I disagree. Thought and philosophy has seen nothing different under the sun since society began. Every generation believes it is the "enlightened era".... all is vanity. The only thing that "evolves" (it seems you like that word) is technology where generations record and add to knowledge gained. In the era of "thought and philosophy" we are no better off than our traditional purporters of wisdom you like to downgrade as a "herder society". That is what makes their wisdom so compelling. We can read their words and see that nothing has changed. Human Nature remains the same.
I don't think Jesus wants us to but our faith under a basket. It belongs on a lampstand. The originators of this thread seethe with anger when they see it, but that is expected.
The Old Testament has been around for 1,000's of years, the oldest copy we have is from the 2nd century BC. The so-called "contradiction" in Genesis 6 & 7 has been addressed for 2200+ years, in the Jewish community Genesis 6 & 7 has never been a "contradiction". There is no contradiction, there is only a willful lack of understanding. You want there to be a contradiction so you create a false understanding. There are real issues in the Bible, but it takes study to find them.
The Old Testament consists of so many texts from so many times that it is difficult to see any coherence, and it is a pity the early church didn't drop it. In the NT there is a fair degree of coherence if we leave out everything until Jesus' baptism by John and the book of Revelations, which wasn't intended to be understood by Roman politzei. I think that so much dubious use has gone on that we'd do better to make our own personal use of what we see is good in it - which is actually, I think, a great deal,
We are also not to be stumbling blocks to others coming to the faith, which is what these vocal in your face types are.
uh, what? The "herder" society commonly had slaves. It took a modern group of "philosophers" to come up with current human rights. So, we absolutely have evolved in terms of philosophy
That one example you provided is a misnomer. Slavery takes several different meanings. There always has been barbarism. Most think of slavery as "American antebellum slavery." Not so. Slavery in Bible times had several different meanings. Actually, in a lot of cases, a salaried person of today would be considered a slave. Slavery often was a "contractural agreement" unlike the sex slaves of today. Muslim countries still practice slavery....Don't get to proud, we haven't "evolved all that much. Actually, we are so busy with technology most are completely blind to that "still small voice". Jesus became a voluntary slave to all. He said the greatest among you would be the same.
Guess the only right answer there is to "always speak the Truth in love." Never the less....SPEAK THE TRUTH! I am not ashamed of the Gospel.
Socialism is slavery as well. The producers are slaves to the non-producers. Just called by a different name. Government becomes the slavemaster.
Nor I, but I am ashamed of how some people portray the Gospel, and in the name of Jesus no less. And sadly, so many claim different points as the Truth.
Honest question.....Do you believe that when Believers earnestly seek out the truth in a spirit of humility, that the Holy Spirit guides them in unity? I do feel unified with other Believers who seek out His Word.. Biblically, I know that is promised.
I do, but I also believe that there are Truths for some that are not for others, and that simply because one claims something as the Truth, it does not make it so. I will provide an example. Many modern Christians hold it as a Turth that marriage is between one man and one woman. However, I recall the words of Paul where he first says that we should not marry, but that it I should preferred to fornication (paraphrasing a bit here). He also notes, and rather specifically, that if you are to be a leader in the Church (some translations might have "deacon" or other like positions) then marry only one. Now to me, that says that polygamy is still upon the table (and no, not just specifically polygyny), while others would disagree. Simply because this is a Truth that I have discovered upon my journey and meditations, does not make it so, nor does the claim of another who has found monogamy to be the Truth. And it may well be that He has certain people he want to be monogamous and others either He wants poly, or will allow to be poly. So your Truth for this area may not be my Truth. And for that matter, neither is the Truth for one He wants celibate.
Not sure I follow you completely. I do not see polygamy as edifying. The results were displayed in the O.T. rather well. Even if it was "lawful for me....I would not find it edifying". Usually when Something of this nature starts to become a dispute among Believers I have found it wise to put it on a shelf. It will be revealed at a later date. Sometimes the revelation will be surprising. There are, however, certain precepts for which there is no compromise. I think you would agree.
3. Can Yeshua control everything? Not according to the Bible. He can't control his energy and people are able to steal it without his knowledge. Mark 5:25-32(TLB) = "25 In the crowd was a woman who had been sick for twelve years with a hemorrhage. 26 She had suffered much from many doctors through the years and had become poor from paying them, and was no better but, in fact, was worse. 27 She had heard all about the wonderful miracles Jesus did, and that is why she came up behind him through the crowd and touched his clothes. 28 For she thought to herself, “If I can just touch his clothing, I will be healed.” 29 And sure enough, as soon as she had touched him, the bleeding stopped and she knew she was well! 30 Jesus realized at once that healing power had gone out from him, so he turned around in the crowd and asked, “Who touched my clothes?” 31 His disciples said to him, “All this crowd pressing around you, and you ask who touched you?” 32 But he kept on looking around to see who it was who had done it."
This seems to be one of the problems that arises when one verse is quoted, not even in context, as an argument for taking government action detrimental to various individuals. I think an argument can be made based on the NT in favor of taking significant care as we judge and condemn others. Even on issues considered by many to be beyond compromise, there are honest and deeply considered differences between those who make it their full time life's work to understand and follow the Bible. Even the most basic requirements for salvation are in serious dispute. Given that, it seems absolutely necessary for us to exhibit significant humility and restraint before demanding others do exactly as the majority directs, when the sole evidence is biblical interpretation.
We do not condemn others. We ARE to judge-discern actions. Humility is good because pride goes before a fall. Requirements for Salvation may be in dispute among various religious strains....but among Bible believers it is one thing "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved". Understanding that different levels of belief will be achieved but out of that faith will undoubtedly come good works that others will see. It's not complicated. Now a Church may say you need to be baptized to be saved, but that is their own peculiar doctrine. They may say you need to say a bunch of hail Mar'y's or confess your sins to a certain man but again that is all contrary to the Gospel. There are issues among Christians that are open for discussion. None are important enough to be devisive. Jesus sent us a Holy Spirit to guide us into all Truth. Knowing that, we are dependent on Him.
No. Christians DO condemn others, even when it is based on the bible alone, using the force of government against even those who do not share a similar belief. And, No, those who believe in the bible disagree sharply on salvation requirements. When not even THAT is shared, theists should show tolerance and humility when attempting government enforcement of their religious ideas.
And, no, you may adhere to a specific version of salvation requirements, but your version is not just disputed within Christianity - it is disputed by two of the three major systems of belief based on the bible. You don't even share an understanding of who Jesus was.
Give us the verses you are using. With that said, I think Paul corrupted what Christ was all about.. Paul turned Him into just another jewish sacrifice, magic blood. But this turned the religion into one fit to be used by empire. Which happened. I am certain Christianity was corrupted not long after the dude got hung on that cross. Turned into another control mechanism.
Indeed. As for alleged 'contradictions', as far as the New testament goes, the only books that matter re doctrine and theology are the four Gospels, and the only 'contradictions' are purely imaginary semantics, somebody trying to lawyer their way out of or into something or other. These four are almost universally the same across denominations, those large enough to matter, anyway; the rest of the books are there to serve various purposes, points of law, historical background, etc., etc., and Revelation's chiastic structure makes a brilliant end piece for both the Old and New Testaments. Plucking out this verse or that verse is just rubbish and nonsense. It's not a list of rambling sentences, it's a cohesive body of work and scholarship, and yes, it requires a considerable amount of education and learning just to understand it, for some it'sa lifetime job. fortunately for teachers, the lay churches have plenty to present and discuss among their members just from the four Gospels. Religious Jews have entirely different problems and studies to work on.
A lot of it is about what to do with widows, a real existential issue with a warrior tribe, especially one as small as Jews in those days, hence you see responsibilities like 'marrying your brother's widow' and other such expectations; 'polygamy' in such circumstances wasn't about building yourself a big harem of sex slaves or other such rubbish, it was about Jews taking care of Jews, especially family members. There is a strong racial component to Judaism, and restrictions on marrying outsiders and the like, something that played a big role in one's children's future options. Family genealogies were a huge deal. I'm certain that among many Orthodox it still is.
There are only two originating from the Bible, Judaism and Christianity. The other one is just a load of gibberish ripped off from everybody around them, and purely a political ideology that has nothing to do with any genuine theology..
Christians do condemn behavior which, in their eyes, is apart from the individual soul with intrinsic value, but with secularists behavior defines the person.....so I understand your confusion.
