U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [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 01-31-2018, 08:08 PM
 
Location: Canada
6,643 posts, read 3,998,284 times
Reputation: 386

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
For the uninitiated, here's a list of the "fruits of the [holy] spirit":

love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control

Unless you're willing to suggest that people who believe differently from you, or not at all, cannot exhibit these qualities, then they are not indicative of god's influence, they are simply positive human qualities that anyone could have. Therefore they are not useful for measuring anything as to being from, or not from, god.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
As you may or may not remember I have some respect for that passage and in fact committed it to memory in my youth and consider it one of the passages in the Bible that has merit. But it is about love, just one of the fruits of the spirit. The topic under discussion is the alleged fruitS (plural) of the spirit.

But my point still holds when discussing any one of these "fruits". Unless you allege that unbelievers cannot exhibit, e.g., love (or that god withholds his grace in these matters from the unbelieving), then it is no useful measure of influence or communication from god. And certainly not the evidence of sanctification it's generally touted as.
Mordant I would never suggest that the unbeliever/atheist, agnostic etc. can not exhibit the fruits of the spirit as there is the light that lighteth everyone coming into the world.

However we were not talking about the fruits of the spirit being exhibited by man/woman we were talking about a literal understanding of the scripture and a spiritual understanding of the scriptures and how one can know how one is able to know whether they are understanding the scriptures correctly.

And I pointed out that by using the fruits of the spirit is the only way one can understand what is being said in scripture.

Now being a materialist you and many others here do not believe in that which is spiritual, thus you do not uses the spiritual fruit to try and understand the scriptures but instead read them literally just as any other fundamentalist. Thus because you read the scripture literally you do not believe what they teach.

Try applying the fruits of the spirit to the scriptures when you read them, you might be surprised at what you can see.

 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:05 AM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
6,926 posts, read 4,307,305 times
Reputation: 1157
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Mordant I would never suggest that the unbeliever/atheist, agnostic etc. can not exhibit the fruits of the spirit as there is the light that lighteth everyone coming into the world.

However we were not talking about the fruits of the spirit being exhibited by man/woman we were talking about a literal understanding of the scripture and a spiritual understanding of the scriptures and how one can know how one is able to know whether they are understanding the scriptures correctly.

And I pointed out that by using the fruits of the spirit is the only way one can understand what is being said in scripture.

Now being a materialist you and many others here do not believe in that which is spiritual, thus you do not uses the spiritual fruit to try and understand the scriptures but instead read them literally just as any other fundamentalist. Thus because you read the scripture literally you do not believe what they teach.

Try applying the fruits of the spirit to the scriptures when you read them, you might be surprised at what you can see.
The many various Spiritualist interpretations of the various Bibliolatries are also in full guilt and are indeed: the needy. Thousands of empirical tests could be designed to show the fruits of such claims amongst each other. It is only called spiritual by the contradicting claimers, to attempt to hide their beloved ideas from scrutiny, because in their heart of hearts they would be afraid if they had no veracity. Now, if we are to read Harry Potter metaphorically, it does have a lot of very important moral and philosophical teachings. And whatever we find offensive, we could try, with an open heart, to paint it in a good light and thus we would then see it that way.
 
Old 02-01-2018, 08:48 AM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,070 posts, read 8,576,448 times
Reputation: 6006
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
However we were not talking about the fruits of the spirit being exhibited by man/woman we were talking about a literal understanding of the scripture and a spiritual understanding of the scriptures and how one can know how one is able to know whether they are understanding the scriptures correctly.
Well perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. Clearly, the scriptures teach that the fruits of the spirit are exhibited by believers in their lives and conduct, particularly sanctified ones. It's taught that they are an indicator of spiritual maturation, and indirectly of spiritual maturity. It's implied that they are exhibited at least in degree, particularly by true believers.

If you're applying them to scripture interpretation specifically then you've found an extra-Biblical use for the concept as far as I know. But that's not necessarily a point against it. Can you explain exactly, perhaps with a practical example, how one uses the fruits of the spirit to determine a correct scriptural interpretation?
 
Old 02-02-2018, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,643 posts, read 3,998,284 times
Reputation: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
Well perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. Clearly, the scriptures teach that the fruits of the spirit are exhibited by believers in their lives and conduct, particularly sanctified ones. It's taught that they are an indicator of spiritual maturation, and indirectly of spiritual maturity. It's implied that they are exhibited at least in degree, particularly by true believers.

If you're applying them to scripture interpretation specifically then you've found an extra-Biblical use for the concept as far as I know. But that's not necessarily a point against it. Can you explain exactly, perhaps with a practical example, how one uses the fruits of the spirit to determine a correct scriptural interpretation?
While the easiest example would be from love. If you read something in scripture that is against love (God is love) then we know that it is not scripture per say.

Example: Christians believed that God told them to go fight in the crusades. God did not tell them to do this but they believed He did.

Now take that example to the OT. People believe things about God that are not based on love but on their own understanding of God and what God wants. If they had of understood that Gods thoughts towards man is always good then they would not have committed so many atrocities in His name. Killing in the name of God thinking to do Him service.

One of the reasons Jesus had to come into the world was to reveal the Father to people. Now why would he have to do this if what the Jews had written about God was indeed correct? Why do you think we see a world of difference between Jesus portrait of God and the writers of the OT portrait of God? The view is so different that some people view the God of the OT as a different God then the NT.
 
Old 02-02-2018, 10:15 AM
 
Location: Land of the Caddo and Tonkawa
3,956 posts, read 1,490,772 times
Reputation: 5582
Considering Person A who know scriptures inside and out, but lives likes hell, and Person B, who knows only basic scripture, but lives a life close to Christ.... the person knowing less scripture in this case would be the more useful and healthy person. Just knowing scripture and "book knowledge" isn't where it's at. Some spend all their time reading and learning scripture, but not applying a damn bit of it. To proclaim that knowing scripture is the highest ideal is "to err", and miss the boat. The heart has to change, first and foremost.

That's largely why when Jesus was out and about among people, he wasn't seeking out "smarties" or scripture robots, he was seeking out those who's lives would be transformed. And the people who did varied from all walks of life.

Last edited by Thoreau424; 02-02-2018 at 10:23 AM..
 
Old 02-02-2018, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,070 posts, read 8,576,448 times
Reputation: 6006
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
While the easiest example would be from love. If you read something in scripture that is against love (God is love) then we know that it is not scripture per say.

Example: Christians believed that God told them to go fight in the crusades. God did not tell them to do this but they believed He did.
I agree that's not a "loving" interpretation -- I suspect that many would. But that's still a subjective interpretation -- someone else might think it's "tough love" for example. Get rid of the apostates before they create more apostates and more net human suffering (utilitarian argument). Ultimately everyone is simply interpreting it -- subjectively -- and will not necessarily agree on what is "loving".
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Now take that example to the OT. People believe things about God that are not based on love but on their own understanding of God and what God wants. If they had of understood that Gods thoughts towards man is always good then they would not have committed so many atrocities in His name. Killing in the name of God thinking to do Him service.
Still ... god literally commanded these kinds of atrocities (assuming the stories are literal history and the claim of divine command is literal). So you would have to deal with some cognitive dissonance here: you say "god's thoughts toward men are always good and they should not commit atrocities" and yet god says "go commit these atrocities".
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
One of the reasons Jesus had to come into the world was to reveal the Father to people. Now why would he have to do this if what the Jews had written about God was indeed correct? Why do you think we see a world of difference between Jesus portrait of God and the writers of the OT portrait of God? The view is so different that some people view the God of the OT as a different God then the NT.
It is humans evolving their god concepts.

Look at it this way, if god really tried to reveal his true monotheistic benevolent self in the OT it was certainly an epic fail. Brings his omnipotence into question, I'd think.

Either the god claims evolved, or the god evolved, I think it's the former, you think it's the latter, I guess.
 
Old 02-02-2018, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Canada
6,643 posts, read 3,998,284 times
Reputation: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424 View Post
Considering Person A who know scriptures inside and out, but lives likes hell, and Person B, who knows only basic scripture, but lives a life close to Christ.... the person knowing less scripture in this case would be the more useful and healthy person. Just knowing scripture and "book knowledge" isn't where it's at. Some spend all their time reading and learning scripture, but not applying a damn bit of it. To proclaim that knowing scripture is the highest ideal is "to err", and miss the boat. The heart has to change, first and foremost.

That's largely why when Jesus was out and about among people, he wasn't seeking out "smarties" or scripture robots, he was seeking out those who's lives would be transformed. And the people who did varied from all walks of life.
Totally agree, my best friend I don't think has ever read a bible yet shows more fruit of the spirit then many a christian. Jesus never said the scriptures will lead us into all truth, he said the Holy spirit would do that.
Salvation is not in a book, it is in the fruits of the spirit.
 
Old 02-02-2018, 04:08 PM
 
Location: Canada
6,643 posts, read 3,998,284 times
Reputation: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant View Post
I agree that's not a "loving" interpretation -- I suspect that many would. But that's still a subjective interpretation -- someone else might think it's "tough love" for example. Get rid of the apostates before they create more apostates and more net human suffering (utilitarian argument). Ultimately everyone is simply interpreting it -- subjectively -- and will not necessarily agree on what is "loving".

Still ... god literally commanded these kinds of atrocities (assuming the stories are literal history and the claim of divine command is literal). So you would have to deal with some cognitive dissonance here: you say "god's thoughts toward men are always good and they should not commit atrocities" and yet god says "go commit these atrocities".

It is humans evolving their god concepts
.

Look at it this way, if god really tried to reveal his true monotheistic benevolent self in the OT it was certainly an epic fail. Brings his omnipotence into question, I'd think.

Either the god claims evolved, or the god evolved, I think it's the former, you think it's the latter, I guess.
That is why we are to use agape love

You missed the point entirely. Just because someone writes or says God told them to tell you to do something does not mean God told them anything.

The writers of the OT wrote what they believed, it does not make what they believed about God true and this is shown in that they did not recognize Christ who was the express image of the Father.


Hmmm does a child have the same knowledge as one who has grown to full stature?
 
Old 02-03-2018, 12:49 AM
 
37,553 posts, read 25,268,086 times
Reputation: 5858
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Totally agree, my best friend I don't think has ever read a bible yet shows more fruit of the spirit then many a christian. Jesus never said the scriptures will lead us into all truth, he said the Holy spirit would do that.
Salvation is not in a book, it is in the fruits of the spirit.
 
Old 02-03-2018, 10:58 AM
 
4,037 posts, read 976,036 times
Reputation: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by granpa View Post
What did Jesus mean by this? What scriptures was he referring to? Does this mean that the Angels don't get married? Then how did Angels evolve?
the resurrected of the DEAD will not marry.... they will be like angels and not marry.. the living are living and probably still are married now and some for 2000 years.. Like Abraham surely did not give up his Sarah who was a beauty even in her oldest ages and kings wanted her. even if there is no sex in "heaven" aka New Jerusalem ( where the Father dwells) , those two will undoubtedly be each timeless companions when in that place.... but that is only one place .
but it is another story on earth the righteous/ lawful humans are having babies just read Rev and Ezekiel and Isaiah and, and , and well just read the whole bible.. you can only speak of inheritance law and laws of Jubilee and land laws being in the future but for one reason.. someone of your children will inherit !
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.


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