U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:07 AM
Status: "Amused by BF/V." (set 2 days ago)
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
23,370 posts, read 12,085,923 times
Reputation: 10657

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rbbi1 View Post
He's bright enough to have you pegged.....the fool says in his heart, NO, G-d.....
And you are...suggestible enough, to swallow the biblical kool-aid wholesale and consider it spiritually nutritious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:20 AM
 
9,169 posts, read 2,784,110 times
Reputation: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcamps View Post
Did you know that all sin is, is unbelief?. When we isolate ourselves from the source of life through unbelief it is inevitable that we miss the mark.

Do you mean, sin, the noun, or sin, the verb? See, one is a principality, the other is an action we take based on agreement WITH that principality.

Either way, sin is not unbelief, but unbelief is a sin. To sin is the miss the mark, the mark is the mind of Christ, the mind of Christ is the heart of G-d, and G-d is a SPIRIT which is love, and love seeks no ill.

The root of sin is HATE. Satan was a murderer from the beginning, because hate was in his heart. He murdered them both in the garden, murder was the fruit, but hate was the root. Eve came into agreement with it, it entered her heart (sin lieth at the door), and slew them both. She didn't care about her husband, the spirit, that it would cost them BOTH. She only cared about her own things as all souls do, and not the things which be of Christ.

Eve was "raped", her husband should have been there to be her covering against the angels and wasn't. Rape is to impose one's will upon another, the will of the soul upon the Spirit, wrong order, wrong pattern.

David imposed his will upon Bathsheba, Peter tried to impose his will upon Christ (get thee behind me Satan), the Romans and the Jews imposed their will on Christ, but with His permission and foreknowledge.

Eve was taken out Adam to show him what was in his heart, just as G-d told the children of Israel in the wilderness that He had taken them out into the wilderness to show them what was in their hearts.

And nowadays, we have souls galore trying to impose THEIR WILL on the Spirit of G-d and His will, which IS HIS WORD, and they think they are somehow less guilty than Satan for trying to do so. Peace
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:28 AM
 
Location: East Coast
30,217 posts, read 19,991,820 times
Reputation: 2108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rbbi1 View Post
Do you mean, sin, the noun, or sin, the verb? See, one is a principality, the other is an action we take based on agreement WITH that principality.

Either way, sin is not unbelief, but unbelief is a sin. To sin is the miss the mark, the mark is the mind of Christ, the mind of Christ is the heart of G-d, and G-d is a SPIRIT which is love, and love seeks no ill.

The root of sin is HATE. Satan was a murderer from the beginning, because hate was in his heart. He murdered them both in the garden, murder was the fruit, but hate was the root. Eve came into agreement with it, it entered her heart (sin lieth at the door), and slew them both. She didn't care about her husband, the spirit, that it would cost them BOTH. She only cared about her own things as all souls do, and not the things which be of Christ.

Eve was "raped", her husband should have been there to be her covering against the angels and wasn't. Rape is to impose one's will upon another, the will of the soul upon the Spirit, wrong order, wrong pattern.

David imposed his will upon Bathsheba, Peter tried to impose his will upon Christ (get thee behind me Satan), the Romans and the Jews imposed their will on Christ, but with His permission and foreknowledge.

Eve was taken out Adam to show him what was in his heart, just as G-d told the children of Israel in the wilderness that He had taken them out into the wilderness to show them what was in their hearts.

And nowadays, we have souls galore trying to impose THEIR WILL on the Spirit of G-d and His will, which IS HIS WORD, and they think they are somehow less guilty than Satan for trying to do so. Peace
When you are in unbelief you are going to miss the mark, it is impossible not to do so. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Romans 14:23
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:37 AM
 
9,169 posts, read 2,784,110 times
Reputation: 658
Agreed; I'm just saying it's not the root. Peace
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:45 AM
 
9,169 posts, read 2,784,110 times
Reputation: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
And you are...suggestible enough, to swallow the biblical kool-aid wholesale and consider it spiritually nutritious.

No, actually, I used to be YOU. I WAS the fool that said in his heart, NO, G-d. Then I had a life changing event that shook everything I thought I knew, and I found the One that wrote the book. I closed myself off with it for the first 2 years of study, 16 hours a day, and when I emerged I was not a fool any longer, to Him be the glory. Peace
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:52 AM
Status: "Amused by BF/V." (set 2 days ago)
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
23,370 posts, read 12,085,923 times
Reputation: 10657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rbbi1 View Post
No, actually, I used to be YOU. I WAS the fool that said in his heart, NO, G-d. Then I had a life changing event that shook everything I thought I knew, and I found the One that wrote the book. I closed myself off with it for the first 2 years of study, 16 hours a day, and when I emerged I was not a fool any longer, to Him be the glory. Peace
When and where did I say no God?

There may well be a god/God(s).

But sure as shinola it's not the psychotic dude depicted in the bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 12:45 PM
 
Location: East Coast
30,217 posts, read 19,991,820 times
Reputation: 2108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rbbi1 View Post
Agreed; I'm just saying it's not the root. Peace
According to your bible it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 02:37 PM
 
37,534 posts, read 25,255,858 times
Reputation: 5857
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
God hates no one and nothing. Hatred is a human psychological weakness and God has NONE. Warden does not accuse God of hating anyone. He simply acknowledges that there are negative consequences for some of our actions. But they are not punishments by God anymore than the consequences of violating God's law of gravity is a punishment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
He came right out and said that God hates us. It's there for all to see.
If he did he simply misspoke. There is NO hate in love and God IS agape love.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 03:16 PM
 
10,516 posts, read 4,146,327 times
Reputation: 1193
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
When and where did I say no God?

There may well be a god/God(s).

But sure as shinola it's not the psychotic dude depicted in the bible.
yup. I aint with the "psychotic" part, but you are correct.

maybe its psychotic because its us. If there was ever a book that answered when a human asked "what am I? !!!!!!!!!!" its that there dern bible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Denver, CO
8,597 posts, read 5,122,268 times
Reputation: 3917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
I haven't, and don't deflect.


No, that is not what you said. You originally stated that the New Testament didn't exist until 300 years after Jesus.
Post #126, ''There was no NT until 300 years after Christ.''
And that simply is not true. The 27 New Testament books were all written before the end of the 1st century. They simply were not all put under one cover until a later time.



The arguments used by those scholars who doubt the Pauline authorship of some of the letters attributed to him have all been addressed by those scholars who do hold to the Pauline authorship of those letters, and found to be weak.


No, it has not been proven that forgeries were accepted into the New Testament canon. What is true however is that no book was accepted into the New Testament canon if the church had doubts about the book. That's why the disputed books were not immediately recognized as canonical but finally were recognized by the church at large.



There were several criteria that the church used in recognizing the authenticity of a NT letter. The three basic criteria were 1.) Apostolicity, 2.) Orthodoxy, and 3.) consensus among the churches.

Apostolicity: for a letter to be recognized as canonical it had to have been written during the time of the apostles, by an apostle, or by someone closely associated with an apostle. This is why, as stated in the Muratorian Canon the Shepherd of Hermas could not be accepted as canonical. It had been written too late.

Orthodoxy: In order to be accepted as canonical a letter had to conform to what was called the 'rule of faith.' That is, it had to be in keeping with the basic teachings of the church which already existed and which were considered as normative.

Consensus among the churches: This had to do with continuous usage and acceptance by the church at large.

Bruce Metzger goes into more detail about these criteria used by the early church for recognizing canoncity in his book, 'The Canon of the New Testament, It's Origin, Development, and Significance.'




Of course certain people had doubts about certain New Testament documents. That is why the disputed letters were delayed in being recognized as canonical. Finally however, they were recognized by the church at large even though certain individuals continued to disagree.


I said nothing about anyone being a 'pure and accepting soul.' Nor have I said that I prize the Muratorian canon most.
1. One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine. 1 And this the ancient elders 2 used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work. 3 But we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to the canon; 4 yet, as it has appeared profitable to many, it has been used with the other Scriptures. 5

Eusebius on the Canon of Scripture
In Eusebius' statement above he was expressing his opinion and that of those who were in agreement with him that 2 Peter was not canonical. He then recognized that others did not share his view. It is a fact that while there were those who did not believe that 2 Peter belonged in the canon, it was finally recognized by the church at large that it did belong in the canon. There will always be some who disagree.




The Muratorian Canon simply recognizes 21 of the New Testament books that were accepted as canonical by the late 2nd century. It also mentions some of the documents which were not acceptable.



The issue of canonicity was not even a topic of discussion at The First Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325. in which 1800 bishops attended. At that first counsel there were twenty areas of discussion which were addressed, and none of them concerned which books belonged in the canon.

The Canons of the Council of Nicea

It was at a later counsel that a formal recognition of the books already generally recognized by the church as canonical was addressed.



Again, while some of the NT documents had been disputed, they were finally recognized as canonical. But even as early as the late 2nd century, 21 of the 27 NT books were recognized as being a part of the canon. It was only the few disputed books at were an issue for a time.




Again, the first Council of Nicea wasn't concerned about the issue of canoncity.


Only the few disputed books were the topic of discussion. Not all 27. Again, 21 of the books had been recognized as canonical by the late century. And actually, long before that.


No. Twenty-one does not make twenty-seven. It makes twenty-one. And those twenty-one, once again, were recognized as canonical in the 2nd century and were not in dispute.

The criteria which the early church used to recognized the canoncity of a NT document has already been posted above. As for the few disputed books, the fact that they were disputed but finally recognized as canonical means that the church did in fact have a methodology for determining a forgery.



As already stated, there will always be some who doubt the canonicity of certain NT books, but the church at large has recognized the 27 NT books.



From God's standpoint, the NT canon was complete with the writing of the last of the 27 NT books by the end of the first century. From man's standpoint, most of those books were never in doubt, and the few which were disputed were finally recognized as canonical even though some individuals continued to disagree.



Those additions have nothing to do with the issue of which books belong in the NT canon. It's a different issue.
I'm not going to keep refuting the same points without you providing any new data.
1). There are still discrepancies between Christian faiths about what should be in the Bible.
2). The Bible as currently printed does not reflect the oldest documents that have been discovered in the last 100 years.
3). Constantine pressed the bishops for a settlement and for unity--which there was not:
Quote:
In 331 AD, Emperor Contantine ordered that an "ecumenical Bible" be written. Constantine wanted a Bible which would be acceptable to pagans as well as Christians, and Eusebius (the Bishop of Caesaria and a follower of Origen) was assigned to direct this task. Eusebius rejected the deity of Christ and claimed that Christ was a created being.
Constantine
Quote:
The actual compilation of the Bible was an incredibly complicated > project that involved churchmen of many varying beliefs, in an > atmosphere of dissension, jealousy, intolerance, persecution and > bigotry.
-------
we do know that there were many books of supposed prophets floating around up until 312 CE when the Council of Nicea decided which books were scripture and which ones were burned. Thanks to the notorious habit of early Christian leaders of destroying books/scrolls, we may never know what doctrine existed before the Council of Nicea.
The Council of Nicaea (Nicea) and the Bible
4). It was well into the fourth century before the 27 books of the NT were listed and nearly a decade later before they were finally affirmed

Quote:
Athanasius as the bishop of Alexandria listed the twenty-seven books in 367 A.D. The Chalcedon Council merely affirmed what had already been clearly established in 451 A.D.

5). Canonization took many years as there was not easy method to spread all writings to many differing christian communites:
Quote:
Canonization happened over periods of time as the community of God's people became familiar with the different books and got copies of them. For example, some books were written to certain places such as Rome (Romans) or even to individuals (Gaius in 3 John). It would take a good amount of time before the document circled back to Antioch, Jerusalem and the other Christian communities. Those books that were questioned were often excluded from one part of the church.
The Canonization of the Bible: Part of 'The Origins of the Bible' series

All sorts of writings were floating around for over three centuries and some were not formally dismissed until the fifth century.

Most Pauline scholars doubt the authenticity of all the letters ascribed to him. You are in a minority of fundamentalist believers defending the undefendable:
Quote:
Most scholars agree that Paul really wrote seven of the Pauline epistles, but that four of the epistles in Paul's name are pseudepigraphic; scholars are divided on the authenticity of two of the epistles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles

The number of biblical scholars defending Paul as the author of all 11 letters traditionally ascribed to him are equal to the number of biblical scholars ascribing to YEC.

True to form, you believe only your interpretation to have any standing and everyone else, no matter how numerous, how well educated, nor how well studied--are in error. The only question is--do you send them all to hell.

If you wish to revive my thread on "God hates SINNERS," please do so. Since you are apparently claiming He does not, it will make for an interesting adjustment on who supports who. You will have Mystic, TroutDude, DewDropInn, Jerwade, and host of other good people siding with you. As a true manipulator, you ignore the title of the thread and picked up on a subline I wrote within it. But that is your history---as in when you take a line from a guy like Bruce Metzger, F.F. Bruce or agnostic Bart Ehrman and use those to support your fundamentalist position when clearly an overview of ALL their beliefs disproves your position.

Last edited by Wardendresden; 03-14-2016 at 03:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top