Why have we quit standing up for whats right?

[Nuhen]

The Bible is God-breathed. If you are a true Christian, then what Paul says/built up was in fact what God wanted done and what the Holy Spirit divinely inspired Paul to write and to do.

It's a lovely idea, but historically inconsistent. If the fact that Paul is canon means his writings are part of the Scriptures, what would you say about the books of the Apocrypha, that were removed from Protestant bibles by Martin Luther and his followers?

Honestly, based on your 3 points in your response to me, I felt that you were not a true Christian. If you were, you wouldn't respond in such a manner. You basically said to me "I know what I'm talking about" with an underlying tone of insult because I questioned you. If you're a Christian, you wouldn't feel that way - your relationship with God has nothing to do with another person.

This is really just supposition and has no basis in fact. I was saying that yes, I know what I'm talking about, but I'm not afraid of being questioned. It's just the nature of the questions.

Honestly, I found what YOU said to be a bit insulting. The implications behind what you said is that I'm not a Christian, so I must not know what I'm talking about. I'm not a Christian, so I can't possibly know the facts.

If you're going to get on my case for allegedly saying that to you, what are we to say about you doing the same to me?

What I believe is really going on is that there is a confusion of the definition of "Christian." For you, a Christian does not necessarily mean one who believes in Jesus Christ and follows His teachings. But even Webster's lists that as a definition for one to be a Christian (and we are using a secular, non-biblical dictionary).

Well, I don't know where I ever said that a Christian isn't necessarily someone who believes in Yeshua and follows his teachings. That pretty much IS a Christian, though only part of what makes one a Christian. For example, I believe Yeshua is the messiah and follow his teachings, but I'm not a Christian because I do not subscribe to Christian doctrine.

 

[oopsies]

The Biblical scholars don't all agree, you know. From Wikipedia:

Those who favor the non-sexual interpretation argue against a denotation of sexual behavior in this context, noting that while the Hebrew word for know appears over 900 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, only approximately 1% (13-14 times[2][13]) of those references is it clearly used as a euphemism for realizing sexual intimacy.[14] Instead, those who hold to this interpretation usually see the demand to know as demanding the right to interrogate the strangers.[15]

Wikipedia is a nice resource that provides good overviews. However, here's the problem. Notice how it is worded...

Those who favour a non-sexual interpretation makes an argument. The argument is substantiated with evidence. These people with this interpretation also feel that this particular verse is non-sexual.

In other words, all of the above is just an opinion from a sample. We don't even know how large of a group these scholars are. For all we know, they could represent 1% of the world's biblical scholars. Yes, not all scholars agree on everything but nothing is said on how many disagree. They could be right. I'm not convinced of their argument but there is the possibility that they could be right. That's why you need to look at more than one translation. It gives you a better overview of what the majority of the world's scholars believe.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Nuhen: "Well, I don't know where I ever said that a Christian isn't necessarily someone who believes in Yeshua and follows his teachings. That pretty much IS a Christian, though only part of what makes one a Christian. For example, I believe Yeshua is the messiah and follow his teachings, but I'm not a Christian because I do not subscribe to Christian doctrine."
I'm curious why you used the word "we" in the title of your thread. It seems that when it is convenient for you to join in with the Christians, or appear to join in, you do so. But if there is anything that you disagree with you simply separate yourself by saying, "Well, I'm not a Christian." Jesus said, "Upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail." Do you also disown the church?

 

[Nuhen]

I'm curious why you used the word "we" in the title of your thread. It seems that when it is convenient for you to join in with the Christians, or appear to join in, you do so. But if there is anything that you disagree with you simply separate yourself by saying, "Well, I'm not a Christian." Jesus said, "Upon this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail." Do you also disown the church?

It has nothing to do with convenience. We all should, ideally, be united together as followers of G-d. However, when it comes to specifically Christian issues, I have to make the distinction between myself and Christians, because I am not one.

It's not convenience, it's honesty based on the context of the situation.

And no, while I think church is not run the way Yeshua would have wanted it to be, I do not disown it.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

It has nothing to do with convenience. We all should, ideally, be united together as followers of G-d. However, when it comes to specifically Christian issues, I have to make the distinction between myself and Christians, because I am not one.

It's not convenience, it's honesty based on the context of the situation.

And no, while I think church is not run the way Yeshua would have wanted it to be, I do not disown it.

So, you are one of those called out--as a member of the church, the body of Christ.

 

[Nuhen]

So, you are one of those called out--as a member of the church, the body of Christ.

I'm not sure if it's the fact that I'm sick and drained of energy, or what, but could you rephrase that? I didn't quite catch it

 

[oopsies]

It's a lovely idea, but historically inconsistent. If the fact that Paul is canon means his writings are part of the Scriptures, what would you say about the books of the Apocrypha, that were removed from Protestant bibles by Martin Luther and his followers?

There is a method to determine whether a set of writings are storybooks or actual Scripture. You will need to refer to the Bible thread on which Bible do people use... there was one from a few months ago.

This is really just supposition and has no basis in fact. I was saying that yes, I know what I'm talking about, but I'm not afraid of being questioned. It's just the nature of the questions.

Fear of being questioned isn't the point here... you are upset that I questioned you and that I made a supposition that you feel is unsubstantiated. That's what I'm getting at. If you were a true Christian, you wouldn't have that feeling. Why would need to feel that way anyway? If you are a true Christian, you know you are grounded in your belief. What I say then, should not invoke feelings of insult. It would then be me who is mistaken. But here's the problem. You are insulted. That begs the question, why would you need to feel insulted if you are truly 100% correct? If you are grounded, you simply wouldn't be insulted.

Honestly, I found what YOU said to be a bit insulting. The implications behind what you said is that I'm not a Christian, so I must not know what I'm talking about. I'm not a Christian, so I can't possibly know the facts.

It takes one to know one. If you were not a true Christian to begin with, then you wouldn't have really known how it feels. Because I do not believe you were truly saved then it is natural for me to also believe that you wouldn't truly know how it feels to be a Christian.

If you're going to get on my case for allegedly saying that to you, what are we to say about you doing the same to me?

You can tell me that I'm not a Christian if you like. I believe in once saved, always saved theology. If you had truly believed at one point, then you are merely lost - His Holy Spirit is still with you - God promises that it's His responsibility to bring you back to the fold. If you were truly saved, then the Holy Spirit will convict you - it will not condemn you but it will convict you and you will know it. I can't possibly know if you were truly saved or not. So I'm sorry if I assumed so and as a result, made you unhappy. So let's let the Holy Spirit decide the matter then. Only you will know if you are truly saved.

Well, I don't know where I ever said that a Christian isn't necessarily someone who believes in Yeshua and follows his teachings. That pretty much IS a Christian, though only part of what makes one a Christian. For example, I believe Yeshua is the messiah and follow his teachings, but I'm not a Christian because I do not subscribe to Christian doctrine.

But you are saying that you are not a Christian because you do not want to be a part of the religion that it has become. That doesn't make sense because it is not the religion that makes one a Christian - it is accepting Jesus as your Saviour that makes one a Christian. So are you a Christian or are you not a Christian? There is no fence-sitting if you subscribe to the teachings of Christ because Jesus says that only through him (i.e. Jesus himself) can one obtain salvation and reconciliation with God. That is a teaching of Jesus (John 14:6).

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know(b) my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

(b) Some early manuscripts say "If you really have known me, you will know."

 

[charisenexcelcis]

I'm not sure if it's the fact that I'm sick and drained of energy, or what, but could you rephrase that? I didn't quite catch it

If you don't feel well, perhaps you should go to bed. it is late. My question is, do you consider yourself part of the church (the called out)?

 

[Nuhen]

If you don't feel well, perhaps you should go to bed. it is late. My question is, do you consider yourself part of the church (the called out)?

Well, I suppose that depends on your definition of the church. For me, I consider all followers of G-d to be part of the church, which does include me.

 

[Nuhen]

There is a method to determine whether a set of writings are storybooks or actual Scripture. You will need to refer to the Bible thread on which Bible do people use... there was one from a few months ago.

I understand this method, but that wasn't what I was driving at. What I was driving at is the belief that the bible is untouchable. Often the argument for why Paul's writings are considered Scripture despite the fact that they oftentimes contradict the words of Yeshua himself is, "Well, his writings are canon, so they must be Scripture!"

Well, the Apocrypha was canon at one point too, but it isn't now, so obviously tampering with the Word is possible.

If you were a true Christian, you wouldn't have that feeling. Why would need to feel that way anyway? If you are a true Christian, you know you are grounded in your belief. What I say then, should not invoke feelings of insult. It would then be me who is mistaken. But here's the problem. You are insulted. That begs the question, why would you need to feel insulted if you are truly 100% correct? If you are grounded, you simply wouldn't be insulted.

...

I don't mean this to come across as rude, but do you realize how utterly ridiculous that is?

It takes one to know one. If you were not a true Christian to begin with, then you wouldn't have really known how it feels. Because I do not believe you were truly saved then it is natural for me to also believe that you wouldn't truly know how it feels to be a Christian.

Okay, I can understand that, but feelings have nothing to do with facts. You were trying to say earlier that what I was saying can't be true because I am not a Christian, which implies that you can only be intelligent by being a Christian, but we see idiots both non-Christian and Christian alike so we know that's not possible.

At any rate, got into a bit of thought-speak there. Point is, my religious affiliations are absolutely irrelevant. The facts are the facts, and the facts remain that Christians in this country:

a) are not persecuted
b) are not second class citizens
c) are a majority
d) have more rights than non-Christians

Furthermore, whether or not I'm a Christian also has no bearing on the fact that prayer has not been removed from public schools and it is illegal to deny a student the right to pray in schools.

But you are saying that you are not a Christian because you do not want to be a part of the religion that it has become.

No, I'm saying I don't want to be a Christian because of the religion it IS. It didn't "become" a religion I don't care for, it has always been a religion I don't care for.

That doesn't make sense because it is not the religion that makes one a Christian - it is accepting Jesus as your Saviour that makes one a Christian.

That sounds nice and fluffy, but unfortunately it is factually incorrect. To be a Christian is to subscribe to Christian doctrine. You cannot call yourself a Christian and yet reject Christian doctrine. THAT is what doesn't make any sense.

So are you a Christian or are you not a Christian? There is no fence-sitting if you subscribe to the teachings of Christ because Jesus says that only through him (i.e. Jesus himself) can one obtain salvation and reconciliation with God. That is a teaching of Jesus (John 14:6).

I am not a Christian. I do however believe Yeshua is the messiah and follow his teachings.

And I find it ironic that you would quote Yeshua's words saying that salvation is obtained ONLY through him, considering earlier in this post you said someone who is not a Christian is not saved.

 

[oopsies]

Ok, well, if that is how you feel. As I said, let the Holy Spirit be the judge.

 

[Nuhen]

It's actually about facts, not feelings, but alright

 

[superdave5221]

I believe he is the messiah, the Deliverer, sent by G-d to serve as the last and perfect sacrifice for the atonement of sins.

If you believe that Jesus is all of these things, then why would you not want to follow Him and obey Him? If He is the Messiah, then you know that He is the only way to be reconciled to God. If you follow Him and obey Him, then you are a Christian, even though you may call yourself a Messianic Jew, or something similar, it becomes a matter of semantics. You must agree that to believe that He is the Messiah, and to not follow and obey Him, would be foolishness.

Now as to Paul. If you read of his conversion in Acts 9, you will notice that it is a very public event. All of those with Paul also saw the light, and heard the voice, though they did not comprehend it. The light was described as brighter than the noon day sun. For those who have experienced the noon day sun in that part of the world, that is remarkable. In 1 Timothy 6:15-16, God is described as living in "unapproachable light". This would indicate that the messenger would be either God Himself, or someone (Jesus) who had been glorified with God. The change in Paul is immediate. He is blinded, led into Damascus, where he spends the next three days praying, neither eating nor drinking.

Ananias has a vision to go and heal Paul's blindness and preach the gospel to him. He is relunctant, knowing Paul's past persecuting spirit, but is commanded of God. He goes to Paul, places his hands on him, and using the miraculous healing powers granted him by the Holy Spirit, he heals Paul's blindness. He then teaches him the gospel, and Paul believes in Jesus, and is baptized into the church. All of this is done before many witnesses who could verify or deny Luke's account. The fact that Paul immediately goes out and begins to preach Jesus as the Son of God, and as Lord and King, when only days before he had a murderous and violent spirit against His followers is miraculous in itself. Again, all of this in front of many witnesses who were amazed at his transformation.

Later, when Paul goes to Jerusalem, and the apostles are reluctant to accept him, Barnabus is able to recommend him and the apostles immediately accept him. Barnabus's opinions were obviously highly regarded.

You must ask yourself, how could all of these things be done in front of many witnesses, yet Luke's account not be opposed? Why would you believe Luke to be reliable up to this point, and then no longer be truthful? If Jesus did appear to Paul and appoint him as an apostle, then we must believe his sayings as inspired by the Holy Spirit who was sent by Jesus.

You must decide. There is no middle road. Either you have saving faith in Jesus Christ, or you don't.

 

[Brackenzee]

Wikipedia is a nice resource that provides good overviews. However, here's the problem. Notice how it is worded...

Those who favour a non-sexual interpretation makes an argument. The argument is substantiated with evidence. These people with this interpretation also feel that this particular verse is non-sexual.

In other words, all of the above is just an opinion from a sample. We don't even know how large of a group these scholars are. For all we know, they could represent 1% of the world's biblical scholars. Yes, not all scholars agree on everything but nothing is said on how many disagree. They could be right. I'm not convinced of their argument but there is the possibility that they could be right. That's why you need to look at more than one translation. It gives you a better overview of what the majority of the world's scholars believe.

That's a fair point. I'm not even beginning to suggest the majority of scholars interpret it that way, but trying to demonstrate that the story of Sodom is "about gays" is just one possible view point, and that the majority is not always right. And that even if the word 'know' is used euphemistically, it's still a euphemism for rape rather than consensual sex.

 

[Nuhen]

If you believe that Jesus is all of these things, then why would you not want to follow Him and obey Him? If He is the Messiah, then you know that He is the only way to be reconciled to God. If you follow Him and obey Him, then you are a Christian, even though you may call yourself a Messianic Jew, or something similar, it becomes a matter of semantics. You must agree that to believe that He is the Messiah, and to not follow and obey Him, would be foolishness.

Okay, let's work this out here. Christianity is a religion. In order for me to be a Christian, I have to follow that religion. If I do not follow that religion, I am not a Christian.

I follow Yeshua and believe he is the messiah, the son of G-d. However, I follow the religion of Judaism, and that makes me a Jew, NOT a Christian.

You must ask yourself, how could all of these things be done in front of many witnesses, yet Luke's account not be opposed? Why would you believe Luke to be reliable up to this point, and then no longer be truthful? If Jesus did appear to Paul and appoint him as an apostle, then we must believe his sayings as inspired by the Holy Spirit who was sent by Jesus.

There were twelve apostles. By your logic, all twelve are inspired...so why don't we have books in the bible written by all twelve?

The historicity of the canon is what you also have to call into question when deciding what is Scriptural and what is not. Scripture does NOT contradict Scripture, so when Paul contradicts Yeshua, I question that.

Trust me, you'll find out exactly why Paul is considered canon if you look into the history of the canon.

You must decide. There is no middle road. Either you have saving faith in Jesus Christ, or you don't.

I do. Never claimed otherwise.

 

[Nuhen]

That's a fair point. I'm not even beginning to suggest the majority of scholars interpret it that way, but trying to demonstrate that the story of Sodom is "about gays" is just one possible view point, and that the majority is not always right. And that even if the word 'know' is used euphemistically, it's still a euphemism for rape rather than consensual sex.

Even if the intent of the men was to have sex with the angels, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah would STILL not be about homosexuality. Scripture is clear and specific exactly WHY Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, and homosexuality is not listed.

 

[aspen]

Seriously? I thought we as Christians are called to love one another? God loves the liars and the homosexuals equally and surprisingly he calls us to do the same - they, like all of us are sinning against Him, daily, and it is up to Him to determine judgment. God have mercy on us all!

 

[Nuhen]

Seriously? I thought we as Christians are called to love one another? God loves the liars and the homosexuals equally and surprisingly he calls us to do the same - they, like all of us are sinning against Him, daily, and it is up to Him to determine judgment. God have mercy on us all!

Exactly! Nice to see someone gets it

 

[superdave5221]

Okay, let's work this out here. Christianity is a religion. In order for me to be a Christian, I have to follow that religion. If I do not follow that religion, I am not a Christian.

I follow Yeshua and believe he is the messiah, the son of G-d. However, I follow the religion of Judaism, and that makes me a Jew, NOT a Christian.


There were twelve apostles. By your logic, all twelve are inspired...so why don't we have books in the bible written by all twelve?


The historicity of the canon is what you also have to call into question when deciding what is Scriptural and what is not. Scripture does NOT contradict Scripture, so when Paul contradicts Yeshua, I question that.

Trust me, you'll find out exactly why Paul is considered canon if you look into the history of the canon.



I do. Never claimed otherwise.

So, I take it that you don't consider Luke's accounts to be canon either. We are only left with about 20% of the N.T.

 

[Nuhen]

So, I take it that you don't consider Luke's accounts to be canon either. We are only left with about 20% of the N.T.

Ideally, all we really need is the Tanakh and the Gospels anyway.