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.
Acts 17:16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. 17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
They would have been discussing scripture in the synagogue and then the same subject in the market place.
Also Corinth:
KJV Acts 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;
2 And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them.
3 And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. 4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
KJV 1 Corinthians 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
Referencing:
KJV Jeremiah 9:24 But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.
Obviously there were very few of what we call NT books available, as he wrote most of them, but he did quote the OT frequently and would in a synagogue as such was a part of such meetings there.
He used scripture to support his message.
So when Paul preached to them, why in verse 32 did they sneer about the resurrection from the dead if they had earlier been listening to him teaching from the scriptures.
He did not speak scripture to the Athenians when he preached who the unknown God is. . Acts 17:22-32
I really don't have the need or the ability to prove anything about the Gospel to anyone. The bible tells us that the "Things of God are NONSENSE to the NATURAL man". We are also told that the "Gospel is an OFFENCE" to the natural man. God's simple plan of redemption is all we are called upon to share with nonbelievers. God uses this "nonsense" as Paul calls it to bring people to faith. At that point they will become interested in exploring the deeper things of God and hopefully with The Holy Spirit's illuminating power they will come to a fuller understanding of the things of God.
Those who so strongly believe in the bible, I wonder how many have read Thomas Paine "The Age of Reason"?
Paine does a masterful job of showing the bible is errant, by using the bible.... not an outside source.
If you haven't read it, you should. Keep an open mind. There are many OT 'prophecies' Paine shows are false, and why, using only the bible.
My bet is not one of the fundies will actually read it.
Paine's reason for not believing the virgin birth. He chooses not to believe it because ''it is hearsay upon hearsay, and I do not choose to rest my belief upon such evidence.'' Then he should have rejected all ancient history.
When also I am told that a woman called the Virgin Mary, said, or gave out, that she was with child without any cohabitation with a man, and that her betrothed husband, Joseph, said that an angel told him so, I have a right to believe them or not; such a circumstance required a much stronger evidence than their bare word for it; but we have not even this — for neither Joseph nor Mary wrote any such matter themselves; it is only reported by others that they said so — it is hearsay upon hearsay, and I do not choose to rest my belief upon such evidence. Age of Reason, Part First, Section 2
Paine makes the following claim that if Jesus wanted to establish a new religion, He would undoubtedly have written the system Himself, or procured that it be written in His life-time. This is simply an unwarranted assumption on his part. Nothing but an opinion. Jesus had stated that he had many more things to say to the apostles but could not say them at that time because they could not bear them. But He promised that when the Holy Spirit came, He would guide them unto all the truth (John 16:12-15). The result are the Books of the New Testament.
Had it been the object or the intention of Jesus Christ to establish a new religion, he would undoubtedly have written the system himself, or procured it to be written in his life-time. But there is no publication extant authenticated with his name. All the books called the New Testament were written after his death. He was a Jew by birth and by profession; and he was the son of God in like manner that every other person is — for the Creator is the Father of All. Age of Reason, Part First, Section 5
Paine then asks why Jesus had to die on the cross instead of some other way. The ignores the fact that it was God the Father's pre-determined plan that Jesus go to the cross to bear the sins of the world (Acts 2:23).
The Christian Mythologists tell us, that Christ died for the sins of the world, and that he came on purpose to die. Would it not then have been the same if he had died of a fever or of the small-pox, of old age, or of anything else? Age of Reason, Part First, Section 5
I am old school when it comes to the scriptures, and if it is not found in the scriptures or is in the same spirit of the scriptures i do not take any heed to what is being said, it is the main reason i reject orthodox fundamental christianity, because its beliefs are not scriptual nor more importantly in the spirit of the scriptures. Do the scriptures prove Jesus is the Christ ? Yes, do we need them to prove that he is ?. Not at all
When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son of God!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
On the contrary. Fundamentalism adheres to the teachings of the Bible. Such as the following:
The term "fundamentalism" has its roots in the Niagara Bible Conference (1878–1897), which defined those tenets it considered fundamental to Christian belief. The term was popularized by the The Fundamentals, a collection of twelve books on five subjects published in 1910 and funded by the brothers Milton and Lyman Stewart. This series of essays came to be representative of the "Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy", which appeared late in the 19th century within some Protestant denominations in the United States, and continued in earnest through the 1920s. The first formulation of American fundamentalist beliefs can be traced to the Niagara Bible Conference and, in 1910, to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, which distilled these into what became known as the "five fundamentals":[8]
Biblical inspiration and the inerrancy of scripture as a result of this
Virgin birth of Jesus
Belief that Christ's death was the atonement for sin
Bodily resurrection of Jesus
Historical reality of the miracles of Jesus
8. Jump up ^ George M. Marsden, "Fundamentalism and American Culture", (1980) part III
I disagree, its roots are in handed down traditions, which traditions have leavened tbe whole of scripture. It looks like bread, but tastes like it ? No way Jose.
You are disagreeing that fundamentalism believes the virgin birth of Jesus, the atoning death of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the historical reality of the miracles of Jesus? You are claiming that these things are not taught in the Bible?
You are disagreeing that fundamentalism believes the virgin birth of Jesus, the atoning death of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the historical reality of the miracles of Jesus? You are claiming that these things are not taught in the Bible?
I disagree with what the orthodox fundamentalists have made of them.
I disagree with what the orthodox fundamentalists have made of them.
For instance, the Atonement has been made int"no acceptable mechanism for atonement but Penal Substitution."
But the main thing to me is that they have made these positions actually secondary to the message of the Way of life taught by Jesus: that what we believe about Jesus is more important than how we live it out.
For instance, the Atonement has been made int"no acceptable mechanism for atonement but Penal Substitution."
But the main thing to me is that they have made these positions actually secondary to the message of the Way of life taught by Jesus: that what we believe about Jesus is more important than how we live it out.
That too, and many others things, making that which testifies of the Christ of no effect.
Christians have to get away from this idea that Jesus' death was a blood atonement. Jesus never once in Mark's gospel, the most accurate gospel we have, uses either blood or atonement in describing His death, either alone or combined. Jesus specifically spoke only about his death. He never once mentioned anything to the effect that His blood would be an atonement to appease God's wrath (that came much later as the Jesus legend and theology grew and developed). Jesus described the capacity of His death only once that I am aware when He said,
Quote:
45 For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
All this stuff about blood atonement and appeasing God's wrath against sinners came during the medieval Age and Reformation. Paul started polluting the doctrine when he and John started using words like propitiation and substitution and atonement instead of just sticking with Jesus own language to describe the nature of His death, that being a "ransom" pure and simple. Once men started dragging their own theologies and terminologies into the soup that's when Christianity started to derail big-time and has been off the tracks ever since.
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.
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.
and came unto them.
