Hypothetical Question

[TheGrungeDiva]

I NEVER used the word LITERAL. I said that people don't believe the Bible is all True, which is very different and sad.

No, what you said is that a lot of "Christians" don't believe the Bible is all True. And if you don't mean literally true, then I have to take issue. I know some very liberal Christians who hold some very radical beliefs, but they all believe the Bible is "true" at least figuratively, if not literally. I don't know why someone would even call him- or herself a Christian if they didn't accept the Bible on at least some level.

Sure, a lot of non-Christian people don't believe the Bible is true. If that's what you meant, then I'll except that you just made a typo and move on.

Yes, that is very different, and I don't know so much that it's "sad," it's just the way it is. God instructed us to evangelize. If everyone already believed, to whom would we evangelize? Seems to me that we need unbelievers in this world if we're going to carry out God's command to preach the Gospel. I have an inkling that when, and not 1 second before, the whole world believes, then the Kingdom of God will be fully realized.

 

[CanadaNZ]

No, what you said is that a lot of "Christians" don't believe the Bible is all True. And if you don't mean literally true, then I have to take issue. I know some very liberal Christians who hold some very radical beliefs, but they all believe the Bible is "true" at least figuratively, if not literally. I don't know why someone would even call him- or herself a Christian if they didn't accept the Bible on at least some level.

Sure, a lot of non-Christian people don't believe the Bible is true. If that's what you meant, then I'll except that you just made a typo and move on.

Yes, that is very different, and I don't know so much that it's "sad," it's just the way it is. God instructed us to evangelize. If everyone already believed, to whom would we evangelize? Seems to me that we need unbelievers in this world if we're going to carry out God's command to preach the Gospel. I have an inkling that when, and not 1 second before, the whole world believes, then the Kingdom of God will be fully realized.

No alot of christians don't believe the bible as a whole is true, you can run all the circular reasoning you want. Those that believe in only a figurative interpretation of the bible don't believe that the bible is true because the bible itself speaks about itself as literally true, so they lie to themselves. Your example earlier comparing one of the 10 commandments to a passage in matthew. The problem is you used only a portion of the second thus messing with its meaning. The 10 commandments say "honour your father and mother" and the matthew passage says "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." No issue there both are true, you are to honour your father and mother but not love them more than God. That is the problem people pick and go as they, thinking that since the bible is not literally true then I can take what I want as truth and leave the rest. The whole Bible is interwoven together and if you take something out of that context you twist God's word.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

CanadaNZ, if you're going to flip-flop what you say every time you post, then forget it.

 

[CanadaNZ]

CanadaNZ, if you're going to flip-flop what you say every time you post, then forget it.

I have not flip flopped. You have just tried to make this about something else. I am talking the fact that the bible is literally true cover to cover, take it or leave it. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." The Bible is God's word and he does not lie so trust that the bible is completely and totally true.

 

[resurrection33]

This is a very hypothetical question, because the US Constitution is very clear that no religion can ever be favored by the government in any way.

But we always talk about how this is a "Christian" nation, and I'm curious ... IF ... IF the US changed its constitution so that it could recognize an official "religion," what religion and denomination would you want that to be?

Looking forward to hearing what others might say. Please vote and comment.

Hopefully there will never be a national religion. I don’t think there is a perfect demomination. If there was a national religion, a lot of power mongers would want to be one of the bishops (or pope) of that denomination.

 

[CanadaNZ]

Hopefully there will never be a national religion. I don’t think there is a perfect demomination. If there was a national religion, a lot of power mongers would want to be one of the bishops (or pope) of that denomination.

Amen. Look what happened when Constantine made christianity the state religion of Rome.

 

[resurrection33]

Amen. Look what happened when Constantine made christianity the state religion of Rome.

Even as it is, I suspect a lot of people want to become church bishops, not for the good of the church, but because it would please their egos to do so, and I suspect a certain percentage of them succeed. If there was just one church, the problem would be exponentially worse. I don’t think the Lord would approve of this.

This is the same argument I use when people argue there should be just one church—not many denominations. I suspect the Lord prefers many denominations to one church.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

I have not flip flopped.

Oh , really? In this post, you say:

I am talking the fact that the bible is literally true cover to cover

But you said:

and I NEVER used the word LITERAL.

So, if you would like to pick ONE side of this and argue it, I'm very much up to a lively friendly debate. But if you keep changing the topic, and arguing out of both sides of your mouth like this, there is really no point in discussing this further. I have no desire to join in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

This is the same argument I use when people argue there should be just one church—not many denominations. I suspect the Lord prefers many denominations to one church.

Well ... to a point. I don't think God appreciates the petty sniping we do with our sisters and brothers. I think if we kept our denominational identities but got along and recognized that we are all One in the Lord, God would be well pleased.

I, too, like multiple denominations, because I know that we don't all see God the same way. I know that I would not enjoy worshiping in, say, a Baptist church (I've done that before), and I know a lot of evangelicals would not appreciate the liturgical worship that I love so dearly. We worship the same God, but we do so differently, and I think, as long as we respect each other and the differences, God doesn't mind the variety. Heck, he probably likes the variety -- he'd get tired of the same ol' same ol' right?

 

[resurrection33]

Well ... to a point. I don't think God appreciates the petty sniping we do with our sisters and brothers. I think if we kept our denominational identities but got along and recognized that we are all One in the Lord, God would be well pleased.

I, too, like multiple denominations, because I know that we don't all see God the same way. I know that I would not enjoy worshiping in, say, a Baptist church (I've done that before), and I know a lot of evangelicals would not appreciate the liturgical worship that I love so dearly. We worship the same God, but we do so differently, and I think, as long as we respect each other and the differences, God doesn't mind the variety. Heck, he probably likes the variety -- he'd get tired of the same ol' same ol' right?

Yes, we need to respect those that are different than us. Some of them walk in error, but we can’t assume everybody who is different than us is evil.

 

[TheGrungeDiva]

Yes, we need to respect those that are different than us. Some of them walk in error, but we can’t assume everybody who is different than us is evil.

Amen. Error does not mean evil. And I have to remember that just because one church teaches something that I believe is in error ... it could be that I am the one who is in error, and they are right. They are reading the same Scripture that I am, and their theology is just as informed as mine. We both have the Holy Spirit, and sure, only one of us is "right," and of course I think it's me, but I could always be wrong.

This is something it seems to me gets forgotten among Christians far too often.