be known by the evil.

If we didn't know how bad things can be, would we ever really know when things are good?

Your logical fallacy in this a=b=c equation is with b. You suggest that an all good god must necessarily want to destroy all evil (or) that because he wants to, he necessarily will. The simple existence of a reason for evil, which would be "better" than eliminating it, makes your equation mute and your conclusion incorrect.

The previous poster who suggested this was a silly logical game was correct. But other than that, I won't give you crap. I've appreciated your other questions and contributions to this discussion.

Didn't we all have this discussion before in the other thread?

Main thing when reading the bible is to take things in context and not simply pick statements or contradictions to make a point.

Yes much of the old testament is rather violent and their laws and rules are very strange in relation to modern day society.

However the rules set down by Jesus as the way to live in the new testament supercede any given in the old testament.

Why did God require a revised rule set you ask if he's infallible? ... (been here, asked this myself - came up with this possible conclusion) ....

I think of it along the lines of human society not being at a level of being able to follow a more stingent/advanced (delete as you feel applicable) rule set during the times of the old testament, once they were able to do so a new set of rules were given out.

This is equivalent to the difference in expectations that a child has of its children, when very young you let them get away with simpler cruder rules than when they are older and can understand more.

NB. No answers which I might post are in these discussions are 'true' (and indeed I won't even claim they'll make sense to everyone who reads them) - they are simply the most rational explanation I could discern for the cases in question.

Technically, according to the Bible, it's illegal to "allow your seed to spill upon the ground."

That would mean that every farmer in the world is going to Hell.

Ok look at this another way, when you have a child it is born innocent - if that child then does something you don't like do you kill it?

God gave mankind free will, how man used it was up to him*.

God is the 'father' of humanity, even if humans are all sinful/evil in nature should be simply dispose of the race? - or should he take a more peaceful approach and give us the chance to redeem ourselves in the same way that we'd expect a good parent to.

According to the bible God has given humans that chance by the death of Jesus. Thus God (again according to the bible) is destroying evil, but first he's giving man a chance to redeem himself ... this fits in fairly neatly with your questions imho.

*There's the seperate conflict of God giving free-will which I'll go over in my next post.

(I'll apologise in advance for this post - I've thought twice about posting it as its not something which I can generally explain coherantly person to person, so God knows how badly I'll manage it at 00:19 in the morning via. the medium of a message board)

One of the things which bugged me for a long time was the contradiction in people having been given free will, it goes along these lines:

Proviso:
* God is omnipotent

Thus:
* God knows everything thats going to happen
* God can do anything

Problem:
If God knows everything thats going to happen then everything is predetermined.
If everything is predetermined then how can anyone have 'free will'.

This is something which bugged me for a long time, as with many of my problems I came to a conclusion which I was content with by drawing conclusions with programming (sad but true).

Ok, bear with me - this is probably going to ramble.

* God knows the past, present and future of everything.
* God gives people free will, at this point he knows all of the possible past, present and futures that can occur - but individual free wills are as yet undetermined (in fact in my theory all possibilities happen as this removes any restrictions on Gods omnipotence, your free will is actually determining which of an infine number of realities which you are in - yeah I know this has gone a tad surreal now).

My programming analogy with this - its CM based (hurrah ;) ) :D

To set the scene let me introduce the players:
* God (played by the CM match engine, sorry God its an analogy ok? ;) )
* The universe/time (played by the fixture result, yeah I know its stretching things somewhat)
* You (played by errr you, should have warned you that reading this might involve having to purchase a copy of CM (cough) ;) )

The CM match engine plays the entire match out before a user starts a match (ie. it knows what is going to happen before it has done so).

The result is thus pre-determined, however 'you' the player have free-will and can depart from this pre-determined path at any point by making a tactical change and unknown to yourself changing a pre-determined reality you didn't realise existed.

(to take my analogy further I could re-engineer the CM match engine to work out every possible change a human could make and pregenerate them in advance (taking only possibly a year or so ;) ), hence creating for the purposes of this analogy the alternate realities I mentioned earlier.)

As I mentioned in the previous thread many peoples interpretation of "Hell" isn't fire and brimstone and is simply the concept of missing out of an eternity shared in communion with God.

Thus in itself "Hell" might be pleasurable to a person, however compared to "Heaven" it would be intolerable.

The choice between "Heaven" and "Hell" is then down to an individual choosing to know God or not ... and thus isn't God being 'evil' by casting someone into Hell, its a choice they make out of their free-will.

I am overjoyed to see such great discussions. Blessings to all of my fellow believers for presenting the complexities of faith, sin and God's Words.

(bro, you are showing off again :) )

Marc, great post in coming up with an analogy of one of the toughest theological thoughts.

To me, the omniscience (sp?) God is our Father, we are His children. Just like some of us are fathers to our children, we want our child to learn, to grow and to mature. Sometimes we have to correct wrongs and enforce consequences of actions,while sometimes we just stand back and let the child discover right/wrong on his/her own (usually learning from doing some bad). The trials and tribulations we all experience are part of the learning experience. Even though our Father knows the outcome, we have to experience it ourselves and learn from it so we can grow closer to Him. That is why the parable of the Prodigal Son is my favorite.

Thanks, rev.

Hey - don't you have a sports sim to design? Quit talking about God and pound out more code! :)