I’ve noticed that the more religious forums I’ve been on the more people seem to stray away from the biblical principals & believe in some sort of offshoot of Christianity, which seems to come from picking & choosing what to believe & what not to believe. I have seen those who will quote a bible verse to make a point & in the same breath tell you how they do not believe in the bible. What gives here? Again I was taught to believe in what the bible teaches us & if you didn’t like it then maybe it wasn’t for you & so you moved on. This is just a shot in the dark here but here goes. Maybe people don’t live by the bible because it's impossible. Or maybe they were not taught to believe in the bible word for word? One other thought & this might sound bad Sorry if it does. Could it be that they refuse to believe that God would do & say those things in the bible? That just maybe the men who wrote it got it wrong? Being that over some 2,000 years someone could of wrote down what they wanted to instead of what they should of wrote. Seems to me to be admitting that Christians don't in fact derive their beliefs or actions from the Bible in any consistent or coherent way, but cherry pick according to their current situation and values. I full agree that Christianity "does not have its basis a rational or logical construction. I was taught to believe that God inspired the Bible. That means that the men who wrote it were true followers of God and influenced what they wrote. God did not come on the earth and write things. If you notice, not even Jesus ever wrote any thing. His apostles did. So here’s my question finally! To me those who do not believe in the bible is the same thing as those who call themselves Christian- Pagans you can do it but keep your head down because your going to get attacked a lot. Where do you get your direction from? IF you don’t go to church or read the bible do you just tend to believe that maybe if you were God this is how you should be living? Help me out here please I want to understand this.


Sorry I got a bit carried away.

Job 19:25 - 27 And as for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God; Whom I myself shall behold, And whom my eyes shall see and not another.

Always a pleasure

It IS impossible to live according to the bible, as the bible is full of contradiction after contradiction. That being the case, some Christians pick and choose which side of any given contradiction is to be taken metaphorically, but the other on is to be taken literally. A lot of Christians have realized that the bible makes absolutely no sense at all, and basically serves no purpose except for poorly kept history, and they think that maybe God did inspire the bible, but the men who wrote it down got it all wrong, or the context was lost in the translations, or what have you.

In that case, I would ask what parts of the bible are even true at all then? Why do you even think there is a God if you don't believe the ONLY source we have for information on him?

If the Bible had never existed, would Christianity exist?

Believe it or not, There are Still some people out there that do tend to try to live according to the Bible and the guildlines within. There is more than what you see, look into the Apostlic doctrine, faith, beliefs, etc. They live the closest I have seen. They believe the Bible is Gods word, messeage to mankind, a light unto their path. They beleive and try to live it line upon line and Precept upon Precept.

Your right it would be very hard to live your life according to the bible these days & it full of contradictions.
There are laws saying not to work on the Sabbath which in this day & age you’ll work when you can get it.
I’m not saying that you should or have to live your life by the bible be there should be some kind of guidelines every belief does so I want to know where they get those guidelines from. There is the NT in which people seems to follow because it’s the Christian bible being the OT is the Jewish bible a lot of people tend to lick at that book.

When I was younger I thought too that it was impossible to live by the bible. I've never read from the bible directly (except for a bit in the genises section) but everything jesus says makes sense to me. I've heard stories from my different school religion books over the years and they make sense to me. I think that if you feel that you would be confining yourself by living by the bible than you are missing the point. In my point of you if you understood it then you wouldn't be confining yourself to it. Now i'm not firmilar with any contradictions maybe the heaven and hell stuff. Jesus makes sense to me. So how should i live if i don't live by the bible? Well basically you can live anyway you want regardless of what you do. Their is nothing wrong with what you do. Nothing wrong with killing someone. Well their isent in terms of evoloution or darwin. It basically implies we don't have a meaning. Moral seems to be tied to the fact the we feel bad things and feel good things. Basically we experience things while the physical universe doesn't. So would it be right to assume that we are more importnant that the physical universe mainly because we can experience feelings and emotions. From this stand point you could assume that you should not try and hurt things than can experience. If you understand the morals than you will understand that it's not about how much money you have or how much material posetions you have. So you can easily live by the bible if you believe this. no?

The should never be a book to learn morals from just look at all the death & killing that goes on in it.Nor should any book for that matter.
Morals should be taught at home not from a religious text. Your parents should teach you about such things.

Well ok... what are morals based on? How would you ever discover that there are morals in a society of law. How can parents teach you morals if the father thinks that men are superior to women? I think the death and killing are in the old testiment. The new testiment is much diffrent. Ok lets not look at relgioun for moral guidence but we will look at science. .... hmmm i don't see anything which tell me that i'm doing right or wrong in regards to science. If I killed someone without anyone knowing it would be ok. If I could make lots of money and other peoples expense thats ok too. well in actuallity it's not ok. It's neither ok or not ok. There is no diffence between killing someone and a rock on the beach. We neglect ourselves by thinking we can be happy by material means but we must look within first to look out morally. when we look within we see that there is a diffrence between killing someone and a rock. How could one learn such things if we one was in north korea?

I'm not buying that OT & NT they both are violent. Your asking alot of IF questions your also assuming that all parents are bad in fact your making alot of assumptions.

I don’t see how they can even come close to living the bible line for line, as a lot of things in the book are illegal such as slavery, polygamy, stoning, wife beating, genocide, etc.

I don't think the bible was ever written to be taken literally. It is nothing more than a collection of historical stories, whether true or fictional, with good morals to them. It is a reference for teaching the morals of the Christian faith. I don't think people should believe in the bible itself, but rather in the lessons it teaches through these stories.

People do live and act the same as in the bible. You had love, hate, killing, lying, etc., etc... So, actually most of us do live the bible.

I personally don't have a problem with a Christian picking and choosing what to follow in the bible, whatever floats their boat. Only problem I would have is when they would try to use a verse against me.

If you have never read the Bible how do you know what is in it and how can you live you life by it? If your going to follow the Bible you should study it. I have to study things for my religion that are a lot harder then the Bible.




I am kind of glad they pick and choose I would hate for people to start obeying that line "suffer a Witch to live" kind of give me the creeps. I am sure you understand.

ill explain why people pick and choose

because we went from worshipping several gods with names to one who is undefined.

so because the supra god is undefined people draw on any nearby religions to define


the christian movement is diseased by doubt because some roman genius [constantine] decided to wrap efery god into one. this was so everyone would bow to the emporer [later the pope] as gods representative.

im not saying christianity is fake im saying it carries a lot of "dead weight" that is destroying its original purpose.

Well, if by "live by the Bible" you mean follow "the Law" then yes, it is IMPOSSIBLE to live by the Bible, which is what God intended. He wanted man to see that he CANNOT live a life worthy of pleasing God. That is why He became a man, lived like a man, and died to pay for our sins.

However, if you are simply pointing out that it's easy to assume the title of Christian but by far not the same as actually living the type of life God calls His followers to lead, then I completely agree with you. It seems a lot of people just want the acceptability that comes from hiding under the largest umbrella around.

A friend once told me " You can't take things from a book that inspire you and ignore that things that don't." I really have no comprehension of people who use to biblical text to support their arguemenst and then say in the same breath that the opposing evidence is ' out of context'.

Well I havent read the Bible. I read A Course In Miracles ages ago instead.. which is Christian in language, so I guess it is an offshoot of Christianity.. So some might think I'm trying to 'act' Christian or something but its not like that. Check out the book I read instead and you'll see.

I'm interested in the Bible sometimes.. when I read certain things which remind me of my dreams. But that's about it. I liked the Gospel of Thomas and some of that kinda stuff too... but I'm not really much of a reader anymore. So I also dont really care about whatever sins are perceived in the Bible because to me its only an example of something more to forgive. So if YHVH was such a meanie.. then you should just forgive that. Like it shouldnt matter.

So yeah.. I guess the book I read was an offshoot of Christianity... but in the end I mainly believe in what I dream and what my heart tells me. That's why I think of Crowley's Lam as the Father(Wandjina) lol.

Hi DW,

While I do agree with the general sentiment that you should most definitely study what you are claiming to base your life on, I was wondering if you could explain to me exactly how what you study is "a lot harder than the Bible" to understand?

When I read the Bible, I need my Greek/Hebrew dictionary to look at the original language and any other meanings that the word has or might have. I need to cross reference what I am reading with other places that similar words/phrases are used (especially if they are within the the same book, or written by the same author). I need to take into consideration so many things - not just what the individual verse says, but how it fits into the chapter, then how it fits into the book, then how it fits into the whole Bible. What style was it written in (historical, narrative, poetry, prophecy). Who was it written for (if known)? Who wrote it (if known)? Why was it written (was it a warning, a judgement, a call to celebrate, a call to persevere....). When was it written (Old Testament or New Testament, or more specifically before the promises of Abraham or after, before the Kingdom Split or after, before the Exile or after). What part of the Old/New Testament is it (the Law, the writings, the wisdom books, or the prophets/ gospels or teachings or revelation). If we wrote a time-line of biblical events, where on that timeline does this event occur? What Greek/Hebrew words are used in the verse (may need a concordance for this part if you're not a Greek/Hebrew scholar). What words are repeated in the passage (repeated words or phrases usually denote special significance). What context is the word used in in this verse? What context was the same word (again, may need a concordance) used in different parts of the specific book (assuming it was used again), and what context did the same author use the word in within other texts they wrote - if they wrote more than one book, that is). What did the author originally intend their reader to gain from the text? Is it the same today?? How does this passage point to Jesus Christ? If Old Testament, how was this passage fulfilled through Jesus? If New Testament, what does this passage show about the character of Jesus?

I would truly like to know what you need to study that you feel is so much harder than what Christians do? Thanks in advance for the response

~ Regards, PA

I can see where you are coming from, Dante, but I can only partly agree with you. If the person simply says "out of context" without any further addition to their comments, then I would most definitely agree with you. But if that same person then goes on to explain exactly why they feel that passage is out of context, and how the context supports that point of view, then I cannot see how you can hold this view, except by a point of bias. No one will ever understand the entire Bible in exactly the same way (though there may very well be many similarities in many instances).

On a personal level, if someone has a different point of view on a passage than I do, I explain exactly why I feel there is a difference of opinion, and then I ask them to provide their own interpretation. And when (or if) they provide their own contextual interpretation, even if I disagree with them, I accept they have a valid point - it's happened before, even with non-Christians. But most often when I make the challenge I never get a contextual response beyond "read that one line, it's obvious" (sometimes not even that).

Sorry, I'm rambling - I've just gotten back from holidays and I'm trying to satisfy my UM withdrawal symptoms, lol. In short, I can agree with you sometimes (when a Christian won't explain their reasoning), but your reasoning seems too generalised and one-sided to me. All the berst, Dante.

~ Regards, PA

Sorry, you have me confused... your title says "to those who believe in God" yet when I come here I find your topic revolves around the bible, perhaps you should have called your topic "for those who believe in the bible"...
I came here to put my 2 cents in but I don't believe in the bible so I will just say this much...
In all religions and all cultures, not just Christianity, there are very few people who stick to the rules...
simple as that, nothing more to it, man is weak...

Physics, Archeology, history, animal behavior, astronomy, ritual writing, magic, and those darn tarot cards. Reading the Bible and studying it was a piece of cake compared to all that, then I was kid and my brain was in better shape.

^ Thanks for the response, DW. I can't say as I agree that the Bible is a "piece of cake", even when compared to other branches of study. Though why you MUST study some of those things is quite confusing to me. For some, I can understand that you would need to, but for others it doesn't make sense. I certainly can understand how having a knowledge of those would improve your overall understanding of Druidism, but are they necessary?

Sorry, I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you (I'm not), I'm just trying to seek clarification. I do agree with you that people should study the religion they follow or claim to follow. For me, the message of the Bible is the simplest message and can be understood after the most basic reading of scripture. But to truly study the Bible takes a lot more than that.

All the best, DW.

~ Regards, PA

Yesy I see what your saying and in some respects I do agree however i find it hard to understand exactly why so many people do argue against meaning and metaphor in the bible. What I mean is that I've never seen or heard any debates about the meaning and context of the teachings of Buddha for example! It just seems to be the three Abrahamic religions that are constantly trying to shift meaning and context to suit the individuals needs why is that? What do you think?

[quote name='Paranoid Android' date='Jan 11 2008, 11:50 PM' post='2090945']
Sorry, I don't mean to sound like I'm attacking you (I'm not), I'm just trying to seek clarification. I do agree with you that people should study the religion they follow or claim to follow. For me, the message of the Bible is the simplest message and can be understood after the most basic reading of scripture. But to truly study the Bible takes a lot more than that.

All the best, DW.

~ Regards, PA
[/quote

Just a quick question of the bible is so simply to read & understand then why did God make it so cryptic? Why the hidden meaning behind some words?
You have stated yourself that the word fear means something else entirely, so going by that statement how is someone supposed to understand it? Sorry a bit off the topic here.

[

the real problem is looking at the bible in a subjective or objective way which is correct? For example especially when it comes to the huge amounts of metaphors that are in the bible - revelations for example! think of it this way two people stand infront of a painting in a gallery one says to the other "what does this painting mean to you?" he replies "I think it represents the turning point of socialism" " really! "said the other " I thought it was just a tree!!!! "

the problem with the bible is it is trying to make sense out of something that is far beyond our comprehension. the idea of us labelling the creator as 'god' seems to make the concept of him managable. somethin that is able to create this vast universe and all the life in it is mind blowing. even just the creation of the earth to us seems impossible because our perception has been moulded by science and is based on logic. the idea of god isnt logical. there is only one rule in the bible that can be easily percived 'love thy neighbour as thy self" the golden rule. having said rule this shouldnt be followed out of fear like most rules, it should be created out of love which should be a natural occurance. 'god' is something that words dont and cant explain, me writing this now is rediculous trying to explain it with words. the bible is thousands of years old, think about the intelligence level back then. there was no education system even if there was there wasnt the communication abilities past a small travelling radius. id say all in all the human race is alot more intelligent now we have alot more resources to learn from which inturn gives us a broader range of thinking. we share information globally. i dont think the bible is about what happens in the stories its about what the stories are saying. trying to proove the stories right or wrong isnt going to change there credibility or teach any one anything. were here to learn through experience to learn things first hand for our selves the chillipeppers said it well 'this life is more than just a read through'

all you need to know is that god is light, light is love and love is everything

There is no problem with the bible. It is not in any way trying to make sense of something incomprehensible. The problem lies in how people interpret it. Take another piece of literature, a novel for example. Everyone sees different symbols and they interpret those symbols in different ways. Also, people tend to focus more on events and/or symbols that relate to their lives. This is the same case for the bible. So, the conflicts arise when people disagree what the bible says.

Why are there so many different strands of Buddhism then? Why were/are there monks who belonged to one Temple and believed their understanding of Buddhism was correct and everyone else was wrong, and why did some of these Temples militantly attempt to exterminate competition to prove it? You hear more about Christianity because you live in the West (presumably) and you are posting on a website catering primarily to people in the West. And in the West, Christianity is far more popular than Buddhism.

I could be wrong, but I do think that there are many differences in interpretations of Buddha's teachings.

Just a thought.

As for why people are "constantly trying ot shift meaning and context to suit the individuals needs", I think your phrasing of the question is biased and seems to imply that the Abrahamics are choosing willy nilly what to take as literal and what to take as metaphorical. However, to answer the claim, I would argue that this again is a result of living in the West. Because Christianity is so popular it becomes the number 1 target for critics of religion. Thus there are many people who dedicate their lives to trying to disprove Christianity. With the prevalence of criticism, a large part of Christianity becomes answering questions about context. When someone says "the Bible states x and is therefore false", the obvious response is to contextually respond to that criticism.

However, this doesn't address the issue of different Christians arriving at different (and sometimes opposing) conclusions based on the same text. To this, I would say that in some cases, there are times when one or all parties are using the passage out of context (either willingly or unwillingly), and in some cases, the passage is just ambiguous to begin with which leads to multiple interpretations. Personally, I would look at the claims and ask the person for their contextual interpretation. If they have shown they have used contextually accurate methods, then regardless of whether I agree or not, I am more than happy to accept their interpretation (it has happened in the past, even with non-Christians who completely disagree). But when Christians or non-Christians state "the passage says x and I don't care what happens around that verse" (don't laugh, I've seen it on this forum), then my only response can be to take their conclusions with a grain of salt because they have obviously invested no time in actually studying the passage.

Anywho, sorry for teh long post, I hope this helps you with how I perceive things. All the best, Dante

~ Regards, PA

The message of christianity is so simple and easy to understand taht anyone can understand it. It is simply stated, and simple to understand. However, there are parts of the Bible that are not quite so easy. The Bible is a big book, and while the overriding message is consistent and easy to understand, certain aspects of it most definitely are not.

If you have ever studied languages, you will know that it is impossible to translate perfectly from one language to another. This is where the problems with translations arise. That is why I always study the Bible with my Greek/Hebrew dictionary open. If I could take an Ancient Languages course at college, I might do that (definitely a possibility), and that would make reading the Bible even more productive for me. I don't see it as a matter of me changing the meaning of a word to something else, but more a case that translating words is never an exact art so it is always helpful to go back to the original Greek/Hebrew and check.

And finally, you did ask why God made it so cryptic - I think that this is God's way of always keeping us (Christians) challenged. The message of the Bible is simple and easy to understand, even by the most cursory glance. But as you delve into the mysteries of the bible, no matter how many years you have studied it there will always be something else to gain from the text. If the Bible was all simple and basic, then there comes a point in a Christian's life when they begin to think "What's the point in reading this - I know it all". Some sections are difficult to understand and even after years of study can only bring questions and possibilities. To me, this is the most interesting part of Bible study. It's great learrning about different interpretations of passages and as long as the actual thing being interpreted does not have an impact on the way I live my life, I don't see it as a vital doctrine (the imagery of Revelation, for example).

Hope this helps with your question, norwood

~ regards, PA

That's a great point, and you are largely correct. With passages such as Revelation, it is never clear cut what it means. two people will read it and get two different means that are both biblically supportable. In cases like this, I ask myself one simple question: Does any interpretation of this passage affect the way I live my life for Jesus? It's all well and good to look at a passage from Revelation that goes into seven trumpets, seven seals, etc, but this is all dealing with prophecy - things that are yet to happen (either in our lifetime or in another). It has no bearing with how I live my life in the here and now. I therefore put this kind of passage in the "non-essential doctrine" category. It is great to think of these passages and dwell on them and theorize about what they might mean. But they have no bearing on how I live. if I am wrong about the interpretation, then it has no bearing on my life.

It's when the interpretation does affect the way I live that things become interesting. So far, however, I have yet to find an ambiguous passage on matters such as this. Whenever i have come to passages such as this, sometimes I have arrived at a conclusion taht I need to change my life to fit in with what the Bible asks of me. Other times, I have found that the way I have been living is how I should be living.

This has been my experience of the bible, at least.

Yes your right many temples believed that their teachings were correct and the rest were wrong but this seems to be many years ago mostly due to land ownership. I don't believe its as prevelent today as before. One thing you might be interested in by the way is that I actually live in Thailand and yes there are many strands of Buddhism however from my own personal experience they don't seem to contradict each other as much as other religions. I also stated that people are "constantly trying ot shift meaning and context to suit the individuals needs" I still firmly stand by this statement and would like to just highlight the fact that this is what Creationists are exactly doing! Do you agree? What I think is the most interesting however is if I were to quote a story about Zeus from greek literature 99% of people would dismiss it as mythology but how can you do that and then use the bible as your defence? Thanks by the way for a very interesting and thought provoking reply

Any time. It's been a pleasure debating with you. It's always good to have a discussion without insults, insinuations and attacks thrown in, and quite a few people at the moment seem interested in doing that. Your responses have certainly made me stop and think

As for shifting meaning in the sense of creationists, I can't exactly comment on this. While I do believe in the Bible, I am not a "Creationist" in the sense of the term that you are referring to. The creation of the world fits into that pesky "non-essential doctrine" category that I referred to in my last post. I have my opinion on creation and I can give you interpretations of Genesis to back that up, and you may even see it as "shifting the meaning". But to me, whether God created the world in seven literal days, 10,000 years ago, or whether it happened over billions of years with God at the helm controlling it, it doesn't matter. To me, the point would still be the same - God was in control. It in no way affects the way I live my life and so I don't see any point in making a huge song and dance about it.

*for the record, through my reading of scripture, I do not take a literal view of creation in Genesis 1. There are many common poetic devices used within this passage that imply to me that it is a figurative/poetic piece designed to convey WHO was responsible for creation, as opposed to a literal account describing HOW creation was done*

Finally, your last sentence was most interesting:

For me, the easiest answer would be that I have read the Bible, and I have read the many accounts of Hercules (though i have not actually read any "holy text" attributed to Zeus-worship). What I have read of the Bible is consistent with my experiences of God, while Zeus-worship is not. Thus I would claim Zeus to be mythology, but the Bible not. However, i do understand how from a non-Christian perspective both Zeus and Yahweh/Jesus would fall in the category of mythology. This is the only way I can answer it though.

All the best,

~ Regards, PA

Firstly you are so correct!"It's always good to have a discussion without insults, insinuations and attacks thrown in, and quite a few people at the moment seem interested in doing that" The main obstacle I find in discussing religion is that people feel so passionately about it but it is that passion that can fire some of the most thought provoking and stimulating debates and discussions! By the way I hope you didn't think I was implying your a creationist I'm not its just a good example of people taking their interpretation of a holy text and twisting its context and meaning to suit their needs in this case I feel qwhich is more of a political agenda than anything else the same by the way can be said for the Taliban! I find your approach to the Zeus idea intriguing could you elaborate a little on this-What I have read of the Bible is consistent with my experiences of God, while Zeus-worship is not. Thus I would claim Zeus to be mythology, but the Bible not Also I did read somewhere recently it could have been on UM that many Zeus worshipers are trying to revive their own religious practices at the Parthenon however the Greek Orthodox church are trying to ban them as being Paganists. This is what I'm intrigued by as many people in this day and age would state the worship of Zeus and other Gods as being mythological and not religious but then how do you define the difference between that and the abrahamic religions?

the bible is trying to guide people in the right direction to try and make sense of 'life'. to me the whole concept of life is mind boggling. there is no explination to how life started and there is none to why it exists. and yes like everything the bible is open to interpretation. i in no way appose the views of the bible. i no through experiences the next part of life (the bit after you die) is something far above and beyond our perception and comprehension. its not that there is a problem with the bible its that we dont have the capacity to figure out the itching question "whats next?"

So if we took someone who was of simple mind for them the bible would be a bit much for them with so many word meaning different things what would they gain from it? It make it sound like God or the bible that wrote the bible did not want just anyone to have this privileged information.

^ "Jesus died for you and for everyone"! How hard is that message, norwood? That message is as simple as can be, and unless there is a severe handicap, even the most simple person can understand that. As I said, the primary message is as simple as can be. However, the further you dig into the Bible, the more you get out of it. Why does that not make sense to you? It makes perfect sense to me.

Hi Dante,

Don't worry, I never got the impression you were labeling me a Creationist. I did not take that point at all, I was just saying I couldn't answer for them because I have never been in their shoes and it would be presumptuous of me to try. I agree with much of what you say in this post. Just to elaborate on that whole Zeus thing, for one thing my experience shows me that God is above the pettiness of humans, yet Zeus (and all Greek gods) are very much human and petty (if you and others think the Bible God is being petty and human with these jealous frailties, then spare a thought for the ancient Greek gods = x1000). The gods of the Greeks governed the natural world (storms, sun, weather, etc), whereas my experience of God is that God is above and beyond such petty thinking. Adding to all of this my reading of the Bible, I have arrived at the conclusion that the God I have experienced is the God of the Bible.

For your last statement, on defining the difference between Zeus and the Abrahamics, I would say there is very little (from the standpoint of a non-believer). But to me, any belief other than Jesus, I consider "mythology". I do of course respect all other forms of belief, and a person's right to hold that belief. But just as you see what I believe as myth, I see what others believe as myth. The only thing that makes me believe this is..... well, Trust. I trust that the Bible is true. I trust that the promises made in the Bible are true. Is this Trust misplaced? I have yet to find anything to shake that, but it may be so - who knows? It reminds me of something my old writing lecturer said -

Myth + Faith = Truth.

Of course, this is personal truth, not universal truth, but you know what I mean. Hope this helps. All the best,

~ Regards, PA

Jesus never really died, he is enjoying fringe benefits. So there was NO REAL sacrifice.

Many people would die for what they love & believe in ,they do it everyday.

He died for a short time.

Many people suffer as he did every day.

Blasphemy i know, I'm good at it.

Besides ...my sins and those of many others have never been so awful that someone had to be tortured for them,of this i am sure

No I guess they aren't really necessary, but if you want to do magick it helps to understand physics. If you want to understand the ancestors it helps to study history and archeology. It helps to understand your brothers in the forest and sea if you want to understand the Earth. The Druids were the intellectual class of the Celts if you want to carry on the tradition you must study many things like science, and the arts. I forgot about botany every Druid needs a good herbal book.

Sorry but jesus died for the sins that God created not us. I agree with momentarylapseofreason where was the sacrifice? He was only dead for 3 days & then he returned to his fathers side. There was nothing to lose whichever way you look at it.

"ToThose Who Believe in God..."

When did believing in God become synonomous with being a Christian?

Jesus still died and went through horrible pain. Does the fact that he rose again negate the pain and torture he endured before hand? Does it negate the point that the God who has been eternal did indeed die (if only for three days)? For sin, the punishment is death - and if it wasn't Jesus it would have been us (for some of us, that still might stand true). I suppose you don't have to use the word "sacrifice" if you don't want to, but it doesn't change anything.

Ptch.. and here I thought you worshipped me, PA. X)

Then indeed every man who has ever been judged and killed because of this judgement , Died because of our sins, or in some twisted way For them, This is what I think dieng for sins meant, "Because Of them" and we still do it on a daily basis, Judge one another for their beliefes, History repeating itself.

Jesus did not come to advocate the laying of ones sins on another, he came to show How to be acountable for ones own sin and ones own love, Dumping ones sins On Jesus or Heaven bound( Devine absolution) with out doing all in ones power to wright His wrongs right here on Earth First Is a sin in My Eyes.

It is in effect asking God to forgive what you did to your bro right here on Earth, Before asking your bro To forgibve you, In essense Using him as a spring board to Be divinly forgiven while he is still laying in the dirt.

One has to Wonder if they are forgiven for not doing the work here first, or even atempting it, and Going straight to God..

What do you think God thinks Of asking for forgiveness from God while His other child lays in the dirt because Of your sin?

Do you really think this action is blessed?

I know when I mess up, and do the work of righting the wrong to Bro, or sis that because I ttried < and did the work to fix things, My action is aplauded By all of Heaven, For my learning The diferance, Or Baptism by Fire.

Love Omnaka

But every man who ever died was not perfect. Only one person was perfect. Only one person in the history of the world could be acceptable as the sacrifice once-for-all, the righteous-for-the-unrighteous. How can any person who was killed be an acceptable substitution/sacrifice when they are just as sinful as you are? Jesus who was perfect was the only one capable of dying for all of humanity.

I agree to an extent. Being a Christian is far more than about simply being absolved of sin. People often forget that Repentence is about far far more than simply saying "sorry". Repentance involves a complete turnaround of your life, 180 degrees complete opposite to what you have been doing (is that what you mean by righting the wrongs?). There is more to Christianity than being absolved of sin. However, if you are not absolved of sin, there is no way you can get into heaven because you will still be in judgement for the sins you have done.

As an aside, could you explain what you mean by the reason for Jesus coming was to show us how to be accountable for our own sins? Providing scripture references if necessary.

Asking forgiveness from both God and your brother is important. The Bible teaches that we should not let the sun go down while there is a disagreement between our brother - do it as soon as possible, don't wait. To become a Christian is to follow the Bible, and the Bible says to go to your brother and seek a reconcile. I don't think asking forgiveness of God denies the need to ask forgiveness of those you have wronged. Nor does it imply that being forgiven by God means that everything will be peachy.

I never meant to imply anything of the sort here, and if I have, I do apologise - I have never said that and thought I had never even implied it. Hopefully this clears up any misunderstanding. All the best,

~ Paranoid Android

I agree to an extent. Being a Christian is far more than about simply being absolved of sin. People often forget that Repentence is about far far more than simply saying "sorry". Repentance involves a complete turnaround of your life, 180 degrees complete opposite to what you have been doing (is that what you mean by righting the wrongs?). There is more to Christianity than being absolved of sin. However, if you are not absolved of sin, there is no way you can get into heaven because you will still be in judgement for the sins you have done.

In order to be absolved By Heaven, and believe it One Must do the work, down here before Going to God, one can not turn around 180Degrees, if he has not felt the Pain of those he has wronged, Once felt , By doing all he can, For his brother right here, He will think twice before doing it again. Just saying sorry, and Then asking for divine absolution, is week in my eyes and Subjects the offender to offend again.

Humbling ones self and doing the work, whatever it is to right the wrongs right here on Earth, which is very painful, but worthy, Then one automatically knows God the Father is proud of him, and there is really no need to even ask for divine absolution from God, For God just saw you do all in your power to make ammends, and Felt your humbleness and love twards your brother. you are Forgiven from High now and can actually believe it.

If one does not do the work and Just says Jesus died for mty sins, or asks Gods forgiveness with out doing the work, then he must wonder if he is forgiven.

Our heavenly Father Truly does love all unconditionally, But the sinner wont Believe this because He cant forgive Himself, and if The self is not forgiven, No amount of Love or forgiveness from Father, Or brother Jesus, will matter, he still is not forgiven, by self.

Love Omnaka


As an aside, could you explain what you mean by the reason for Jesus coming was to show us how to be accountable for our own sins? Providing scripture references if necessary.

He came to show that the comandments could be followed, not for lack of trying, or dumping of ones sins On the Innocent, And If one thinks Jesus was innocent, then putting ones sin on him is a no no.
As I can Do so will you, even Better. (Paraphrasing)

Love Omnaka

As did other Gods before him they to suffered though terrible pain & suffering. They just did it before Jesus did is all. No one is really sure if he was perfect I mean there’s some years missing from his life so we don’t know what really happened during those missing years. I really very surprised that those who believe in God and or call themselves christian accept this, & dont seem to care what happanded to him all those years.

Good Point, and because Reincarnation is true, Who knows what kind of trouble he got in to in Hes early Incarnations.

Original sin, is everyones first incarnation , and what they did, not Adams transgressions.

THere are Christians today saying Jesus is God of this world, and in their first incarnation They were Yelling Blasphemy , Hang him.

Go figure.

Love Omnaka

[quote name='norwood1026' date='Jan 15 2008, 08:24 AM' post='2096609']
As did other Gods before him they to suffered though terrible pain & suffering. They just did it before Jesus did is all.

that is a very good and valid point which many seem to forget! I am confused slightly about the perfect person idea since if Jesus was the son of God and God is without sin how can God break his own commandments 'Thou shalt not kill' and still be sinless therefore Jesus himself would be part of that sin and therefore not completely without sin? I would really like someone to try and explain this to me

Completely agree with you, 100% on this statement. Very well said

I disagree. One cannot simply be absolved of past wrongs because of good things they do in the present and future. We can never be perfect, and no matter how much we try, we will always fail in some areas. Forgiveness is a gift, but a gift is not a gift until it is accepted. I don't agree that one can simply make up for all the things they have done by trying to live from now on in a good manner. While it is good to do this, this in itself does not save us.

And back to the agreement part. I don't disagree with this. Though I would question what you mean exactly by "do the work". It's such a broad phrase and could really mean anything. But in general I understand your reasoning and on this I largely agree.

I'm sorry, but Jesus showed throughout his ministry on earth that the law could not be followed. "You have heard it said, "Do not commit adultery", but I tell you that if a man even looks at a woman lustfully he has already committed adultery in his heart". "You have heard it said, "Do not commit murder", but I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother has already committed murder in his heart".

Jesus' life shows one thing clear and simple - as a species we are incapable of following God's rule. There is nothing that Jesus said or did that in any way shows we can be responsible for our own salvation - it is only through Faith in him that this is possible.

P.S - I'm not sure what passage you are paraphrasing, but I'll take a guess at it as being John 14:12 - I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

I'm not entirely sure how this passage equates to Jesus showing that we are accountable for our sins - as you put it "he came to show How to be acountable for ones own sin and ones own love" - I just don't see that here.