Missing Boy in the N.C. Mountains Found Alive.

[Thomas Rogers]

BigBear said:

It's obvious from your previous posts that you are an articulate, intelligent, and well-read individual.

Okay, that's about the third time you have done that. Please don't do it again. You are an intelligent person and you have shown here on this thread that you can articulate yourself quite well.



I encouraged the reading of other books, not by you in general but for all those that I stereotypically view are like you (that's my flaw), so that people understand that being challenged on the content of the Bible isn't something that need diminish one's faith, but can actually strengthen it; and that it needn't lessen one's understanding and meaning of the bible, but can actually increase it.



Faith is a great thing. Tradition too is a wonderful thing. But faith that is blind faith, and tradition that is dogmatic and done because "it's always been done this way" starts to become a shield; a man-made shield, that is comfortable and protects the believer, but is a shield nonetheless. That shield protects their faith from those that might question it, and it separates the believer from many outside influences...and ultimately, it separates the believer from the word of Christ.



Yes, that's right, blind faith and living the Bible as you have been taught by man means you have a sheltered, man-made, and handed-down by man version of Jesus' teaching. Likewise, the following of that faith and that specific, man-made version of those teachings is almost always done by today's Christians in a safe place (a church) among a number of people that more or less think the same way and observe the same ritualistic teachings.



Jesus himself walked among the sinners. He entered places of sin, and preached and helped people that the Pharisees thought should not be taught and helped. He discussed controversial things with people and be broke many the rituals.



I fear that for many churches today IF Jesus came down again and preached a modern-day version of the sermon on the mount that he would again be crucified (maybe not literally), but this time by many of our Christian fundamentalists...



I say this because he might very well say things like:

I know it has been said that a man shall not lay with another man, but let me say to you, that the power of my father's word is love, and love is the greatest thing, and if there is true, pure love between two men then that is pleasing to my father.

What would you do if Jesus came down and said that?



What would your church do to me if I visited as a lay pastor and posited that question one Sunday?



TJR

 

[Thomas Rogers]

R Shek, I just posited a scenario of Jesus' return. Logically with the world as screwed up as it is today (and will most likely be when he returns), we can only assume there will be a third book and a new covenant.



As I asked before, I wonder what his next sermon on the mount will look like and what he will restate?



TJR

 

[Josh Langel]

R Shek:

There is NOTHING in the bible that says anything about mortal vs venial sin.

I never said it was in the Bible.

That is not marriage in the church or per GOD's word. Marriage is a creation of GOD.

Um, cam people marry outside the church? Yes. Okay then.

Homosexuality is a sin. It is also a choice, just as alcohalism, drug abuse and lying.

Right, and so is retardation and skin color; both those can be cured with some good ol'fashion counseling, AA meetings, and jail time. I think you need to get out into the real world and meet some people. You will realize that this isn't just a habit or choice.



I just hope you don't cut off your tongue, pluck your eyes, or chop off your hands because your Bible says to. Oh, or will you interpret that as a metaphor and not as literal?



Then again, you have the right to believe what you want. I respect that. I just rather not be so careless with my assumptions of other people.

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Gay marriage will likely be another example in the near future in more and more states (there will be no laws prohibiting such, though there may be morality issues with said).

Problem with this arguement is that more and more states have consitutional amendments banning Gay marriage... North Carolina just added thier name to the list.



Let's count the places where it's legal....



1) Massachusets

2) ....



Let's count the places where it's not legal:

1) Arkansas

2) Missouri

3) Texas

4) North Carolina

5) South Carolina

6) Hawaii**

7) Nebraska

8) Alaska

9) Nevada

10) Mississippi

11) Montana

12) Oregon

13) Colorado

14) Tennessee

15) Alabama

16) Georgia

17) Kentucky

18) Louisianna

19) Michigan

20) North Dakota

21) Ohio

22) Oklahoma

23) Utah

24) Kansas

25) Idaho

26) South Dakota

27) Wisconsin

28) Virginia



Laws Pending (either for or against union of some sort):

1) Connecticut

2) Illinois

3) Maine

4) New Jersey

5) New York

6) Rhode Island



Civil Unions are permitted in:

1) Connecticut

2) New Jersey

3) Vermont



Domestic Partnerships Allow:

1) California

2) Washington D.C.

3) Maine

4) Hawaii



Marriage Undefined:

1) New Mexico

2) Rhode Island



RECAP:

Unions of some type allowed: 7 + D.C.

Unions of some type not allowed: 28

Other: 15



28:7 in the states. That's 4:1 or more than enough to pass a federal amendment.



Facts don't lie. Politicans do.

 

[Jim Reeves]

Okay, that's about the third time you have done that. Please don't do it again.

It most certainly was not meant to offend, but to convey that I understood that your opinions were well-thought out . I will not do it again, as you wish.

I know it has been said that a man shall not lay with another man, but let me say to you, that the power of my father's word is love, and love is the greatest thing, and if there is true, pure love between two men then that is pleasing to my father.

What would you do if Jesus came down and said that?

Then I would take it as His will and the Truth. Until then, I can only go by what He has said to date, and not assume what He might say next based on my perception of things.



I feel that this thread has taken a turn towards anger and resentment, and thus will bow out of it. If I have said anything that has offended anyone, I do apologize. May God Bless you.

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Right, and so is retardation and skin color; both those can be cured with some good ol'fashion counseling, AA meetings, and jail time. I think you need to get out into the real world and meet some people. You will realize that this isn't just a habit or choice.

Not the same. There is A HUGE difference between "being born" with a handicap or a skin color or hair color or eye color or some physical attribute. Homosexuality is NOT A PHYSICAL Attribute. It is a mental condition (not in anyway related to mental retardation). Homosexuality is something that can be changed by choosing not to (ok, maybe it's not that simple for some). I choose to be heterosexual. You don't have a choice if you are handicapped. That's the way it is pending a miricle (which has and can happen).

I just hope you don't cut off your tongue, pluck your eyes, or chop off your hands because your Bible says to. Oh, or will you interpret that as a metaphor and not as literal?

Show me where this is punishment under the New Covenant.

R Shek, I just posited a scenario of Jesus' return. Logically with the world as screwed up as it is today (and will most likely be when he returns), we can only assume there will be a third book and a new covenant.

It is definately a different world than the last time he was here. The good news is that once he returns, perfection will exist for millenia to come.

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

BigBear, I'd like to see where you get your information, other than Belief. What I have found is based on Fact, research done by Theologens (sp) and Bible scholors. None of my above statements are, so called, tongue-in-cheek - period. Do your homework. You may call it blasfamy, but I take a (so called) new age approach to the interpretation of the Bible, at least the New Testament. Take a look at how many times the New Testament has been rewritten.



TJR, You forgot to mention the Kabbalah as well. I do know that the Catholic Jesuits study the Kabbalah.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

BigBear,



Actually, I meant to quote where you said that "YOU" were not intelligent and articulate and ask that you not do that again. I think you have proven here otherwise. No need to put yourself down again and again.



TJR

 

[Thomas Rogers]

R Shek, I submit to you that it is Unconstitutional for the US Govt to establish a definition of marriage and to thereby recognize or not recognize marriages based on said definition. I say this because of the 1st Amendment. One's church, moral code, and peers should be able to define what constitutes marriage. Anything else has the govt defining morality and potentially religion for its people.



The biggest reason most that are against gay marriage have with said is that it redefines and cheapens what they believe if a holy institution defined by their religion.



That fact alone clearly makes the point that the issue isn't gay marriage, but our govt's recognition and definition of marriage in the first place (straight or gay).



Get the govt out of the marriage business and the problem goes away.



TJR

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

TJR, I couldn't agree with you more on getting the government out of the business of marriage.

 

[Jim Reeves]

As i said before, this thread has gotten close to the line where feeling get hurt and anger is stirred. My comment was made purely because I didn't understand your including the winky faced icon. Your accusation that you have facts where I have "blind faith" is both unfair and unfounded. I too, can read. I too, have done much reading , and don't require admonition to "do my own homework"



" Basically, the book of Acts was written by Luke. But Luke fails to mention the destruction of Jerusalem in 79. A.D., nor does he mention the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65). Since Acts is a historical document dealing with the church, we would naturally expect such important events to be recorded if Acts was written after the fact. Since Acts 1:1-2 mentions that it is the second writing of Luke, the gospel of Luke was written even earlier. Also, Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple in the gospels: "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:5, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1). Undoubtedly, if Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written after the destruction of the Temple, they would have included the fulfillment of Christ's prophecy in them. Since they don't, it is very strong indication that they were written before 70 A.D."



"The gospel of John is supposed to have been written by John the apostle. It is written from the perspective of an eyewitness of the events of Christ's life. The John Rylands papyrus fragment 52 of John's gospel dated in the year 135 contains portions of John 18:31-33, 37-38. This fragment was found in Egypt and a considerable amount of time is needed for the circulation of the gospel before it reached Egypt. It is the last of the gospels and appears to have been written in the 80's to 90's."



" Paul the Apostle was a convert to Christianity. The book of Acts speaks of his conversion in Acts 9. Since Acts was written before 70 A.D. and Paul wrote the Pauline Epistles and we know that Paul died in 64 A.D., the Pauline Epistles were all written before that date. Furthermore, in 1 Cor. 15:3-4 is an early creed of the Christian church where Paul mentions that Jesus had died and risen. "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures," (1 Cor. 15:3-4). Notice that he says he received this information. From whom did he receive it? Most probably the apostles since he had a lot of interaction with them. This means that Paul received the gospel account from the eyewitnesses. They were, of course contemporaries and since they all died before the turn of the century. Therefore, their writings were completed within the lifetime of the apostles of Jesus."



"The New Testament (Greek: ÊáéíÞ ÄéáèÞêç), sometimes called the Greek Testament or Greek Scriptures, and sometimes also New Covenant – which is the literal translation of the original Greek – is the name given to the final portion of the Christian Bible, written after the Old Testament. The original texts were written in Koine Greek by various authors after c. 45 AD and before c. 140 AD. Its books were gradually collected into a single volume over a period of several centuries. The New Testament is a central element of Christianity, and has played a major role in shaping modern Western culture."



Biblical scholarship has taken note of fairly recent claims made on behalf of 2,000-year-old papyrus fragments in the Magdalen College Library at Oxford, England. Perhaps the most ancient fragments of the New Testament in existence, to some observers this papyrus supports the contention that Matthew's Gospel is an eyewitness account.



"Named Magdalen GR 17, this discovery may change the way the New Test

 

[Thomas Rogers]

R Shek said:

It is definately a different world than the last time he was here. The good news is that once he returns, perfection will exist for millenia to come.

Yes, if you believe the literal interpretation of the Bible there will be a 2nd coming, Rapture, there will be the judgement and then there will be true heaven on earth, aka Tribulation.



So goes the prophecy. And the Bible has already proven that God delivers on the prophecy because all the prophecies of the first coming of Christ as described in the Old Testament came true.



But along the lines of what Rodger has said, how can we be so sure? The Old Testament was passed down, largely unwritten for generations, and both it and the New Testament that we follow today were written centuries after the birth and death of Christ. That's more than just a convenience.



What is known, is that unless there is a "Tower of Babel" type event we should assume that our currently documented and understood prophecy of the 2nd coming will still be around when that 2nd coming occurs. So we can compare and constrast the prophecy with the reality. For those not up on Genesis, the Tower of Babel refers to man uniting to build a tower into the heavens to see, interact and be with God, and God intervened and set communication back for centuries because man got too close to him...almost in an "Ignore the man behind the green curtain fashion". But that's a whole other debate, one that starts in its foundation of whether the Tower of Babel story is parable or fact.



Read more on this very topic of the validity of prophecy at:

 

[Thomas Rogers]

BigBear, I wasn't trying to say that you had blind faith. I was speaking generally.



TJR

 

[Jim Reeves]

TJR

My response was to Rodger, not you. Sorry, I should have stated that.

 

[Bill V]

28:7 in the states. That's 4:1 or more than enough to pass a federal amendment.

Actually, assuming by "federal amendment" you're referring to an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, no, that's not enough. You need to have 75% of all states--which would be 38. The 28 you cite, even if they were all wiliing to ratify a constitutional amendment (and just because it's not currently legal there doesn't mean they'd all be willing to go to the step of ratifying a constitutional amendment), is 10 short.

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

BigBear, All I know is that Biblical Scholars can only trace the writing of the Bible back to around 300 A.D. I am not saying your wrong at all. Probably we're both right.

 

[Steve M 2]

Ummm... perhaps this thread should be put to sleep before people start taking things really personally! Or would that just rile up the euthanasia crowd and spark a Dr assisted suicide argument?



"Can't we all just get along?"

 

[WXMotorSports DecalsPartsAccs]

Politics, Religion and Sports...no one wins the debate.

 

[Gavin Allan]

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone....

 

[Jim Reeves]

Rodger

Most of my post above concerning the origins of the New Testament WAS from Biblical Scholars. I'm not bright enough (oops, sorry TJR) to figure that out for myself. Biblical scholars and academicions.



I think we're getting along just fine. It's a discussion. I'm not trying to win, I'm trying to learn.