PDA

View Full Version : How do you choose what parts to follow?



Snow ninja
05-14-2019, 09:16 PM
Old Testament and New Testament.

A post on another part of the forum makes me ask this. Which parts do you follow of the old testament and which ones do you not? And thusly, how do you choose?

People love to quote the parts about what the laws say about homosexuality and adultery and "Eye for an eye". But leave out the other parts like sacrificing 2 turtle doves when a female has her period. And those of you that go out to eat after church on Sunday should probably stone your server cause they are working on the Sabbath.

Seems to me that you shouldn't just be able to stick to some parts and not others. Some state that after Jesus, he did away with the old laws, but people still quote them regularly.

So, where do you draw the line? I've always struggled with this aspect. Thank you.

Ickisrulz
05-15-2019, 07:44 AM
The Old Testament was for Israel as a contracted way to live. The Law contained components of ceremony (clean vs unclean, dietary rules, etc.), sacrifices and morality. It also contains the history of God's interaction with man in general and Israel specifically.

With the coming of Jesus, the ceremony and sacrifices no longer apply to God's people: the Church. Additionally, the Law no longer applies as a way to live in order to please God. We please God with our faith in Christ which leads to a life no longer characterized by sin. The history of God and man is valuable in showing God's loving character.

This leaves the moral commands of the Law. What does the Church do with them? God is still opposed to the immoral acts he prohibited in the Old Testament. God's people are still not to fornicate, murder, steal, hit their parents, practice homosexuality, etc. The big items are re-stated in the New Testament. In fact, all but one of the 10 Commandments are re-stated in the New Testament (keeping the Sabbath holy is not). Most importantly, Jesus summed up the moral components of the Law: "Love God with all your being and your neighbor as yourself." God will always expect this from his people and to not do so is sin.

While the moral component of the Law has not changed, God's people no longer seek to be justified by following the Law. It is important to note that the Church is not charged with enforcing moral requirements in society as Israel was. What I mean is the Church does not stone adulterers or homosexuals.

Thundarstick
05-15-2019, 08:08 AM
A very well thought out and accurate reply, especially about how the Church isn't taxed with enforcing God's law's. Some folks do still have a problem distinguishing between ritual and law.

Ickisrulz
05-15-2019, 09:20 AM
Another issue when comparing the Old Testament to the New Testament is that some Christians have the idea that God changed from one to the other.

People see the Old Testament as a history of God's wrath. While the Old Testament records acts of God's judgement and destruction, it also records God's patience in dealing with people, his repeated warnings and emotional pleadings for people to change their ways and preclude judgement. Additionally, people tend to overlook the fact that the removal of evil people and cultures was done to eliminate their continued harm to their neighbors and their adverse influence. The removal of evil is because of God's love.

People tend to see the New Testament as solely a record of God's forgiveness and love. This overlooks the warnings to and promise of judgement for evil-doers. Jesus talked quite a bit about the final destruction of the unsaved as did the other New Testament writers. We also see the physical destruction of Ananias and Sapphira and some in the Corinthian church (1 Cor 11:30), as well as the prediction of the fall of Jerusalem (70 AD). So there's plenty of judgment in the New Testament.

God has never and will never change.

Sig556r
05-15-2019, 09:43 AM
They're all God's words chronicled by earlier prophets then thru Jesus' Apostles...

jmort
05-15-2019, 10:50 AM
I do not follow the Old Testament, it was not intended for me. It was a specific Covenant with the 12 Tribes. In Ezekiel God compared the tribes to two whores, one being the 10 "Lost" Tribes, and the other to two Tribes, Judah and Benjamin.
God divorced the 10 Tribes and punished the remaining two tribes. Almost exclusively Jesus taught Jews and all the Original Apostles were Jews who fellowshipped with Jews.
Then God sent a Jew named Paul to preach/teach Salvation to non-Jews. So, I follow the New Covenant as proclaimed in the New Testament and pay special attention to the Gospels and Paul's instruction as well as the other letters/Books intended for those following The New Covenant.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-15-2019, 01:42 PM
Snow Ninja,

I'll give you the Catholic reply:

The Catholic Church uses both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition as guides. So there is a tradition that is handed down through the generations that illuminates confusing Bible passages. Catholics do not believe that it is sufficient to sit in your living room and read Scripture and ask yourself, "What do I think this means?" If you do this you can open yourself up to one of the Devil's snares. Rather we read a scripture passage and ask, "what did they mean when they wrote this? What did past and present bishops and saints think it means?" Then there are entire libraries full of ancient writings from people who studied under the Apostles and other great theologians through the centuries. If you can trace a particular scripture interpretation through the centuries of writings within the church you have a safe bet that you've got the right interpretation.

There is also something called Natural Law. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI made a reference to this in his most recent letter concerning the scandals that have rocked the church. We often make silly references to something like Natural Law when we make statements like ". . . the 1911 as John Moses Browning intended. . ." What we are doing in those situations is mimicking a rationale that there is something intended in the nature of things. Thus we will say, "as God intended..." or "as Mother Nature intended. . ."

Natural Law applies to all mankind regardless of creed and thus can be enforced regardless of creed. Thus, even though Sharia Law may demand that a father kill his dishonorable daughter - such a thing is still murder.

1hole
05-15-2019, 10:19 PM
Modern people have a lot of trouble reconciling Old Testament rules vs. New Testament rules because too few ministers understand the differences or even try to explain it. That allows a LOT of unneccessary confusion. It's impossible to totally answer every aspect of the OP's question, that would require volumes of big books, the best we can do here is try to answer fragments of it.

First thing we need to recognise is that God does not change but, from Adam/Eve to today, HIS revelation to man of what He wants our motivation and conduct to be has indeed changed. He loves us and for our salvation He only requires the right heart to be in us. There is no mandatory checklist of perfection for that, meaning we can't possibly "earn", "deserve" or "buy" our salvation, it's a perfect gift from Jesus to imperfect people who trust and love him as Lord.

The OT is mostly a history of the Hebrews who were ruled by things to do or not do to gain God's favor. Didn't work, wasn't expected to work because He knew it's impossible for weak/fallible humans to accomplish anyway.

The "Law of Moses", aka Ten Commandments, are the core of that and we fail even in that simple law. Therefore God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, devised a way for men to attain spiritual perfection by substituting the perfection of the Son to us through our willing faith/trust in the coming Messiah (the man God Man/Jesus).

So we, the "Church", i.e., the body of Christ consisting of born again believers, Jew and Gentile, from the Day of Pentecost until the coming Rapture of the saints by faith follow a different set of rules based on the original Ten Rules save one.

The concepts of the original ten laws are actually restated in the NT (all except the "Seventh Day Sabbath") so they apply to our blessings now. The stated rules are to be followed for later heavenly rewards but NOT for salvation so the old Hebrew rules of daily religious practices and temple sacrifice don't apply to us.

If we read scripture for ourselves and basically understand to whom the varied rules apply, and for what purposes, most of the puzzlement fades away. I think. :)

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-16-2019, 08:47 AM
Modern people have a lot of trouble reconciling Old Testament rules vs. New Testament rules because too few ministers understand the differences or even try to explain it. That allows a LOT of unneccessary confusion. It's impossible to totally answer every aspect of the OP's question, that would require volumes of big books, the best we can do here is try to answer fragments of it.

First thing we need to recognise is that God does not change but, from Adam/Eve to today, HIS revelation to man of what He wants our motivation and conduct to be has indeed changed. He loves us and for our salvation He only requires the right heart to be in us. There is no mandatory checklist of perfection for that, meaning we can't possibly "earn", "deserve" or "buy" our salvation, it's a perfect gift from Jesus to imperfect people who trust and love him as Lord.

The OT is mostly a history of the Hebrews who were ruled by things to do or not do to gain God's favor. Didn't work, wasn't expected to work because He knew it's impossible for weak/fallible humans to accomplish anyway.

The "Law of Moses", aka Ten Commandments, are the core of that and we fail even in that simple law. Therefore God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, devised a way for men to attain spiritual perfection by substituting the perfection of the Son to us through our willing faith/trust in the coming Messiah (the man God Man/Jesus).

So we, the "Church", i.e., the body of Christ consisting of born again believers, Jew and Gentile, from the Day of Pentecost until the coming Rapture of the saints by faith follow a different set of rules based on the original Ten Rules save one.

The concepts of the original ten laws are actually restated in the NT (all except the "Seventh Day Sabbath") so they apply to our blessings now. The stated rules are to be followed for later heavenly rewards but NOT for salvation so the old Hebrew rules of daily religious practices and temple sacrifice don't apply to us.

If we read scripture for ourselves and basically understand to whom the varied rules apply, and for what purposes, most of the puzzlement fades away. I think. :)

That an interesting concept. Where did you hear of this? So basically the 10 Commandments are just 10 Suggestions? Or am I not understanding something?

T_McD
05-16-2019, 09:22 AM
The biggest issue is that most have not read the Bible for themselves and are left with what various sects proclaim as truth. Contrary to popular belief knowing Hebrew or ancient history is not required for a basic understanding of the text.

Now for my opinion, Jesus said (paraphrased) to “love God and love your neighbors” and that those two things summed up the entirety of the law. He has whittled it down to two rules which are still completely out of humans abilities to succeed at. When one can succeed at these two commandments, they will likely find homosexuality, divorce, suicide, abortion to be no more important than any other human failing.

Last point, if Jesus felt it appropriate to leave just two rules, who else has any right to add to that?

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-16-2019, 11:18 AM
Contrary to popular belief knowing Hebrew or ancient history is not required for a basic understanding of the text.

Says who?

I for one have read, and do read, the Bible. I do not find it magical in any sense, in fact I find it boring, and confusing much of the time. There are some parts that are great to be sure. But if I was raised as an unbeliever, atheist perhaps, and just sat down and read the Bible, by myself, there is nothing about it that would be convincing of its value. It is only when I start asking others and researching "what does this mean?" that things come to light. Even in the Bible itself, there was an Ethiopian eunuch that read scripture and asked St. Paul for an explanation because the Ethiopian found it confusing.

Yes Jesus summed up the law, but he also clarified the law in more detail when he said that whoever calls his neighbor a fool commits murder, or whoever looks at a woman with lust commits adultery.

The fact is, Jesus didn't write a book, he chose 12 men and started a church. He put the responsibility on those men to get it started. The Bible only gives us a tiny glimpse of everything that Jesus said and did. How do I know? The Bible admits it.

jmort
05-16-2019, 11:25 AM
The biggest issue is that most have not read the Bible for themselves and are left with what various sects proclaim as truth. Contrary to popular belief knowing Hebrew or ancient history is not required for a basic understanding of the text.

Now for my opinion, Jesus said (paraphrased) to “love God and love your neighbors” and that those two things summed up the entirety of the law. He has whittled it down to two rules which are still completely out of humans abilities to succeed at. When one can succeed at these two commandments, they will likely find homosexuality, divorce, suicide, abortion to be no more important than any other human failing.

Last point, if Jesus felt it appropriate to leave just two rules, who else has any right to add to that?

Paul
He was ordered to save the non-Jews.
He has everything covered in his letters.
What Paul said.

1hole
05-16-2019, 11:53 AM
That an interesting concept. Where did you hear of this? So basically the 10 Commandments are just 10 Suggestions? Or am I not understanding something?

I don't quite know how to answer because I don't exactly understand what you're trying to say; help me with this:

In your judgement what do we obtain if we precisely follow the Ten Commandments? Are each of the Commandments mandatory and must every one be followed in order for God to love us? Or, if the laws aren't absolutely mandatory, where is the break point, how many Commandments may believers break before God sends us to he77?

God started man out with just ONE rule; "Don't eat that stuff!" Later, over hundreds of years, He expanded the rules. Then, after the Exodus from Egypt, he gave Moses a vastly increased list of laws to be worked out. Then, some 2,000 years later, Messiah came to full fill the purpose of the Law of works and He gave man a New Covenant, in his blood, based on our love of Him and our faith that He will see us safely through the tribulations of this life.

The New Testament, the Gospel of Christ is the "good news", the news that salvation is His undeserved gift to imperfect believers because it cannot be earned by works of the Law even if you want to call them the Ten Suggestions. If that's wrong then John 3:16 has no fixed meaning and nothing was changed with the New Testament; I don't think you actually believe that.

If salvation could be earned by following a set of Laws then the Pharasees were right and Jesus' agonizing sacrifice of himself on the cross to pay for our failures was meaningless. And that just ain't so.

T_McD
05-16-2019, 12:03 PM
Says who?

I for one have read, and do read, the Bible. I do not find it magical in any sense, in fact I find it boring, and confusing much of the time. There are some parts that are great to be sure. But if I was raised as an unbeliever, atheist perhaps, and just sat down and read the Bible, by myself, there is nothing about it that would be convincing of its value. It is only when I start asking others and researching "what does this mean?" that things come to light. Even in the Bible itself, there was an Ethiopian eunuch that read scripture and asked St. Paul for an explanation because the Ethiopian found it confusing.

Yes Jesus summed up the law, but he also clarified the law in more detail when he said that whoever calls his neighbor a fool commits murder, or whoever looks at a woman with lust commits adultery.

The fact is, Jesus didn't write a book, he chose 12 men and started a church. He put the responsibility on those men to get it started. The Bible only gives us a tiny glimpse of everything that Jesus said and did. How do I know? The Bible admits it.

“Love god, love your neighbor” requires no explanation. If your actions don’t meet that criteria, they inevitably fail to meet other aspects of scripture.

T_McD
05-16-2019, 12:05 PM
Paul
He was ordered to save the non-Jews.
He has everything covered in his letters.
What Paul said.


Paul was a man, a preacher. His words have some value but I prefer to rely on the source

jmort
05-16-2019, 12:28 PM
Paul was a man, a preacher. His words have some value but I prefer to rely on the source

What source?????
BTW Paul was an Apostle
If you want to disregard Jesus' specific instruction on the role of the Apostles and his direction that they would build The Church, you have free will.
Sounds like people just want to make it up based on their own whishes and desires. I will stick with The Bible as the inherent Word of God.
Make it up if you will. Good luck with that.

T_McD
05-16-2019, 01:46 PM
What source?????
BTW Paul was an Apostle
If you want to disregard Jesus' specific instruction on the role of the Apostles and his direction that they would build The Church, you have free will.
Sounds like people just want to make it up based on their own whishes and desires. I will stick with The Bible as the inherent Word of God.
Make it up if you will. Good luck with that.

Please tell me how following the two greatest commandments to the best of my abilities will do any amount of harm?

Focus more on that and less on the judgement of others. The Bible is not a club and should not be wielded as such.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-16-2019, 01:54 PM
“Love god, love your neighbor” requires no explanation. If your actions don’t meet that criteria, they inevitably fail to meet other aspects of scripture.

Right, it is pretty simple, but also pretty vague. If a brief, 5-word summary of Scripture is all that is necessary, why read the rest of the Bible? There's over 50 books in the Bible, you surely can't be saying they're just a long-winded way of saying, "Love god, love your neighbor."

How do you go about loving God?
How do you go about loving your neighbor?

When I research those answers I find that reading the Bible by myself only gets me so far.

jmort
05-16-2019, 02:02 PM
Please tell me how following the two greatest commandments to the best of my abilities will do any amount of harm?

Focus more on that and less on the judgement of others. The Bible is not a club and should not be wielded as such.

Where did you find those two commandments?????
Did you tear the rest of the pages out of your Bible???
There is no judgment. I have seen any judgment in this thread.
241813

T_McD
05-16-2019, 02:17 PM
Right, it is pretty simple, but also pretty vague. If a brief, 5-word summary of Scripture is all that is necessary, why read the rest of the Bible? There's over 50 books in the Bible, you surely can't be saying they're just a long-winded way of saying, "Love god, love your neighbor."

How do you go about loving God?
How do you go about loving your neighbor?

When I research those answers I find that reading the Bible by myself only gets me so far.

Agreed, vague tends to accompany all inclusive statements. My point in all this is simply that when one’s focus shifts away from those two commandments, things go downhill quick.
My answer on what parts of scripture to follow revolves around what enables you to love God and love people. In my mind it really is that simple, not easy but not complex either.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-16-2019, 02:30 PM
In your judgement what do we obtain if we precisely follow the Ten Commandments? Impossible to do without Gods grace. With Gods grace, if we succeed, we shall hear, "Well done my good and faithful servant. . ."Are each of the Commandments mandatory and must every one be followed in order for God to love us?In order for God to love us? No. In order for us to love God? Yes, each and every one is mandatory. Or, if the laws aren't absolutely mandatory, where is the break point, how many Commandments may believers break before God sends us to he77? When you choose to break a Commandment you choose condemnation, not so much God sending you but God letting you go there.

I hope this helps clarify my position.



The New Testament, the Gospel of Christ is the "good news", the news that salvation is His undeserved gift to imperfect believers because it cannot be earned by works of the Law even if you want to call them the Ten Suggestions. If that's wrong then John 3:16 has no fixed meaning and nothing was changed with the New Testament; I don't think you actually believe that.

John 3:16 says that whoever believes in Jesus will not perish, but shall have eternal life. So then, do we believe Jesus when He said the road to destruction is wide, and the gate to eternal life is narrow? Do we believe Him when He said He would separate the sheep from the goats, and then tells the goats they didn't feed, clothe or comfort Him? Do we believe Him when he said whoever loves Him follows His Commandments?
My question still stands: where did you hear this way of interpreting Scripture? Did you make it up yourself? Or did you get it from somebody else?

Please read everything of mine as brother-to-brother. I respect your views as I sense that you are a good and faithful Christian.

dverna
05-16-2019, 03:23 PM
We should never lose sight that the Bible was written by men. Within it are many truths that we should live by to please our Father, and to be "good" people.

For me, there is less consternation and thrashing around if I accept that the Bible is not 100% accurate. Some parts of the Bible are plainly in need of wordsmithing or "interpretation" to be acceptable...others parts are foolish....not many but they are there. Start with your turtle dove example, Genesis (and the differing theories by theologians), acceptance of slavery, Ephesians 5:22, etc. etc.

God gave us not only choice, but common sense. When those who make studying the Bible their life work cannot agree 100%, what makes us think we "know" exactly what it says or means?? KISS.

I feel sorry for those who believe every word in the Bible is 100% correct. Dogma is easier than thinking. If, centuries later and after numerous iterations, God meant for us to rely on theologians (who are just men) to understand the Bible He made a number of grave errors. First, not making it simple and succinct. Second, making it a document this is NOT timeless (as it should be). Third, not "correcting" or updating it after centuries have passed and He sees us wallowing in multiple Christian sects and their interpretations.

Use the few good (and universally accepted) instructions in the Bible to live your life by. Ignore the ones that do not make sense. Like I said...KISS.

Honor and worship God, accept Jesus, love others, and live by the 9 Commandments He did not rescind. (See even God makes mistakes...we did not need 10).

Ickisrulz
05-16-2019, 04:58 PM
Some parts of the Bible are plainly in need of wordsmithing or "interpretation" to be acceptable...others parts are foolish....not many but they are there.

There are many people who find the concept of God becoming man and dying for our sins to be foolish and even blasphemous. How do you know this biblical assertion is not a falsehood made up by man?

When you go down the road claiming that the Bible contains the words of God, but is not the Word of God you create many stumbling blocks for your belief system and spiritual life.

Just because the Bible was not written in the way you would have done it, does not mean it is imperfect. Additionally, just because God has varied his methods in dealing with man does not mean he is imperfect.

I take you to be an honest person. But I encourage you to re-think claiming that God makes mistakes and is not perfect. God's address to Job comes to mind. We humans have no power and no knowledge compared to God. Who are we to claim that he is wrong? None of the biblical writers, prophets or Apostles ever hinted to such an idea.

jmort
05-16-2019, 05:01 PM
Exactly Right On

T_McD
05-16-2019, 09:43 PM
While this thread has been a civil discussion, it exemplifies my misgivings about the church. One is expected to leave critical thinking at the door. How exactly does paragraphs of genealogy contribute to my faith?

How do you rationalize the inconstancy found in scripture?

Ickisrulz
05-16-2019, 10:23 PM
While this thread has been a civil discussion, it exemplifies my misgivings about the church. One is expected to leave critical thinking at the door. How exactly does paragraphs of genealogy contribute to my faith?

How do you rationalize the inconstancy found in scripture?

While biblical genealogical records may not mean anything to you, they did to the original audiences. Genealogies were especially important to show the lineage of Christ and his connection to David (and the first man) as promised in Old Testament prophecy.

Properly interpreted Scripture does not present inconsistencies. What specific problems do you have in mind?

dverna
05-16-2019, 11:51 PM
There are many people who find the concept of God becoming man and dying for our sins to be foolish and even blasphemous. How do you know this biblical assertion is not a falsehood made up by man?

When you go down the road claiming that the Bible contains the words of God, but is not the Word of God you create many stumbling blocks for your belief system and spiritual life.

Just because the Bible was not written in the way you would have done it, does not mean it is imperfect. Additionally, just because God has varied his methods in dealing with man does not mean he is imperfect.

I take you to be an honest person. But I encourage you to re-think claiming that God makes mistakes and is not perfect. God's address to Job comes to mind. We humans have no power and no knowledge compared to God. Who are we to claim that he is wrong? None of the biblical writers, prophets or Apostles ever hinted to such an idea.

The fact that God has varied His methods of dealing with man is only one of the "proofs" of His imperfection. It does not diminish His power. or His love for us, or that He was the ultimate Creator; but power does not equate to perfection in every act and decision He made.

My faith is not based on Him being perfect. I do not need Him to be perfect. Just as my natural father, loved me and did the best he could, I trust in the love of God and that He always tries to do His best...that is good enough for me. If I had to believe God and the Bible are perfect, I would likely revert back to atheism. Too many things do not "add up" for me.

I know I will never find a church that accepts this view. I still attend church as it helps me think things through.

On the core principles of how we should live, there is little or no disconnect that occurs with my opinion that God and the Bible are less than perfect.

I welcome your words of encouragement. Even if my spiritual development is retarded by my current thoughts, at least I am no longer an atheist. For those who have never been there, it is huge leap to accept God and Jesus when you have not been raised as a believer in ANY God.

For those of you that question God, the Bible and religion I offer my take. Accepting an imperfect God is better than not believing at all IMHO, and salvation only comes from accepting Jesus. Do not dismiss the entire Bible for sections that we either cannot understand or seem inconsistent. Lastly, be wary of religion. There is no "right" one....but you may find one that works for you most of the time; and there is much to be gained by being with others who believe.

Ickisrulz
05-17-2019, 09:06 AM
The fact that God has varied His methods of dealing with man is only one of the "proofs" of His imperfection. It does not diminish His power. or His love for us, or that He was the ultimate Creator; but power does not equate to perfection in every act and decision He made.

My faith is not based on Him being perfect. I do not need Him to be perfect. Just as my natural father, loved me and did the best he could, I trust in the love of God and that He always tries to do His best...that is good enough for me. If I had to believe God and the Bible are perfect, I would likely revert back to atheism. Too many things do not "add up" for me.

I know I will never find a church that accepts this view. I still attend church as it helps me think things through.

On the core principles of how we should live, there is little or no disconnect that occurs with my opinion that God and the Bible are less than perfect.

I welcome your words of encouragement. Even if my spiritual development is retarded by my current thoughts, at least I am no longer an atheist. For those who have never been there, it is huge leap to accept God and Jesus when you have not been raised as a believer in ANY God.

For those of you that question God, the Bible and religion I offer my take. Accepting an imperfect God is better than not believing at all IMHO, and salvation only comes from accepting Jesus. Do not dismiss the entire Bible for sections that we either cannot understand or seem inconsistent. Lastly, be wary of religion. There is no "right" one....but you may find one that works for you most of the time; and there is much to be gained by being with others who believe.

Can you please share with me your criteria for determining if a biblical story or assertion is true or false? Is it just a matter of what rings true to you?

God's revelation of himself to man, as well as his expectations of and requirements for man have been progressive. God did not start off demanding that "every thought be obedient to Christ. (2 Cor 10:5)" This would not have been possible without the coming of the Holy Spirit, who could not come until after Jesus' work had been accomplished. Jesus could not perform his mission until certain things had happened.

Therefore, God gave man incremental steps to bring him closer to living the life he was meant to. This included the prohibition in the Garden, the removal of universal evil with the flood, institution of man-administered penalties, physical separation of those who might be loyal to him from their neighbors and eventually the Law. Each of these steps, was intended to reveal God's desire for man, improve man's existence and show how man is prone to failure. The final step was the coming of the Messiah who finished the plan that God had all along; the "Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. (Rev 13:8). Each of the aforementioned steps was perfect, but did not result in the fullness of its potential because of human response. This includes the work of Jesus Christ. Jesus' sacrifice is sufficient to save every person on earth. But because of man's failure to respond, most will not benefit from Jesus' work.

God's means of dealing with man has been and will always be perfect. The imperfect response of his creatures will often thwart his efforts.

jmort
05-17-2019, 09:23 AM
"The fact that God has varied His methods of dealing with man is only one of the "proofs" of His imperfection. It does not diminish His power. or His love for us, or that He was the ultimate Creator; but power does not equate to perfection in every act and decision He made."

If you are a Member of The Body of Christ, I implore you to disregard this utterly and completely.
The Pit cometh to this sub- forum
Wow, just Wow. Don't go there.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 11:39 AM
How do you rationalize the inconstancy found in scripture?


Can you please share with me your criteria for determining if a biblical story or assertion is true or false? Is it just a matter of what rings true to you?

These are totally awesome questions guys! I love it.

I will point out that none of the ideas I've expressed on this thread are invented by me. I'm just paraphrasing thoughts and teachings that have been handed down for ages.

Here is how many men far holier than I approach these questions, let's first see if we can agree on some basic principles:


A) Do you agree that when someone says something, the words they say can often be interpreted in different ways, sometimes wildly different?
B) Do you agree that when someone writes something the same problem can arise? E.g. the statement, "I never said he stole the gum." If you say this sentence several times, but each time put vocal emphasis on a different word, it changes the meaning quite a lot.
C) Do you agree that the best way to find out what someone meant when they said or wrote something is to go directly to that someone and ask them?
D) Do you agree that when that someone is no longer available to directly ask, the next best way to decipher a cryptic statement is to ask people who knew that person really well?
E) Do you agree that when a person stands nothing to gain by saying something but they say it anyway, they are likely telling the truth?
F) Do you agree we ought to apply the same level of skepticism about the existence of Alexander the Great, or things he said and did?


Next:
Look at the very last verse in the Gospel according to John (I'm Catholic, I don't memorize chapter:verse numbers as a general rule). He says something like, Jesus said and did many other things, so much that all the books in the world could not contain them if they were written down. That seems like a clue that if you are operating on the Bible alone, you're going to miss some things. If you think about it, Jesus spend 3 years preaching and traveling with his Apostles. There has to be a TON of stuff that he explained over the campfire as they were hiking between towns (the Gospels allude to this).

Finally lets compare two Gospel stories I hope you're familiar with:
One is where Jesus says, "if your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away." The other passage is where Jesus says "whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall have eternal life."

These are both passages that can be understood in wildly different ways. So let's go ask Jesus what He really meant. Not possible? Do you think the 12 Apostles had a chance to ask Him? We don't really have anything written by any of the 12 that elaborate on this, but it seems reasonable that the people most qualified to understand what Jesus meant by these wild statements were those who lived to see Him & the Apostles face to face. If that is the case, then history should record descriptions of early Christians gouging out their eyes and cutting off their hands, as that would have been passed down through oral tradition. I've never heard of such a thing, but I have heard the claim that early Christians were accused of cannibalism. This would suggest that the early Christians were preaching that the Eucharist was Christ's flesh and blood. There is also a guy named St. Ignatius of Antioch who said, "...they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ..." St. Ignatius was martyred in 107 A.D. and he lived early enough to study under John the Apostle. So doesn't it seem likely that this belief existed from the very beginning of the Church?

Now if you apply the principles outlined in A through F you can see that a given passage can be confusing but by careful historical research you can get some perspective that helps understand what it meant. This is primarily why Catholics and Orthodox do not subscribe to "Bible alone" theories. Now, it is still possible that these teachings are wrong, and something in the historical record is awry. But if you want to deny Christianity based on a very high standard of evidence, then you ought to apply that same high standard of evidence to other parts of history such as the events and statements of Alexander the Great. Much of what is known about him depends on an oral tradition that lasted centuries before anything was written down, yet I know of no worthy historian who denies the existence of Alexander the Great.

Alabama358
05-17-2019, 02:16 PM
These are totally awesome questions guys! I love it.

I will point out that none of the ideas I've expressed on this thread are invented by me. I'm just paraphrasing thoughts and teachings that have been handed down for ages.

Here is how many men far holier than I approach these questions, let's first see if we can agree on some basic principles:



Next:
Look at the very last verse in the Gospel according to John (I'm Catholic, I don't memorize chapter:verse numbers as a general rule). He says something like, Jesus said and did many other things, so much that all the books in the world could not contain them if they were written down. That seems like a clue that if you are operating on the Bible alone, you're going to miss some things. If you think about it, Jesus spend 3 years preaching and traveling with his Apostles. There has to be a TON of stuff that he explained over the campfire as they were hiking between towns (the Gospels allude to this).

Finally lets compare two Gospel stories I hope you're familiar with:
One is where Jesus says, "if your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away." The other passage is where Jesus says "whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood shall have eternal life."

These are both passages that can be understood in wildly different ways. So let's go ask Jesus what He really meant. Not possible? Do you think the 12 Apostles had a chance to ask Him? We don't really have anything written by any of the 12 that elaborate on this, but it seems reasonable that the people most qualified to understand what Jesus meant by these wild statements were those who lived to see Him & the Apostles face to face. If that is the case, then history should record descriptions of early Christians gouging out their eyes and cutting off their hands, as that would have been passed down through oral tradition. I've never heard of such a thing, but I have heard the claim that early Christians were accused of cannibalism. This would suggest that the early Christians were preaching that the Eucharist was Christ's flesh and blood. There is also a guy named St. Ignatius of Antioch who said, "...they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ..." St. Ignatius was martyred in 107 A.D. and he lived early enough to study under John the Apostle. So doesn't it seem likely that this belief existed from the very beginning of the Church?

Now if you apply the principles outlined in A through F you can see that a given passage can be confusing but by careful historical research you can get some perspective that helps understand what it meant. This is primarily why Catholics and Orthodox do not subscribe to "Bible alone" theories. Now, it is still possible that these teachings are wrong, and something in the historical record is awry. But if you want to deny Christianity based on a very high standard of evidence, then you ought to apply that same high standard of evidence to other parts of history such as the events and statements of Alexander the Great. Much of what is known about him depends on an oral tradition that lasted centuries before anything was written down, yet I know of no worthy historian who denies the existence of Alexander the Great.


Proverbs 26:11

T_McD
05-17-2019, 03:03 PM
Pretty sure it says somewhere that men are saved by faith. What takes more faith, believing despite serious doubts and misgivings or believing in divine perfection? If ones faith can’t handle a challenge to Christ’s deity, or the divine ness of scripture, it would seem to me to be rather weak. I find more comfort in admitting ignorance and doubt than blindly following the blind.

This is the failing in organized religion, to be accepted in the club, one must agree to all tenets completely. It sets up an us vs them mindset that is absolutely the antithesis of scripture.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 03:04 PM
As dogs return to their vomit, so fools repeat their folly.Proverbs 26:11


Hmmm. I find your remark rather cryptic. So I could go straight to the source and ask you to please elaborate on what you mean and how this applies to my post.

Or. . . I could take the approach that your response self-interprets and just ask myself what do I think it means.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 03:07 PM
Pretty sure it says somewhere that men are saved by faith. What takes more faith, believing despite serious doubts and misgivings or believing in divine perfection? If ones faith can’t handle a challenge to Christ’s deity, or the divine ness of scripture, it would seem to me to be rather weak. I find more comfort in admitting ignorance and doubt than blindly following the blind.

This is the failing in organized religion, to be accepted in the club, one must agree to all tenets completely. It sets up an us vs them mindset that is absolutely the antithesis of scripture.


I'm not sure what this is in response to. One of my posts? If so, I don't know how it applies.

Walks
05-17-2019, 03:10 PM
Thank the GOOD LORD I'm Jewish.

T_McD
05-17-2019, 03:19 PM
I'm not sure what this is in response to. One of my posts? If so, I don't know how it applies.

Everyone and no one in particular.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 03:56 PM
ok.

This is the failing in organized religion, to be accepted in the club, one must agree to all tenets completely.

Except it's not a club. And within Catholicism this statement is not true. It is true that one must assent to all dogmas in order to be considered Catholic - but that's just being honest. I mean, come on, there must be some beliefs that make Christianity, Christianity, while other beliefs are more arguable. Yes, if you are unwilling to accept that God became man, and that Jesus Christ was the divine incarnation of the God of the Hebrews (which implies perfection), then be honest, Christianity is not for you. But there are also other tenets that are argued among good Christians.


Pretty sure it says somewhere that men are saved by faith.
But it doesn't, or at least didn't, say "faith alone." And nowhere does it say "blind faith". If you read my posts, what I'm offering is solid, historical evidence on which we can form a basis for our faith.

Do you believe in Alexander the Great? If you do, you are doing so on faith, because you haven't met him.

Ickisrulz
05-17-2019, 04:01 PM
This is the failing in organized religion, to be accepted in the club, one must agree to all tenets completely. It sets up an us vs them mindset that is absolutely the antithesis of scripture.

It's too bad this has been your experience. I have not found things to be this way among any group of Christians or church I have associated with.

I enjoy the academic side of Christendom much more than the going to church side. I hate sitting still and being a captive audience for a person who enjoys public speaking. I like discussing biblical exposition and ideas, even though that always leads to differences of understanding.

1hole
05-17-2019, 04:30 PM
=Black Jaque Janaviac;4648104]I hope this helps clarify my position.

So then, do we believe Jesus when He said the road to destruction is wide, and the gate to eternal life is narrow? Do we believe Him when He said He would separate the sheep from the goats, and then tells the goats they didn't feed, clothe or comfort Him? ---- Do we believe Him when he said whoever loves Him follows His Commandments?[/COLOR]

Yes, sure believers should believe all of that but none of it addresses my question: "What do YOU believe spiritually happens if we are not perfect followers" and, by extension, "On judgement day (?), what do you believe happens to imperfect believers?" I mean do you think, "There's a legal limit to God's tolerance for human failure?" and, if you believe so, "At what point of imperfection may weak believers be consigned to he77?"

My point is, far too many well meaning Christian people get too deep into works/legalism religion and (unconsiously?) teach a works based gospel in which salvation has to be earned and then maintained by diligent rule following (usually in a specific denomination).

Legalism does that and it puts people in exactly the same spiritually oppressive box as the Pharasees did in Jesus' day. The whole book of Galatians is written specifically to oppose Christian legalisim!

That heavy load of "You must follow the rules or go to he77" did and still crushes the hearts of stumbling believers rather than reassuring them that their eternal safety is secure in the hands of a trustworthy God, not themselves, because the perfection of Jesus life is imputed by the Father to each born again believer even before we die. (Everyone knows John 3:16 but far too few know John 3:17 & 18.)

There is no grading on a curve for Christians and there is no weighing the books at Judgement Day for salvation. All believers should know THAT!


where did you hear this way of interpreting Scripture? Did you make it up yourself? Or did you get it from somebody else?

I got where I am today by a long lifetime (78 years) of prayer and reading the Book to see what it actually means without being lead by the nose in denominational traditions or doctrines. (And doing that isn't as easy as it may sound, most of us have firmly entrenched doctrinal error fixations that are hard for anyone to get passed!)

Please read everything of mine as brother-to-brother. I respect your views as I sense that you are a good and faithful Christian.

My "good and faithful" is an open question but my eternal security is solid because it rests on Christ alone, not me!

Finally brother Jac, I never once thought you mean anything less than honorable. Fact is, I love honest challenges because others force me to rethink and reappraise what and why I believe about anything. I've never learned a single thing from folks who agreed with me! Honest people do honestly hold different positions. Far too many folk seem to take disagreement as a personal affront and that should not be. :)

T_McD
05-17-2019, 05:00 PM
ok.

Except it's not a club. And within Catholicism this statement is not true. It is true that one must assent to all dogmas in order to be considered Catholic - but that's just being honest. I mean, come on, there must be some beliefs that make Christianity, Christianity, while other beliefs are more arguable. Yes, if you are unwilling to accept that God became man, and that Jesus Christ was the divine incarnation of the God of the Hebrews (which implies perfection), then be honest, Christianity is not for you.

How can you say with a straight face that’s it’s not a “club” and then say it’s not for me? Who are you to pass judgement? You have exposed quite clearly what I am talking about. You realize this attitude is extremely evident to “non-believers” who are looking for something different but aren’t ready to jump in whole hog.

Do you believe in Alexander the Great? If you do, you are doing so on faith, because you haven't met him. Historical records are great for history. I believe both men existed, that has little to do with divine status.

Adding words for minimum length

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 05:18 PM
How can you say with a straight face that’s it’s not a “club” and then say it’s not for me? Who are you to pass judgement? You have exposed quite clearly what I am talking about. You realize this attitude is extremely evident to “non-believers” who are looking for something different but aren’t ready to jump in whole hog.

Because it is not a club. Religions are meant to be take-it-or-leave-it belief systems. Either the divinity of Christ is a core part of what makes Christianity, Christianity. I don't expect Hindus to change their core beliefs to accommodate my doubts. I say let Hindus be Hindus and let Christians be Christians. Then we get to pick from what is there. There are plenty of other religions that believe Christ is not divine - Muslims, Mormons, and Jehovas (I think).

I'm not passing judgment on anyone who does not accept Christianity. I'm actually enjoying people asking some basic-yet-challenging questions, because these are the very questions I've grappled with. The fact that you have these questions only indicates that you are a clever, critical thinker. So there, I guess I did judge you.

I do get the sense that your not really reading my posts though.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 05:20 PM
Finally brother Jac, I never once thought you mean anything less than honorable. Fact is, I love honest challenges because others force me to rethink and reappraise what and why I believe about anything. I've never learned a single thing from folks who agreed with me! Honest people do honestly hold different positions. Far too many folk seem to take disagreement as a personal attack and that should not be.

Like two pugilists duking it out in the ring. Then laughing over a beer and black eyes afterwards. I love it!

T_McD
05-17-2019, 05:56 PM
Because it is not a club. Religions are meant to be take-it-or-leave-it belief systems. Either the divinity of Christ is a core part of what makes Christianity, Christianity. I don't expect Hindus to change their core beliefs to accommodate my doubts. I say let Hindus be Hindus and let Christians be Christians. Then we get to pick from what is there. There are plenty of other religions that believe Christ is not divine - Muslims, Mormons, and Jehovas (I think).


It’s an organized group of people pursuing similar interests, call it what you will.

Does your version of heaven include Jews? Hindus? Indigenous peoples with no organized religion?

I ask because I strongly believe in A deity. However, I cannot ignore that my deity of choice is largely based on geography and not righteousness.

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-17-2019, 07:40 PM
It’s an organized group of people pursuing similar interests, call it what you will.

Does your version of heaven include Jews? Hindus? Indigenous peoples with no organized religion?

I ask because I strongly believe in A deity. However, I cannot ignore that my deity of choice is largely based on geography and not righteousness.

I don't have a version of Heaven. It is Someone else's version that I subscribe to.

If a Catholic is someone who believes that everything the Catholic Church teaches is true, then, at the end of time, everyone in Heaven will be Catholic . . .and everyone in Hell will be Catholic. At the end of time everything will be made manifest - we will know what it true and what is not. We won't have to have these discussions as the Truth will be plain and obvious (and glorious).

But I think your question is more along the lines of Can a Jew or Hindu or some pagan in the jungles of Borneo get into heaven without converting to Catholicism during this lifetime. Yes it is possible, God is perfectly just, and someone who, through no fault of their own is not given a fair opportunity to become Catholic will not be condemned. Not for that anyway.

dverna
05-18-2019, 08:03 AM
Can you please share with me your criteria for determining if a biblical story or assertion is true or false? Is it just a matter of what rings true to you?



Let's start..."In the beginning...."

This was the topic of a thread I started a couple of weeks ago I believe. It was simple....was a day a 24 hour day in Genesis?

Genesis is the very foundation of the Bible and there is a difference of opinion on whether every day was a 24 hr day. I was pleased to learn that theologians cannot agree on this as it addresses my doubts about how Genesis occurred. I choose not to believe each day was 24 hr as written in the Bible as it does not fit my knowledge of science.

So yes, to address your question..... I use my education, and common sense to discern what is highly likely, or probable, or possible, or likely false, or not applicable in our time (slavery for eg), or foolish and not applicable ever (like the sacrifice of turtle doves eg).

If I must accept every word in the Bible as true and the way to live my life to qualify as a Christian, I fail. God will judge me on that. He knows my thoughts, rationale, and what is in my heart (brain).

dtknowles
05-18-2019, 02:04 PM
Let's start..."In the beginning...."

This was the topic of a thread I started a couple of weeks ago I believe. It was simple....was a day a 24 hour day in Genesis?

Genesis is the very foundation of the Bible and there is a difference of opinion on whether every day was a 24 hr day. I was pleased to learn that theologians cannot agree on this as it addresses my doubts about how Genesis occurred. I choose not to believe each day was 24 hr as written in the Bible as it does not fit my knowledge of science.

So yes, to address your question..... I use my education, and common sense to discern what is highly likely, or probable, or possible, or likely false, or not applicable in our time (slavery for eg), or foolish and not applicable ever (like the sacrifice of turtle doves eg).

If I must accept every word in the Bible as true and the way to live my life to qualify as a Christian, I fail. God will judge me on that. He knows my thoughts, rationale, and what is in my heart (brain).

We define a day as the time it takes Earth to spin 360 degrees on its axis of rotation. On the first day there was no Earth so the idea that Genesis is talking about 24 hour days is kind of unfounded..

https://bibleview.org/en/bible/genesis/7days/

I think Genesis is really the 7 phases of creation.

Tim

dverna
05-18-2019, 03:57 PM
We define a day as the time it takes Earth to spin 360 degrees on its axis of rotation. On the first day there was no Earth so the idea that Genesis is talking about 24 hour days is kind of unfounded..

https://bibleview.org/en/bible/genesis/7days/

I think Genesis is really the 7 phases of creation.

Tim

Tim,

Glad you are back. I kind of identify with you as I do not "fit the mold" of most of the members here. If we were cast bullets we would be in the reject pile...LOL

As to the 24 hr day, my pastor is adamant that yom can only be translated as a 24 hr day. He is convinced that Genesis happened as written in six 24 days and that the universe is 6-10,000 years old. He has been patient with me and refers to me as friend...not brother...but as least he puts up with my questions. In one email, he was kind enough to see the logic of my doubt but he made it a point that we must agree God created everything by his Word and that evolution was ridiculous. Although I had not mentioned evolution, he must have thought it prudent to draw a line in the sand before I said something "stupid".

As someone once said to me. "Reasonable people can agree to disagree". And that is were we left it. He cannot believe anything else without undermining his faith...I cannot believe what is at the least highly improbable, and more than likely incorrect.

Thank you for the link.

To the rest, I will probably stop posting on this thread. My goal is not to upset others. I search for answers to those hard questions that require a degree of faith I do not yet have. The answers will be revealed soon enough anyway, and He will know those who had honest questions and those who were instruments of Satan.

Ickisrulz
05-18-2019, 05:36 PM
Let's start..."In the beginning...."

This was the topic of a thread I started a couple of weeks ago I believe. It was simple....was a day a 24 hour day in Genesis?

Genesis is the very foundation of the Bible and there is a difference of opinion on whether every day was a 24 hr day. I was pleased to learn that theologians cannot agree on this as it addresses my doubts about how Genesis occurred. I choose not to believe each day was 24 hr as written in the Bible as it does not fit my knowledge of science.

So yes, to address your question..... I use my education, and common sense to discern what is highly likely, or probable, or possible, or likely false, or not applicable in our time (slavery for eg), or foolish and not applicable ever (like the sacrifice of turtle doves eg).

If I must accept every word in the Bible as true and the way to live my life to qualify as a Christian, I fail. God will judge me on that. He knows my thoughts, rationale, and what is in my heart (brain).

God doesn't require his people to be 100% accurate in their theology. This is good for the majority of us.

I once heard a teacher claim that many Christians didn't really believe God was omnipresent. If they did, they wouldn't do the things that they do. It's important to walk in the light you have.

Thundarstick
05-19-2019, 11:27 AM
If I use my education, science, common sense, and my own discernment. There is no resurrection of the dead, Christ did not raise himself from the dead, and my faith is in vain, and being a Christian is a total waste of time! After all, you only go round once!

jmort
05-19-2019, 11:40 AM
Pretty much
The Gift of Salvation is given to all
Some get The Call
Others reject it

T_McD
05-20-2019, 10:00 AM
I don't have a version of Heaven. It is Someone else's version that I subscribe to.

If a Catholic is someone who believes that everything the Catholic Church teaches is true, then, at the end of time, everyone in Heaven will be Catholic . . .and everyone in Hell will be Catholic. At the end of time everything will be made manifest - we will know what it true and what is not. We won't have to have these discussions as the Truth will be plain and obvious (and glorious).

But I think your question is more along the lines of Can a Jew or Hindu or some pagan in the jungles of Borneo get into heaven without converting to Catholicism during this lifetime. Yes it is possible, God is perfectly just, and someone who, through no fault of their own is not given a fair opportunity to become Catholic will not be condemned. Not for that anyway.

So where do the pagans go if heaven and hell are catholic only?

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-20-2019, 05:12 PM
So where do the pagans go if heaven and hell are catholic only?

Imagine that, at the end of time, we all get to meet God. At that point all the cards will be shown and we will all know who He is. You'll meet Jesus Christ in person, and you can have all your questions answered. If the Catholic Church is right, it will be obvious that Budda, Mohammed, Brahma, Moloch, and whatever spirit of the four directions are false prophets and false gods. So if a person was pagan all their life, then it is made obvious to them that paganism was incorrect, but that Jesus Christ is Lord - will they still be pagan? They can no longer claim to believe in the spirit of the oak tree when Jesus Christ is shaking their hand.

Remember, even the demons in the Gospel said, "We know who you are! You are the Son of God!" They recognized Jesus as the Son of God - the demons believed.

wv109323
05-20-2019, 06:19 PM
The common thread throughout all the Bible is " The just shall live by faith".
Hebrews 11 deals with people that had faith and pleased God. A few were Abraham, Noah, and Abel. These were before the Law or the Torah was given to the Jews. On that I believe that all people can obtain salvation.
Faith is a three legged stool. Action- if we have faith then it will show in our actions and there will be action if we have faith. Belief- Our belief must be solid. God never requires us to be 100% correct on every issue. But if we truly belive then we will study and educate ourselves (church id a good place to learn)the best we can. There are many things I consider "non-essentials" in order to please God. I am not dogmatic about some things but there are truths that MUST be adhered to. What I don't know,I don't know. I realize I can not approach Gods intelligence. I consider a lot of todays science and politics as biased and untrue. The best sciencists at one time thought the earth was flat.
Conscience- my actions and belief will affect my every action in order to please God.
I realize God can create at whatever speed he wants, he can keep Jonah in a whales belly three days alive and he can work outside our laws of space,time and matter.

T_McD
05-20-2019, 11:40 PM
Imagine that, at the end of time, we all get to meet God. At that point all the cards will be shown and we will all know who He is. You'll meet Jesus Christ in person, and you can have all your questions answered. If the Catholic Church is right, it will be obvious that Budda, Mohammed, Brahma, Moloch, and whatever spirit of the four directions are false prophets and false gods. So if a person was pagan all their life, then it is made obvious to them that paganism was incorrect, but that Jesus Christ is Lord - will they still be pagan? They can no longer claim to believe in the spirit of the oak tree when Jesus Christ is shaking their hand.

Remember, even the demons in the Gospel said, "We know who you are! You are the Son of God!" They recognized Jesus as the Son of God - the demons believed.

So everyone gets a chance to become “Catholic”? Who the hell ends up in hell?

1hole
05-22-2019, 08:10 PM
So everyone gets a chance to become “Catholic”? Who the hell ends up in hell?

I can't speak for Jac but it might help if you know that "catholic" (small "c") simply means universal, as the universal church includes all Christians regardless of denomination. "Roman Catholics" (large "C", and its many fractured subgroups) is a discrete denomination and, at best, only a fragment of Christianity at large. Meaning that no denomination has a lock on heaven or he77. If we are not Christians, i.e. if we are not born again, trusting believers in Jesus as Lord, we'll go to he77 no matter what denomination we may have joined, or what cult-like denominational hoops we may spend our lives hopefully jumping through, to placate God. (That's not my words but His; see Eph 2:8-10)

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-24-2019, 08:27 PM
So everyone gets a chance to become “Catholic”? Who the hell ends up in hell?

Remember, Satan didn't say "I do not believe." Satan said, "I will not serve." Those who refuse to serve Truth, Goodness, and Beauty end up in Hell.
I should repeat, this is my feeble attempt to explain what the Catholic Church teaches. I could be off-mark on some things.
So the answer to who ends up in he77 is - those who did not love God (who is Truth, Goodness, and Beauty). So if you really love Truth, and you encounter a claim that someone has risen from the dead, do you dismiss this as lunacy? Or do you investigate the bejeebers out of this?

If you dismiss this, then you relegate those who believe the claim to the same bin as wild conspiracy theorists, and bigfoot hunters. But the evidence indicates that many, many believers are perfectly sane and normal people. So, if you really love Truth, are you going to just ignore this conundrum? Are you just going to forget about it and go mow the lawn?

T_McD
05-25-2019, 11:01 AM
I just have a hard time subscribing to the belief that my version of god is THE God. Is seems a bit egotistical to believe that I just happen to have found the truth and billions of others are ignorant

dtknowles
05-25-2019, 01:34 PM
I just have a hard time subscribing to the belief that my version of god is THE God. Is seems a bit egotistical to believe that I just happen to have found the truth and billions of others are ignorant

There is but one God. The creator of the Heavens and the Earth. I don't believe it matters what religion only that you do what he wants.

Tim

Black Jaque Janaviac
05-26-2019, 08:22 AM
I just have a hard time subscribing to the belief that my version of god is THE God. Is seems a bit egotistical to believe that I just happen to have found the truth and billions of others are ignorant
What do you mean by "my version"? That seems to imply that whatever god you believe in is one that you made up. The Christian God is not my version of a god at all. God is His own being, and He and I don't always agree (I've learned the hard way that when that is the case I am wrong).

It could be egotistical if by finding the truth we thought we were special, or that others were inferior. But that is why we say that it is possible that someone who has not been exposed to Christianity can still be saved. God is a just judge. There will be no one in Hell who doesn't deserve to be. If some poor soul in China has never heard of Christianity, he may be in Heaven.

And believe you me, being Catholic is no ego trip. Everytime my church leaders are in the news it is quite embarrassing.