Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Yes.  I see the Song of Solomon for example and ask, "What possible
    significance could such a romantic interlude have with our relationship
    with the living God."  It actually ties in well when one grasps its
    intent...which may be why Jesus speak of the church as his bride.
    
 Z   would s/he produce a set of scripture that was puzzling and ambiguous
 Z       rather than more direct and clear?
    
    I truly believe the ambiguities cause us to dig deeper in order to
    obtain the treasure.  An archeologist in the early 1900's spent much of
    his adult life digging...digging...digging.  He could only conjecture
    as to whether or not he was digging in the right place.  I can imagine
    the pure elation in his heart when he finally found the prize...the
    burial place of the Pharoah's.  Something he had strived for his whole
    life.  
    
    Jesus' parables also caused the disciples to ask questions.  Jesus used
    this techniques many times in order to spur believers to study the
    scriptures...day and night.  Well, actually it was Peter and Pauls
    proclamations that did this.
    
    -Jack

    I think the scripture and gospel you are searching for is there.  It is
    spiritually discerned.  "Let him who has ears to hear..."
    
    The most important discovery of my life was the insight that the Bible 
    is a highly  *integrated message system.*  We possess 66 books, penned
    by 40 authors over thousands of years, yet the more we investigate, the 
    more we discover that they are a unified whole. God's Holy Word is more 
    than just divinely-inspired and infallible. Every word, every detail, 
    every number, every place and name, every subtlety of the text: the 
    elemental structures within the text itself, even the implied punctuation 
    are clearly the result of intricate and skillful supernatural 
    'engineering.'  The more we look, the more we realize that there is still 
    much more hidden and thus reserved for the diligent inquirer. The evidence 
    of design is clearly obvious even in the acrostics hidden throughout
    the Bible.  *ALL*  Scripture is given by inspiration and is profitable for 
    doctrine, for reproof, and correction. We haven't begun to discover the 
    detail, the power, and the majesty of God's handiwork. Would you expect 
    anything less in the Word of God Himself?   It is amazing how apparent 
    contradictions disappear when you realize what we hold in our hands.  
    
    Mike

Gee... I hope it translates well.....

>    Eclessiastics

Are you referring to Ecclesiastes or Ecclesiasticus?

Which book?

/john

    John,
    
    I was hoping you would pipe in and help me with my spelling.  I
    remember you always as I struggle with Isaiah.  I always have to think
    about and even write it both ways.  Is it an "a" surronded by two "i's"
    or an "i" surronded by two "a's"
    
    It is Ecclesiastes  to which I refered.  The book of the OT and not the
    apaaocrapha.
          
    
                 
    
    

    
    Hi Patricia,
    
    >Eclessiastics gives new meaning to the question of why the
    >contradictions or at least apparent contradictions within scripture.
    >Even if we assume that God, masterminded the canonization process, why
    >would s/he produce a set of scripture that was puzzling and ambiguous
    >rather than more direct and clear?
    
    I'm certain that I'm not up to date on discussion in other topics,
    which I assume provides the context for why you think Ecc. is an
    example of contradictions, so for my sake will you tell me to what you
    allude above?
    
    >why is there not just one Gospel with a more precise definition of
    >Christ and a more precise description of his life.
    
     >                                 Patricia
   
    If we stick with your assumption above, that God is the author of the
    canonization of Scripture, then the question I have for you, is on what
    basis do you indirectly declare that "one Gospel" is better than four?
    Once one presupposes God as the author of the Bible and the definer of
    the canon, then one must submit all thoughts to God, including what is
    best in terms of revealing Christ. 
    
    I will suggest that the number of Gospels is directly related to the
    value of witnesses as God has defined it broadly in reality (i.e. our
    beliefs and understanding of facts, for example, are largely tied very
    closely to processes related to witnessing/communication).  I will also
    suggest that God has provided His revelation of Himself in history, as
    recorded in Scripture, through revealing Himself through prophetic
    methods/statements then providing interpretation of those statements
    thorugh subsequent revelation.  We have this record which He has
    chosen, in the Scriptures, and there would be no other reliable method
    for witnessing throughout the ages.
    
    jeff 
                                
    
    
    

    I was listening to a news spot on the radio the other day.  The issue
    was the management of forests in Maine.  The environmentalists wanted
    to legislate restrictrions on the tree harvest while the paper
    companies did not want the restrictions.  The paper companies said
    that there are 35% more trees in Maine today than in 1959 thanks to
    responsible management, implying that it's been steadily increasing
    since then.  The rebuttle mentioned that 1959 was chosen because there 
    were several unchecked forest fires in Maine that year, a great deal of
    damage from insects all on top of unthrottles harvest of what was left...
    an unusually bad year for trees in Maine.  He went on to say that the
    tree population has been declining of late and that it's headed for
    disaster.

    But what does all this have to do with the Bible?

    The paper companies data mined the facts.  They picked and chose the
    particular pieces that would bolster their cause while conveniently
    ignoring the rest.  What they presented "worked" for their cause but
    was in fact misleading.  The potential for this sort of thing happening 
    increases with the richness of the data source.  Beware of "data mining"
    the Bible when finding hidden truths or reconcilling contradictions.
    The Bible is rich in stories, metaphors, parables, fact and some may say 
    fiction.  What you come up with may seem to meet your objective, but that
    doesn't make it the truth.  Remember Jimmy Jones and David Koresch.

    
    -dave

    Jim Jones and David Koresh both took hold to the claim of messiahship. 
    This is no great feat since there were about 25 or so proclaimed
    messiahs roaming about Jerusalem during the life of Christ.  The Koresh
    and Jones incidents were bolstered because they appealled to
    individuals who lacked the wisdom to understand scripture in its whole
    text.  This is why I cringe when people avoid understanding Revelations
    and other books due to the hardness of such messages God brings forth.
    
    Read scripture, grow in wisdom, understand who Satan is and how Satan
    will come into the world.  Subjectivism IS bible mining.  Jesus was NOT
    a martyr for his cause.
    
    -Jack

    Interpreting anything, biblical or otherwise, is a practice in being
    subjective.  The more one "mines", the less accurate the results are
    liable to be.  My intent was to caution the interpreter in accepting
    heavily mined "discovered truths" as being facts. They may be artifacts.
    
    It seems like resolving biblical contradictions is an unenviable task.
    The more you mine for answers, the less believable the explanation
    becomes.  When working in a system where contradiction is defined not
    to exist, I guess you do the best you can.  
    
    
    

    Re: -1
    
    I don't see it that way at all.  When you use the Bible in the way it
    was intended to be used, the apparent contradictions disappear.

    I submit that from the perspective of the ardent believer, the
    contradictions cannot, by definition, exist in the first place.
    They don't "disappear" because they were never considered to be
    contradictions, just puzzles.  

| <<< Note 1260.10 by PHXSS1::HEISER "watchman on the wall" >>>

| I don't see it that way at all.  When you use the Bible in the way it
| was intended to be used, the apparent contradictions disappear.

	Mike, you can only imagine how the inteded use of the Bible. Because
even you would agree I'm sure that no 2 people are ever going to agree 100% on
every little thing on the inteded use, on interpretations, etc. So what you
said above only holds true to one person... you.

    Not true, Glen.  the size of the largest denominations around show that
    many people can agree on everything the Bible presents.  Especially
    when it comes to the only matter that really counts: salvation.

    I know of many who belong to a large denomination and do not see
    eye-to-eye with other members as well as established doctrine of their
    church.  Catholic gays/lesbians for example (not that I want to open
    that can of worms in this string).  
    
    -dave

    Re: -1
    
    that's a minority in Catholicism.  More of them see eye-to-eye than
    those who don't.

| <<< Note 1260.13 by PHXSS1::HEISER "watchman on the wall" >>>

| Not true, Glen.  the size of the largest denominations around show that
| many people can agree on everything the Bible presents.  Especially
| when it comes to the only matter that really counts: salvation.

	Mike, I may believe this is something you think, but don't fool
yourself. The ONLY one who knows what is right in every aspect is God Himself.
Therefor, everyone else can not agree 100% on everything. Because we all have
some sort of difference.


Glen

 And so we're back to "we're just left here to figure it out and we may 
 get it right, and we may get it wrong..we'll just find out in the end".
 Let's see..we have standards for weights and measures, we have standards
 for what is and what is not acceptable to pass from one grade to another,
 standards for entry into college, standards for this job or that..but on
 the question of where we spend eternity, of what is and what is not expected
 of us by our Creator, we are just left here to guess, right? 


 Jim

    Re .15 (Mike)
    
    >that's a minority in Catholicism.  More of them see eye-to-eye than
    >    those who don't.
    
    Not true at all.  Believers disagree on issues of abortion, birth
    control, women as priests, homosexuality, what the eucharist really is,
    whether Noah's ark was fiction or not... a thousand things.  I'd say
    that you'd be hard pressed to find two people who think exactly alike
    on all of the issues.  Look at this conference.  
    
    
    
    Re .17 (Jim)
    
    Yes. There doesn't seem to be a standard.  That might be because things
    like weights and measures are known to be something "created" by
    people.  There is no objective truth to find or know.  The mundane
    standards are whatever we define them to be.  But searching for God!
    Now that's another story.
    
    
    -dave
    

| <<< Note 1260.17 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Every knee shall bow" >>>

| And so we're back to "we're just left here to figure it out and we may 
| get it right, and we may get it wrong..we'll just find out in the end".

	If you think about it, how can it be any other way, Jim? There is only
one absolute when it comes to knowledge, understanding, interpreting, right? 
That's Him. Would you agree on that? 

	Let's just say the Bible is 100% innerant for arguments sake. That is
the standard. But is there any way we are going to fully understand the thing?
I don't think we can. And no matter what standard God has laid out, it would be
the same. Do you think the path He wants us to take is absolute? I do. Do you
think we follow it like an absolute? I don't. I think we, being humans, go off
on our own paths from time to time. And I think the same happens for those who
interpret the Bible.

| Let's see..we have standards for weights and measures, 

	Metric or inches?

| we have standards for what is and what is not acceptable to pass from one 
| grade to another,

	And how many pass on anyway? I mean, people graduate who can't read or
write.

| standards for entry into college, 

	And how many times are those bent for scholarships, etc? 

| standards for this job or that..

	Oh come on, Jim.... there are few jobs that have strict standards.
There is no ONE standard for a job.

	What you have done is help me illustrate that what you may think is a
standard has so many other things involved to show they are far from an
absolute. 




Glen

>| Let's see..we have standards for weights and measures, 

>	Metric or inches?


  The point, which apparently has eluded you, is that there is a standard
  to which one can refer if there is any question as to the correct measurement,
  be it inches, centimeters, feet, miles, furlongs, acres, quarts, pints,
  gallons, litres, etc.


>| we have standards for what is and what is not acceptable to pass from one 
>| grade to another,

>	And how many pass on anyway? I mean, people graduate who can't read or
>write.


 Is there, or is there not a standard?  I didn't ask who adhered to it, I
 stated that there is a standard.


>	Oh come on, Jim.... there are few jobs that have strict standards.
>There is no ONE standard for a job.



Hot Dog!  I can be an airline pilot?  I've had no training, but since there
are no standards, I can be one anyway!



>	What you have done is help me illustrate that what you may think is a
>standard has so many other things involved to show they are far from an
>absolute. 


you have illustrated your refusal to accept the authenticity and authority
of the Word of God.




Jim

| <<< Note 1260.20 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Every knee shall bow" >>>


| The point, which apparently has eluded you, is that there is a standard
| to which one can refer if there is any question as to the correct measurement,
| be it inches, centimeters, feet, miles, furlongs, acres, quarts, pints,
| gallons, litres, etc.

	But no ONE standard, which is what you are trying to say the Bible is.
And with the standards that MAN created, can not be compared to someone who is
perfect. How do we know our standards are correct? Because we say so. Will that
pass for a standard that God has? I don't think so.

| you have illustrated your refusal to accept the authenticity and authority
| of the Word of God.

	No, I have shown that a human standard thought up by a human can not be
100% correct. Another example of this would be a car. It is designed. It is
approved. It is thought to be perfect. Then there are sometimes slight
deviations from the plans, sometimes there are problems due to mistakes that
weren't originally seen. There are so many different possibilities for these
things because humans are involved. We can't say a standard that WE developed
is absolute. And we can't say that if the Bible is ineerant, that we have it
down 100%. Only One can do anything absolute. Humans can not.


Glen

    There's a big difference between addressing human defined standards and
    something like a search for the truth... God.  Even though we may not
    agree on what standard to use (e.g. inches or cm), we agree that both
    are valid, workable and true. They're just artifacts we concocted as
    tools.  
    
    There is no standard in the search for God.  IMO, there's no evidence
    that God (whatever (s)he is) has left anything to assist us in this
    endevour.  Look at the title of this string.  It's true.  The Bible 
    is ambiguous and confussing.  The Koran is just as bad.  Same for all
    the rest.  
    
    If God REALLY wanted us to know him/her, you'd think he/she would
    provide exceedingly clear evidence for everyone to tap into. If Jesus
    was the messanger, then where is he for us here inthe 20th century?  
    No vague descriptions about how he's here "in spirit" or "in your
    heart"... where is he?  No vague accountings of a man who lived 2
    millenia ago, accountings which can provide a flavor of the man only.
    I mean God can do better than that!  WHERE'S THE BEEF!!!  If God just
    can't manage to get Jesus here again in the flesh, then what about a
    VCR tape or something.  The Bible?  Come On.  From the standpoint of
    responsible reporting, that paper gets... well, in the interest of not
    offending any more than I already have, I'll keep the grade to myself. 
    
    Sorry for venting like that.  It needed to be said.
    
    -dave
                                                                         

    
>    If God REALLY wanted us to know him/her, you'd think he/she would
>    provide exceedingly clear evidence for everyone to tap into. If Jesus
>    was the messanger, then where is he for us here inthe 20th century?  
 


     God could step right into the 20th century world today, and He would
     still be rejected, because most of humanity would refuse to accept
     that they are sinners, and that their sin separates them from the God
     who created them.  That is the crux of the matter.  It is clear that
     even after the destruction described in Revelation, after God has
     presented Himself, that people will continue to reject Him.


 

 Jim                                                                         

    I dunno Jim.  People would be willing to follow if there were clear
    signs.  People followed Jim Jones, David Koresh and the rest of those
    assholes.  That's how desperate they are.  They want something real.
    They're tired of fighting over what the Bible might and might not say. 
    It's a quagmire or ancient verbage that's confussing, ambiguous,
    unclear and just plain unacceptable by any means other than faith.
    They're tired of living day to day with automobiles and computers while
    being told that they should believe in Noah's Ark.  They just don't
    jive.  And people are tired of trying to live double lives.
    
    Lack of clear signs are evident in the the number of different religions
    in the world, moreso when you look at how major religions are ferther
    fragmented.  Some regard the whole thing as being so pathetic they give
    up and become atheists.  Others go and build/create their own religion
    because the existing ones are too many, too confussing, too
    unbelievable and often too vague.  
    
    There's a serious lack of real leadership here.  I'm talking about
    leadership from above.
    
    -dave

>    I dunno Jim.  People would be willing to follow if there were clear
>    signs.  People followed Jim Jones, David Koresh and the rest of those
>    assholes.  That's how desperate they are.  They want something real.
>    They're tired of fighting over what the Bible might and might not say. 
>    It's a quagmire or ancient verbage that's confussing, ambiguous,
>    unclear and just plain unacceptable by any means other than faith.
>    They're tired of living day to day with automobiles and computers while
>    being told that they should believe in Noah's Ark.  They just don't
>    jive.  And people are tired of trying to live double lives.
 

  Noah's Ark has much to say about society today..go back and read the 
  account of what was happening then, even as people were being warned
  of impending destruction.  

  It begins with Romans 3:23 "for all have sinned and fall short of
  the glory of God".

  Dave, have you ever just prayed and said "God, I really don't know
  if you are there or not.  My heart is full of questions, and there
  seem to be so many answers"?  God is a rewarder of those who dilligently
  seek Him.  And I believe if you pray with an honest heart, He will answer
  you.




 Jim

   
        
   

|    Not true at all.  Believers disagree on issues of abortion, birth
|    control, women as priests, homosexuality, what the eucharist really is,
|    whether Noah's ark was fiction or not... a thousand things.  I'd say
|    that you'd be hard pressed to find two people who think exactly alike
|    on all of the issues.  Look at this conference.  
    
    Dave, you have examples of 2 or more right in this conference.  For the
    Catholics, you have John and Eric who agree on every topic I've
    discussed with them.  Others have said the same about Jim, Jack, Jeff,
    and even myself and those over in CHRISTIAN.
    
    Mike

|	If you think about it, how can it be any other way, Jim? There is only
|one absolute when it comes to knowledge, understanding, interpreting, right? 
|That's Him. Would you agree on that? 
    
    I think the real problem is how much of the world's gray areas we've
    allowed to seep into our thought process.  The more you see things as
    black and white (i.e., wrong and right) the less problems you have with
    the Bible.  If you're into justifying and rationalizing everything in
    life, introducing all sorts of gray areas, you are going to have a big 
    problem with the Bible.  this falls back to the contrast of the
    carnal/natural person vs. the spiritual person in 1 Corinthians 2.
    
    Mike

	Mike, anyone could see something as black and white. But guess what? It
doesn't make what one sees as black, really black. Same goes for white. A
perfect example of this would be the KKK. They feel they are correct in their
thinking. They see things as either right or wrong. If you're <insert white,
etc>, it's right. If you're anything else, it's wrong. 

	It still comes down to He has all the answers. We can't even come
close.

>    I think the real problem is how much of the world's gray areas we've
>    allowed to seep into our thought process.  The more you see things as
>    black and white (i.e., wrong and right) the less problems you have with
>    the Bible.  If you're into justifying and rationalizing everything in

    The only problem is, the world isn't just black and white.

    And, yes.  Life is a lot "simpler" if people choose to ignore
    the reality of the world and see everything in black and white
    terms.

    Tom

 Z    They're tired of fighting over what the Bible might and might not say. 
 Z       It's a quagmire or ancient verbage that's confussing, ambiguous,
    
    Dave, since Jones and Koresh both made the claim to messiahship, (which
    by the way brought them to horrible ends I might add), it leads me to
    conclude that the members of these churches had absolutely no
    understanding of the dispensations of the gospels and the end times. 
    One need only read Jesus words in Matthew 23 and 24 to avoid such
    churches.  
    
    Dave, in all honesty, I believe you are making something easy very
    complicated...I also find it interesting you keep pondering over the
    credibility of the account of the ark...something that is quite
    believable in relation to the many miracles the world takes for
    granted...the resurrection which is something we commemorate every
    year as an example.
    
    -Jack

|    provide exceedingly clear evidence for everyone to tap into. If Jesus
|    was the messanger, then where is he for us here inthe 20th century?  
    
    He's in the hearts of His children, those who have called upon Him as
    Lord and Savior.
    
|    No vague descriptions about how he's here "in spirit" or "in your
|    heart"... where is he?  No vague accountings of a man who lived 2
|    millenia ago, accountings which can provide a flavor of the man only.
|    I mean God can do better than that!  WHERE'S THE BEEF!!!  If God just
|    can't manage to get Jesus here again in the flesh, then what about a
|    VCR tape or something.  The Bible?  Come On.  From the standpoint of
|    responsible reporting, that paper gets... well, in the interest of not
|    offending any more than I already have, I'll keep the grade to myself. 
    
    Well according to God's Word, you may get your wish sooner than you
    think.

    Re .26 (Mike)
    
    So you're saying that these people see all religious doctrine, all
    biblical interpretation, all religious moral issues in exactly that
    same way?  That can't be said for any individual from day to day, never
    mind from person to person.
    
    Re .25 (Jim)
    
    With regard to Noah's Ark, I was referring to the physical aspects of
    the story.  For me it's tough to declare science as being wrong in
    it's evaluation of the story while typing away on a computer.  And if
    the physical aspects are considered an exaggeration, then a precedent
    has been set for selective acceptance of bible as fact.  The floodgates
    of doubt have just been opened.
    
    >Dave, have you ever just prayed and said "God, I really don't know...
    
    Ohhhhhhhhh..... have I prayed.  For some 20 years now.  It doesn't
    work.  I sincerely wish that it did, but it doesn't.  Maybe it's not
    supposed to, at least not for me.  So I've come to consider other
    sources.  Maybe I can only see the truth through an eastern lens.  To be
    perfectly honest, that approach seems far more palletable.  But I'm
    still wide open to truth coming from any source... biblical, prayer,
    churches, notes conferences... anything.
    
    
    -dave
    
    
    
    

    
>    >Dave, have you ever just prayed and said "God, I really don't know...
    
 >   Ohhhhhhhhh..... have I prayed.  For some 20 years now.  It doesn't
 >   work.  I sincerely wish that it did, but it doesn't.  Maybe it's not
 >   supposed to, at least not for me.  So I've come to consider other
     
 

 Perhaps it has worked and you don't know it.  There are plenty of folks
 (Mike, Mr. Crews, etc) who have been sharing much about God with you.    
    



 Jim
    
    

    Re .30 (Jack)
    
    Many of the followers of Jones/Koresh/Others were good, well meaning
    people.  They studied the Bible but might have failed to interpret the
    particular passage you cited the way you did.  They wanted a leader.
    They were hungry for a leader. They followed someone who looked like a
    leader.  Were they wrong?  Sure.  So what was their real, living,
    physical leader sent from heaven?   One that they can related to 
    outside of reading a book?  They followed who was available in lack of
    a better alternative.  
    
    I'm not defending these people or their actions.  I won't battle over
    how to interpret the bible in this matter.  I am citing the fact that
    basically good people fell astray for lack of clear leadership.  ANd
    some of them were mere children.
    
    
    Re .31 (Mike)
    
    >Well according to God's Word, you may get your wish sooner than you
    >think
    
    Is that it?  God saith "Believe in me or burn".  Is fear the foundation
    someone should build a belief in God on?   Not to say that it doesn't
    work.  I mean that's the game Hitler played and almost won with.

    -dave

    re:26
    
    while John and Eric may very well agree on the topics that you'd
    discussed with them, Mike... i certainly don't and i consider myself
    Catholic.
    
    and while i most certainly respect John Covert's opinions, i know that
    he is a member of a small minority within the Episcopal Church..for
    example, the status of women within our Church and abortion. i have on
    more than one occasion wondered why someone who holds the opinions that
    he does remains rather than convert to Roman Catholicism.
    
    peter

|    Is that it?  God saith "Believe in me or burn".  Is fear the foundation
|    someone should build a belief in God on?   Not to say that it doesn't
|    work.  I mean that's the game Hitler played and almost won with.
    
    I meant that you will get to see Him sooner than you think.  Didn't say
    anything about where you spend eternity.  The signs will be there for
    you to make a decision before His actual arrival.  When Jim, Jack, and
    myself are gone, and a world leader sets himself up in the 3rd Temple
    of Jerusalem as god, that will be a major hint for you that the time is
    near.  Your best bet is to heed the words of Christ now:
    
    John 20:29  
    "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast
     believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."
    
    Mike

|    Is that it?  God saith "Believe in me or burn".  Is fear the foundation

    Well, from Mike's reply, I guess that *is* it.

    Nothing about learning to love one another.  Nothing about community
    or communion or healthy living.  It appears that some people have
    one and only one goal in their life:  to keep their respective
    butts out of hell.
    
    Is this a church that only thinks about death?
    
    Tom

|    Nothing about learning to love one another.  Nothing about community
    
    Love is sending your only Son to die for the world so that they might
    be saved while knowing full well that the majority will reject Him
    anyway.
    
    Love is the fellowship among the community of believers who have chosen
    to accept the Son.  Before Christianity came along, the Greek language
    didn't have a term for it.  They do know, it's called "koinonia."
    
|    Is this a church that only thinks about death?
    
    Not at all.  We rejoice in the assurance of eternal life and the
    salvation the Son has brought us now that we've accepted Him.  We
    worship Him for paying a price that we could never pay.
    
    Mike

| <<< Note 1260.38 by PHXSS1::HEISER "watchman on the wall" >>>

| Love is sending your only Son to die for the world so that they might be 
| saved while knowing full well that the majority will reject Him anyway.

	Now put it into how humans can achieve this.

>    Love is sending your only Son to die for the world so that they might
>    be saved while knowing full well that the majority will reject Him
>    anyway.

    What?  So we shouldn't bother trying?  If that's such a tough
    act to follow then why should we bother?

>    Not at all.  We rejoice in the assurance of eternal life and the
>    salvation the Son has brought us now that we've accepted Him.  We
>    worship Him for paying a price that we could never pay.

    These seem like hollow words coming from you.  All I've see from
    you is how you're going to get out of here when/if the "stuff"
    hits the fan.

    That's not based on love.  That's based on fear.  No wonder it
    bugs you when I talk about love.
    
    Tom

    re: -1
    
    you can't.

    Tom,
    
|    What?  So we shouldn't bother trying?  If that's such a tough
|    act to follow then why should we bother?
    
    the point is that there is nothing you can do, the price was paid for
    you.  All you have to do is accept Him into your life.  It's too easy
    for most people.  People have been thinking for years that there is
    something they must do.  Most people can't relate to a God of love who
    would die for His children and save them for just accepting Him into
    their hearts.
    
|    These seem like hollow words coming from you.  All I've see from
|    you is how you're going to get out of here when/if the "stuff"
|    hits the fan.
    
    Your words are even more hollow since you don't know anything about me. 
    You don't know of the testimonies of the Christians in here.  You don't
    know of their hurts, sufferings, sacrifices, harassment, and persecution 
    that Christians go through to serve Him.  You don't know the
    testimonies of how God has healed them, blessed them, and has had mercy
    on them in the toughest of circumstances.  You don't know of the
    Christian joy and peace in the midst of any circumstance, the
    incredible delight in helping to bring a lost soul to the full saving
    knowledge of Jesus Christ, and the koinonia of all born again Christians.
    
    God in His Word has stated that He has not destined His children to
    wrath.  If He wanted me to remain throughout the tribulation, I would,
    even knowing that it would be painful as well as fatal.  This isn't a
    concern for someone who has a personal relationship with Christ.  We
    have a bigger perspective of what is temporal and what is eternal.
    God's love for His children will keep them from Jacob's trouble.

|    That's not based on love.  That's based on fear.  No wonder it
|    bugs you when I talk about love.
    
    Where do you get this stuff?!

    And  the words go round and round....

    First you say:

>    the point is that there is nothing you can do, the price was paid for
>    you.  All you have to do is accept Him into your life.  It's too easy

    Then you say:

>    You don't
>    know of their hurts, sufferings, sacrifices, harassment, and persecution 
>    that Christians go through to serve Him.  You don't know the

    So which is it?  Do you have to do work or don't you?  Do you
    have to actually "serve" Him, which implies *work* or do you 
    just kick back and hang out?

    The parable of the master who gave his servents 10, 5 and 1 coin(s)
    before he left comes to mind.  He was really ticked at the last one 
    who didn't do anything with what he was given.

>|    That's not based on love.  That's based on fear.  No wonder it
>|    bugs you when I talk about love.
>    
>    Where do you get this stuff?!

    Threats of enternal hell are the only thing I've seen you use to
    bolster your position.  It's not the gospel of life or of love.  
    It's hollow.  It's fear.  It's dead.

    Tom

    Hi Dave,
    
    >Interpreting anything, biblical or otherwise, is a practice in being
    >subjective.  The more one "mines", the less accurate the results are
    >liable to be.  My intent was to caution the interpreter in accepting
    >heavily mined "discovered truths" as being facts. They may be artifacts.
    
    I disagree completely and so does science.  There are objective
    means for interpreting language.  The whole discipline of linguistics,
    for example, is based upon that premise.
    
    >It seems like resolving biblical contradictions is an unenviable task.
    >The more you mine for answers, the less believable the explanation
    >becomes.  When working in a system where contradiction is defined not
    >to exist, I guess you do the best you can.  
    
    Are you referring to internal contradictions or external
    contradictions?  Will you give me some examples?  Also, your assertion
    that the system used to interpret the Bible denies the concept of
    contradiction or the possibility of contradiction in the Scriptures is
    patently false.  On what basis do you make such an assertion?
    
    jeff
    
    
    

    Salvation is a free gift.  You serve Him out of gratitude.  Love is
    what saved us, not fear of death.  I felt no fear when I asked Him into
    my life.  I felt overwhelming joy and gratitude.
    
    Mike

>|    Is that it?  God saith "Believe in me or burn".  Is fear the foundation

>    Well, from Mike's reply, I guess that *is* it.

 >   Nothing about learning to love one another.  Nothing about community
 >   or communion or healthy living.  It appears that some people have
 >   one and only one goal in their life:  to keep their respective
 >   butts out of hell.
    
 >   Is this a church that only thinks about death?
    
  
     What you don't seem to understand, is, according to the Bible the
     first step is being saved.  Once that is accomplished, what you
     alude to above becomes part of one's life as they grow.

 Perhaps it would help if you were to visit a good New Testament, Bible
 preaching church, that teaches salvation, that teaches serving, that teaches
 growth in the love and knowledge of the saviour, rather than pontificating
 such as what you mention above.




Jim

re .35

Because I couldn't stood it ifn we left all the good music to da debbil.

/john

    Re .44 (Jeff)
    
    It's against my better judgement, but here goes...
    
    >I disagree completely and so does science.
    
    I'm sure you disagree.  I'm sure science doesn't.  Reducing subjectivism
    is one focus of science.  It's understood that it can never be
    eliminated.
    
    
    >There are objective means for interpreting language.
    
    The means may be objective but the interpretations are subjective. It's
    unavoidable.
    
    
    >Are you referring to internal contradictions or external
    
    Internal.  If everyting in the Bible is declared as being true, then
    internal contradictions cannot exist.  Note that I'm talking about
    objective contradictions, not subjective "apparent" contradictions.
    
    >Also, your assertion that the system used to interpret the Bible denies
    >the concept of contradiction or the possibility of contradiction in the
    >Scriptures is patently false. 
    
    Not sure what you're talking about.  I'm asserting that the ferther you
    move away from direct interpretation (the more "cross referencing", 
    "tapping other sources inside the bible", "linking stories via
    keywords", etc...) then the less probable the explanation represents the
    truth.  Let me restate (cuz I know we have a problem with interpreting
    each other). The more complicated and indirect one's explanation, the
    less likely it's true.  This applies to matters inside and outside the
    Bible.
    
    >On what basis do you make such an assertion?
    
    Common sense and common experience.
    
    
    >Will you give me some examples?
    
    Correct me on the details to follow if you feel it necessary...
    
    Matthew ans Mark describe the story of the ressurection as the two
    Marys going to the tomb, seeing a single angel, bumping into Jesus on
    their way to the disciples, telling the disciples, disciples visited by
    Jesus once.  Luke's description has Peter and a couple others going to
    tht tomb and finding it empty, them the Marys stop in and see two
    angels, bump into Jesus, go to the disciples who visits them once.
    John's version has the two Marys being the first to arrive, seeing two
    angels, bumping into Jesus, telling the disciples, Peter and a couple
    others go to the tomb after that, and Jesus spends days with the disciples.
    
    One angel or two? 
    
    Who got there first, the Marys or Peter and friends?
    
    Did Jesus visit with the disciples once then vanish (I think vanish was
    in Luke's account) or did he come and go over the course of many days?
    
    I seem to remember in another string, there were even more
    discrepencies cited.  Jesus as spirit, walking through walls vs Jesus
    as man eating food.  Jesus appearing only to the disciples once vs
    roaming around Jeruselem over the course of days.  Not sure of where
    those folks got their info.
    
    WHen you address this, remember that the more elaborate your
    explanation, the less believable it becomes.
    
    -dave