Ahhh! I see the connection with the OP. Didn’t get it right away.
Yeah she seemed to be limiting reality to recorded history, which I thought was strange.
2 Likes
So you believe.
Some of us believe it is a work of God. Human beings are involved of course – human beings as His writing instruments, at the very least. And the latter is good cause not to expect perfect accuracy in every detail while still giving it all our full attention and seriousness as a message from God.
But I don’t think it teaches a path to God. I think it teaches there is no such path and it is God who reaches out to us.
No difference. I don’t think any other religions provide a path to God either, whether they teach this or not. LOL
I quite agree it is foolish to limit God to your religion as if God were one of its assets. But I don’t think this is a valid reason to disregard the teachings of your own religion. If God doesn’t speak to you in any of it, then that is a different matter.
When you are speaking to someone like me not raised Christian and growing up thinking the idea that we should believe something just because it is in the Bible is very foolish, I think it is unwise to leap to the conclusion that taking their own scriptures seriously equates to thinking any other scripture cannot be valid.
Besides this cannot change the fact I have read the scriptures of other religions and they don’t sound like truth to me. Take just one example… reading what Jesus supposedly said in the Book of Mormon, it doesn’t sound like the same person as in the Bible to me at all. The one in the Bible sounds like love and freedom to me. The one in the BoM sounds like power and authority.
Yes, I know, but where does that notion come from? Scripture does not claim it for itself.
i would agree but there is a consistency in the expectation of the participants, even in Christianity. We may not need works for the perceived salvation but they are expected nonetheless. Christianity is the only belief that claims god comes to us, but the standards of living Paul expects are as high, if not higher than other Religion’s. The other unique aspect of Christianity is forgiveness when we fail. Others just try harder.
Why? You have found a belief that you can live with and accept. I am not suggesting you try and find another one. However, within Christianity there is a teaching that judges and condemns those who do not agree or follow that path. I have always claimed that the problem lies with those with no belief at al, rather than those who do not agre with me, ad even then, there are those who do not seem to need religion for a guidance, or direction in terms of how to behave. It is can be destructive to overturn such codes of living just for the sake of Christianity.
Why should they? And I am not claiming all faiths are legit or even God serving. (Mormons being a case in point) although there are almost certainly genuine God worshippers within those faiths. (As there are false Christians)
Richard
I certainly acknowledge that my preferences could very well be my limitations. But they are limitation I have to live with.
1 Like
That may be true of the majority of documents, but a fair number have definite apologetic aspects. For example, the first Creation account seems perfectly crafted to explain to the “mixed multitude” who came out of Egypt with the tribes just what the Egyptian priests had gotten wrong – something that would have been of high importance at the time.
And the Gospel of Luke at the least was directed to “seekers”.
Last year I read a novel where a group of people in the future didn’t regard anything that couldn’t be found on electronic media as real – and pre-electronic material that had been scanned or otherwise transferred was seen as myth. That sort of strikes me as the same attitude.
Richard thinks, contrary to what scripture says, that scripture is purely human. I fail to see what that makes it any more valuable than say the Egyptian Book of the Dead or Aristophanes’ The Clouds.
Just the way in which Jesus cites from the Old Testament writings puts them at a high level of authority. That should be our example.
That’s a good way to put it!
Sadly, the last time I told a pair of Mormon missionaries that I thought the Book of Mormon wasn’t quite as good as Conan the Barbarian they didn’t get the comparison (turned out they’d never heard of Conan…!). That wasn’t just a humorous put-down, it points to the fact that Conan is all about winning in human terms, and so is the Book of Mormon.
1 Like
O wow, you really have a poor view of God’s creative ability. If we are unable to understand and relay God’s message what is the point of Him writing it down for us?
God did not author, verify or designate Scripture. That is a heresy.
It is just an excuse for you not to have to think.
Richard
that is so very true Christy. I agree that for judo-Christians (i hope i can use that group descriptor) we make the claim that its this group who have the true history. But yes, what if it isnt the only history?
I find it fascinating that you have raised a really important point here, and its worth my studying more into as im certain that we could learn a whole lot more from other cultures and their own journey with God.
I suppose the criticism may arise that given God told Abraham to “come out to a land i will shew thee” and God uses the statement “come out of her my people”…the parallel there between the two strongly suggests that according to the judo-Christian movements, only those who follow “this version” know the one true God.
I am keenly interested in your criticisms of that statement, because even i would have to consider the possibility that other peoples/nationalities/cultures…surely God has spoken to them separately?
Actually, a supporting thought in reference to that…given Christ earbashed" the Jewish leadership for failing in their responsibility to be a shining light to the "people (even to the world)…perhaps God found another way to reach those cultures long before the gospel went to the gentiles?
For example, we know that the “three wise men” who visited the baby Jesus from the East…these men almost certainly got their knowledge of the coming messiah from the Israelite captivity…ie likely Daniel, given his high place and influence 400 years earlier in Babylonian and subsequently Persian palaces. It is not unreasonable to consider that perhaps the gospel and knowledge of the one true God spread parallel to the Judo-Christian one.
Despite the above, i would challenge any claim that the historical record given to the Jews might be different from others. If God protects his word, thats universal…because if it isnt universal, then God isnt very powerful or very capable of ensuring that the various groups he gave his history to didnt succumb to the corruption of Chinese whispers.
You see this is the problem when our view or understanding of God conflicts with the more obvious view of Scripture.
Where do these thoughts come from? It would be vane to think they come direct from God, especially when many people have them. Could they actually come from a more general view of Scripture?
Richard
Today, maybe. We don’t have a historical record that goes back very far.
Most animistic Indigenous religions believe in one Creator God and a spiritual realm of other lesser spirits. That’s not that far off from Judeo-Christian-Muslim monotheism with other created spiritual beings (angels/demons/false gods).
It’s interesting to me that in the Abraham story, you have the reference to the priest Melchizadek, who was a priest of YHWH, but totally apart from the Abrahamic covenant and Judeo-Christianity. Yet Jesus is called a priest of his order (Heb. 7:13-17), that is, an order of true God worship that transcends ethnicity and the Hebrew nation.
Well, you know I don’t think the Hebrew Scriptures are about teaching history, I think they are about revealing God’s character and inviting people to encounter and serve the one true God. I find it easy to believe that God has revealed himself to humans in other times and places. As limited humans, we are all wrong about all kinds of things when it comes to understanding God. There does seem to be a pretty striking consensus about basic morality across history and cultures though and what counts as wisdom in many religious traditions has a lot in common. That makes sense if God is the source of all wisdom.
1 Like
So we’ll know what the message is.
You just called scripture heretical. And all the early church. And the whole church since then.
No, it is a requirement to think God’s thoughts after Him rather than make up your own. By demoting scripture to the equivalent of Aristotle as you do, there’s no need to actually think because you can just play smorgasbord.
1 Like
Sucker punch again.
Then we still won’t understand or relay it!
Non sequator.
I did not insult or defame Scripture, I defamed your understanding of it.(And anyone else who treats Scripture like you, yes.)
What does that even mean?
Sounds like parroting to me.
Still need to work on that diagnostic function of yours.
It means nothing of the sort/ You just have to justify your view and throw insults at anyone who thinks differently.
You do not think for yourself. You have basically admitted that elsewhere, and you do not trust your own reasoning even though you defend the reasoning you have with all your might. It is secondhand. You have not internalised it, you have learned it.
Scripture is not (scientific) data to be processed and learned.
Richard
Good question!
You are right that Gods first direct and personal revelation to humans seems to have started at the time of the patriarchs. (As many EC christians don’t take Genesis 1-11 as history.)
But according to Paul, there is also another way God revealed himself to us. God did so by means of his creation:
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”
Romans 1:18-20, NIV
Paul also says there are some basic moral rules which every human can understand:
"Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
"They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy.
“Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.”
Romans 1:28-32, NIV
“Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.”
Romans 2:14-15, NIV
1 Like
What a dim view of God that is.
Still, if you are going to accept Scripture in that way, you must believe the same
Rather ruins the view of a Loving forgiving God though who gives us the freedom to choose Him or not,. never mind.
I will put my law onto their hearts? clearly not, or if its there it would appear to be unt=readable, or incomprehensible… Bit of a waste of breath really. And as for God? Why would he say one thing and then make it irrelevant?
Scripture is Scripture. Why do you make it ambiguous?
Richard
Hello Richard, thank you for your response!
I always use night mode on my screens, so when I read about God in the Bible, I indeed have a dim view. 
God doesn’t force people to sin but respects their free will to reject Him. When people persistently do so, God “gives them over”. This “giving over” is God letting the consequences unfold, which leads to further moral and mental depravity.
Romans 1 focusses on Gentiles who reject God despite knowing his moral standards. Romans 2 focusses on Gentiles who live morally without knowing the Mosaic law.
These passages complement each other.
1 Like
You get that from Scripture?
Either He forgives or He doesn’t
How many times was Peter told to forgive? Once? and only if they repent? or as many times as is needed regardless!. Ae you claiming god does not abide by this?
Either He allows people to reject Him or He doesn’t None of this halfway house malarky.
Romans 1 and 2 are the start of an eight chapter explanation. They do not stand alone, neither do they compliment each other. They are part of the whole.
And you have not answered my challenge about God giving us the knowledge of His Laws. You just bypassed it to the bit you wanted to assert.
Richard
So . . . the Apostles, the church Fathers, and the vast majority of Christian theologians down through the ages.
Your arrogance is astounding.
LOL
Making scripture ambiguous – or throwing it out entirely – is your trademark!
No – just forgiving when people are deliberately wicked would be unloving.
1 Like
Ouch
What a statement, and not even qouted from Sripture or another person.
You need to reread 1 Cor 13.
i think you will find it disagrees with that assertion of yours
(But what do I know!)
You are fixated with human Justice. Shame that God isn’t
Richard
Edit
If you are going to quote me, Quote the whole thing. You did not.
You are claiming that your view is the same as Scripture
(See what can happen?)
Forgiving when people are deliberately wicked would qualify as “rejoicing in wrongdoing”.
Forgiveness must be asked for:
“Forgive us our trespasses”.
“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive…”
Once again you reject what scripture says, calling it “human”.
2 Likes
I will not engage further because this is getting off topic. If you would like to continue this, you can start a new topic.
To return to the main points of my initial reply:
- God revealed himself through creation.
- Natural law exists.