[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

EXAMPLE: I believe in an eye for an eye and will not turn the other cheek. For me it is as if the Bible was a living changing document until Jesus inspired the current version I will refer to as the King James Version. Then the morphing of Jewish to Christian and heals dug in. That's it, no more modification or updates. Regardless of how many chosen ones there were in the past, we are now the only path to the light. Could Jesus have been a well thought out conspiracy?

I just want to put "an eye for an eye" in perspective. This rule appears in a section of Exodus dealing with Laws. It establishes a rule of proportionality for the punishment for offenses. Without this law it could be that an offender would be punished (injured) far in excess of the injury he had inflicted. So, "an eye for an eye" was a softening of the earlier practice.

When Jesus addressed this issue in The Sermon on The Mount he was discussing a variety of interpersonal relationships. He said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ “But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." This exchanged proportionality for love of one's neighbor.

You do not have the option to return to the earlier, outdated, rule and still be within the Christian faith.

And you are correct, at the close of the Apostolic Age (the death of the last of the twelve Apostles -- and Paul) the Bible was completed. The Bible is complete and unchanging.

There have been many great theologians throughout history who have added enlightenment and understanding to scriptural passages, and archaeology sometimes sheds light on scripture, but there are to be no additions to the Bible.

For ease of reading you might want to consider a Bible translation other than the King James Version which contains much language from the English language structure of 1611 A.D. Dr. Paul Enns, author of The Moody Handbook of Theology, recommends The New American Standard Version as a very good translation.

.

[rubicon]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

You have a history of interpreting my posts with meaning entirely different from what I say. Perhaps just ask me to clarify and I will do so promptly and as clearly as I am able.

Perhaps you are correct or perhaps it is because your posts come across as rhetorical questions. My intent is not to attack or to mis-represent but that is my reading. sorry if you were offended

[onslowe]

Golfingnut, it seems to me that you are facing an impasse here. Your struggle with issues of faith, belief, nature of the Bible (OT and NT) etc are wonderful. They may well form the basis of a strong faith.

However, for now, it does seem that the 'apples and oranges' problem has arisen. I had a long struggle in my faith journey…a really long one. I found the comments and opinions of others really didn't do it in my search for answers. I now could assert to you my deep tenets of faith and they probably would not satisfy you. The good people here who are posting back and forth with you have strongly held positions of faith - exactly like me. But I know I am not a theologian, and even if I were, it wouldn't mean much.

Someone once said "Nothing is said that hasn't been said before." I believe that, and I place great value and weight on the words of tradition - right up to the present. Your questions, your doubts and such all have been voiced and felt before by millions of other people, and some have given us their own insights and wisdom and conclusions. They spoke and speak the language you speak, unlike me for sure.

I sure hope that you do pick up CS Lewis' "Mere Christianity" and as another man mentioned, even more so, his "Screwtape Letters." Maybe go to a library and pick up the Oxford Annotated Bible just for its valuable Introduction and commentaries before each Book.

Read and read and read others thoughts if you are sincerely on a quest. Four or five posters here on TOTV cannot ever approach the wisdom of the ages. It's there for you. I respectfully suggest reading Psalm 131 several times and reflect on it. It 'right sizes' my swollen head every time.

God bless you and keep on plugging.

[onslowe]

Carl, I didn't see your post above before I posted my own directly above. Sorry. You said it all and said it well.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

The precepts of each are mutually exclusive; that is to say that they would each reject your proposal that either of the other two provides the path to Heaven. Put in plain language, this is not a buffet; you must choose one of the three and reject the other two.

The only exception that I can think of to this is that there are many Christian theologians who teach that God does have a separate plan for religiously observant Jews who practice the Law --- that would be the minority of all Jews.

.

I personally reject any theology that is exclusionary. I have a good friend who is Muslim, is married to a Lutheran, and brings up his children to respect both religions and their traditions. He is a good man and lives an exemplary life, I personally can't accept that God would deny him the kingdom of heaven because he practices a religion other than Christianity. I also choose to believe that most Jews who live good lives will be accepted into heaven. I also believe that the God I believe in would accept children that die before being Christened, and people in areas where they have no knowledge of organized religion. If that is in conflict with traditional religious theology, then so be it, I hope I am the one who is right. If the Muslims are right, we have been living in fantasyland. I cannot reconcile the concept that God created the earth and everything on it, yet blesses only a relative minority of the people on it

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Perhaps you are correct or perhaps it is because your posts come across as rhetorical questions. My intent is not to attack or to mis-represent but that is my reading. sorry if you were offended

So sorry if you thought I felt your post offended me or was attacking in nature. I only wanted to point out that you were mistaken in your interpretation of my post. I was not offended, but did feel obligated to let you know that you misunderstood the intention of my post. I appoligize if my earlier post offended you.

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by Abby10

Great discussion on here and some good information - thank you Carl and Dawn Marie - I too enjoy listening to many of the Christian speakers that you mentioned. Golfingnut, sometimes you confuse me too. You seem kind of combative in your questioning but I have to believe that you are truly seeking answers for yourself. I say that because looking back, I probably appeared that way to others before becoming a believer myself 20 years ago. You all have a local Community Bible Study (CBS) at New Covenant United Methodist Church in The Villages. It is not affiliated with the church, or with any church for that matter, it just uses the facilities. Unfortunately, I think there is only a women's group meeting there now, but the organization does have men's groups (I believe there is one in Ocala). It is an in depth bible study open to anyone - all ages, all denominations, believers and unbelievers, at any level of knowledge. When I started attending a study years ago, I had very little knowledge of the Bible. If interested, check out the organization at their website - communitybiblestudy.org

Thanks and I will look into the bible studies they offer. I would prefer a mixed group as I see MEN ONLY as demeaning to women as would be whites only etc.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by onslowe

Carl, I didn't see your post above before I posted my own directly above. Sorry. You said it all and said it well.

I don't think we conflicted. Your post was very insightful. We are pretty much on the same page.

Carl

[DAWN MARIE]

Of course, I'm a woman and I don't see anything demeaning about a men's study at all. I've been to women only studies and mixed groups. Both have their place. Men's studies may gear more towards men's issues as a woman's study would towards women's issues. Nothing wrong with that.

The most important thing is that they are in Scripture. Some groups out there are only into the social aspect of meeting together with very little real teaching. The best studies go in deep and leave you thinking hard in the days after.

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by DAWN MARIE

Of course, I'm a woman and I don't see anything demeaning about a men's study at all. I've been to women only studies and mixed groups. Both have their place. Men's studies may gear more towards men's issues as a woman's study would towards women's issues. Nothing wrong with that.

The most important thing is that they are in Scripture. Some groups out there are only into the social aspect of meeting together with very little real teaching. The best studies go in deep and leave you thinking hard in the days after.

I respect your opinion. I am more progressive than most folks my age.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I personally reject any theology that is exclusionary.

You may reject all three of the great monotheistic religions which spring from the same root, and are considered "revealed" religions, but where does that leave you?

Whom and how do you worship? What is your basis for believing that God cares for you rather than thinking that He is the impersonal Creator who simply set things in motion and let it go? You have to have borrowed from some religious practice to even have the concept of prayer, and for that matter the concept of Heaven.

It sounds like you are at that buffet table, borrowing a little tenet here and a little dogma there and trying to assemble your own religion. None of the three major monotheistic religions would agree with this approach.

.

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

...I cannot reconcile the concept that God created the earth and everything on it, yet blesses only a relative minority of the people on it

Nor can I.

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

You may reject all three of the great monotheistic religions which spring from the same root, and are considered "revealed" religions, but where does that leave you?

Whom and how do you worship? What is your basis for believing that God cares for you rather than thinking that He is the impersonal Creator who simply set things in motion and let it go? You have to have borrowed from some religious practice to even have the concept of prayer, and for that matter the concept of Heaven.

It sounds like you are at that buffet table, borrowing a little tenet here and a little dogma there and trying to assemble your own religion. None of the three major monotheistic religions would agree with this approach.

.

And I am quite comfortable with that, thank you.

[donb9006]

Originally Posted by DAWN MARIE

No... Jesus is a historical figure that has been verified by many witnesses and the Koran and the Bible contradict each other so they cannot both be on the same path to heaven. They can both be wrong..but there's no way they can both be right.

Actually, he hasn't been "verified" except by believers. There is no record of him except in religious texts written by followers...many years after he was gone. I know I sound like a broken record, I keep saying the same thing...neither Jesun nor ANY of his immediate followers wrote anything down. ALL the writings are done decades after he was gone. That is the biggest problem I have with the whole thing. It's like people beginning to talk/write now about someone who died in the 60s. Someone whom nobody wrote about at the time, and now suddenly everyone is writing about. You have no way of knowing what REALLY happened.

Originally Posted by rubicon

I said it in another post on another thread blind faith requires one come to God (Jesus Christ) as a child. Some people simply cannot relinquish such control. I truly envy people who have blind faith because such a surrender seems to empower them more than those who cannot relinquish such control

Perhaps its all imaginary but to quote "If God did not exist then man would have had to invent him"

God (Jesus Christ) real or inventive is a good thing because man has to believe in something greater than himself or his inventions. godless men commit atrocious acts because one or more of the seven sins over take them. Men who claim to do God's work, but do evil, cannot actually believe because if they did they could not and as such are deceivers

I am by nature a naturalist who believes in intelligent design but cannot determine its origins but there is organization and collaboration to this universe as is evidenced all around us and as the commercial says, ïts not nice to fool mother nature" Abortion is one of those meddling and it has had a pronounced effect on our population which ages quickly with a loss of a younger generation to take up the mantle

People who believe "blindly" often times don't fare well.

Personally, I think we did invent him...just my guess.

Why? Why do you think people MUST believe in something greater than themselves? Men OF God also committ atrocities... Seems comitting atrocities isn't just for non-Christians. Atrocoties were condoned by Popes throughout history, the Pope speaks for God, why the atrocities then? Are atrocities OK with God? Many questions and no answers.

So why not stick to "I don't know"? Why "blindly" believe in a religion? Do you have a "need" to believe? Scientists say we're predisposed to relinquish ourselves to authority. Maybe they're right, maybe we HAVE to believe in something, our genes force us to. Who knows...nobody does...and that's the point. NOBODY knows...

Abortion is responsible for the "baby boom", mainstreaming of birth control and abortion is what stopped the exponential birthrate into the early 60s. It IS a cause of a lot of our problems.

Originally Posted by onslowe

I sure hope that you do pick up CS Lewis' "Mere Christianity" and as another man mentioned, even more so, his "Screwtape Letters." Maybe go to a library and pick up the Oxford Annotated Bible just for its valuable Introduction and commentaries before each Book.

Read and read and read others thoughts if you are sincerely on a quest. Four or five posters here on TOTV cannot ever approach the wisdom of the ages. It's there for you. I respectfully suggest reading Psalm 131 several times and reflect on it. It 'right sizes' my swollen head every time.

Yes, I agree...read, read, read...but make sure you're an equal opportunity reader...you also have to read things counter your beliefs.

Psalm 131 teaches you to not think about things that are important. Be content in your ignorance like a child. Sorry...that's not for me. I do my own thinking thank you...

Not here for any reason other than to try to get you to have an open mind. Just because everyone believes something...doesn't make it true.

Your "religion" is more where you're born than anything else. And they believe as fervently as you do that THEY are the ones with special knowledge. Religious belief is quite interesting when you study ALL sides. Look at the extremes Muslims go through for their religion. Everyone thinks THEY have found the answer...I posit none have...

Have a great day...

[eweissenbach]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

You may reject all three of the great monotheistic religions which spring from the same root, and are considered "revealed" religions,
.

It seems to me that you are saying that to be a "true Christian", you must be intolerant of every other religion, or at least believe that they do not have a path to heaven. How do you reconcile the fact that many Christian denominations have specific beliefs which would exclude every other denomination from a path to heaven. Are you SURE you are in the right one? That is actually a rhetorical question because clearly you do. For all of our sakes, I hope I am right and God has an inclusionary policy.