Bible Topic Thread (merged)

#326
#326
I will agree many Christians turn non-Christians off with their in your face approach. Matter of fact I probably don't have the appearance of a "Christian" and was lifting weights at my church when this older guy started trying to talk to me. I had headphones in so I took them out. He asks "do you go to church here?" and I said "since the third grade." He then asks in the middle of my workout who Jesus is to me and after I told him he said "oh good you have the right answer."

I wanted to tell him off and say it is none of your business and say I'm not looking for your approval but I just let it go.
Point is I have been there, trust me, but we can find reasons in anything for not doing something, they are called excuses.
 
#327
#327
BigPapaVol said:
because we tell them.
Click to expand...

I see what you are saying.

I would argue I don't want to tell or talk anyone or guilt anyone into believing in Jesus. I guess who can present the what the Bible says then the listener has to make the choice on their own based on faith.
 
#329
#329
I take the approach of asking what someone believes and then let them make their own conclusions. People will eventually have to get to their own basis of beliefs in exploring their faith / lack thereof. I think it's a far better approach to let them finally figure out that their own beliefs are based in a far flimsier faith than are mine. Doesn't make me right and not all listen, but I like the approach better. We all deal with our commission in different ways, I just can't stand the cajoling and browbeating that I see happening. It's simply the crusades in different form.
 
#330
#330
MyBloodRunnethOrange said:
The one thing in the Bible that I can't bring myself to question is the gospel accounts of Jesus. You see, I do believe in Jesus Christ. My problem has never been with God, it is with organized religion. When the church tells us that some letter that Paul wrote to a small church in Corinth or wherever was meant to apply to all people at all times, I don't agree. While I do think there are some points in those letters that are good to apply to our lives today, I don't think they carry any more authority than if your pastor goes on a long vacation and writes a letter back to his church.

I also find it amusing that the pastor (at least in my experience), when asked about something like the eating of unclean animals, or the wearing of mixed fabrics, will tell you that the Law of Moses no longer applies, yet they will tell you that eight of the ten commandments are still in force, plus the tithe. We can't forget the tithe. That's why I get so annoyed when the church starts taking a stand against homosexuality or something else like that in society. Either all of the law of Moses applies or none of it does. I'm rambling now so I'll shut up.
Click to expand...

ALL of the bible is for us-- BUT ALL of it is not to us -- you must get the context of the verse and whom it is being spoken too--- rather simple when things are placed within the written context -- As far as the 10 commandments go today --They are most certain for us but they were given not for us to live by to gain entrance into heaven but they did 3 things and those are ---
1: They set a standard by which to live

2: They exposed SIN

3: They Revealed GOD'S Hoilness to us


If I could question one part of the scripture then I could not bring myself to believe another part. If you really accept the gospel's but not the letters what makes you so sure the gospels are correct-- do you have some insight that give more reason to be the one and not the other a VIRGIN bearing a child is a pretty good strecth don't you think -- ONE person named JESUS could bring salvation to the entire human race that pretty far out too.. I believe that if one word is wrong or uninspired then this is the only heaven any of us will ever enjoy ..
 
#331
#331
lzbvol said:
ALL of the bible is for us-- BUT ALL of it is not to us -- you must get the context of the verse and whom it is being spoken too--- rather simple when things are placed within the written context -- As far as the 10 commandments go today --They are most certain for us but they were given not for us to live by to gain entrance into heaven but they did 3 things and those are ---
1: They set a standard by which to live

2: They exposed SIN

3: They Revealed GOD'S Hoilness to us


If I could question one part of the scripture then I could not bring myself to believe another part. If you really accept the gospel's but not the letters what makes you so sure the gospels are correct-- do you have some insight that give more reason to be the one and not the other a VIRGIN bearing a child is a pretty good strecth don't you think -- ONE person named JESUS could bring salvation to the entire human race that pretty far out too.. I believe that if one word is wrong or uninspired then this is the only heaven any of us will ever enjoy ..
Click to expand...

well said man!
 
#332
#332
lzbvol said:
If I could question one part of the scripture then I could not bring myself to believe another part. If you really accept the gospel's but not the letters what makes you so sure the gospels are correct--
Click to expand...
I never said that I'm sure of anything.

lzbvol said:
do you have some insight that give more reason to be the one and not the other a VIRGIN bearing a child is a pretty good strecth don't you think -- ONE person named JESUS could bring salvation to the entire human race that pretty far out too
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact they are pretty far out there.

lzbvol said:
I believe that if one word is wrong or uninspired then this is the only heaven any of us will ever enjoy ..
Click to expand...
If every word in the bible is 100% true, then that means that God really did command the Israelites to go out slaughtering women and babies. Maybe that's not a problem for you, or maybe you are one of those people who glosses over those passages with that "God's ways are not our ways" BS. I personally choose to believe that the Israelites went out on their genocidal raids and then later tried to justify their actions by claiming that God told them to do it.
 
#333
#333
lzbvol said:
ALL of the bible is for us-- BUT ALL of it is not to us -- you must get the context of the verse and whom it is being spoken too--- rather simple when things are placed within the written context -- As far as the 10 commandments go today --They are most certain for us but they were given not for us to live by to gain entrance into heaven but they did 3 things and those are ---
1: They set a standard by which to live

2: They exposed SIN

3: They Revealed GOD'S Hoilness to us


If I could question one part of the scripture then I could not bring myself to believe another part. If you really accept the gospel's but not the letters what makes you so sure the gospels are correct-- do you have some insight that give more reason to be the one and not the other a VIRGIN bearing a child is a pretty good strecth don't you think -- ONE person named JESUS could bring salvation to the entire human race that pretty far out too.. I believe that if one word is wrong or uninspired then this is the only heaven any of us will ever enjoy ..
Click to expand...
When did it become the Bible? How did they decide? Who interpreted? Was that process purely objective or was there some politics in the decision putting together what we today call the Bible. God inspired, yes. Human compiled and written, therefore some inconsistency, absolutely.
 
#334
#334
BigPapaVol said:
When did it become the Bible? How did they decide? Who interpreted? Was that process purely objective or was there some politics in the decision putting together what we today call the Bible. God inspired, yes. Human compiled and written, therefore some inconsistency, absolutely.
Click to expand...

What you say has been said many times and several different ways -- I can't answer you well enough to convince you of doubts you have about GOD'S word -- I just have enough faith to believe that GOD would not give his word out and then not perserve it for future generations if GOD can't perserve his word by using GODLY people to as you say complie it then that's a god I know nothing about and one who most certainly can't take care of my daily needs or make heaven a home for me --- How do we even know that heaven exsists -- IF we have reason to think GOD perserved his word --Eat drink and be merry for tommorrow we die--
 
#335
#335
lzbvol said:
What you say has been said many times and several different ways -- I can't answer you well enough to convince you of doubts you have about GOD'S word -- I just have enough faith to believe that GOD would not give his word out and then not perserve it for future generations if GOD can't perserve his word by using GODLY people to as you say complie it then that's a god I know nothing about and one who most certainly can't take care of my daily needs or make heaven a home for me --- How do we even know that heaven exsists -- IF we have reason to think GOD perserved his word --Eat drink and be merry for tommorrow we die--
Click to expand...
I think it was you who actually made the argument that Popes, Bishops, and Priests are not all that "godly" (or something of the sort.) Take a wild guess at who selected the books, compiled the Bible, and preserved it for 1,200 years so that Luther, Calvin, and the British Royalty could alter it to their liking?
 
#336
#336
lzbvol said:
What you say has been said many times and several different ways -- I can't answer you well enough to convince you of doubts you have about GOD'S word -- I just have enough faith to believe that GOD would not give his word out and then not perserve it for future generations if GOD can't perserve his word by using GODLY people to as you say complie it then that's a god I know nothing about and one who most certainly can't take care of my daily needs or make heaven a home for me --- How do we even know that heaven exsists -- IF we have reason to think GOD perserved his word --Eat drink and be merry for tommorrow we die--
Click to expand...
I'm not having doubts about God's word. I'm having doubts about our methodology for spreading it. There are inconsistencies in the Bible and shouting down those pointing them out is hardly winning souls.
 
#337
#337
BigPapaVol said:
I'm not having doubts about God's word. I'm having doubts about our methodology for spreading it. There are inconsistencies in the Bible and shouting down those pointing them out is hardly winning souls.
Click to expand...

do you win souls? if you do where do you point them to gain knowledge of who GOD is -- and since it seems you have little confidence in the bible how do know if what you are telling them is true

Seems Satan to a large degree has placed enough doubt in a lot of people's mind about the bible and GOD that it's no wonder the world is in the shape that it is in -- When you get back to what this thread was all about to start with you see Churches allowing homosexuals to take part in the service and some churches allowing them to be preachers " a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" either GOD'S word as we have it is true or it's not we cannot take what we like discard the rest

GOD'S word is NOT a buffet--- you don't take what you want and leave the rest behind --

Just for another question can someone tell me how a person can gain entry into heaven what are the requirements or are there any requirements
 
#338
#338
lzbvol said:
Just for another question can someone tell me how a person can gain entry into heaven what are the requirements or are there any requirements
Click to expand...

Refer to post 298 on what is required of you to gain entry into heaven.

On what heaven will be like, refer to posts 271, 275, and 279.
 
#339
#339
therealUT said:
I think it was you who actually made the argument that Popes, Bishops, and Priests are not all that "godly" (or something of the sort.) Take a wild guess at who selected the books, compiled the Bible, and preserved it for 1,200 years so that Luther, Calvin, and the British Royalty could alter it to their liking?
Click to expand...

While many alter even more go back to the original words and their meanings. Keep in mind that what we today call Catholics NEVER had complete control over the affairs of Christians as a whole. I'm not sure where anyone gets off thinking Catholics are considered the true and original Christians when so many from the beginning have ALL parted company.

For those who doubt the authenticity of the Bible or its original meanings, keep in mind that Christ did say that another would come after Him and pretty much 'raise' us in the faith. It is through the Holy Spirit and the gifts of the spirit that we do learn and grow to mature as Paul says. We all will doubt something we've been told. But the words of Christ are pretty simple to grasp. But we have been given help and the means to figure it out. Keep in mind that anything you question you can ask man but go find the source, Scripture to back it up, understand the original meaning, and pray for guidance.
 
#340
#340
Yeah, so I'm jumping into this conversation a little late. I want to go back to the "Is baptism essential to salvation" part.

OE gave some fine examples of the use of baptism in the New Testament and I feel the need to add to those. One example he gave was the baptism of the Phillipian jailor. Acts 16:30-33

30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized.

Fantastic scripture, but it begs a question. With all that was going on that night (earthquake, wanting to kill himself, and it was midnight) why would they go "the same hour of the night" for the jailor to be baptized? Several churches now-a-days (is that a word?) have baptism services on designated dates. Why didn't they just baptize him later? And after the baptism,

34 Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.

Why did they rejoice after the baptism? Why weren't they rejoicing before the baptism if he was, in fact, saved once he believed? It was after the baptism that Luke tells us "having believed in God with all his household".

Yes, the Bible tells us that believing in God and believing that Jesus is the son of God is essential to salvation, but that's not the only thing it says.
 
#341
#341
salutethehill said:
Yeah, so I'm jumping into this conversation a little late. I want to go back to the "Is baptism essential to salvation" part.

OE gave some fine examples of the use of baptism in the New Testament and I feel the need to add to those. One example he gave was the baptism of the Phillipian jailor. Acts 16:30-33

30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized.

Fantastic scripture, but it begs a question. With all that was going on that night (earthquake, wanting to kill himself, and it was midnight) why would they go "the same hour of the night" for the jailor to be baptized? Several churches now-a-days (is that a word?) have baptism services on designated dates. Why didn't they just baptize him later? And after the baptism,

34 Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.

Why did they rejoice after the baptism? Why weren't they rejoicing before the baptism if he was, in fact, saved once he believed? It was after the baptism that Luke tells us "having believed in God with all his household".

Yes, the Bible tells us that believing in God and believing that Jesus is the son of God is essential to salvation, but that's not the only thing it says.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I remember the baptism of the thief on the cross. Help me out there.

Are you trying to say that those unbaptized believers out there will join the unbelievers?
 
#342
#342
BigPapaVol said:
I'm not sure I remember the baptism of the thief on the cross. Help me out there.

Are you trying to say that those unbaptized believers out there will join the unbelievers?
Click to expand...

I wonder how people get around the thief on the cross. I have never been given a straight answer.
 
#343
#343
salutethehill said:
Yeah, so I'm jumping into this conversation a little late. I want to go back to the "Is baptism essential to salvation" part.

OE gave some fine examples of the use of baptism in the New Testament and I feel the need to add to those. One example he gave was the baptism of the Phillipian jailor. Acts 16:30-33

30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized.

Fantastic scripture, but it begs a question. With all that was going on that night (earthquake, wanting to kill himself, and it was midnight) why would they go "the same hour of the night" for the jailor to be baptized? Several churches now-a-days (is that a word?) have baptism services on designated dates. Why didn't they just baptize him later? And after the baptism,

34 Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.

Why did they rejoice after the baptism? Why weren't they rejoicing before the baptism if he was, in fact, saved once he believed? It was after the baptism that Luke tells us "having believed in God with all his household".

Yes, the Bible tells us that believing in God and believing that Jesus is the son of God is essential to salvation, but that's not the only thing it says.
Click to expand...

Sorry, meant to quote this one.

What did I do?

:blink:

Jesus=salvation :thumbsup:
 
#344
#344
Jesus definitely equals salvation :good!: .
What about the thief on the cross? A good question and one that I've studied.
We all know that the thief on the cross was no ordinary thief. He defended Christ and rebuked the other thief. He had courage and integrity. He obviously knew about Christ and believed in Christ, but why didn't he need to be baptized?

We also know that when Christ died, he

wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.Colossians 2:14

After Jesus' resurrection he met with the apostles and gave the great commission:

Matthew 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

Mark 16:15-16 15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Luke 24:46-49 46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

The thief on the cross lived and died under the old law, before the great commission was given therefore baptism was not essential.
 
#345
#345
salutethehill said:
Jesus definitely equals salvation :good!: .
What about the thief on the cross? A good question and one that I've studied.
We all know that the thief on the cross was no ordinary thief. He defended Christ and rebuked the other thief. He had courage and integrity. He obviously knew about Christ and believed in Christ, but why didn't he need to be baptized?

We also know that when Christ died, he

wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.Colossians 2:14

After Jesus' resurrection he met with the apostles and gave the great commission:

Matthew 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.

Mark 16:15-16 15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

Luke 24:46-49 46 Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”

The thief on the cross lived and died under the old law, before the great commission was given therefore baptism was not essential.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have a friend who is a CoC, Church of Christ, pastor who argues the same point.

Don't quite see it....but you know......

:)
 
#348
#348
MyBloodRunnethOrange said:
If every word in the bible is 100% true, then that means that God really did command the Israelites to go out slaughtering women and babies. Maybe that's not a problem for you, or maybe you are one of those people who glosses over those passages with that "God's ways are not our ways" BS. I personally choose to believe that the Israelites went out on their genocidal raids and then later tried to justify their actions by claiming that God told them to do it.
Click to expand...
I see that nobody wants to take this one on, so I'll put it as a direct question.

Thus says the Lord of Hosts: 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up out of Egypt. 'Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' " (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NKJV)

So is the Bible inerrant or not? Did God command the Israelites to committ genocide, or did they later claim it was from God to cover up their atrocities?
 
#350
#350
MyBloodRunnethOrange said:
I see that nobody wants to take this one on, so I'll put it as a direct question.

Thus says the Lord of Hosts: 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up out of Egypt. 'Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them. But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' " (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NKJV)

So is the Bible inerrant or not? Did God command the Israelites to committ genocide, or did they later claim it was from God to cover up their atrocities?
Click to expand...


What is there to take on?

What is the difference between this and God commanding Joshua to destroy Jericho?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top