[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Bible Study
See other Bible Study Articles

Title: My pastors don’t believe Genesis. Should I leave my church?
Source: creation.com
URL Source: http://creation.com/my-pastor-doesnt-believe-in-genesis
Published: Nov 15, 2014
Author: creation.com
Post Date: 2014-11-15 19:23:45 by CZ82
Keywords: None
Views: 86053
Comments: 223

My pastors don’t believe Genesis. Should I leave my church? Published: 15 November 2014 (GMT+10)

We received the following question from a supporter in Australia who was surprised to discover the pastors of his church did not believe Genesis. Tas Walker talks about some of the issues that need to be considered.

"Hi guys, I love your work, and have subscribed to the magazine and am continually encouraged by what you guys publish".

"I have a question. I’m at a church which I’ve attended for the last 12 years (I’m now 30). I’ve since realized that none of the 3 pastors take a straightforward reading of Genesis, and at least 2 of the 3 (haven’t yet checked the 3rd) don’t even believe the Flood was global. I was wondering if you had some advice on what I should do about this. I have 2 kids and 1 on the way and I want them growing up in a biblically sound church. Apart from Genesis our church is excellent. Do you think leaving the church is too drastic? Love to get your feedback, thanks heaps"!

Tas Walker replies:

Thank you for your question about being part of a church where the pastors do not accept Genesis as written. Unfortunately that is more common these days than it should be.

The decision as to which church you and your family should belong to depends on many different factors. Here are some issues for you to think and pray about.

There is no such thing as a perfect church. In some areas the church may be really good for you but in others it may be totally unhelpful. So you have to balance a lot of factors in your life.

There are usually good reasons in your life why you belong to the church you do, but churches change with time. E.g. sometimes the youth ministry is strong and other times it struggles. Your pastoral team will change and that will bring a different dynamic. So, perhaps by waiting you may see things improve.

Church is not just about what you can get out of it, but it is a place where you can minister to others with your gifts. Your passion and experience with creation may be one area where you can be a blessing to others.

In every church you will have to stand for and speak out the truth, and this can apply to many different issues. In this particular church the issue that you need to bring to others is the truth and foundation of Genesis. But speak the truth in love, with tact and in a winsome way. Look at this as an opportunity to share some wonderful truth that otherwise would not be shared.

Rather than pushing creation in six days on people as if it is your hobby horse, use it to meet their needs as you become aware of them. Thus, you can present the truth to people along the following lines: “You may find this will help resolve some of your doubts and give you a firm foundation as you follow Christ.” I always take back issues of Creation magazine to church, as well as brochures and DVDs, which I freely give to people as the need arises.

Speak the truth in love, with tact and in a winsome way.

You may be influential in the thinking and life of your pastors. It’s important to love them and support them. Don’t be divisive or argumentative. Don’t be a one-issue person but show that you are interested in the wider ministry of the church and that your passion is to serve Jesus Christ and to help others come to Him and grow in Him. Here are two examples of how a person in the pews was pivotal in helping their minister come to the truth of Genesis: A young man in a church lent a book to his minister who was big enough to read the book and research the issue and who changed his mind (see Esa Hukkinen interview).

This pastor, Owen Butt, believed Genesis was myth but changed his mind after attending a creation meeting, and that changed his whole approach to ministry. What this article does not say is that it was one of his congregation who fed him information and invited him to the creation meeting, where his whole way of thinking was changed (See Catching the vision).

Make sure that your family is properly instructed in the truth of Genesis and creation by providing books, DVDs and other resources for them. Talk about the question and issues as they arise. However, note that it is really important to always speak in a positive way about your pastors and your church, especially with your children. If there is a critical spirit and an undermining of your pastors and your church in your home, that will poison things for your children.

If the situation becomes very difficult for you, with say the pastors instructing you not to talk about the issue you may need to think about moving. In the same way, you could not accept a ministry offer from the pastors if they included a condition that you could not talk about creation in that ministry or in the church. So if there is a hardening and aggressiveness develops toward your position, say from the pulpit, you may need to think about moving.

In our life’s entire journey it is important to seek the Lord and His will for our lives.

“If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.” James 1:5

God bless,

Tas Walker

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-149) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#150. To: SOSO, Liberator (#134)

Or calling the right play at the right time.

Jesus Christ gave us the game plan. If we call audibles, then we will be rushed, hurried, hit and maybe sacked.

Stick with the Head Coach's game plan.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   0:38:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#151. To: SOSO (#135)

I posed the question Jasper.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   0:39:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#152. To: SOSO, liberator (#139)

A trite example might be whether or not a man should stand by and watch his wife and children be murdered by a nutso when the man had the capacity to save his family by killing the nutso as he commenced to do harm to the man's family.

That's easy. If we have the capacity to stop the shedding of innocent blood and do nothing about it, then we are guilty of that shed blood. So, if killing the nut protects innocent life we have a moral right to defend.

Even in Luke 22 Jesus Christ allowed his disciples to have two swords between them for defense.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   0:55:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#153. To: Liberator, liberator, GarySpFc (#141)

I realize this is troubling and disturbing -- we all have friends and family who are compassionate, GOOD people. But they may not have bought into or understood the concept of Salvation for sinners through Jesus Christ. Nor believe in it. Red has cited Jesus' own words, warnings, and conditions in Scripture -- with authority. The most definitive, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

All good points.

Let's apply the "glory to God aspect" to your words above. Do people who do good works, and kind do so to glorify God? If not who or what is the object of their affection to do so? The poor? The human 'spirit'? A tax deduction? Or glory to self to feel good about doing something. Even garnering "favor" from God for one to justify one self to be in His presence?

Who gets the glory, the praise from Ghandi's works and compassion? Auntie Maye working in the soup kitchen? We look to these wonderful works of love and compassion but where is that "energy" directed and for whose glory? If for The Father in the Name of Jesus Christ, then Amen! If not, it glorifies something or someone else other than God.

Here is an example of a man and His household who did acts of mercy, were kind to others and prayed to God to do the right thing. It is a true story of a man who knew what God wanted, prayed for such but did not have Jesus as his savior. This man did not travel to Jerusalem to seek out an apostle to hear the Gospel. He prayed and his prayer pleased God. This man didn't even have to leave his home. God sent an apostle with an armed escort to his house to hear the Gospel!

Here below is the story of our mystery man:

Acts 10 New King James Version (NKJV)

10 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius!”

4 And when he observed him, he was afraid, and said, “What is it, lord?”

So he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God. 5 Now send men to Joppa, and send for Simon whose surname is Peter. 6 He is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea.[a] He will tell you what you must do.” 7 And when the angel who spoke to him had departed, Cornelius called two of his household servants and a devout soldier from among those who waited on him continually. 8 So when he had explained all these things to them, he sent them to Joppa.

[…………………………………………………………………………………………………………] 24 And the following day they entered Caesarea. Now Cornelius was waiting for them, and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25 As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I myself am also a man.” 27 And as he talked with him, he went in and found many who had come together. 28 Then he said to them, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. 29 Therefore I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. I ask, then, for what reason have you sent for me?”

34 Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. 35 But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. 36 The word which God sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ—He is Lord of all— 37 that word you know, which was proclaimed throughout all Judea, and began from Galilee after the baptism which John preached: 38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things which He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem, whom they[e] killed by hanging on a tree. 40 Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead. 43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.”

44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.

Then Peter answered, 47 “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   1:17:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#154. To: SOSO, Liberator (#144)

That is not the issue. The issue are the ones that claim to relay Christ's words to us reliable scribes. There was quite a bit of time from when Christ actually spoke His words to when they were wriiten down.

Was ready to list out the verses, but found the below which addresses your questions:

Further, we can take note of the following verses that demonstrate God’s plan to preserve His Word. In Matthew 5:18, Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” In this verse Jesus declared that not even the smallest stroke of a letter in the Hebrew alphabet would pass away until all is accomplished. He couldn’t make that promise unless He was sure that God would preserve His Word. Jesus also said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matthew 24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33). Jesus again affirms that God’s Word will not pass away. God’s Word will remain and accomplish that which God has planned.

The prophet Isaiah, through the power of the Holy Spirit, stated that God’s Word would remain forever. “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8). This was reaffirmed in the New Testament when Peter quoted the same passage and referred to it as “the word that was preached to you” (1 Peter 1:24-25). Neither Isaiah nor Peter could make such statements without the understanding of God’s preservation of Scripture.

More here:

God's Preservation of Scriptures

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   1:34:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#155. To: Liberator (#146)

Later Bro.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name (John 1:12)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   1:35:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#156. To: SOSO (#135)

When? Was there a deathbed conversion or acceptance? Or did they see the light once they actually saw the Light?

Hmmmm, so seeing the light will get you two $3 bills and one $8 bill in change? John 3:19

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   1:39:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#157. To: GarySpFC (#156)

Indeed.

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”(Isaiah 40:8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   1:45:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#158. To: SOSO (#144)

That is not the issue. The issue are the ones that claim to relay Christ's words to us reliable scribes. There was quite a bit of time from when Christ actually spoke His words to when they were wriiten down. And most of the writting is not from firsthand interaction with Christ but via hearsay. Memories are fallible. Language is fallible. There has been more than ample opportunity for slippage from Christ's mouth to your and my ear.

Imagine that! All that hearsay upon hearsay in God's Word has made it null and void.

Soso brings up a very important question, and that asks, how long did the manuscripts last? Now, I have here in mind the originals, the autographs, but also the earliest copies.
Just for illustration, let’s think of Matthew. Let’s suppose Matthew’s Gospel was written in the year 75. It might have been written some years earlier, maybe even a few years later, but we’ll just say, in the year 75. How long did it last? How long did it circulate?
I asked a professor, when I was in grad school many years ago, this very question. “How long do you think the autographs lasted?” I asked. “Oh,” he said, “I don’t know—10, 20 years.” The answer, at that time, seemed reasonable to me. We think of our cheap paperbacks, read several times—the spine begins to crack; pages start to fall out. Surely these precious documents would have been eagerly read by many people over and over again.
So after 10 or 20 years, maybe the original Matthew was falling to pieces and was discarded, and other copies were made, and so on. In fact, if—let’s say every manuscript lasted about 10 years, and then there was a copy made, and that copy lasted 10 years, and another copy was made. Over the course of 150 years—or from, say, the year 75 to 225—we could have as many as 15 generations. Each time there’s a new copy made, probably some more scribal errors are introduced; more variance enters into the text.
So after 15 such generations, who knows? Maybe the text of Matthew in AD 225 would be very different from the original Matthew that was composed by the evangelist in the year 75. So this is the backdrop, just—that kind of assumption. Is there evidence that shows that that is so? Or perhaps the evidence shows something else.

Well, in a recent study published in 2009, there was an analysis of 53 libraries from antiquity that have been recovered intact. And what I mean by that is, the entire library: the actual literature itself—the various books—as well as supporting documentation, private letters, and things like that. The entire collection was dumped at the same time. So when scholars were sifting through the dry sands of Egypt, or whatever the location is, all of these books were found together.
Of course, this is wonderful, because the books then can be studied together. We not only have copies of literature, but we have letters that have dates on them. We have correspondence talking about the books—requests that a new one be copied, or a request that one that had been loaned out be returned, and so forth. And so this kind of information has enabled scholars to reconstruct the history of the library, as it were.
Now, I’m talking about 53 libraries—not archives, business papers, and that sort of thing, but libraries, [consisting] of literature. The smallest library that’s been analyzed had 12 books in it, and some of the largest have close to 1,000 books. Many of these libraries that were found intact were recovered from the dry sands of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt, where about a half million texts were recovered from 1896 on into the 20th century, when the digging finally came to an end.
What we’ve learned is that these libraries contained books that were in use, before being retired or discarded—were in use anywhere from 150 years to 500 years. It was noticed that most of these books fell in the 200- to 300-year range before being retired or discarded or thrown out. This has enormous implications for our understanding of the NT manuscripts and [for] our question: How long were they used? What was their longevity before they were retired or thrown out?

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   2:06:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#159. To: SOSO (#147)

Worse yret, when it comes to scripture much of it is in dead languages. And for those that are still around the nuances of words have changed over time. One cannot be certain what the nuance of the word agape was two thousand years ago.

Let's see. I have one love letter from my sweetie, and I'm having trouble understanding what she means by the word "love." Unfortunately, or fortunately, I have 35,000 letters from her, and she used the word love in many of them.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   2:16:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#160. To: TooConservative (#86)

You would know.

Shouldn't that read "As if you would know"? /s

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

CZ82  posted on  2015-01-16   6:49:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#161. To: CZ82 (#160) (Edited)

Shouldn't that read "As if you would know"? /s

We've already taken a sharp turn into the bizarre with this latest incarnation, Saint Yucko, and his Merry Band of Canaries.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-16   8:47:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#162. To: GarySpFC (#159)

Let's see. I have one love letter from my sweetie, and I'm having trouble understanding what she means by the word "love." Unfortunately, or fortunately, I have 35,000 letters from her, and she used the word love in many of them.

Nice post. And so good to see you over here. I can see my Escape From LP post/email to you was unneeded as you have an old account here already, apparently from LP's Banfest/Fundraiser 2009 episode.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-16   9:09:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#163. To: TooConservative (#162)

I had an account long before 2009.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   10:13:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#164. To: SOSO (#124)

But the act is amply described, as is the consequences to Adam and Eve and their progeny. A rose by any other name my friend.

Not so. Read it again. Adam is told that if he eats of the fruit, he will die. Eve recounts to Satan that she has been told this too.

They ate the fruit. God told Adam that he was dust (literally: powder), and to dust he would return. And Scripture tells us he did, dying at the age of about 930 (if I remember correctly).

Scripture doesn't tell us when Eve died, though we can assume she did...unless she was one of the wives on the Ark, which seems exceedingly unlikely.

So, God told them that if they ate the fruit they would die. And Scripture recounts the death of Adam.

You, and tradition, say that God said that their progeny would die because of that. That is the way that man has explained death. But God never said that. Go read Genesis again. God never said: you shall die, and your children after you, if you eat the fruit.

In fact, God never says that in Scripture. God says: the wages of sin is death. And all men sin. That is why you die: you die, because that is the death sentence for YOUR sins.

Paul explained that death came into the world because of the sin of Adam, but we don't die because of HIS sin. We die because of OUR sins.

Note well that innocent babies die because of sin too. Not because of THEIR sins, but because the sin that other men commit is murdering them. Abel pleased God with his offering, so Cain murdered him. Abel wasn't dying for his OWN sins - his death WAS the sin (one of the sins) of Cain.

Those who die innocent of sin - babies and the like - have no sins to answer for at judgment, and Jesus said repeatedly and unwaveringly that men are judged by their DEEDS. No bad deeds, no personal sin. Anybody who has lived very long has personal sin, and so is under a sentence of physical death, which God will carry out.

How does this link to Adam? Directly, but not because of a mystical taint of death that passes down in the blood. That is human tradition and it is not what God said. Rather, it has to do with something else that you said about human temptations.

There are indeed human temptations, and they lead to sin. But what leads to many of these temptations are the living conditions of men, and these living conditions are NOT God's design. They have been imposed on man BY man, because of what man values.

Remember, as creatures, we are designed by God to live naked and without jobs, in tropical environments where we eat fruit off the trees. We are designed to be intensely attracted to the other sex, and to fall in love and to begin to copulate and reproduce freely, starting very early.

Remember teenage love, how intense it is? There is a sexual component, but there is, in early teenage years, a very intense love and attraction component. We are designed, by God, to ardently fall in love at age 12 and 13, to being to have sex at once, and to be intensely bound to that one person for the rest of our lives. THAT is our nature.

Our ideas about economics and society are NOT natural too us. They are imposed ON us, not by God, but by owners and leaders and rulers ideas of economic and social order. Now, remember well, God does not give me the right to shed other men's blood, which means that it is not the natural order of man to dominate and rule other men. Men resist that, rightly, because we are NATURALLY designed, by God, to serve HIM, not to obey each other. The only way that men can compel other men to obey them and impose laws on them is by murdering some of them to instill fear in the others. Nimrod was the first Emperor. Others followed. They used force to establish "their" law, and maintained their (illegitimate) lawmaking power through the threat of force and the use of force. When they die, emperors are all unrepentant murderers, for not only do they kill men - which God forbids - but they have made an idol of themselves and their states such that they ignore God's prohibition and claim they have the RIGHT to, to uphold "the law". But where the law departs from God's law, it is domination, and evil, and when it is enforced by bloodshed and killing, the enforcer has broken a law of God and is a murderer. And if he believes he has the right to do so, he never repents, he SERVES another ideal - an idol - he dies unrepentant, and at judgment he is rejected and thrown into the flames.

The social order of man is unnatural. It is not how God made us. It restrains and forces changes upon in against how God made us. So, when we're "resisting sexual immorality) at 25, it's not because God has made it hard. It's because MEN have made it hard. There shouldn't BE any sexual immorality, because we're SUPPOSED to be married and having sex at 12 and 13, with our intense teenage loves. And there is not supposed to be a highly structured system of economic domination over us that takes our God-given nature - to pair off very young and in love and breed - and replaces that with a serve-man, serve-money model, which is violent, idolatrous and very evil.

We are so accustomed to thinking of the violent system of empire, law, order and finance as being "natural" that we fail to remember that we were not made for this in any way, and that it has been imposed on us, by some men, whom God never gave the right to do so.

OF COURSE, if we live in structures that are not godly, serving things God told us not to, and repress our actually God-given natures, we're going to end up violent, sad, sullen, sex-twisted freaks. It isn't GOD who made a mess of us, it's MEN who did.

The wages of THEIR sins ARE our death, but not because of a taint in the blood - because of the actual physical conditions they imposed on us.

Adam and Eve ate fruit without effort. They tended the garden, because that was their "job", but they enjoyed doing it. What happened with their sin is that they were put out of the garden and had to make clothes (a major effort). God cursed the ground - now it was hard to make it grow food, and the food wasn't pleasant), and now childbirth was painful and even deadly.

Just the economic situation of having to spend hours growing food, and making clothes - this reduced man's happiness, and THOSE economic conditions continued, and posed a challenge to men from Adam to the Flood (God removed the curse on the ground through the Flood, so the ground is no longer cursed).

Look what MEN did in reaction. Consider carefully: Hevel (Abel) used the natural human mastery of animals, before men ate animals and animals had the fear of us on them, to herd sheep. He didn't eat their meat but he drank their milk (that was what he offered to God as his gift). And he probably used their wool for clothing. So, it was still possible for men to live relatively pleasant lives even under the restrained economic conditions of the ex-Eden world. Cain grew his food and offered that - grudgingly. God wasn't interested in Cain's offering because of the way it was offered (not, as some said, because it was grain: a daily grain offering was DEMANDED by God in Torah). Cain murdered Abel in a cold and calculated act of spite. He didn't fly off the handle and kill Abel on the spot. He called his brother out into the field and killed him, out of spite.

Soon we see violence growing in Genesis. We also see polygamy - enforced by fear - appear with Lamech, who warns his wives that he is not to be taken lightly because he's a killer. When God decides on the Flood, he says why: violence, everywhere.

The economic conditions of Eden were ideal for man, that's what we were designed for. But even after Eden we had it well enough. Jealousy, rage and lust: two wives, then more. Is THAT really our nature?

No. It isn't. Every one of us remembers first falling in love, as a teenager. That endless, aching desire just to be WITH that other person. It wasn't even sexual, it was the desire for the bond, the companionship. All of THAT is natural, and in its first blush, it is SUPPOSED to be able to be swiftly reciprocated, such that the teen boy and teen girl fall in love, couple, and begin producing children. And that young love, strong love, NATURAL love is meant to last for life - and often DOES, when it is allowed to happen. THAT is how we are designed.

We men do not PERMIT it. It makes a mess of our economic plans. It makes a mess of the educational structures we have designed in order to prepare men to be cogs in the gears of other men's economic plans. To keep our NATURES, which are GOOD, in check we impose harsh rules and violent laws, and we DO mostly stay in check. And then our nature, restrained, chafes at the restrain and becomes perverted, through unnatural use.

We hear it said that masturbation is a sin, and we marvel: how could God be so cruel to command us to act against our natures! You would level the charge. But God isn't commanding us against our natures. Our NATURE is to take that sexual urge and couple with the girl we're in love with at 13, and she do the same, and to bond for life, THEN. If teenagers were marrying at 12 and 13, as God DESIGNED US, they would be being fruitful and multiplying, as we were designed by God, and they wouldn't be masturbating or committing any of the other sexual sins at all. In societies where they actually DO pair off very young, there are usually large families and lifelong bonds. Because that's our nature, and when permitted to express itself as God made it, we DON'T actually have sexual sin, because we don't need it or want it.

It's only when we are twisted into pretzels through unnatural, man-made structures, structures which can only survive through constant and unlimited threats of death (which man never has the authority to mete out to other men, other than for murder), that sexual sin, and violence, and lies, and all of the other sins emerge.

And yet we read so-called religious philosophers treat these great groaning human idols as though THEY are the natural state of man. They are not.

Original sin? It exists: what Adam and Eve did removed humanity from Eden, and thereby imposed additional challenges on us all that are hard - food and clothing alone are burdens of time and labor, and require cooperation with other men. Their sin greatly complicates our lives. Some men accepted the reality and operated within the straightened world: Hevel did. Others become perverse and seek to dominate other men to force THEM to do the crap work. Nimrod, for example.

But a taint in the blood, that works independently and causes men to die directly because of Adam's sin - "Original Sin" as you understand the word? - it does not exist. God never said it did. It's not in the Bible.

We do not die because Adam died. We died because of our personal sins - or because somebody else's personal sin kills us (Hevel died as the result of Cain's sin). If we are spotless, we don't die when we are killed, for our spirit goes on and ultimately will go into the City.

Physical death is one death, but the death of the spirit is the final death. Because of our personal sins, we die physical death. We don't die physical death directly because of something we inherited from Adam's personal sin. We die physical death because of our own personal sin, or because we're murdered in somebody else's sin. The effect of Adam's personal sin is to thrust us out of the Garden and place us into a world where living is hard, and the hardness of living has caused men over the generations to build up a bigger and bigger fist of violence and domination and law and idolatry to money and power, that then occasions our personal sin.

So yes, in THAT sense Adam's sin kills us. But ONLY in that sense. There is nothing inherent in our blood that kills us.

"Original Sin" as a taint of the blood was devised, not from Scripture, but as a logic exercise to try to explain WHY baptism is necessary for salvation. We're told it is, but that's all we're told. Men want ANSWERS. Scripture tells us about forgiveness of sins, but Christians have always baptized babies and children too, so they haven't committed any sin...so why baptize? "Original sin" as a taint coming down from Adam is what was made up to explain what "sin" baptism washes off of babies.

And you know, IF we were Jews, it would be true. For sex and blood make a person unclean before God. And what that meant, in Israel, was that a man or woman could not participate in the ritual sacrifices at the altar. So, if a man had an emission of semen, however it happened (alone, or in regular sex with his wife) he was unclean until evening and could not participate in the rites. A woman was unclean throughout her period and for a time afterwards until she took her mikvah - mikvah is the Hebrew word which we would translate as baptism if it were in a Christian context, but which we would translate as bath in any other context. John the Baptist was giving people mikvah in the Jordan for forgiveness of sins. The unclean who had touched bodies had to have a mikvah outside of the camp in the lustral water (from the ashes of the red heifer - in other words: soap and water). Those who were covered in blood, such as women after periods or women and babies after childbirth, required a mikvah to be cleansed, not just physically, but from ritual impurity.

Baptism for cleanliness is throughout the Torah. The Christian variant of it is easier: it's not repeated. It's once. But God never explains WHY. He doesn't explain it in the Torah, and he doesn't explain it in the Gospel either.

So men have made up a reason. Some say that it's to wash away personal sin. That's what John the Baptist's mikvah was, but Jesus didn't say that was what his was. Those who say that oppose infant baptism because they say, correctly, that infants have no personal sin. Of course, they incorrectly assert that the "purpose" of baptism is to wash away PERSONAL sin. God never said that.

Conversely, traditionalists such as Catholics have made up the doctrine that there's a mysterious taint in the blood that comes down from Adam, and that baptism washes away this "Original Sin", and that indeed it's necessary to follow their cultural tradition of baptizing babies, because otherwise the baby will die in sin and may be rejected by God for that sin.

Both of these doctrines are made up. God said neither. God said that everybody needs a mikvah. He did not say why. We don't know why. Paul seems to say that we inherit death in the blood because of Adam's sin, but that isn't what Paul actually says, if you read him closely. And nowhere does God ever say that we physically die because Adam ate the fruit. Never once does it say that. The whole doctrine has been made up by men to try to EXPLAIN something, about baptism, that God didn't explain.

Men can fight about these made up things if they want to, but when they do, they're just piling tradition on tradition, none of which came from God (UNLESS one believes that God gave these traditions outside of Scripture - but in no case do we have any saint or prophet standing up and declaring "God told me thus and so", so no, these traditions did NOT come out of God's mouth. Next, we'll hear that God chose leaders, and that the heirs of those leaders were given the power by God to reveal such things. Those heirs ALSO killed other saints of God, so obviously whatever power of leadership was given, does not go nearly as far as is claimed.

Truth is: we don't know a lot of things. Baptism, we know we're supposed to do. And trying to devise a tortured argument that Baptism has something to do with removing a taint in the blood from Adam is ridiculous. How so? Baptized people die anyway. If the taint was the death sentence, then baptism would remove that. It doesn't. So it wasn't.

Christians will fight endlessly over the sanctity of their doctrines, and will hurl around charges of heresy. It's bullshit when they do it, it's what the Pharisees did.

The answer is that you look at what God said, and you do that. Why? Because that is what GOD said to do. "Man lives on every word THAT PROCEEDS FORTH OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD" - Jesus.

"If you love me, you will do as I say." - Jesus.

"What good does it do you to say that you follow me if you don't do as I say?" - Jesus

It does nobody any good at all to not do what Jesus said. What Jesus said to do is hard enough. Adding to it in order to fight is bad. But then using energy fighting and refusing to even do the minimum - that's worse.

One can question to clear away the thicket and get at God. That's what I'm working on in these writings, clearing the thicket.

OR one can question in order to increase the thicket, to satisfy one's self that it's not possible to answer the questions, or know anything, and therefore justify doing whatever one pleases. That is common.

Everybody decides for himself what he's going to do or not do, and why, on any given day. God leaves men free to do this personally, but he places a lot of constraints on the degree to which men can impose their wills on other men.

Men cannot stand THOSE rules, because they mean that men would have to do a lot more work directly for themselves that they don't want to do - AND that they don't want to pay for either. So that's the drama.

My views: focus on what God left us, so you're sure he IS. Then focus on what GOD said HIMSELF - not what men said that God meant - both in the Bible and without - and then follow God. Where what the men said is helpful, embrace it. Where what the men said and wrote is not helpful, ignore it. Where what the men said is actually opposed to what God said, ignore that too, but then correct other men when they seek to impose that on men.

There are contradictions in Scripture, but there are no contradictions in what Jesus, himself (only himself) said. You start with what he said LAST, because that's when all is fully revealed. And then you move backwards.

Or you spare yourself the trouble and accept the basic summary we've already seen a few times (no need to repeat it here).

If the problem is that you have trouble believing that God IS, then he left artifacts that prove it. Go look at them.

If the problem is that you really don't know what God WANTS, then read HIS words in Scripture. To save yourself time, just read Jesus, starting with Revelation (not the images, but what he actually SAYS, before and after the images), and then go read what he said in the Gospels. And stop. Jesus is the way. Ignore the rest of Scripture and all of the Churches and just fix your eyes on Jesus and what he himself SAID, and DO THAT, and you're fine, as far as eternal life and passing judgment goes. (You won't be fine with other men, who will seek to establish their dominance over you by insisting you ALSO believe THEIR doctrines about what Jesus MEANT. Jesus MEANT what he SAID. So read that and ignore the other men. Sometimes this may mean ignoring Paul too, because Paul wrote in a certain way to certain audiences, about conversations that were already had, and in private correspondence to boot. Some of what Paul says about belief appears to contradict what Jesus said about being judged on deeds. Jesus is God. Paul isn't. You can spend a lot of time convincing yourself Paul doesn't REALLY conflict (and he doesn't), or you can spare yourself and ignore Paul and listen to Jesus. You cannot go wrong doing what Jesus said, but you can go wrong doing what anybody else says if it makes you not do something Jesus said. Jesus is Lord for you, nobody else.

If your problem is trying to make all of the vast body of material make sense, then first cut to the chase and do what Jesus said, and spend your leisure time trying to work out the puzzle. Or ignore it. It doesn't matter anyway to YOU. YOU are going to pass judgment, or not, based on how well you followed Jesus.

If your problem is that other men are imposing, arrogant, tell you nonsense, and really annoy you with all their prattling and preachiness...well, welcome to the human race. (And if it REALLY bothers you THAT MUCH, then resist the urge to write to ME about these things, because I always write back).

Up thread, I told folks that their wide ranging questions required a thoughtful response. I've given most of those responses in the past few posts, but I guess I should close the door here.

BECAUSE we don't inherit physical death from Adam, Jesus' death was not, for us Gentiles, about making an offering for us. The offerings and redemptions and sacrifices were for Jews, and Jesus did what he did within the Jewish system, to satisfy requirements of it, and close the books on the Jewish sacrifices, to fulfill and complete them before pulling down the Temple and destroying the altar forever.

What Jesus means to us Gentiles is that death is not the end, we live forever IF we follow him. To follow him, we have to do what HE said, which is generally at odds with what the world says (and sometimes with what we WANT). Do that, and when we die, we get to live. Tribe and sacrifice have nothing to do with it. It's one on one, none of our tribes mean anything to God, and we're not judged by tribe but by deed. We don't have to become Jews to follow Jesus, and in fact we can ignore everything about the Jews, as long as we follow Jesus. If we ignore the Jews, we won't understand many things Jesus talks about, because HE has to complete a specific law given by YHWH to the Jews, but that law was to the Jews and for the Jews, and never had anything to do with Gentiles, and still doesn't.

Prediction: I've just told a lot of men that key parts of their theologies are wrong. I've said that the wrongness is IRRELEVANT, as long as they do what Jesus SAID, but men will press further and not simply listen to Jesus on how to be acceptable to him, they will insist that their traditions are also part of the highest truth, and must be accepted, and that I'm an agent of Lucifer if I say otherwise, and all sorts of other accusations that will not be respectful. It's all been done before.

When Jesus is the subject, Gabbatha is never far away.

Jesus IS the subject. Read him, and base all of your beliefs and laws on him ALONE, and you will be doing well. Dilute him with others, and you may know more, but when you start convincing yourself that the easier paths proposed by others are "just as true" as what Jesus said, because "they were his apostles", you've lost the trail. The Apostles sometimes did contradict Jesus. And whenever they did, they were wrong by definition.

Don't get wrapped around the axle. There is one leader. Follow HIM. Not me. And not some other guy who will certainly be less respectful of you than I am. He and I both "know it all", but the difference is that he says "Listen to HIM!", but I say "Listen to JESUS" and point to HIS words.

That's the law, and there's not very much of it.

If you want a "Just Jesus" synopsis, that just contains the words spoken by Christ with a little bit of surrounding text for contextual framework, in the order he said what he said, in a "concordant" format (such that the same Greek word is always translated by the same English word, and no single English word is used to translate two different Greek words) so that you can see the full nuance of difference but also the same terminology across the texts, then ask and I will send it to you.

Study what Jesus said, Just Jesus, day after day. There's no much of it, and some is hard. But remember what Jesus said about sin: if you want to be forgiven it by God, then forgive men.

And of all of your sins and flaws, the one to work on the most is being bitter and unyielding and unforgiving of other men, because you have sins as we all do, and the only way you're going to be forgiven those sins is if you forgive other men. THAT part: the YOU doing the very thing for other men you don't like that you want GOD to do for YOU, is not optional or negotiable.

If you sin much but you forgive much, you will be forgiven much. But if you sin little love little and judge harshly, you've probably doomed yourself. Jesus told you that YOU set the standards of your OWN judgment. If YOU are an unyielding, judgmental bastard, that's the standard by which you shall be judged. Jesus promised it. So, if you are one, then understand that your approach is going to get you damned, by your own hand, and repudiate your stupidity, back down from your belief in your own rectitude, and be lenient. You want God to be lenient with you, yes? You've said that God is cruel for judging us harshly for sins if our nature doesn't let us stop.

Yes, he WOULD BE, but that's not the standard he set. He said that he will judge you according to the standards by which YOU judged other men their sins against you.

So, we were talking about sexual sins. All men have them. Men who are judgmental prigs about the sexual sins of others are simply men who think their secrets are safe. What they have done is set a standard of judgment for themselves that will be God being as unyielding and unforgiving of THEIR sexual sins as THEY have been of other men's. You are judged by the measure by which YOU judged. Jesus promised that - which is GOOD NEWS if you're lenient. But it means you have damned yourself to death in hell if you are a harsh, stern, judgmental and unyielding prick when it comes to others.

As YOU judge, you SHALL be judged. That's Jesus' promise to the lenient, and threat to the unyielding. So if you're unyielding, yield. Back down. Soften. Be lenient. Harshness will get you little good in life. In the afterlife, it will get you damned. Jesus promised that. So be lenient.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   11:05:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#165. To: redleghunter (#151)

I posed the question Jasper.

Which needed refienment, if not context.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:09:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#166. To: GarySpFC (#159)

Let's see. I have one love letter from my sweetie, and I'm having trouble understanding what she means by the word "love." Unfortunately, or fortunately, I have 35,000 letters from her, and she used the word love in many of them.

ping to 127. I hope this illustrates my point. What if half of her letters used like (or sunstitute any other word that may hace the nuance of love) instead of love?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:12:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#167. To: redleghunter, SOSO, liberator, vicomte13 (#152)

That's easy. If we have the capacity to stop the shedding of innocent blood and do nothing about it, then we are guilty of that shed blood. So, if killing the nut protects innocent life we have a moral right to defend.

I believe that vicomte13 has a different take. His take on Thou Shall Not Kill is that Scripture tells us that God tells us not the shed blood, which may include killing, murder, maiming, etc.. Things are not as neat as you state.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:16:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#168. To: GarySpFC (#158)

All that hearsay upon hearsay in God's Word has made it null and void.

No, not null and void but open to questions of fidelity.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:22:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#169. To: GarySpFC (#158)

This has enormous implications for our understanding of the NT manuscripts and [for] our question: How long were they used? What was their longevity before they were retired or thrown out?

And the answer is.................

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:25:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#170. To: Vicomte13 (#164)

Did God originally create Adam to be physically immortal?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   11:37:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#171. To: SOSO, GarySpFC (#147)

Worse yret, when it comes to scripture much of it is in dead languages. And for those that are still around the nuances of words have changed over time. One cannot be certain what the nuance of the word agape was two thousand years ago.

We do know what agape means. We have generations since the Resurrection using the same words even when the language progresses.

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”(Isaiah 40:8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   11:42:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#172. To: GarySpFC, redleghunter, viconte13, Liberator (#159)

Let's see. I have one love letter from my sweetie, and I'm having trouble understanding what she means by the word "love." Unfortunately, or fortunately, I have 35,000 letters from her, and she used the word love in many of them.

I have to thank you for your post. I have never been satisfied that I was adequately articluating my point on why I believe that Scripture, while may be necessry, is not sufficient as its fidelity is open to question. You have given me a means to improve upon stating my position. So here it is.

Why do you know that your sweetie loves you? It's becuase she told you herself. She told you face to face while looking into your eyes and holding your hand. You heard her say the words I Love You directly to you and she probably said other words to you with the nuance of the meaning of love on many other occasions. She did not send one of her firends to tell you that she loves you or another one to tell you that she really cares for you a lot or yet another one to tell you that she really likes you or another yet to tell you that she wants to be with you. She did it herself, not through hearsay from a less than perfect proxy.

Now had she sent her emmisaries to deliver their nuanced messages of her love for you, you may have found that very comforting and encouraging. You even may act upon those messages. But until you heard it directly from her, until she herself touched your soul there was always a bit of unertainty. Thomas needed to touch Jesus' wounds to seal the deal for Thomas and he had plenty of personal contact with Jesus prior to that and still doubted.

Jesus touches our lives in many ways. For some it may be Scripture. But IMO if that is the only way a person knows the presence of God in his life it is lacking in substance, it is an incomplete relationship - it is a relationship based on hearsay. It is much more assuring if you hear/feel God communicating to you Himself that He loves you.

That's it.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   12:26:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#173. To: SOSO, GarySpFc, liberator (#172)

It is much more assuring if you hear/feel God communicating to you Himself that He loves you.

That's it.

The very evidence The Father loves us. He gave us Jesus Christ:

John 3:

10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? 11 Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.[a] 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but[b] have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”(Isaiah 40:8)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-16   15:21:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#174. To: SOSO (#139)

God says thou shall not kill. Does He mean that in the absoulte in every circumstance? Or does He expect you to protect the lives of your family even if it meant that you had to kill to do so?

God said to the HEBREWS on Sinai: "You shall not kill". He never said that to the rest of us.

What he said to the rest of us was, first "Do not shed man's blood. He who sheds man's blood, by man his blood must be shed."

And then, Jesus, at the end, said that murderers do not enter the City. Murderers.

Distinctions of killing and murder, and vengeance, and trial procedures - those were all laws laid down specifically for God in the Constitution of the only state that he ever ruled directly as King: ancient Israel. And they were all predicated, all of them, on DO THIS, and YOU GET A FARM."

"You shall not kill", given at Sinai, given only to Hebrews at Sinai, along with a bunch of judicial laws and rules as to what killing was - the entirety of that - was a rule for that people, in that time, and it never applied to anybody else.

For the only reward ever offered to the Hebrews under the law - if they didn't kill, or commit adultery, and did everything as told at Sinai, was that they would live securely and prosperously and be fertile and have families on their own farm in Israel. That is it. That is ALL. God never said one word about the afterlife, or judgment, or life after death, or the soul, to the Hebrews at Sinai. The man who followed the WHOLE JEWISH LAW was not "saved" from anything. If he wasn't a Jew, he got nothing. There was no promise of anything, except for circumcised members of the Hebrew community, and the ONLY THING God EVER promised them for obeying the law of Sinai was a FARM. THAT is the Mosaic Covenant..."Do not kill (or any of the other stuff), and you'll live in peace on your own farm in Israel." THAT was the reward that God promised the Israelites.

He never said a thing - not one thing - about what happens to any Israelite's spirit or soul after that person dies. Nothing. The "Old Covenant" with the Jews, was a direct promise: obey these conditions and you get a farm, in this particular land, during your physical life. God never said one single word about life after death, or judgment, or going to Heaven, in the Old Covenant with the Jews. Nowhere in the Torah is there a whiff of it.

SO, you as a Gentile, watching your family being attacked, what law did God give to YOU?

He NEVER commanded YOU, or any ancestor you ever had, "Thou shall not kill." That law was for Jews. Nobody else.

He said "Do not shed man's blood", coupled with "He who sheds man's blood, by man his blood must be shed."

Is the man who is aiming to kill your family shedding man's blood? Yes. Then God has COMMANDED you to shed his blood. If you sit by and do nothing, you are not obeying God's command to punish - by bloodshed of the perpetrator - his crimes.

Further, at the last Supper Jesus told his disciples that they'd been free from attack during his life, so he had sent them out unarmed, but now that he was leaving they had to sell their extra cloak and buy a sword. Jesus told his disciples to arm themselves, with swords, so that they could defend themselves violently if need be. Jesus not only did not command his followers to not shed blood, he commanded his followers to arm themselves so that they would be ready TO shed blood, in their own defense, if necessary.

If somebody is attacking your family, you are the good shepherd of that family: God ordered all men to shed the blood of men who shed blood - bloodshed must be repaid by bloodshed: that is God's COMMANDMENT to Noah and mankind in general.

(He ruled Israel directly and had special laws for Israel, the reward for obedience of which was a farm, for Jews, in Israel - UNTIL Jesus pronounced the doom on Israel; now there's not even THAT.)(Oh, and the law of Israel merely provided a PROCEDURE for shedding the blood of those who shed blood, to be sure it is just.)

Finally, on the last page of the Bible Jesus twice said that MURDERERS do not enter the City of God after judgment, but are thrown into the fire.

MURDERERS are men who kill others without justification.

So, we have three pieces of non-Israelite reference: (1) Men must shed the blood of those men who shed blood - God, to Noah and his sons, speaking of MAN, not of just them.

(2)Jesus commanded his followers to arm to defend themselves.

(3) Jesus said twice that murderers - specifically - will be damned to the flames.

The law God gave the Israelites doesn't depart from these principles at all. It's useful to read it because of the greater detail that God gives to the people under his direct civil governance. But before we dive into that detail we have to stop short and remind ourselves over and over: NOTHING IN THE LAW OF MOSES EVER APPLIED TO ANYBODY BUT HEBREWS IN ISRAEL. Nothing. Not. One. Word.

Yes, there are laws in there that ALSO apply to the whole world, but God didn't reveal those laws TO the world THROUGH Israel. He revealed those laws either through Noah and his sons (remember, all of humanity was concentrated on that one boat, were all related, and all got the law delivered to them much more personally than the Hebrews did, sprawled out in a million-person camp at the foot of a mountain with only one or two guys speaking to him).

We have to remember that because otherwise we end up saying that we have to, or are PERMITTED to, say, burn witches at the stake because God commanded the Israelites to kill witches, so we know that he approves. But actually, God ONLY gave permission to the Israelites to do that, in his land. For US, he commanded not to shed blood, not to murder. Killing a witch if you're not in ancient Israel under God's direct rule is MURDER. The ancient Sanhedrin who ordered a witch killed were doing right. The medieval bishop's court that ordered a witch burnt, and everybody who burnt here, were murderers who themselves will likely be burnt in the lake of fire.

If you are going to pick up the tools of violence, you had damned well better UNDERSTAND God's law. Because you will be held accountable for that killing.

The law of Israel confuses people, much in the same way that Paul confuses people on some central facts. For that very reason, it is most important to read exactly what GOD said DIRECTLY, himself and through Jesus. THAT IS THE LAW.

And under THAT law, you MUST intervene to save your family, if you shed the would-be killer's blood, you have done justice. Of course, if you go off half cocked, make up a threat that's not there, and blow away a lost kid who wandered into your garage because you're a nutjob with a hairtrigger who imagines threats, then you're just a murderer and are going to the fire at judgment, probably. God sees hearts. If you're so overwrought that you fear everything and strike to kill, then you need to get help.

Because remember: COWARDS are also thrown into the fire. God damns COWARDS as well as killers. So, if you violently stop this killer from killing your family, and you have good reason - reason that would stand up to honest witnesses - to believe that you are saving their lives, defending them and yourself, then you have done right: who have shed the blood of the bloodshedder, you have been the good shepherd that has killed the lion.

But if you're unreasonably afraid, and just shoot somebody who is near your family on suspicion, because "you know how things go", then you're a murderer, and damned, or if he actually lives, you may be damned anyway, for shedding a man's life out of your own cowardice. Remember, God damns both murderers AND cowards to the fire: both.

Why cowards? Because he who would preserve his life will lose it. Men who make an idol out of biological life lack faith. They do not remember that flesh is grass, and death comes to all, but life goes on. We are spirits in a body, and the spirit is our life. We do what is right, and if that exposes us to danger such that we die, then we die.

But before we go out there shedding blood in our headstrong arrogance, because we have convinced ourselves that "we have the right" by our human legal logic, we have to remember that OUR human logic doesn't count for shit in the court of God, that God gave specific directions and commandments, and that man will be judged on God's law alone.

A bishop and 60 clergy of the courts of northern France tried and sentenced Joan of Arc to be burnt alive for carrying out the instructions she heard from God. They did this because she upset their political applecart and overthrew a government they preferred, with much loss of life among the conquerors they preferred. They used the legal system to extract revenge. They believed themselves in the right, for surely God would not favor the other side, and her voices could not be proven, so she must be a witch. And witches must die.

Except that if anybody but the ancient Israelite Sanhedrin killed a witch, the killers were murderers God will throw into the lake of fire. Nobody outside of ancient Israel had the right to kill any witch.

The problem for those clergymen who damned themselves to the flames by sending Joan of Arc to the flames is simple: they committed murder. They used their power to murder a woman they hated, on the grounds that she was a witch.

Had they tried her on the grounds that she killed people, they would have also have had to try their own reigning nobility and every soldier in their own army, and they did not think that way. God does, by HIS law, but those men didn't.

This is the problem of trying to force man's law down on top of God's. When it's done, it's ALWAYS to give men GREATER leeway than God gives, and it often plays around with those very things that God has warned will result in the fire of hell.

Men cannot authorize other men to get a pass out of hell for doing men's bidding. And when men are faced with the problem of those orders, God commands them to be courageous, and warns that cowardice buys hell just as surely as killing.

Sometimes to protect life, you have to kill. That's not murder under God's law, but it may well be under human law. Conversely, sometimes to obey human commanders and laws you are ordered to do things that you must defy in order to not break God's law. You can kill to stop the shedding of innocent blood, and if you can stop the shedding of innocent blood, you must do so - if you hang back and refuse to do it to protect your own reputation, you're a coward. But you don't have to throw your life away in a hopeless attack either.

Human laws of order do not trump God's law, and God gave you a head to use.

There should be no crisis of conscience when a man is watching his wife and children endangered by a nutso, because God's law is clear: you intervene, forcefully, and you stop the killing. If you don't because you think that God prohibits that, then you have bought a load of bull taught to you by idiot men.

God only said four things to YOU about killing: You are not to go out looking for shedding blood. You are not to murder. You ARE to defend yourself, and you ARE to shed the blood of those who shed blood. Don't be a coward.

That's it. That's the law.

Murderers and cowards are thrown into the fire. Defend yourself and punish killers. That's God's law. It's unambiguous. And if you take any part of God's specific law for the Jews in Israel and use that law, which does not apply to you, to try to override or weasel out of God's short, stern, clear law for YOU, you're doing it wrong.

And whoever tells you otherwise can't read.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   16:31:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#175. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator, redlegnuter (#174)

If anythnig you are certainly thorough.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   16:39:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#176. To: redleghunter, GarySpFc, liberator (#173)

The very evidence The Father loves us. He gave us Jesus Christ:

I guess that I still haven't made my point well.

And exactly how do you, I or anyone know that God gave us Jesus? Through third party written words or through personally revealing His presence to us?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   16:54:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#177. To: SOSO (#172)

While I was His enemy Christ died for me. That is love.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   17:55:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#178. To: GarySpFC (#177)

While I was His enemy Christ died for me. That is love.

When were you ever Christ's enemy?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   18:03:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#179. To: SOSO (#176) (Edited)

1 John 5:10 (AMP)

10 He who believes in the Son of God [who adheres to, trusts in, and relies on Him] has the testimony [possesses this divine attestation] within himself. He who does not believe God [in this way] has made Him out to be and represented Him as a liar, because he has not believed (put his faith in, adhered to, and relied on) the evidence (the testimony) that God has borne regarding His Son.

. Is God a liar?

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   18:16:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#180. To: GarySpFC (#179)

Is God a liar?

You are getting a little slippery here, Gary.

"He who believes in the Son of God [who adheres to, trusts in, and relies on Him] has the testimony [possesses this divine attestation] within himself."

Is God a liar? Of course not. I am surprised that you are still asking.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   18:28:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#181. To: SOSO (#180)

The point being do you believe His testimony?

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org/Bible

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-16   18:31:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#182. To: SOSO (#170)

Did God originally create Adam to be physically immortal?

Don't know. Can't know. God didn't say.

Perhaps if a man never sins, and is never killed by somebody else committing a sin (or killed through the agency of somebody else's sin (e.g.: somebody pouring mercury in the waters)), then we might not die.

But we all sin, and so we all die.

The "hard case" might appear to be children with birth defects who die before they can sin. But if one explores each birth defect, one may very well find a human agency there, with the defect the product of disease or problem that resulted from human agency. Certainly people who live around toxic dumps have more defects - the babies didn't sin, but like Abel, they were really killed by somebody else's sin.

No way to know for sure.

Just as there is no way to know for certain that you will in fact die. The world may end first. Or you might not. Chances are, though, that if you're able to contemplate this sort of thing, you've already committed a mortal sin.

And the reason you "had" to was because of the dysfunctional and sinful structures of our society working against our natures.

God made up his mind about the physics long ago, and he's not going to change it. So if our social and legal and governmental structures force us all onto a path that inevitably leads to mortal sin, and death, then we have to see that - just as we have with cigarette smoking - and take the painful step of changing the way we choose to do business, choose to govern ourselves, choose to have laws. If we do that, we may be able to relax the human-imposed strictures that funnel us all down the chute of mortal sin. And if we don't sin, maybe we won't die, and maybe we will.

The Scripture does not ever say that there is anything intrinsically different between us and Adam that would have caused HIM to live forever if he hadn't sinned, but which causes us to die regardless. It only tells us that the wage of sin is death.

If you've already sinned, you're going to die physically.

Until Jesus, that was a disaster. It was Jesus' new covenant that gave the second chapter and told us that death is not so bad after all, that more and better awaits the good.

God doesn't change the physics: you sin, you die, BUT he showed the second act.

And THAT is why Jesus had to die - in order to be resurrected, to demonstrate the very good new that death ain't nuthin' but a thing.

To the extent that we are excessively concerned about death and think that it's a disaster to be held off at all cost - that in itself is idolatry, causing us to serve the flesh and forget that flesh is grass and that if we're brave, good - and forgiving - once we get flesh BACK, we get to keep it and live with God.

Some say this is not human nature. I am human, I understand it perfectly well. So yes, it IS human nature to be able to see it, understand it, and act on it. Humans who resist this truth are idolators, refusing to accept the good news and CHOOSING to treat flesh as though it were more important than it is. Idolators fail final judgment. To find your life, you have to lose it. Cowardice results in damnation. Refusing to repent results in damnation. Refusing to forgive results in damnation. Idolatry results in damnation.

So don't do any of those things. Be brave: they can't DO anything to you but kill you, and flesh is grass anyway. They can't really kill you: Jesus proved it. THAT's the good news, and the purpose of the crucifixion and the resurrection - and that's WHY God left the Shroud of Turin as the specific, most remarkable of all of the artifacts, to commemorate THAT VERY EVENT - the horrible death AND the miracle of the resurrection.

Which means divinity. Which means you can trust what HE said.

I just repeat what HE said. It's a good deal. It's good news.

Words are wind and flesh is grass, but wind is spirit, so keep the spirit and follow the words of Jesus - Just Jesus - and you will come through.

And you MIGHT not even die. God MIGHT forgive you your sins and let you just keep on living. Of course, after time, as you knew that for certain, that flesh would become a hell of a burden. For the longer the miracle continued, the more you'd realize it WAS a miracle...and then all of a sudden immortality would look like a curse.

WHY is the wage of sin death? Pretty obvious, really. Once man gets a taste for sin, that sin becomes practically irresistible. But God doesn't change his mind any more than men do, and God is the King and judge - men are just insubordinate, corrupt and violent soldiers, bad cops, crooked judges. Eventually there's an accounting, and Gehenna, and various dispositions.

But if there were no death, men would marinate in their sins forever, until the end of the world. Imagine the horror if men just kept springing back to life and could not be permanently killed. Then man could never escape the cruelty of man, and a man could be tortured to death a thousand times to rise and face it a thousand times more, for as long as another immortal man hated him.

Death is a punishment, but it is also a strange gift. It cuts off Satan, by removing the flesh from the spirit. For Satan puts his hooks in the flesh, but the spirit CAN be cleansed.

Jesus said how.

Lots of men have said how too, but what men say is often quite different from what Jesus said.

Jesus said that if you sin, and if you want to be forgiven, then you have to forgive other men their sins against you. To the extent you forgive other men, God will forgive you. To the extent you hold other men accountable to you for their debts, God will hold you accountable to them for theirs.

Some men say that you don't have to do anything, because Jesus' death "redeemed" you. Redeption fits within the sequence of Jewish sacrifices - which have nothing to do with Gentiles and never did. Men say that nevertheless, Jesus' death is all that does it. But JESUS says that men are judged by their deeds, and that if men want to be forgiven, they have to forgive. Jesus is right.

Some men say that men have to say certain prayers and go through certain rituals to be forgiven their sins. Jesus said that God will forgiven men's sins if they forgive men their sins, but that God won't forgive men who don't forgive. Once again there is a conflict. And once again, Jesus is Lord, and therefore right, and the men who say otherwise are wrong.

Some men say that men have to become religious zealots to be forgiven their sins. They say that Jesus said to be perfect, and that therefore men have to perfectly follow the rules of religion. These men are half right: Jesus said to be perfect, and men do have to perfectly follow the rules. But then men propose a bunch of rules that Jesus didn't say. Jesus said be perfect, do this and don't do that, but included in the rule is the rule that says that God will forgive your breaking the rules if, and to the extent that, you forgive other men breaking the rules.

We all have free will. We all choose what we believe, and what we're going to do about it. Read what Jesus said: keep your eyes on HIM, and ignore the rest, and you'll have a pretty simple, even threadbare, religion. It will be hard and not very colorful. And you'll pass judgment and go into the City at the end - and there it will make a whole lot more sense.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   18:35:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#183. To: redleghunter (#140)

You missed the overarching piece. The actual Gospel.

I didn't miss anything: the forgive to be forgiven, and you will be measured by the measured with which you measured comes directly from the mouth of Christ in the Gospel.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   18:38:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#184. To: GarySpFC (#181)

The point being do you believe His testimony?

Of course. I received and accpeted His testimony from the Holy Ghost as a gift from God.

Now, I have answered every one of your questions, yet you do not answer mine. Why is that?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   18:40:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#185. To: Vicomte13 (#182)

Perhaps if a man never sins.......then {he} might not die.

Jesus never sinned yet He did die.

But you really go along way around the barn to use logic not to come up the the most logical conclusion that God did indeed create Adam and Eve to be physically immortal. You can conclude this because God said to them that they would die if they ate the forbidden fruit.

If God intend from the beginning that Adma and Eve to physically die at so time, presumably to be transformed into an after life with with Him, why would He have created the flesh to begin with?

Yeah, I know God works in mysterious ways and we mortals can't know the Mind of God. As soon as any of us applies human logic, human reasoning to describe or understand God we fail in that endeavor and are left to our own devices.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   18:53:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#186. To: SOSO (#175)

If anythnig you are certainly thorough.

Yeh.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   19:07:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#187. To: TooConservative (#161)

I have no doubt he's not religious he's just trying to make religious people out to be a hypocrites while trying to portray himself as a saint, talk about a legend in his own mind.

“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”

CZ82  posted on  2015-01-16   20:29:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#188. To: SOSO (#185)

Jesus never sinned yet He did die.

But you really go along way around the barn to use logic not to come up the the most logical conclusion that God did indeed create Adam and Eve to be physically immortal. You can conclude this because God said to them that they would die if they ate the forbidden fruit.

Jesus was MURDERED, which is not the same thing as just dying from natural mortality.

Adam and Eve, or you or I - being IMMORTAL doesn't mean we can't be killed by lightning or drowning or poisoning, or get cancer from exposure to plutonium.

It would mean that our bodies would not age and wear out on their own, causing us to die of old age if nothing killed us sooner.

And maybe if we didn't sin, we wouldn't age and die.

This proposition is difficult to test, because we've sinned.

One proposition that is not so difficult to test is that notion that "Original Sin" is the sentence to die because of Adam's sin, that Adam lost his immortality because he sinned, and that THAT is this "Original Sin". If THAT were really true, then if baptism washed away "Original Sin", then people who were baptized would be immortal, because their sins, including Original Sin, were all washed away.

Truth is, we may very well STILL be immortal, each of us, right now (if we ever were), because Scripture does not say that Adam incurred inheritable Original Sin for eating the apple. All that God said is "If you eat of it, you will die." He did, and he did.

Nothing says that Adam would not have eventually been killed by something else - probably not, because he was in God's garden and the animals were tame and the humans had dominion. Nothing says that they wouldn't have aged. Tradition says that, but Adam and Eve in the garden, and their original condition, is only a few sentences long.

Nor does anything in the Scripture tell you that if a man is born and grows up and never sins, that he will die of natural causes. Nothing there says that man must die of natural causes. What God DOES say is that certain sins are deadly. He'll kill you for them. And he does. Lots of passages (none of them spoken by God directly) say that all men sin. That's probably right: all men DO, and there are at least two reasons for that; conditions are bad, and we do have active, aggressive and intelligent enemies: Satan and demons, aggressively pushing us to do bad things and die.

Now, if Original Sin really meant the removal of immortality, then if baptism really removes Original Sin (as some men tell themselves), then the baptized man who never sins again is immortal...but when he commits a mortal sin, then he's back on the cycle of degradation and death.

Want to live forever in the flesh? Then be perfect and don't sin and you very well might...except that somebody else will kill you, or an accident will intervene, but that's not mortality, that's getting killed. Mortality is wearing out and dying of natural causes that are not externally inflicted.

Query as to whether terrible environmental conditions are themselves deadly things ways by which sinful men inadvertently kill other men.

The problem with the concept of Original Sin, that Adam did something that taints the blood and causes us to die, is that God never said anything like that. To the Jews, he said that men were punished for THEIR sins, not the sins of their fathers. Of course that was a principle of Jewish law and doesn't directly apply to anybody else (but it shows you how God thinks).

To us, he said that if you sin, God pays you with death.

The good news is that it's just physical death, and just for a time.

It's logical to assume that Adam and Eve were immortal, and that sin is what killed them. And it is equally logical to assume that the identical thing is true of every man or woman ever born. YOU were immortal, but you sinned, so now you're under a death sentence. Same with your wife, children, everybody.

The case of Jesus tells us that an immortal sinless man can STILL be MURDERED - immortality is not superhuman.

It is not logical to assume that Adam's sin created a taint in the blood that passes. It's not logical to assume it because God never said it. We die because we sin, not because he sinned. That's what God said, and THAT is logical.

Now, it may be that that is just too unpleasant to bear: that you WERE immortal, but you yourself did the same thing that Adam did and went ahead and did what you know was forbidden, so now you're going to die. But on a straight read of Scripture, unpleasant or not, that's true.

I'm not going to die because of Adam's sin. I'm going to die because of my own. Adam lived 930 years, sin and all, so maybe you or I will too. The REAL lasting effect of Adam's and Eve's sin is that they got kicked out of the natural habitat of man. So now, instead of living naked and eating fruit at ease like we're supposed to, we're living in really bad conditions that wear us down, with violence and death and disease all around us.

Perhaps Adam was immortal IN EDEN, because there were no diseases IN EDEN, and perhaps aging and disease are things that are imposed by the bad environment, so perhaps the WAY that Adam's sin killed us all isn't because of some taint of the blood that gets washed off (makes no sense: baptism doesn't stop aging, disease and death, and it should if those things are the consequence of Mortal Sin, and Baptism washes away mortal sin). Perhaps the WAY that Adam's sin killed us is by getting us kicked out of our perfect habitat where we would live forever, into a hostile one that wears us out.

We used to live in Paradise. But now we're wearing out in the disease infested jungle. THAT, and not mysterious taints in the blood, is probably why we wear out and die.

But again, focusing on the flesh is kind of pointless. Flesh is grass. Be immortal, live "forever", and "forever" is the end of the world, in fire, so you get to burn to death at the end. Great.

We can't hold onto it even if we're sinless Adam. And we're not.

The good news is that we get it back. The bittersweet news is that we get it back, and then we get judged.

The good news is that if we pass the test, we get to live on and on in the City of God.

The bad news is that if we fail the test, we get thrown into the fire and killed again.

The good news is that we already have the crib sheet and know how to pass.

The bad news is that we have an insubordination problem.

So, the bottom line is that we each need to get over our insubordination problem if we want to live until the end of times in God's City.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-16   20:56:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#189. To: Vicomte13 (#188)

Jesus never sinned yet He did die.

Jesus was MURDERED, which is not the same thing as just dying from natural mortality.

Here's my accepted definition of mortality, one which I believe is widely accepted:

mor·tal·i·ty

noun: mortality; plural noun: mortalities

1. the state of being subject to death.

What's yours?

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-16   21:27:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#190. To: CZ82 (#187)

I have no doubt he's not religious he's just trying to make religious people out to be a hypocrites while trying to portray himself as a saint, talk about a legend in his own mind.

He's looking for cover by posing as a Christian or, more likely, he's trying to annoy us so much that we bozo him (again) so he can sneak around like a backstabbing stalker on the forum and badmouth us behind our backs while high-fiving his fellow-Canaries in forum mails.

Pretty much one or the other.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-16   21:49:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (191 - 223) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com