Egyptian Mythology

[Mark C.]

Hi Will.
  I tried to figure out the quote thing so that I could specifically address some of your points, but couldn't figure it out.  I will try and answer as best as I can from memory and hope we can communicate.
  Re. Church history and cannonical documents:
  Your contention that there has been a considerable evolution in what we now consider the Bible is false.  The more we find of older and ancient copies of Bible text the more we discover the remarkable reliability of our present day Bible.  Yes, there have always been spurious "gospels" and those small groups who followed them, but it has never been difficult to see that these writings strayed from the cannonical books.
  The idea that "we all have a different view of Jesus" is certainly not true.  There are orthodox beliefs that have been held since NT times and that remain solid to our present day.  These orthodox beliefs come from what the Bible teaches, and not from personal speculation.  If you asked a Bible believing Evangelical Christian who Jesus is you would get a consistent answer.  If you asked a Unitarian "Christian", you would get various answers, since they don't accept the Bible as authoritative.
  When reading  from accounts that declare themselves to be the "real" inside story of what went on in ancient history you have to ask the questions re. the writer:
  1.) Does he have a bias?  
  2.) Is the writer making it up?  How do we verify a single document?    
    The wonderful thing about Bible documents is we have many, many different copies that have been found, spread over a very wide region.  These have been preserved and copied prodigously over the years and textual science has been able to compile these texts with great accuracy.
   One can receive, through the Holy Spirit, the conviction that these Bible texts are both authoritative and able to communicate eternal life.  Faith in the scriptures is the gift of God and will deliver one from their own speculations re. the true nature of God.
                                     God Bless,  Mark  
     

[David Mauldin]

O.K. Tom let me restate it.  I don't think I or anyone else can give an exacting defenition of God. ( the answer to the question, "Where did God come from?"  Is clearly beyond our ability to comprehend so- we let it go!)  Yet I think you would agree that things like art and nature give us clues as to the existance of  God. When I walk through the woods or hear certain pieces of music I feel connected to something that is greater than myself.  Yet to describe exactly what this is is impossible. It or He or She is beyond words!   I don't think it is wrong to try to describe God (and this is the purpose of art)  but if anyone around me starts being dogmatic "The Koran says "Sch and such and you have to accept this as truth..." This is clearly someones attempt to controle their environment.

[Arthur]

David, we know who God is because Jesus showed him to us.  The answer for that which you seek is in the Bible, if you are willing to read it, and believe it.  Will you not come to him that you may have life? John 5:37-44

No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. John 1:18

36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. 37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. 38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. 39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. 41 I receive not honour from men. 42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you. 43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive. 44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?  John 5:36-44

Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.  John 6:46

Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.   John 8:19

Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God.  John 8:54

15 As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep...17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. John 10:15, 17

I and my Father are one. John 10:30

Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God.  John 13:3

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.  
John 14:6-7

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake. John 14:8-11

He that hateth me hateth my Father also.  John 15:23

I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.    John 16:28

O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.   John 17:25

[Will Jones]

Mark,

I wrote a lengthy reply to you which was lost when I went to post.  I do not have the time to type it all up again.  

You stated:  "Your contention that there has been a considerable evolution in what we now consider the Bible is false."  Have a look at this timeline from Professor Paul Hahn of the University of St. Thomas, Houston, Texas, and you will see that there was a lengthy process of deciding which books were canonical:

"C. AD 51-125:
The New Testament books are written, but during this same period other early Christian writings are produced--for example, the Didache (c. AD 70), 1 Clement (c. 96), the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100), and the 7 letters of Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110).
C. AD 140:
Marcion, a businessman in Rome, teaches that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the OT, and Abba, the kind father of the NT. So Marcion eliminates the Old Testament as scriptures and, since he is anti-Semitic, keeps from the NT only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke's gospel (he deletes references to Jesus' Jewishness). Marcion's "New Testament"--the first to be compiled--forces the mainstream Church to decide on a core canon: the four gospels and letters of Paul.
C. AD 200:
But the periphery of the canon is not yet determined. According to one list, compiled at Rome c. AD 200 (the Muratorian Canon), the NT consists of the 4 gospels; Acts; 13 letters of Paul (Hebrews is not included); 3 of the 7 General Epistles (1-2 John and Jude); and also the Apocalypse of Peter.
AD 367:
The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his Easter letter of 367. [Note: this is well after the Constantine's Edict of Toleration in 313 A.D.]
AD 904:
Pope Damasus, in a letter to a French bishop, lists the New Testament books in their present number and order.
AD 1442:
At the Council of Florence, the entire Church recognizes the 27 books, though does not declare them unalterable.
AD 1536:
In his translation of the Bible from Greek into German, Luther removes 4 NT books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelations) from their normal order and places them at the end, stating that they are less than canonical.
AD 1546:
At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirms once and for all the full list of 27 books as traditionally accepted."

I was not talking about how well MSS were copied, I was simply stating that the Bible we have today has not always existed as we claim to know it because many groups before and after the Council of Nicea have esteemed different writings.  They also had different views of truth and had different conceptions of Jesus.

My conception of Jesus is unique because it is based on my experience, readings, feelings, etc. which others do not share.  People hold different conceptions of Jesus just as people have different opinions about President Bush.  I agree, however, with you that "If you asked a Bible believing Evangelical Christian who Jesus is you would get a consistent answer."  I was not just talking about the doctrinal view of Jesus, but a personal view that is unique to my perception of him through my mind, beliefs, feelings, etc.  As D.B. stated, we all need to decide who Jesus is to us; we all hold personal views of who Jesus is because we need to INTERPRET whatever comes into our brain based on present beliefs and past experiences.  

My point in my last post was to try to add some balence to how people are trying to convince David that he is wrong for not holding the same views as them:  We need to interpret what we read, hear, experience, etc. and we need to recognize that many people in the past and present have held different views of God, Jesus and the Bible; therefore, we need to be humble and realize we could be wrong and need to be careful when we try to push our "truth" on others.  The light in us may be darkness because we are falible human beings with personal opinions that are (in major or minor ways) different than others.

I have suggested a few books in hopes that people will honor the search for truth by a continued desire to learn and grow by exploring different views.  What a wasted life if one just sticks to what backs up their own views.  The reason that I suggest reading so much is it helps cure you of dogmatism and it helps you to be more tolerant of different opinions.

[Arthur]

Let's get it straight as to what, exactly, it is that you are saying, Will.
Are you saying that Jesus may or may not be the Son of God.  He may or may not have come to earth to dwell among us.  He may or may not have died on the cross to save us from our sins.  He may or may not have been buried and risen from the dead on the third day--Are you saying it all depends on how you feel about it or what you happen to hold as an opinion?

When Jesus comes again to judge the world and reign forever, you can tell him your opinions and educated viewpoints.  I don't think he'll be too impressed, though.  

[Will Jones]

Arthur,

As I said, "Deitrich Bonhoeffer stated that the most important question facing modern Christians was deciding who Jesus is to us today."  I was standing up for the rights of people to decide for themselves who Jesus is/was for them AND stating that our conception of who Jesus is/was is personal and different than others.  Moreover, because we all do not have perfect access to knowledge/reality/truth/divine revelation because we have to interpret things with our limited minds, according to our beliefs/feelings and past experiences, we need to be humble--the light in us could be darkness.  We need to seek so that we may find.  We need to ask questions so that new doors of understanding will open.  That is why I encourage people to read the Bible AND scholarly works, historical documents, and books off the former Assembly's reading list so that we might have a better, broader understanding.  Narrow might be the way that leads to life but it does not mean we have to have a narrow mind.  Right now, we "peer through a glass darkly," but it does not mean we have to be in intellectual darkness because we are afraid to look beyond what we believe for fear that we may be wrong.  

This whole thread was started by David who says he has chosen not to be a Christian based on his past experience in the Assembly and his own personal studies of Egyptian Mythology, etc.  I recognize to some Christians who staunchly believe they know the truth--really, they just have a personal opinion of what the truth is--tend to be offended when someone states that they were Christians but decided, after much study, that they no longer believe as they once did.  (This bothers some people because it makes them think, even for a brief second, that they themselves might be wrong or off target, especially when they look around Chrisendom and see the differences in beliefs and practices.)  What I have seen in this thread is you and others try to prove David wrong when he was (in my interpretation) just trying to start a dialogue and offer interesting viewpoints about Egyptian practices.  

To furthur that dialogue about mythology, please read the books of Joseph Campbell and you will see that the elements of Christianity and Judaism appeared long before Jesus died on the cross.  The idea of a God-man, sacrifice, descent into the underworld, and resurrection is not unique to Christianity.  Does that call into question Christianity as David seems to hint or think?  I don't think it does and neither does Joseph Campell if you read what he says closely enough about how mythologies can enrich our lives.

It is up to me and you to constantly examine what we believe through personal study and seeking because if we simply decide on one view and then never question it again then we are in danger of having accepted a wrong view, a view we will not be able to know is wrong because we refuse to question it.

Think of it this way:  reality is a puzzle.  We will not be able to see everything due to our limitations as I mentioned previously, but we can collect pieces of the puzzle a piece at a time.  We will not get all the pieces and we may not be able to peice them all together, but the more pieces we have gathered helps us to get a better understanding of the puzzle of reality.  If you are just holding onto a few pieces and refuse to gather more or only gather pieces of similar colour, we are going to miss understanding the overall puzzle, the wonderful rainbow that reality is.    

How's that, Arthur?  Are you still gathering pieces of the puzzle or are you just sticking to a few peices or one colour?

[David Mauldin]

Thank you Will for being so balanced and objective.  I started reading Joseph Campbell (The Hero with a Thousand Faces) after I watched him on PBS with Bill Moyer.  He really opened my eyes!  After years of "Vision Quest" "ministry" from George I was able to put some things  together. I believe that all human beings have a capacity and desire to know themselves in a much higher more meaningful way I believe each person must find for themselves who they are and what their purpose is .  Each person is unique and complex beyond the dictates of someone elses opinions/doctrines. Right now I am studying the Egyptians.  What blows my mind is their beliefs! where did they come up with these ideas of Heaven/ressurection?  As I have been aluding to all the time These ideas  I suspect greatly influenced western civilization. Hope to share more later!

[Arthur]

Every day the sun gives light to the earth.  You would consider a man a fool, would you not, if he were to say, "I am seeking for the light" and yet closed his eyes never to open them.  At any moment of the day the man could make the choice to open his eyes and behold the blazing sun in all its brillance.  
Jesus said, "I am the light of the world; he that follows me will not walk in darkness but will have the light of life."  

Mankind is lost without divine relevation.  Mankind shall never find his way on his own.  Mankind is in the kindom of darkness, bound in slavery to the prince of darkness.  Only through divine intervention by our loving God are we delivered from this present evil age.

I see that both of you have bought the age-old lie.  The servant deceived Eve with the words "Has God said...", and then, "...you shall not surely die...in the day that you eat of it, then your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."
It appears that you again are following the lead of the evil one.  Would you question the authority of God's Word and rather believe the lie of the one who would destroy you?

As for the intellect.  God created the mind.  Intelligence and education are good things, but they are subservient to and work in unison with what you believe.  When you hear the Word of God and believe, then the light of God shines your path so that you can see and think properly.  You will not discover the truth or fix upon a moral or spiritual compass by trusting in your intellect alone.  You will be searching in the dark.  Taking that route you are doomed to be lost.

I believe in God and his Son Jesus Christ.  My foundation is secure, eternal, imperishable, and incapable of failure. You believe in man and his abilities.  Your foundation is temporary, passing, and will not stand in the day of judgement.

[Will Jones]

Arthur!  

When have I ever said that I was not a Christian!  You wrongly claim to know me: "I see that both of you have bought the age-old lie.... It appears that you again are following the lead of the evil one.... You will not discover the truth or fix upon a moral or spiritual compass by trusting in your intellect alone.  You will be searching in the dark.  Taking that route you are doomed to be lost."  You, through an BB, can so dogmatically inform me of my eternal fate when we have never met???    This type of aggressive dogmatism that you have just spewed out scares people away from accepting Christianity.  Such a textual blast of black-and-white absolute thinking in today's day and age of relativistic beliefs is off the mark when people prefer to follow the most popular religion--science.  Your street corner preaching style will only succeed in turning people off.  One of my points in posting here is you can't come across as "I'm right and your wrong and by the way you are hell bound if you don't believe what I believe."  You have to be more tactful if you hope to win souls.  

You asserted, "You believe in man and his abilities."  Have you read what I have written?  Did I not say that we are fallible human beings who have to be humble about what we think we know because we have to interpret whatever enters into our minds?  We need to interpret what we read and that is why there are so many different ideas about beliefs and practices in past and present Christendom.  You can say the Spirit guides or enlightens a person's mind, but it is clear that--due to so many differences in beliefs and practices over the last 2000 years--that people's minds are not perfect because they have not all arrived at the same view of truth.  Thus, to claim your truth is THE TRUTH versus so many other views of truth reeks of spiritual pride the Assembly was famous for.

You asked, "Would you question the authority of God's Word and rather believe the lie of the one who would destroy you?"  You equate "the Word of God" with the Bible.  Some Christians and scholars equate God's word or divine revelation with the gospel, the good news of salvation, but not the word-for-word writings of the Bible.  As I said, early church fathers and Luther did not take the whole Bible as the word-for-word Word of God but as a vessel that contained the truth of what God was trying to communicate to us.  Thus, some believe that the Bible is not THE TRUTH, but reveals truth to us about the message of the gospel.

As I demonstrated in my earlier posting, the Bible as we know it has evolved over time.  The first step to deciding what books were to be in the Bible occurred in 325 AD and were not officially approved for hundreds of years afterwards! (Check out the timeline I posted.)  

If you study history, you will see that the a fundamentalist view of the Bible as the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" did not come about until the Princeton scholars in the 19th Century attempted to fight the claims of science which were gaining popularity.  By claiming that the Bible was "the Word of God" in all things including science and history, instead of a work inspired by God but written by men, they opened the Bible up for attack.  People started showing that many passages in the Bible were not scientifically sound if you interpret the Bible literally (sun standing still, sun circling the earth, earth that has a dome over it that keeps the waters in heaven back, heaven held up with pillars, windows of heaven opening, God dwelling in a universal heaven, Jesus ascending into that heaven, age of the earth/universe, etc).  Read the following:  The World's Most Famous Court Trial, Tennessee Evolution Case: A Complete Stenographic Report of the Famous Court Test of the Anti-Evolution Act, at Dayton July 10 to 21, 1925, Including Speeches and Arguments of Attorneys, 1925.  The lawyers rip apart a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3 by showing, as scholars today agree, that that the two creation stories included in Genesis 1-3 do not jive perfectly.  Because I have read many books about the Bible--from Christian and secular authors--such information does not negatively affect my faith.  I know from personal study that Fundamentalist views of the Bible as the literal word-for-word Word of God are a relatively new development in Christianity.  Thus, it does not bother me when I see that the resurrection stories do not jive perfectly or other things that appear to be discrepancies.  I revere the Bible as a great book and accept that the Bible was the work of men and inspired by God to reveal the truth that God loves us and is willing to forgive us.  See Psalm 130, for example, which I just read this morning.  God forgives us and that is good news!

The Bible is a message from God through humans, not a perfectly accurate textbook on science and history--though the Bible is often very reliable in these two areas for its time!  If you believe that the Bible is the Word of God for all time, then do you great your brethren with a holy kiss and do you own slaves?  No, things have changed since then.  It is up to us to decide what God's will is for us in this modern age.  

There is more in heaven and earth, Arthur, than is dreamt of in you [and everyone else's] present philosophy.  We all have to keep gathering more pieces of the puzzle of reality by expanding our understanding through personal study.  Don't just stick to the pieces that reinforce what you believe.  If you truly seek to know the truth then you need to explore what is out there.  Are you expanding yourself, Arthur or only tightly grasping a few pieces of the puzzle?

Here are a few links that I give as some examples but I do not necessarily agree with everything in them:

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rossuk/c-scienc.htm

http://mypage.uniserve.ca/~tfrisen/science/bbl/science2.htm

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/1/story_191_1.html (a portion of Clarence Darrow's examination of William Jennings Bryan at the 1925 Scopes trial.  Very, very interesting!)

[Oscar]

Arthur,

You posted, "Every day the sun gives light to the earth".

So you believe the sun gives light to the earth!  Well, I guess that means that you have bought into the Devil's lie too.

You see Arthur, the sun is burning by nuclear fusion.  There is a region at the very core of the sun where the hydrogen of the sun, under tremendous pressure and heat, is being converted into helium.  As this happens energy is released as electro-magnetic radiation, some of which we percieve as light.

In the sun's interior, because of the tremendous pressure and density, it takes a photon 50,000 years to reach the surface.  

So, when you "see the light" of the morning sun, you are experiencing something at least 50,000 years and 9 minutes old!  (it takes the light 9 minutes to get here from the sun).  It doesn't quite fit the 6,000 years.

Arthur, this is just physics, not demonic deception.

Oh yes, let me warn you against two of the silly things about the sun and light you will read on the YEC websites.

1. The sun burns by gravitational contraction, proved by the "fact" that 2/3 of the nutrinos are missing from the fusion radiation.  The "missing" nutrinos were detected  last year, they just had to adjust the sensors to a slightly different setting.

2. The speed of light has slowed down.

Remember, Arthur, that E=MC2.  E is energy released, M is mass, C is the speed of light IN A VACUUM, that is in space,  not in a denser medium where it can be slowed in laboratory experiments.

If you think this is more demonic deception, just take a look at a film of a hydrogen bomb exploding.  These work by fusion.

If you increase the value of C to infinity, a la Slusher's speculations, the energy release would undergo a corresponding increase, SQUARED!

Adam, Eve, and all the trees, "kinds" and even the dirt would be disentigrated.   Burnt toast X infinity.

Arthur, you keep saying that only you believe the Bible.

I do not question that the Bible is God's inerrant word.  I just question the interpretive system that YEC's use to try to understand it.

God bless,

Thomas Maddux

[Arthur]

"We don't know the millionth part of one percent about anything.  We don't know what water is.  We don't know what light is.  We don't know what heat is.  We have a lot of hypotheses about these things, but that is all.  But we do not let our ignorance about these thngs deprive us of their use."
Thomas Edison

Well now, Tom, do you so hate believing in what the Bible says about creation that you now side with a Buddhist and a guy who thinks Joseph Campbell is a good read?  
Are you so quick to attack your brother in the midst of this discussion?
That's sad.  Is that what "higher learning" gets you --makes an induhvidual to be so "open-minded" that he forsakes sound doctrine?  That's a shame.  

Thank you for the "enlightenment", but how is it exactly that you know that it takes light 50,000 years to reach the earth?

The Bible says, "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light...And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. "

God set the sun in its place on the fourth day of creation.  This is what the Bible says.  This is what I  believe.   I don't see anything about 50,000 years for photons escaping the sun, etc.  You believe in the explanation that you gave me.  That's fine, you believe what you want.  But...how do you know it is true?  Have you been in the sun to see this process (as if it indeed could even be seen)?  You put out these numbers and this explanation, but I have a feeling that you don't know what you're talking about and just picked it up out of the latest issue of Science News.  Problem is, though those physicists know about 100 times what I do about nuclear fusion--that still is ten to the power of infinity times less than what God knows about the universe that he created.

I don't believe you when you say "I do not question that the Bible is God's inerrant word."

[Arthur]

Arthur!  
When have I ever said that I was not a Christian!  You wrongly claim to know me: "I see that both of you have bought the age-old lie....
 You, through an BB, can so dogmatically inform me of my eternal fate when we have never met???    

Will, you have not explicitly said that you are not a Christian.  But the other things that you said sure make it sound like you aren't, or at least shipwrecked in your faith.  
I did not say that you are not a Christian.  If you are one, then you need to get back on track and forget all this nonsense that you've been taught about the Bible evolving over time and getting its stories from other sources, etc.  

Yes, there are things that we can be certain of and say dogmatically.  The Bible says,
"Hold fast the form of sound words",
"But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of",
"Preach the word",
"Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.",
"But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine", and
"Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. " and other such verses.
These things, namely the good news of Jesus Christ--his diety, humanity, perfect life, death as the atonement for the sins of mankind, burial, resurrection, ascension and second coming, etc.--I will hold to.

This type of aggressive dogmatism that you have just spewed out scares people away from accepting Christianity.  Such a textual blast of black-and-white absolute thinking in today's day and age of relativistic beliefs is off the mark when people prefer to follow the most popular religion--science.  Your street corner preaching style will only succeed in turning people off.  One of my points in posting here is you can't come across as "I'm right and your wrong and by the way you are hell bound if you don't believe what I believe."  You have to be more tactful if you hope to win souls.  

No.  You're wrong.  See how easy that is.  Will, it's OK to hold firmly to something you believe in.  We're supposed to, otherwise your faith will be shipwrecked.  Yes, this world is full of relativistic beliefs.  We, as Christians, have a firm foundation.  A solid rock on which to stand.  Jesus is the Rock-eternal, immovable, imperishable. We preach Jesus that others may be rescued from this present evil age and also find their footing for their faith on that solid Rock.  
If you think what I said was offensive, how about the first thing that Jesus said when he began his ministry? -- "Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
And he said many other such things, e.g. "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. "
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."
Jesus knew what he believed in and said it.  He said it because it was the truth and because he loves us.
Will, you've been duped by the wishy-washy, we-can't-say-what's-right-and-what's-wrong relativistic society today. Problem is, they are all in the clutches of the evil one.  He is the father of lies and a big whopper is that you can't firmly beleive in the Bible as God's Word.  Remember "Hast God said...?"

You asserted, "You believe in man and his abilities."  Have you read what I have written?  Did I not say that we are fallible human beings who have to be humble about what we think we know because we have to interpret whatever enters into our minds?  We need to interpret what we read and that is why there are so many different ideas about beliefs and practices in past and present Christendom.  You can say the Spirit guides or enlightens a person's mind, but it is clear that--due to so many differences in beliefs and practices over the last 2000 years--that people's minds are not perfect because they have not all arrived at the same view of truth.  Thus, to claim your truth is THE TRUTH versus so many other views of truth reeks of spiritual pride the Assembly was famous for.

I agree, we are not perfect, and neither is our understanding.  But there are certain things that we can be assured of without a doubt, as I mentioned before. Read I Cor 2.  If any of us has any understanding in spiritual matters, it is because God revealed it to us.  The fact that there are many different views doesn't mean anything and you shouldn't let it detract you from THE TRUTH.   The truth exists and can be known.  Some people know it and some don't.  God is in control, so we don't have to worry about it.

You asked, "Would you question the authority of God's Word and rather believe the lie of the one who would destroy you?"  You equate "the Word of God" with the Bible.  

Yep.

<continued>

[Arthur]

<continued>

Some Christians and scholars equate God's word or divine revelation with the gospel, the good news of salvation, but not the word-for-word writings of the Bible.  As I said, early church fathers and Luther did not take the whole Bible as the word-for-word Word of God but as a vessel that contained the truth of what God was trying to communicate to us.  Thus, some believe that the Bible is not THE TRUTH, but reveals truth to us about the message of the gospel.

I don't care what some christians and scholars or Luther believed.  I know what the Bible says, and that's what I believe.  

As I demonstrated in my earlier posting, the Bible as we know it has evolved over time.  The first step to deciding what books were to be in the Bible occurred in 325 AD and were not officially approved for hundreds of years afterwards! (Check out the timeline I posted.)  

Nope.  Man didn't decide what the Bible would be, God did.  That council just officially recognized what was the obvious case.

If you study history, you will see that the a fundamentalist view of the Bible as the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" did not come about until the Princeton scholars in the 19th Century attempted to fight the claims of science which were gaining popularity.  By claiming that the Bible was "the Word of God" in all things including science and history, instead of a work inspired by God but written by men, they opened the Bible up for attack. People started showing that many passages in the Bible were not scientifically sound if you interpret the Bible literally (sun standing still, sun circling the earth, earth that has a dome over it that keeps the waters in heaven back, heaven held up with pillars, windows of heaven opening, God dwelling in a universal heaven, Jesus ascending into that heaven, age of the earth/universe, etc).  

There is nothing contradictory in the Bible, and all scienctific evidence supports what has already been written.

The Bible is a message from God through humans, not a perfectly accurate textbook on science and history--though the Bible is often very reliable in these two areas for its time!  If you believe that the Bible is the Word of God for all time, then do you great your brethren with a holy kiss and do you own slaves?  No, things have changed since then.  It is up to us to decide what God's will is for us in this modern age.  

Sure, pucker up, Will    No, I don't own slaves.  The Bible doesn't say I should own slaves.  God leads his sheep, even today.

There is more in heaven and earth, Arthur, than is dreamt of in you [and everyone else's] present philosophy.  We all have to keep gathering more pieces of the puzzle of reality by expanding our understanding through personal study.  Don't just stick to the pieces that reinforce what you believe.  If you truly seek to know the truth then you need to explore what is out there.  Are you expanding yourself, Arthur or only tightly grasping a few pieces of the puzzle?

Yes, I'm looking forward to it. I agree it must be wonderful beyond our imagination!  No, I'm not doing anything with a puzzle.  I do try to understand about life.  The Bible and Creation are very deep and wondrous.  I believe the truth that is plainly evident.  The truth will never change, by my depth of understanding it hopefully will.

Arthur

John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
II Tim 3:13-17
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
II Tim 4:1-5
1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
II Pet 1:19-21
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

[Joe Sperling]

"In the Beginning God createds the Heaven and the earth.

And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

And God said Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."

Arthur--you have never answered my question regarding this progression. God comes upon an earth without form and void, creates day and night, divides darkness from light--yet, he hasn't created the sun or moon or stars yet. If you follow what happens next it never says God created the earth---it says "And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear".

There was an evening and a morning in which day and night are created, darkness is separated from light, yet there are no stars are sun or moon. How can there be day and night without a sun? Yet it says day and night were created before the sun.

The earth yields grass on the third day---but guess what? There still isn't a sun yet. The sun and the stars are created on the fourth day! How does the earth bring forth grass and trees etc. without a sun?

The reason I am mentioing this is because I believe God created the world, but if you read the progression in Genesis in the order they were created it seems not to make sense. Day and night before a sun is created? The earth yielding grass with no light from a star or a sun?

Arthur---you believe everything "literally"---can you explain this progression of events in a literal way? Could there be an earth "before" the sun and stars are created?

I believe in Creation---but I think there may be far far more to it than the literal interpretation you adhere to.

take care,  Joe

[Will Jones]

Arthur,

This is written in a positive tone of dialogue; it is not a diatribe.    

I did not say that you are not a Christian.  If you are one, then you need to get back on track and forget all this nonsense that you've been taught about the Bible evolving over time and getting its stories from other sources, etc.  

I have not been "taught" this; I learned it through years of study and research.  Check out the oldest story that we have in existence--THE EPIC OF GILGAMESH--and you will see most of the themes of Judaism and Christianity in it (like the hero being a god-man, the snake that steals eternal life away from humankind, and the flood) existed long before the Bible.  The first chapter of Genesis was written in reaction to the Babylonian creation story to show that the one God is greater than all other gods.  And there are two creation stories in Genesis if you look closely enough and read scholarly books about Genesis.  

But, you said,

I don't care what some christians [sic] and scholars or Luther believed.

And that is your problem.  You only want to believe what you want to believe and you will ignore anything that does not match up with what you have been taught.  Very dangerous because it is self-imposed blindness.  You don't want to be humble as I have suggested many times because the light in us could be darkness.  

People must make the commitment to themselves to try and learn the truth regardless of what the truth is.  A scientist is allowed to have an initial hypothesis before doing an experiment and then after they have observed the results of their experiment they then make conclusions.  You refuse to move past the first stage of a logical, scientific understanding because you refuse to look beyond your own faith/hypothesis at potential evidence.  I have examined a lot of the evidence and, with that evidence that I also see as the leading of God to a greater understanding, I have formed my opinions.

I wanted to know the truth about the reality around me and I kept searching for it (and still keep searching).  I was surprised to discover that many of the things that I had been taught in Christian circles were not fully correct.  Through reading church history, early church fathers/histories, etc. I came to see that
(1) there was a wide range of ideas and practices that have changed over time.  The Church today is certainly different than it was in the past.
(2) I saw how Church leaders tried to silence the discoveries of science for hundreds of years because science relied on observation of evidence rather than on the authority of what some ancients said.  Galileo is just one of many examples of how the old view of the world were out of date in the context of the old view of the universe as depicted in the Bible:  sun standing still, sun circling the earth, earth that has a dome over it that keeps the waters in heaven back, heaven held up with pillars, windows of heaven opening, winds blowing in the four corners of heaven, God dwelling in a universal heaven, Jesus ascending into that heaven, age of the earth/universe, etc.  
(3) I was also surprised to see how earlier believers like Luther regarded "scripture" and that the Fundamentalist view of the Bible was a modern development, started at Princeton to combat the rise of scientific views that were getting a voice as religion's hold weakened in the 19th Century.  
Therefore, Arthur, you are the one who is "off track" by holding to the fundamentalist notions of an "inerrant and infallible Bible" that is perfect in all matters of science and history, etc. because this is a relatively new development of how to interpret the Bible!  Augustine and Luther and many other Christians esteem because of their contributions to the advance of Christianity criticized the human mistakes in the Bible; thus, they did not accept the Bible the way Fundamentalists do today!  Fundamentalist notions of the Bible are built on the sand of reaction against science, not on personal faith in Jesus as one's Lord and saviour!  Thus, I don't appreciate you saying that I am not a Christian or have made shipwreck of my faith simply because I have a more historical view of the Bible than you do.  

Man didn't decide what the Bible would be, God did.  That council just officially recognized what was the obvious case.

 
This is just a bold statement--a belief--that you, or anyone else for that matter, cannot back up.  I have given a clear timeline of how the various different books esteemed as "scripture" came to be gathered in what we know as the Bible today.  You just made a bold statement based on a relatively new development of Fundamentalism, i.e., that the Bible is inerrant and infallible and that God, through man, wrote it.  Does it not seem strange to you that so many Christians before you had a different idea of what "the Bible" was in terms of what books should be in it and who we should accept/interpret them?  No, because you believe what you want to believe and refuse to see anything else.  I accept the Bible as a human document inspired by God without it affecting my beliefs because so far we are talking about history and science, not matters of faith.  

There is nothing contradictory in the Bible, and all scienctific [sic] evidence supports what has already been written.

I take it you have done quite an extensive study to prove this?  It only takes ONE passage in the Bible that does not jive with science to disprove your bold statement, a statement that is a slap in the face to university educated people who are Christians or are thinking of becoming Christians.  The Bible was written by men (inspired by God--not a form of automatic writing that took writers over) who wrote according to the knowledge of their culture and time.  If you accept the Bible as a book written by men and inspired by God, then it is OK if there are a few human mistakes in terms of history and science.  As you quoted in 2 Timothy, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."  It never says anywhere in the Bible that it is perfectly accurate in terms of history and science!  On the other hand, it is a book you can use to establish doctrine in spiritual matters and in how one may conduct their life so " the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."  It says it right there in the Bible!  Did Jesus ever warn us that "One day THE book shall come and you shall follow it because it is THE TRUTH."  NO, Jesus said that HE was the truth by the example he set for us all to follow.  

Now guess what happens when people like you (who claim to represent what a Christian is) refuse to look at the evidence of history/science and boldly claim like the Princeton scholars did in the 19th Century that the Bible is a perfectly reliable document in all matters of faith, science, history, etc. ?  You end up discrediting the Bible when scholars and scientists point out passages in the Bible that do not jive!

(1) There are plenty of concepts that I mentioned above like the sun standing still where the cosmological conceptions of the past do not jive with what we know through scientific observation, etc.  This blows your earlier statement out of the water!  The people who wrote the Bible under the inspiration of God wrote according to the knowledge they had at the time, knowledge we now know to be incorrect.

(2) That the Bible contains literal, absolute statements that do not jive with scientific possibility.  One example, where did all the water come from in Genesis 7:19 if Mount Everest was also covered?  For more examples, contrast the two Genesis creation stories like one poster has already done on this thread.

(3) Jesus in one of the synoptic gospels stated very clearly that the mustard seed is the smallest seed on earth.  He was speaking in the context of what people knew at the time, but there are smaller seeds than a mustard seed.  Does that mean Jesus was wrong or not the Word made flesh?  No, he spoke to people OF THAT TIME ACCORDING TO THEIR CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING.  We are no longer living in the same time or culture that the Bible was written and we need to take that into consideration.  That is how we need to interpret the Bible, not as a book of science and history, but as a book that can tell us what we should believe about the God of love and how we should live.

Keep gathering your puzzle pieces, Arthur.  Don't be afraid of studying science and history to get a better understanding of Christianity.