Those who never heard about Jesus?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Galatians shows us Paul was concerned over his message, and knew he needed confirmation from the apostles in Jerusalem. He got it.

hmm, that is not what i got from the chapter. at all. He seems to go to some lengths to express that he did not care. He waited 3 years?

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Jacob had nothing to do with the ungodly act of Simeon and Levi

(1) "Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor
stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of the scornful."
(2) Men are known to have built walls around their cities for their
defense against marauders and enemies. Simeon and Levi went into
a city on false pretenses (claiming peace), to kill the man (a prince of
that city) that took advantage of their sister. They not only killed him,
but [all the men] of the city (emphasis mine). Although they went in
thought the gates of the city, stealth was in their hearts, therefore it is
said (Jacob's words) that they did ". . . dig down a wall."

What if I told you that the phrase, "digged down a wall", is a mistranslation? An error?

[Antipas]

Originally Posted by shazeep

hmm, that is not what i got from the chapter. at all. He seems to go to some lengths to express that he did not care. He waited 3 years?

Notice, you are both studying the same book, yet walking away with two different perspectives. Is the truth changing for each of you? Or are you each experiencing that human filter that the Divine Reality has constantly struggled to penetrate?

Imagine that you and Blume both chose to write books about various Bible topics. Each of your books would be very different, no doubt. But does that mean your source is imperfect? No! It means your abilities to understand are limited and imperfect. Would there be truth in each of your books? Yes! Both of you would share some important truths. Might there be some misunderstandings? Of course! Both of you will have misunderstood various points.

Ah, the limitations of humanity as it tries to express divine realities.

[shazeep]

i seem to notice truth being more effectively revealed because of these differences...i would not be able to speak as much truth as is revealed without Mike, iow, and vice versa. A reader might not agree entirely with either of us, yet discern some truth of their own in reading both.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Antipas

And your first impulse will be disbelief. You'll even feel anger and like you've been betrayed. Then you'll wonder if it is real and recoil from it, reject it, and even prepare to curse it. It is like pure rage and disappointment.

i have experienced something similar to the first part here, extreme cognitive dissonance, but did not get so far, well, quite so far, as the ending. I'm not sure why, but the passage the last shall be first allowed me to trust, even as i was completely adrift from my religious underpinnings, doctrines. It was weird though, ya, i tried to convince myself i was being tested or deceived, even as a little part of me knew different. But might be experienced somewhat differently by everyone?

[shazeep]

After one has a conversion experience, this is not a comfortable thought--but satan still appeals to you, will be perceived as beautiful, while the presence of God would send you screaming mindlessly in fear. Hard to grasp.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ya but what you might learn if you didn't know tho

Of course... anything specifically laid out is removed by switch and bait for generalities of another philosophy.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Notice, you are both studying the same book, yet walking away with two different perspectives. Is the truth changing for each of you? Or are you each experiencing that human filter that the Divine Reality has constantly struggled to penetrate?

Imagine that you and Blume both chose to write books about various Bible topics. Each of your books would be very different, no doubt. But does that mean your source is imperfect? No! It means your abilities to understand are limited and imperfect. Would there be truth in each of your books? Yes! Both of you would share some important truths. Might there be some misunderstandings? Of course! Both of you will have misunderstood various points.

Ah, the limitations of humanity as it tries to express divine realities.

There are too many variables as to why one person disagrees with another about a particular verse of scripture to say it is because both are wrong, or all religious texts have errors, since all religions are right.

Again, no foundation leaves one at one's own whims.

For example, our friend says no one can know they're saved. I pull out chapter and verse where people in the early church were claimed to have been saved b the writing of the apostle. What's the response? "Those verses are there to deceive the dishonest." Yeah....

And your response to verses showing reincarnation is contradicted in the bible is to say those texts were corruptions amidst the truth of the rest of the bible.

That manner just doesn't fly.

So, when a person actually believes ALL the bible says, and doesn't believe there are glaring errors like both of you claim, THAT is why there are disagreements with us three.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Antipas

Aside from the theological assertions of the Christian religion concerning Christ's cross, did not Jesus ultimately suffer the death of the cross to demonstrate that God is not the narrow, racist, legalistic, bloodthirsty, and vengeful God of Pharisaical Judaism? Did not Jesus warn of that system's soon coming demise? Did not Christ's sacrifice open the revelation of God up to be inclusive of all people and redefine God as love itself? The beauty of Christ's revelation is unparalleled.

Oh, so Jesus didn't come to save us all, He came to tell the Jews that they wrong. And He had to die on a cross in a horrible manner, just to tell them they're wrong? Wow, seems there'd be an easier method than that.

Heck, He told Saul/Paul he was wrong, just by shining a bright light on him, and shouting at him from Heaven. Why couldn't He do that for the whole of Judaism?

If Jesus' death wasn't for salvation, exactly why did He have to suffer on the cross?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Antipas

You've lost your intuitive reasoning. It is almost as though you are a computer spitting out data.

That's an excuse to not actually deal with what I asked.

What is meant by the following text:

Genesis 49:6
O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united: for in their anger they slew a man, and in their selfwill they digged down a wall.

Why did they dig down a wall?

You are taking an accusation that specifically dealt with Levi and Reuben's sin of murdering Shechemites, and applying it in some mystical way to how we handle religion?

This is what I am talking about. Whims and flights of fancy. Sorry, but when you say there is reincarnation in the bible, and show it with Elijah, and are presented with passages that refute reincarnation form the same bible, and say they are examples of corrupted text, you prove you have lost all sincere reasoning to know the truth of the Word.

It's like people get something in their heads about what they WANT to believe, and devise any excuse they can think of to relegate it away as error in order to maintain that DESIRED belief. That's why you couldn't answer Esaias when he asked HOW DO YOU KNOW you are on the right track? You have no foundation. You have no standard. When words of a religious text conflict your view, what is your standard for knowing those words are error? The sand of whim!