Why?  That's easy.  Because I am commanded to do so.

[b]Jude 1:3   Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should [red]earnestly contend for the faith[/red] which was once delivered unto the saints.[/b]

It was [u]once[/u] delivered.  Once.  It is a finished work.

It is my task to earnestly contend for the faith.

I do so with joy.

Of course it matters what the Bible says,that is our guide to know who God is.

You are right…I should have chosen my words better.  

I do not see that it maters that you and I agree, it matters that you and I believe.    You are fallible and may not understand what you are reading let alone be able to draw conclusions from what you read.  I have faith that I understand the scripture and it reveals the truth to me.  I believe that the truth is revealed to you if you have faith.  But debating scripture point for point is a waste of time.  You may be an idiot.  I will not put my faith in you to be correct.  I put my faith in God.

* edited to add, I do not thing you are an idiot.  I am just illustrating a point.

I thought the Gettysburg address was pretty good.  How about  the Declaration of Independence.

I was just fixing (Texan english) to comment, when you added the edit. [:D]



A wise decision.

But our discussions are not useless.

[b]Proverbs 27:17   Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.[/b]

Verily I say unto thee, thou shallst not hog ye bong nor bogart ye joint, for I will join thee over yonder, on ye other side.

Yes, I for got to add the reciprocal, that I may be an idiot, (one would contend there is plenty of evidence to support this), and what are the repercussions if you are responsible for the damnation of you flock. I.e., David Koresh.  I believe Koresh beliefs doomed weak people.  I guess my thought is teach people to read and they will draw conclusions based on their faith.  Back up scripture by setting a good example.


I agree!  I always learn something new when I read these threads.

Out of the mouth of babes... [V]

[peep]
Dirk

Old P- what makes the god intervene in one instance-the canonization, but ignore another instance- like the pope 'misspeaking'.

Or say the earthquake in iran-- did he cause it?? or did he just not prevent it? Is god responsible for [b]everything[/b] that happens in the world?? or he only does 'good' things and the devil does all the bad things???

Evidently some people are more valuable then others- believers vs. non's.

Got to give it to you OHC, you ask some tough ones. [:D]

God tells us in the Bible that he has guaranteed that the scripture is accurate.

He says no such thing about the utterances of the Pope.  He gives the Pope "free will' to say anything he wants too.  God is not responsible for mistakes the Pope makes.



A hard question.  Some may say that even if  Satan does the evil, God created Satan, so...you get the picture.

All I can say is that God is good.  He is also perfect.  Therefore, He never does "bad" things.

Why does He allow evil people to do evil things?

To quote Mark Twain,  "I was gratified to be able to give an immediate answer.  I said, 'I didn't know'."

For some reason that I cannot understand, or especially explain, God gives men "free will" and allows them to do as they please.  He allowed Adolf Hitler to make the decisions Hitler did and to cause all the misery Hitler did.

Why did God allow this?  I don't know.

But I do know that God is love and wonderful, and perfect in all His ways.  Therefore, I will trust Him for now.  When I get to Glory, I will understand, if it is important for me to do so.



Where did you get this idea?  It certainly is not in scripture.  Scripture says the opposite, in fact.  It says that God is not a "respecter of persons".  He loves all men and "is not willing that any should perish, but that all would come to repentance".

(Sorry for the scripture, but it jumped out before I could stop it.) [:D]

I'll take that one for you:

Job 5:17
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty.

Holy Smoke!!

Who are you and what have you done with Kar98?!!

[:D]

I'll take a stab at this one as well.

God allows free will, because without it we can't CHOOSE to love Him and accept Him.  Like any father, He wants us to love Him.  Without free will, we are just automatons; with it, we are loving children.  Anybody with kids ever try to make them apologize to someone else, "And you better mean it!"?  How well does that work?  How do you MAKE someone love you?

By loving Him, we also choose to act and think in certain ways, because A) God commands some of that behavior and we have chosen to obey Him, and B) God would like some of that behavior, and we want to please him because he is our Father--every good work a Christian does is a "thank you" note to God.

Conversely, we also have the opportunity to reject Him and His will.  Those actions are encouraged by Satan, because they work to convince those Christians on the edge that there is no God.  The devil doesn't care about those souls already lost; he wants God's children to turn away or be misled from Him.

So, in the same way we have "free will" to do good, we also have "free will" to do evil; two sides of the same human attribute of CHOICE.

One other thing--people may do evil in [u]this[/u] world, but it doesn't mean they won't pay for it in the next. Justice delayed is not necessarily justice denied.

As for the books of the Bible--the 1st and 2d century Church went to great lengths to determine what is and what is not "valid" for the Bible.  They included the books in the Old Testament, because (after all) the entire Bible is a Jesus story; without the OT to establish the context and lay the foundation, the NT isn't much use.

The NT was harder, but (IIRC) nothing in it is any older than approx 40-50 years past the death of Christ--in other words, all within the lifetimes of the disciples. All the other "books" of the Bible that everyone here has mentioned are at least 100 years older than that, so how can they adequately reflect the life and teachings of Christ if they weren't written by someone who was there?

The eaerliest copies of the Gospel of Thomas, for example, date from the 5th century.  They appear to have been written about AD 140.  There are also things in Thomas that contradict the other four Gospels, which are EYEWITNESS accounts of Jesus' life.  Therefore, which is most credible--something written at least 40 years after the disciples death, or something observed first-hand?  Those contradictions are why the gospel of Thomas is not considered part of the canon.

In the book "The Case for Christ," by Lee Strobel, he interviews Dr Bruce Metzger about this very book.  Dr Metzger makes an interesting observation about the books of the Bible (pg 69):

"...The canon is a list of authoritative books more than it is an authoritative list of books.  These documents don't derive their authority from being selected; each one was authoritative before anyone gathered them together.  The early church merely listened and sensed they were authoritative documents."

I said in my post that I had heard they were not printing it in the Joseph Smith version of the KJV...I guess I heard incorrectly (It's been a few years since I heard it and have not checked on it since then because I am not LDS.

And, if you are implying what I think you are by quoting the above Bible verse, I would be more than happy to go toe-to-toe with you on Mormon Theology and beliefs in another thread.

You can THINK you know about god and christianity, but you do not KNOW.

The bible is a great piece of literature, but it is just that, literature.

We (the infidel nonbelievers) are not saying that god does not exist and that christianity is wrong.  We are saying we do not know, and that there is no way of knowing for sure.

I understand the leap of faith argument, but what is wrong with simply saying, "I don't know?"

So I think we all can agree that the NT that we now have is a "cross section" of Christian books that were read by the early church. As for contradictions, the NT we now have has many aparent contradictions in it so that shouldn't have kept a book from being added to the list. As far as that goes the book of Revelations was almost not added because it was thought to be too violent and not a good picture of a "loving God". So if a vote or two would have went the other way we wouldn't have it in the NT today. My main question is, What gives the Councile of Nicea the right to dictate what books to include or not include in a Canon of books detailing the early Christian writers?  Why not add them all and let each read what he or she want's to read, like ya'll have said, we should have "freewill" to read the early Christians works of our choice. I think this is yet another way that MAN has screwed up something that God has given us. It's too bad we can't keep our hands off of things and just be willing to not mess with stuff. Thank God that alot of early writing have been found and translated for us to read and appreciate. I read the "Acts of Peter and the Twelve" and it was a very good picture of how Christians should try to live. It's too bad it's  not in the Bible that we have today. I'd bet it would help to inspire many.

Having sat under the tutelage of the imfamous John Dominic Crossan (author of several anti-Christian texts extolling the legitimacy of extra-canonical Christian writings, and famous for the statement that "after the crucifixion, Jesus' body was likely thrown down the hill and eaten by dogs" as an explanation of what happened to the body) I can tell you that the logic behind the Jesus Seminar and their argument for the acceptance of books like the Gospel of Thomas as equal to the canonical texts is specious.  As a trained historian I can tell you they fail on all counts when it comes to the accepted academic standard of historical research.  When I confronted Crossan on this in class, the Jesus Seminar's mad dog was apoplectic.  I was getting my degree in history at the time and taking his classes (Depaul University in Chicago) because of the press the guy was getting at the time.  The true story on Crossan is that he's a bitter ex-priest... long story.

There are reasons why these texts were left out of the Bible, the biggest being that they were declared heretical by Jesus' own followers, or by the early church fathers that sat at the feet of the disciples.  There were a lot of movements that cropped up in the first and second centuries that attempted to hijack Christianity.  Many of them with their own texts claiming aposotolic authorship.  These were rejected.  The council at Nicea is an amazing study.  Just this ex-Catholic, now Calvinist's humble opinion.

Not to be argumentative, but can you name one?  Because I can't find one.  There may be some [u]apparent[/u] contradictions, but no [u]real[/u] contradictions.



By that rationale, why not have parts of the Communist Manifesto inserted into the Constitution, and let the people figure it out?

Your primary mistake is in assuming the Church is hiding something by not including the books.  Far from it; the Church has identified those writings which best identify the core teachings of Christ and God the Father.  Anything that fails that basic test (providing God's Word) doesn't belong. Why don't you take an accordion deer hunting?  Because it doesn't fit, that's why.

Why not add Wiccan texts to the Bible, since we're inserting stuff?  How about adding the Satanist books while we're at it?

Simple--becuase those go against the fundamental beliefs of the Church.  Why should they be included?

Edited to add:



Or lead them astray.

As I mentioned before, the devil doesn't care about those already lost; he only cares about misleading those searching for God.

Maybe those documents weren't included because, like the gospel of Thomas, they aren't accurate reflections of Christianity?  So, if you're asking "what does a Christian believe," and you come across Thomas, wouldn't you get a false picture?  And wouldn't that be bad for your salvation?

Nope, I trust (i.e., have faith in) the deliberate methodology of the early Church (inspired by God, of course) to select those documents which best fulfill God's Word.  Otherwise, I could search forever to find that one document that MIGHT tell me the truth.

Those are solid answers Painless- they’re just the kind of questions that bother me when I try to make sense of thing. I obviously have control issues. :)

On your last point-But in other words- the non believers still perish and end up in hell.
But would the ‘penalty’ be the same for say a buddhist  and a satanist??  Or is there a sliding scale of badness??


And since someone brought us satan…. How does he appear or manifest in this country?? Because the church seems to lack any unity on this subject. Do they still do exorcisms??
Is anything that is opposed to god automatically/by default the work of satan??
Say mtv for example?? I would think the churches would be more direct in their opposition to a lot of things, but they seem to accept or tolerate a lot of questionable things.

I don't see any contradictions here..Just a misunderstanding of the Word of God... I have to go to church this morning to pass out food boxes to the poor (I'm serious), so I can't answer these "contradictions" right now. I will try later this evening..But, if there is someone else that wants to before I can get to it, go for it..

And OHC, you have finally hit the nail right on the head.

"I obviously have control issues."  The key to this discussion.  I firmly believe that those that argue against Christianity and those that cannot make the step of faith have this as their main issue; lack of control.

It is hard to say to God, "I am wrong.  I have [u]no[/u] excuses.  I deserve  your punishment.  But I ask your forgiveness and accept Jesus on faith."  That is so vary hard.

Why?  Because it goes against our own will.  Especially for those of us who tend to be self-reliant and able to take care of ourselves.

Many people seem to say to God, "You owe me an explanation.  I am smart enough to understand anything.  I demand that you answer all my questions."

God smiles at this attitude.  He knows that even if He tried to explain some of these hard questions, we would never be able to understand them.  Why?  Because He is the Creator and we are the created.  He is Infinite and we are finite.



That is what the bible teaches.



Man, you ask some deep questions!  There is a theological concept called "depravity".  It means that mankind is "depraved" and totally sinful and unable to be perfectly good.  It doesn't mean that every man is as evil as he can possibly be.  It also doesn't mean that men cannot do some good.

It just means that, without God's grace, mankind cannot be "good" enough to save himself.  Some Calvinists even believe that depravity means that man cannot even desire to want to know God.  They believe that God must "take the first step" to cause us to want to know Him.  (I'll leave that for another time.)

But to answer your question, yes, there are many "levels" of wrong.  Some people, Hitler is often used as a bad example, were very bad.  Others, that we know, while non-Christians, seem to be pretty good people.

But the bible clearly teaches that there "is none righteous, no, not one". (Sorry [:D].)

Even a "good" man, if he does not accept Jesus as his Savior, is still a sinner and will have to answer for his sin.



Satan is certainly misunderstood.  All we know about him, we learn from the Bible.  And it doesn't tell us a whole lot.  Why not?  I don't know for sure, but I believe that God knows that we really don't need to know a whole lot about Satan.  We need to know a lot about Jesus.  So Jesus is what the bible speaks about.



Everything evil is not the work of Satan.  An important fact to remember is that God is Infinite.  Satan is a created being.  Satan is not omnipresent (everywhere), not omnipotent (all powerful), or omniscient (all knowing).  God is all those things and much more.  Satan is very powerful, but still very limited as compared to God.

You may be too young to remember a comedian named Flip Wilson who had a gig where he said, "The Devil made me do it."  It was funny, but poor theology.  The devil cannot "make" you do anything.  He can tempt you, but you have free will as to whether you will do it or not.

And the Bible clearly teaches us that the vast majority of the time, when we are tempted, the devil has nothing to do with it.  Instead, we are tempted by our own lusts. Depravity again.

As far as the churches opposition to sin, you are right.  Many churches have fallen down on the job.  They ought to defend the standards of their Savior.  Sadly, many groups that call themselves Christian, are not truly following His teachings.

Since Az_Redneck is off doing things that those awful Christians do, I'll fill in for him. [:D]



This is not a "contradiction".  remember that the Old Testament (or Covenant) was for the Jews.  After Jesus came, God gave us a New Testament (or Covenant).  The New Covenant changed some of the "rules" of the old one.  For instance, the Old required animal sacrifices for sin.  The New replaced these with the sacrifice of Jesus.  A better way was instituted.

The same goes for this issue.  Jesus was saying, "You used to swear by God's throne.  A better way is to "let your yeas, be yeas, and not have to swear at all."

Not a contradiction at all.



Same as above.  A new way in the New Testament.



No contradiction.  The first is talking about giving money.  The second is about doing good works.



Jesus was obviously not speaking about immediate burial.  The man's parents were not dead yet.  The man was asking if he should stay at his parents home until they died and then bury them.  Jesus tells him that he ought to follow Jesus.  There would be those left to bury the dead.




Nope.  No contradiction.  Jesus was only explaining that if a son accepted Jesus as his Savior, it may set him "at variance" with his parents if they were unbelievers.  He did not say to show them any disrespect.  Instead, Jesus encouraged his followers to try to lead their families to Christ.

And the second is a beautiful illustration where Jesus explains that if we believe in Him, we are then closer to Him than His earthly family.  What a beautiful hope.

What we see here, SteyrAUG, is an example of hermeneutical view.  You expect errors, so you expect any apparent discrepancy to be an error.  I expect that there are none, so I look for a way to understand the scripture that will allow no error.

If I am unable to see how there is no error, I only know that I do not fully understand the scripture or there would be an explanation.  

I know that will drive some crazy, but it is the correct view for a believer.

Painless- the only problem with your stance is that I already tried the christian way. For a long time- church 3 times a week in some instances... always raised more questions then it answered and most of the people were ignorant of the subjuct that they claimed to base their life on.(present company excepted of course) They could discuss football teams for hours, but bring up say, biblical archaeology, and trying to understand the events and places from a historical context, and you could here the crickets chriping.

After spending a large part of my life trying to be a good christian, I was as hollow as when I started. They beliefs seem contridictory, and honestly, it didn't seem like a good choice for a white guy.

I just want less bs and baggage in my life. I'm tired of men twisting belief systems for their own twisted ends, while mainstream churches stand idlely by, or at even seem to condone horrible abuses.

Sooooo... working on the assumption that 'nature' is 'perfect', I chose a slightly different path.

If you believe that god created the world, isn't it then 'perfect'?? We may not understand it all, but it at least makes sense to me, and doesn't require me to bow down to anyone.I don't believe I'm suupposed to be penitent and live on my knees. I find a lot of 'religion' is very un-natural.
I would think that the churches should be at the forfront of the 'enviromental' movement, but they seem to ignore they rape of the resources that have been provided for us.
And no-- I'm not a wiccian freak.  ugggh. Nor a nazi. Just a happy white boy.

Misc quotes:

Separating the East from the West, Buddhism from Odinism. We Answer the Call of History as Odin's Men; Strong, Clean, Pure, Open and Aggressive. We lay the Roads of the Future with Race and Reality in the forefront. We are the Thinkers, Artists, and Individuals of the many Cultures of our Race. We, the makers, the movers and the inventors of our Civilization must push the envelope. Success and Ultimate Victory requires much more then merely our Racial pride, we must have innovation and results. -S.C. Gehl

I like my god like I like my government... uninvolved until I need something.

"...and how can man die better, than facing fearful odds; for the ashes of his fathers and the temples of his gods?"

"overview of our viewpoints.  
We believe that every religion is a projection of the völkish archetype, morals and ethics.(Volk is a German word meaning people or folk. It is commonly used in words such as "Volksmusik" or or the car manufacturer Volkswagen -literally, "people's car".) As every people is unique and different, it is impossible to transpose religions from one people onto another. Therefore the European peoples should be devoted to their original ethnic religion: Ásatrú, Wotanism or Odinism instead of imported, alien dogmas such as Judeo-Christianity or any non-European monotheistic religion.


We believe that Ásatrú is not a dogmatic religion, yet it implies a number of ethical values that are inherent to our people. These ethical values are recorded in the Hávamál (Words of the High One). These rules are our native "commandments", the highest law of our God Wotan - the father of all. Also see The 9 Noble Virtues. Every heathen or Ásatruár has the right to regard and worship the Aesir and Vanir in his or her own way, as long as he does not disrespect, neglect or contradict the essence of our religion.


We believe that men and women have equal rights. The current discrimination of women is merely a side-effect of Judeo-Christianity, a religion that states that females are the tool of evil. In the Germanic religion, man and women are created at the same time, by the same gods, with different yet complementary qualities. The pillar of our society is the mother, as she is the backbone of the family, which is the basic unit out of which society is built.


We believe that the values propagated in modern society are merely a continuation of Judeo-Christian values. As the spirit of Judeo-Christianity is incompatible with the spirit of each and every European people, modern values are also incompatible with the natural values of the European peoples. For the well-being of our people, politics should be based on a strong folkish feeling of solidarity with our own kind.


We believe that every culture is unique, as it is the result of the creative spirit of a people. Culture is the mirror that shows the true nature of a people. Our culture is our identity. Mixing cultures leads to anti-culture and decline, as it destroys our identity. This has, sadly, been proven already throughout history: the Sumerian, Iranian, Egyptian and Indo-Aryan cultures all allowed foreign cultural elements to exist in their ethno-cultural territory. In the end, the only thing prevailing was degeneration, and all the aforementioned cultures disappeared."

I too am amazed by this. If, as a Christian, I really believe that this life will last 70 or 80 years, and I will then spend millions of years in eternity, why would I not spend a lot of time and effort learning about God and my relationship with Him?  What would be more important?

There is certainly nothing wrong with being knowledgeable about other subjects, such as firearms, but there is nothing even approaching the importance of theology.



I'm sorry that you found your church like this.  But that is why I am not a "church guy".  I am a Christian.  I serve Christ, not some man-made religion.



Uh-oh. [:X*]



Not at all.  God created men, and we sure aren't perfect.  We can all think of many things about this planet that are not "prefect".  Earth is full of non-perfect things.

You make the same mistake as those spoken of in the New Testament.  You worship the creature, or that which was created, instead of the Creator.



Well, I guess that is where we part company.  I believe that, when faced with my Creator, that's exactly where I need to be....on my knees.

He is worthy of my worship and praise.  I cannot save myself.  But He has supplied Salvation for me and given it to me freely.

I've enjoyed our discussion.  I hope you will someday meet Jesus.  He is sure better than any "religion".

[lolabove] Truth from TV thats funny. Whats next ? The Democraps and the Republicans are going to start tell the truth ? Tooth fairy , santa , easter bunny are real, I heard it on the TV it must be true. [;D]

I am sorry but I am not reading this whole thread and I jut had to add my useless 2 cents

Preach it Brother OP!  

And Steyr - As for 'Circumventing' the OT, the NT really does nothing of the sort... All the law in the OT was completely fulfilled in the person of Christ, which is why God, through Him, could establish a new covenant with us.

Without His perfect sacrifice, there could be no new covenant, without His resurrection there could be no grace.

OHC, the creation [b]was[/b] perfect, but is no more.  We are told that all of creation groans under the weight of sin (Rom 8:22).

I also understand your experience with "religion".  Sad to say, there are a number of churches out there that are that way (yes, even mainstream ones).  I hate to admit it, but I and my family actally belong to one like that.  We get the Word at service, but like your experience, most people there know more about their favorite sports team than they do about the person they claim to be King of thier life.

That doesn't stop me from taking my own initiative, and studying on my own.  Again, (as mentioned in another thread) testing the teachings of others against the Scriptures as I am directed by the Holy Spirit.  Until such time as I can find a church that provides this 'food' for my soul, I will continue to do so, and even after that, I expect I shall continue study on my own.  It would be foolish of me to simply accept someone elses interpretation just because they have a large following, or a high profile name.

Nature is perfect- all the cycles happen for a reason. Everything has it's part, it role to play.
A tree absorbs nutients from the earth, and makes leaves. The tree converts co2 into oxygen.
The leaves fall to the ground and are reabsorbed by the earth, to be reused by the tree.
Simple and basic. Easy to understand. Doesn't require the interference of man. Balance and harmony.
I don't think that you can live a healthy, quality life if you're disconnected from nature.
Cities kill. They kill the environment, and they kill a mans heart. Only the weakest would need to live in a city. It makes you dependant on others for your very survival.
Why do you have a house in town?? Because it's close to your job. Why do you have a job?? To pay for your house... vicious cycle.

Sounds like 'i do cocaine so i can work longer- so I can make more money- and I can afford more coke- so I can work longer- so I can.....'



>>>>>"The conservation of our natural resources and their proper use constitute the fundamental problem which underlies almost every other problem of our national life." - Jamestown, Virginia, June 10, 1907- T. Roosevelt

Well, OHC, one last scripture:

[b]Romans 1:25   Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and [red]worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator[/red], who is blessed for ever. Amen.[/b]

We could probably spend a year on romans alone--

1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

1:14 I am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise.

1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.

Anyone wanna 'splain 8:22 to me??
8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
- it is referring to salvation upon the 1st coming?

In order to understand 8:22, go back up to verse 18 and start there, and go to verse 25...

Suffering Creation ..The whole natural creation, including ourselves, is groaning for a better order of existance, to be revealed in the day of God's completed redemption, when the body of this death (see Romans 7:24), shall receive the freedom of heavens glory, now in the various processes of creation. It is a grand conception of the work of Christ.