Why is God So Mean?

[Duckybill]

That verse. Jesus used the Flood Myth as an example for a reason.

"Not very honest of you Aspen."

moralizing.....

Anything at all?

 

[aspen]

Anything at all?

I still waiting for proof, Ducky.....get back to me when you have some

 

[Duckybill]

I still waiting for proof, Ducky.....get back to me when you have some

I'm trying to find out if you believe ANYTHING in the Bible. If not then this is a total waste of time.

 

[aspen]

this is a total waste of time.

Finally, reality is dawning on you!

Until you are willing to look past your own ideas about the Bible, with no regard for Biblical or cultural understanding

AND

Stop moralizing my posts.

This conversation is a total waste of time.

 

[Duckybill]

Finally, reality is dawning on you!

Until you are willing to look past your own ideas about the Bible, with no regard for Biblical or cultural understanding

The Genesis Flood is not my idea. It was CLEARLY taught by Jesus, Matthew, Luke, Peter, Jude, Hebrews and Moses. I'm not about to cut it out of the Bible. And I'm not about to add YOUR word "myth" either.

AND

Stop moralizing my posts.

This conversation is a total waste of time.

The worst about this is that you aren't even honest with yourself.

 

[THE Gypsy]

aspen...After reading back through your posts...I have a few questions...

1. What is your overall opinion on the Bible?

2. You have referred to the flood as "the flood myth". Do you not believe the flood happened as it is outlined in the Bible?

3. If not...What do you see as the purpose of it being included in the Bible.

4. You have said that a person needs Jesus to be saved. Based on that, at what point (Book? Or chapter? or Verse?) do you believe the Bible begins to outline the truth? Or do you not believe it does at all?


I am sincerely interested in what your position is. If you would prefer to not answer on open forum, feel free to PM me.

OR...If you want...You can simply tell me to get lost.

 

[aspen]

aspen...After reading back through your posts...I have a few questions...

1. What is your overall opinion on the Bible?

I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. The Bible and the Church are dual authorities. God chose to communicate with humanity through humanity - the Bible is God's Word, written from man's point of view. The OT is a record of God's declaration of Himself and humanities' failed attempts to relate to Him. The NT is God's perfect response to His own declaration - Jesus. He sent His Son to model perfect love and He died and rose again for our salvation. The Bible is true, but not always literal. Many post-Enlightenment Christians get bogged done in word studies of the Bible and end up missing the bigger picture.

2. You have referred to the flood as "the flood myth". Do you not believe the flood happened as it is outlined in the Bible?

I use the word 'myth' because I do not know if the Flood literally happened or to what degree it happened. The word myth is different from fable - it suggests truth rather than fiction. I do not believe discovering or proving or believing that it really happened is the point of the story. It is only a question modern people would ask. The point of the story is God's faithfulness to His creation and His omnipotence. In any case, I truly believe that if I am wrong, Jesus and I will have a good laugh about it someday. In the meantime, I will continue to highlight the important parts of the story.

I do have to add that ever since people started questioning whether the events of the Bible 'actually happened', they have gotten stuck on defending the details and validity of stories that really do not need defending - rather than the message of the stories. The only thing that is going to happen when you defend the reality of the Flood myth is turn off people who are scientifically minded and fail to communicate the important message of the story.

3. If not...What do you see as the purpose of it being included in the Bible.

Declaring the omnipotence of God and His faithfulness to humanity.

4. You have said that a person needs Jesus to be saved. Based on that, at what point (Book? Or chapter? or Verse?) do you believe the Bible begins to outline the truth? Or do you not believe it does at all?

The Bible is completely truth, but not completely literal. For example, is it more important that Solomon really determined who was the real mother of an infant by ordering the baby to be cut in half? Or that Solomon was portrayed as a wise judge?


I am sincerely interested in what your position is. If you would prefer to not answer on open forum, feel free to PM me.

OR...If you want...You can simply tell me to get lost.

 

[FHII]

I've gone back to see if I can find the undelying problem of this debate, and it's still cloudy to me.... I'm not even sure I fully understand all the points of views. However, let me ask a few questions to those who believe we (or I'll regulate that group to me only) who believe the Bible is the Word of God and the source of all our knowledge:

1. I have a Bible which shows the words spoken by Jesus in red ink. I'm sure you have one of those types of Bibles or at least have seen one. My question is, do you believe that those red letters were back in 30 AD or around that time really words that Jesus spoke?

2. If the answer is yes, why wouldn't we take that seriously and believe it is something that should be considered "in stone" and be central to our doctrine? If the answer is no, then you can stop reading... I wish you the best in life but I disagree and I won't have a discussion about Christianity with you. No hard feelings, but there is just too much difference for us to have a discussion.

3. In the OT, when you see the words "Thus saith the Lord", do you believe that God himself spoke to those prophets, and that they are the words of God? If yes or no... again read number two.

4. The epistles... Same questions. Did Jesus speak to Paul, Peter, John, James and so forth? Were they really ambassadors and spokesmen for God?

If you answer no to any of these questions, we can all save ourselves a lot of time and energy. I believe in faith that they were and I imagine I'm just as hard headed and set in my beliefs as you are.

If the answer is yes (and to sum it up, I'm asking you if you believe 2 Tim 3:16), then what do you have to do on other than the Bible? God talking to you? Ok. Let's entertain that thought for a moment. I'm not saying he doesn't. God does talk to some people directly. He talked to Moses (but not the millions of Israelites following him). He talked to Isaiah (but not to many others at the time). But ok. He does talk to some (and I'm amazed at the number of people who God directly talks to when he rarely talked to more than a few people at a time in Biblical days. Anyone get what I'm saying? Didn't think so....) Here's my question with that backdrop:

5. Is whatever God tells you going to contradict what he said or what he commanded his ambassadors to say, or what he directed to be written?

That is a very important question because I emphatically believe he isn't. I will even be as bold to say he can't! That will cause some stir but I have my reasons for saying it and scripture to back me up. So if that voice inside your head or that "angelic being" (or however you receive the messages from God that you do) tells you something different than what the Bible says (assuming you answered yes to all my above questions), that is a strong indication that it isn't God talking to you.

Got one more question:

6. If you receive something that doesn't contradict the Bible, but still comes from your source of God talking to you, how do you know to trust it? What seal do you have that it is really God and not Satan? Is it because the message wasn't about carving pentograms in trees and killing small animals (I'm being sarcastic, of course.... But not toward anyone here, only to make a point)? Or was it just because is seems so loving? The Bible says Satan can transform himself into an angel of light, but I'd rather make my arguements without quoting the Bible. So forget that quote for a second.... Do you really think Satan is so stupid that he believes he can win you over with a message of kill, steal, cheat and destroy? Everyone knows that is evil and unless you are really twisted, you are going to see through that. No, Satan's going to come to you with something that sounds good. Even 99% right according to the Bible. We saw that with Eve.

With all that being said, My overall point and question is:

7. Without the Bible, what else do you have to be sure you have the true message of God concerning you or anything else?

aspen...After reading back through your posts...I have a few questions...

My goodness! Gypsy, we've just overloaded them with questions! Interestingly enough, our sets of questions probably lead to the same conclusion!

 

[Prentis]

I've gone back to see if I can find the undelying problem of this debate, and it's still cloudy to me.... I'm not even sure I fully understand all the points of views. However, let me ask a few questions to those who believe we (or I'll regulate that group to me only) who believe the Bible is the Word of God and the source of all our knowledge:

1. I have a Bible which shows the words spoken by Jesus in red ink. I'm sure you have one of those types of Bibles or at least have seen one. My question is, do you believe that those red letters were back in 30 AD or around that time really words that Jesus spoke?

2. If the answer is yes, why wouldn't we take that seriously and believe it is something that should be considered "in stone" and be central to our doctrine? If the answer is no, then you can stop reading... I wish you the best in life but I disagree and I won't have a discussion about Christianity with you. No hard feelings, but there is just too much difference for us to have a discussion.

3. In the OT, when you see the words "Thus saith the Lord", do you believe that God himself spoke to those prophets, and that they are the words of God? If yes or no... again read number two.

4. The epistles... Same questions. Did Jesus speak to Paul, Peter, John, James and so forth? Were they really ambassadors and spokesmen for God?

If you answer no to any of these questions, we can all save ourselves a lot of time and energy. I believe in faith that they were and I imagine I'm just as hard headed and set in my beliefs as you are.

If the answer is yes (and to sum it up, I'm asking you if you believe 2 Tim 3:16), then what do you have to do on other than the Bible? God talking to you? Ok. Let's entertain that thought for a moment. I'm not saying he doesn't. God does talk to some people directly. He talked to Moses (but not the millions of Israelites following him). He talked to Isaiah (but not to many others at the time). But ok. He does talk to some (and I'm amazed at the number of people who God directly talks to when he rarely talked to more than a few people at a time in Biblical days. Anyone get what I'm saying? Didn't think so....) Here's my question with that backdrop:

5. Is whatever God tells you going to contradict what he said or what he commanded his ambassadors to say, or what he directed to be written?

That is a very important question because I emphatically believe he isn't. I will even be as bold to say he can't! That will cause some stir but I have my reasons for saying it and scripture to back me up. So if that voice inside your head or that "angelic being" (or however you receive the messages from God that you do) tells you something different than what the Bible says (assuming you answered yes to all my above questions), that is a strong indication that it isn't God talking to you.

Got one more question:

6. If you receive something that doesn't contradict the Bible, but still comes from your source of God talking to you, how do you know to trust it? What seal do you have that it is really God and not Satan? Is it because the message wasn't about carving pentograms in trees and killing small animals (I'm being sarcastic, of course.... But not toward anyone here, only to make a point)? Or was it just because is seems so loving? The Bible says Satan can transform himself into an angel of light, but I'd rather make my arguements without quoting the Bible. So forget that quote for a second.... Do you really think Satan is so stupid that he believes he can win you over with a message of kill, steal, cheat and destroy? Everyone knows that is evil and unless you are really twisted, you are going to see through that. No, Satan's going to come to you with something that sounds good. Even 99% right according to the Bible. We saw that with Eve.

With all that being said, My overall point and question is:

7. Without the Bible, what else do you have to be sure you have the true message of God concerning you or anything else?



My goodness! Gypsy, we've just overloaded them with questions! Interestingly enough, our sets of questions probably lead to the same conclusion!

If I may, I will also answer this. See it as a questionnaire, and Im just the first one to take it :)

1.Yes
2. Agreed
3. Yes again
4. Yeah.

5. No

6. 2 things are important here.

First of all, it takes faith. How do you know it's God? I ask you this; how did Moses know? How did Isaiah know? How did Jeremiah know? How did... Ok, Im sure you get my point!

The second thing is this. God confirms what he tells you through someone or something. That is my experience and I also believe it's a biblical principle (every word is confirmed by two or three witnesses). You have to look to God in faith and prayer.

7. Without the Bible I have faith in God.

Here's what I want to ask you. :)

All those stories in the Bible, what good do they do if we don't learn to walk like the people in those stories? What good is all this head knowledge we can get if we don't walk in the love of Christ?

Nothing.

Those stories are there to point us to Christ and to his walk. God had already given us lots of scripture. Yet John, Peter, and all these men were looking to receive things directly from God.

We don't need words on a paper or knowledge in our heads. We need the life of Jesus Christ. We need to walk in the Spirit. And for that we need God to touch US, not Paul or Peter. Us. WE need to be born from above. We need to become like Christ, and ONLY Christ in us can do that.

 

[Groundzero]

aspen...After reading back through your posts...I have a few questions...

1. What is your overall opinion on the Bible?

2. You have referred to the flood as "the flood myth". Do you not believe the flood happened as it is outlined in the Bible?

3. If not...What do you see as the purpose of it being included in the Bible.

4. You have said that a person needs Jesus to be saved. Based on that, at what point (Book? Or chapter? or Verse?) do you believe the Bible begins to outline the truth? Or do you not believe it does at all?


I am sincerely interested in what your position is. If you would prefer to not answer on open forum, feel free to PM me.

OR...If you want...You can simply tell me to get lost.

Great points Gypsy. I am tired of not knowing for certain what people believe.

Yes, I believe that Jesus is the Only way, but the Only way that we can know Jesus is through the Scripture! If we cannot trust the Scripture, we cannot trust what we know about Jesus!

Through the Scripture we are corrected, reproved, and instructed! The Scripture is what reveals the message of the centuries to us!

There's a song which I really like by Casting Crowns. This is what they say:

Jesus is it's grand subject
Our good is it's design
And the glory of God it's end

Whether we like it or not, the Word of God will triumph, regardless.

Did you know that God values his word above his name?
Psa_138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

How about this: WE will be JUDGED by the WORDS OF JESUS! Where do we find the words of Jesus? The Bible!
Joh_12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

 

[Groundzero]

We DO need the Bible because humanity strays far too easily!

Psa_119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
God's Word is what guides us in this darkness!

Mat_24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Tell me, if ALL we need for our foundation is Jesus, how do we know we have the right Jesus?! We need the Word of God to show us, because MANY will come in Jesus' name proclaiming that they are Christ, and guess what? They are going to convince many! How do we know we have the right Jesus without the Word of God? I dare anyone to tell me that they stand fully on the real Jesus and then deny that the Scripture is their foundation! You can't stand on the real Jesus WITHOUT standing on Scripture!

 

[aspen]

I've gone back to see if I can find the undelying problem of this debate, and it's still cloudy to me.... I'm not even sure I fully understand all the points of views. However, let me ask a few questions to those who believe we (or I'll regulate that group to me only) who believe the Bible is the Word of God and the source of all our knowledge:

1. I have a Bible which shows the words spoken by Jesus in red ink. I'm sure you have one of those types of Bibles or at least have seen one. My question is, do you believe that those red letters were back in 30 AD or around that time really words that Jesus spoke?

No.

2. If the answer is yes, why wouldn't we take that seriously and believe it is something that should be considered "in stone" and be central to our doctrine? If the answer is no, then you can stop reading... I wish you the best in life but I disagree and I won't have a discussion about Christianity with you. No hard feelings, but there is just too much difference for us to have a discussion.

Ok wait! I am all prepared to answer your questions so, no offense, I would like to continue. The red ink used in the NT was started in the KJV in 1611. If you are not referring to the actual ink and instead, to the words; yes, Jesus spoke the Aramaic words associated with the English translation and I believe they are accurate enough.

3. In the OT, when you see the words "Thus saith the Lord", do you believe that God himself spoke to those prophets, and that they are the words of God? If yes or no... again read number two.

I believe the prophets properly used the phrase, 'thus saith the Lord' before phrases that they received from God. I believe the inspirations they received got an accurate message across. I also believe that they wrote the correct message down from their point of view. For example, if the Egyptians were experiencing a drought - they would credit it to God (rightly so) and they may give a reason - the sinfulness of the Egyptians. I believe the message gives us an accurate picture of God's omnipotence and how the prophet thought about the Egyptians and themselves. I do not believe God gave the prophets word for word dictation. Instead, He was able to get His message across despite the presence of prejudice, cultural aspects, nationalism, and perspective of the prophet. This what really separates the Bible from Hindu texts or other Middle Eastern texts - it is not esoteric - God used people to talk to people.

4. The epistles... Same questions. Did Jesus speak to Paul, Peter, John, James and so forth? Were they really ambassadors and spokesmen for God?

Yes.

If you answer no to any of these questions, we can all save ourselves a lot of time and energy. I believe in faith that they were and I imagine I'm just as hard headed and set in my beliefs as you are.

I am not here to persuade you.

If the answer is yes (and to sum it up, I'm asking you if you believe 2 Tim 3:16), then what do you have to do on other than the Bible? God talking to you? Ok. Let's entertain that thought for a moment. I'm not saying he doesn't. God does talk to some people directly. He talked to Moses (but not the millions of Israelites following him). He talked to Isaiah (but not to many others at the time). But ok. He does talk to some (and I'm amazed at the number of people who God directly talks to when he rarely talked to more than a few people at a time in Biblical days. Anyone get what I'm saying? Didn't think so....) Here's my question with that backdrop:

5. Is whatever God tells you going to contradict what he said or what he commanded his ambassadors to say, or what he directed to be written?

No.

That is a very important question because I emphatically believe he isn't. I will even be as bold to say he can't! That will cause some stir but I have my reasons for saying it and scripture to back me up. So if that voice inside your head or that "angelic being" (or however you receive the messages from God that you do) tells you something different than what the Bible says (assuming you answered yes to all my above questions), that is a strong indication that it isn't God talking to you.

Got one more question:

6. If you receive something that doesn't contradict the Bible, but still comes from your source of God talking to you, how do you know to trust it? What seal do you have that it is really God and not Satan? Is it because the message wasn't about carving pentograms in trees and killing small animals (I'm being sarcastic, of course.... But not toward anyone here, only to make a point)? Or was it just because is seems so loving? The Bible says Satan can transform himself into an angel of light, but I'd rather make my arguements without quoting the Bible. So forget that quote for a second.... Do you really think Satan is so stupid that he believes he can win you over with a message of kill, steal, cheat and destroy? Everyone knows that is evil and unless you are really twisted, you are going to see through that. No, Satan's going to come to you with something that sounds good. Even 99% right according to the Bible. We saw that with Eve.

With all that being said, My overall point and question is:

7. Without the Bible, what else do you have to be sure you have the true message of God concerning you or anything else?

The Church - Matt 16:18. I also am a strong believer in prayer, without new revelation. Finally, the church assembled the Bible - it came first.

My goodness! Gypsy, we've just overloaded them with questions! Interestingly enough, our sets of questions probably lead to the same conclusion!

 

[Groundzero]

Aspen, how could the Church come before Scripture IF Jesus was the Rock upon which the Church was built? (Mat_16:18)

 

[aspen]

Aspen, how could the Church come before Scripture IF Jesus was the Rock upon which the Church was built? (Mat_16:18)

I think you need to read Matt 16:18 again.

Jesus is talking to Peter.

BTW, I misspoke - the Church came before the NT, not the Bible.

 

[Groundzero]

I think you need to read Matt 16:18 again.

Jesus is talking to Peter.

BTW, I misspoke - the Church came before the NT, not the Bible.

No probs.

No, Peter was just a pebble. Jesus is the Rock of ages!

1Co_10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

 

[aspen]

No probs.

No, Peter was just a pebble. Jesus is the Rock of ages!

1Co_10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Jesus used the male form of the word rock, which is pebble. It would have been inappropriate to call Peter a female rock.

BTW, Peter was a pebble in comparison to Christ - so is the Church - so is the Bible.

 

[Groundzero]

Jesus used the male form of the word rock, which is pebble. It would have been inappropriate to call Peter a female rock.

BTW, Peter was a pebble in comparison to Christ - so is the Church - so is the Bible.

Now that I've had a look at it, you are correct.

Jesus didn't actually build his church ON Peter, but Peter was the one who brought the Gospel first to the Jews, then to the Samaritans, then to the Gentiles. He was the one who unlocked the doors so to speak.


Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

 

[Prentis]

We DO need the Bible because humanity strays far too easily!

Psa_119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
God's Word is what guides us in this darkness!

Mat_24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Tell me, if ALL we need for our foundation is Jesus, how do we know we have the right Jesus?! We need the Word of God to show us, because MANY will come in Jesus' name proclaiming that they are Christ, and guess what? They are going to convince many! How do we know we have the right Jesus without the Word of God? I dare anyone to tell me that they stand fully on the real Jesus and then deny that the Scripture is their foundation! You can't stand on the real Jesus WITHOUT standing on Scripture!

Yet we have so many bibles, and the world is still going astray.

Don't get me wrong, the Bible is useful when the Spirit is the one yielding it.

But what we NEED is the living word. The life of Christ in us HERE and NOW. The first church did not have the new testament, only the old. In theory, if scripture is what makes the difference, they should of been less effective then we are. But they turned the world over. They changed everything. What was it? Christ in them!

We need the life of Jesus Christ. And his cross that the life may flow freely.

 

[Fire-7]

fire 7
i have looked at this g craige lewis and this is what i have found. what he preachers about is in the bible but what he does is put in his own reasoning. he puts it into his own understanding which is unscriptural. he judges people which is unscriptural. you are to walk in love and love one another. craige lewis seems to love those that follow him and hate everyone else. the word teaches ithat out of the mouth the heart speaks. if you are looking for a Good preacher then i would suggest 1. you find someone that teaches the word and does not preach the word. knowing why the word says what it says will help you come to understand the word better. 2. most importantly you need to look for the moving of the spirit. i could be wrong but i saw no signs, miracles, and wonders working within his church. the word states that signs, miracles, and wonders will follow those that believe. don't get me wrong you can be saved and go to heaven and never see the supernatural workings. i have been blessed to have a church that allows the Holy Spirit free rein to do whatever he wants. i have seen multiple physical healings, Glory dust(gold dust), demons cast out, people freed from additions, freed from depression, and numerous other miracles. the word says where the spirit of the Lord is there is freedom.
i need to go now so i will get back to you on your other questions. see you all later and God bless

All of these were things I personally observed about him. I just couldn't put my finger on it (which he calls the H-ly Ghost). As far as him loving the people who agree with him and hating those that don't, this was one of the main things that stood out to me. I can't help but feel that if I was to agree with him that I would be kissing up to him. I always get this feeling when I see people rooting him on, because to these people it's like he can do no wrong, as in they don't hold him accountable for anything he does that's out of order. It's like they enjoy the drama: the name calling, gay bashing, etc... because it feeds their own negativity. To them, I imagine it is loyalty. To me, it is nepotism and cronyism. Remember too, how hated Hitler and Stalin were, yet there were people who absolutely loved them and considered them to be spiritual fathers.

 

[Fire-7]

I don't want to intrude on the argument because I'm not qualified to really argue, being that I've never read the whole bible.

But here is something I do know: There have been MANY people who have read the entire bible from the front cover to the map, several times over, and still are not christians. As a matter of fact, some of them became atheists because of reading the whole bible. Some people have read the bible over and over again, and the more they read it, the more unorthodox they became. Edgar Cayce, for example, was said to have read the entire bible every year, from the time he was a young teenager until the day he died. Yet, he is known as the father of the New Age movement. At the same time, he was a sunday school teacher for most of his life.

I have a cousin who was raised in the pentecostal church also. He didn't become a Christian until he was incarcerated about 14 years ago. He spent 12 or 13 years in prison, and while he was there, he read the bible from cover to cover, several times. He, in turn, discovered that many of the things he had been taught were wrong (from tithing, to eternal security, speaking in tongues, etc..., etc...). He also believes that some of our beloved church father were false and heretical, including most of our popular televangelists. Even some of the supernatural experiences he had during this time validated that he was on the right path. He got this from reading the bible himself. And he believes everything in the bible is correct, and can show you where anything he says is in the book.

The point I'm making is that just because someone reads and believes the entire bible does not mean that they will all of a sudden be on one accord with others who have read and believe the entire bible. This goes to show that knowing and believing the bible word for word is not the most important thing a person can do. If that were the case, everyone who ever read the bible would be saved. There is obviously something more. And if you go back and actually listen to the videos I posted on page 1, you will understand why I personally don't believe the bible is 100% accurate. And this is what has been the source of controversy and confusion for so long. Do you really think that if everything in the bible was accurate and literal that there would be all of this controversy?