Searching For Truth Seekers!

[NightTwister]

The Book of Jasher, Book of the Wars of the Lord, Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, the Book of Jasher, Book of the Wars of the Lord, Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, (both mentioned over 30 times), Book of Shemaiah, Story of the Prophet Iddo, Book of Statutes, Acts of Solomon, Annals of King David, Book of Samuel the Seer, Book of Nathan the Prophet, Book of Gad the Seer, Book of Anijah, Book of Jehu, Acts of Uzziah, Vision of Isiah, Sayings of the Seers, Laments of Josiah and Chronicles of King Ahasuerus.

Gnosticism for fun and prophet.

 

[biblestudent78]

As far as I know, most of these references contributed to narratives in various scriptures. Not a Gnostic footprint.

 

[GWH]

Clarification: Both Hebrew and Heirtic are very different languages. Hieratic remained partially logographic (signs representing words) and syllabic, while Hebrew moved toward a purely alphabetic system. Hebrew was part of an asiatic group of languages which evolved into Phoenician, Ugaritic and eventually into our modern languages. Hebrew remains unique. It had no vowels ( they were added 1,000 years later) While Phoenician added vowels that we used today in our western languages. Thus, there is no language family tree that contains both Hebrew and Hieratic. I often ask "what language did Moses use to write the 10 commandments? If it was Hieratic, none of the Israelites would have know what it said as slaves were not educated in Egypt. Thus after Moses died nobody would have been able to read what he wrote in Hieratic.

Islam evolved 600 yrs after Christianity, but it came from Christianity. One of the most serious controversies in the early church revolved around the numerous concepts of God & Jesus. The Holy Spirit was pretty much ignore for a few hundred more years. One of the groups that lost out once Christianity became a state sponsored religion with tight borders around what was orthodox and what was not. One widely held theologies, later called heresy, was the belief that followed the Jewish shema prayer that had be in instructed by God that must be repeated 3 times a day..."Hear of Israel! Our God is One." There were perhaps 4-5 million people who repeated this daily. The Council of Nicea in the 4th century define as orthodoxy that God is 3. For Christians who were former Jews this confronted their core beliefs. So, those holding the belief that God is One often retreated to desert monasteries where the could continue their Christianity where Jesus was the one and only son of God, but not God himself. In the 7th century an Arab arrived at one of these monasteries to study. As an Arab, Mohammad could trace his religious heritage back to Abraham and Abrahams's 12 sons with his last wife Keytruda. Thus, from this religious heritage, Mohammed too believed in one God. He thus focused on the ethical and moral teachings of Judaism and Christianity as he evolved an Arab specific mixture of these two religious traditions. Not much is known of Muhammad's writings or actual beliefs but several generations of his followers evolved and split into two major competing group Sunni and Shea. Sunni, the largest group (90%) have 4 separate divisions. Shia has 3 separate groups. Additionally there are Ibadi, Ahmadiyya and Alevi/Alawites.

The Merneptah stele you referred to clearly identified "Israel" a people group, not a political entity nor location specific residents. They claim to have wiped them out as they did on the many town and villages which they did destroy.

A few additional points. Extensive archeological surveys have demonstrated that around 1,200 BC there was a rapid growth of villages in the hill country of Judea. However, the highest total looks like perhaps a 10-20,000 newcomers settled in the hill country. This was also the peak of Great Bronze Age collapse were entire civilizations were destroyed and people across the middle east were moving to escape starvation. Almost all the major cities in the levant were burned and entire cultures were wiped out. Those immigrating into the Judean hill country in the 12th century BC showed no signs of anything Egyptian, either by pottery, buildings or artifacts. These hill country settlements with most being no more than a few hundred people in any one location. They left no know writings behind. This peaceful settlement suggests that the conquest narrative is political and ethnic fiction.

Again, any large scale immigration and accompanying destruction is not in evidence on the ground and in the suggested conquest period, Egypt was in full control of all of Canaan and up the coast as far as Ugaric. They did not encounter any army or armed invaders during your suggested arrival of 3 million people in Canaan. Extensive archeology has been conducted in this area for over 100 years often today using world class physical technology. Still there is no sign of a massive and destructive immigration into Canaan. There is no consensus among the majority of modern archaeologists and biblical scholars that a massive, nation-sized migration out of Egypt occurred around 1200 BC. Instead, mainstream academic opinion holds that the Exodus story is a "founding myth" or a composite narrative rather than a historical record, with little to no archaeological evidence for a large-scale migration. A smaller subset of scholars (sometimes referred to as the "moderate" or "biblical archaeology" camp) argues that the story may have a "historical core," suggesting that a small group—perhaps only the Levites—originated from Egypt. Egypt during the period in question left us extensive historical, religious and cultural writings none of which are aware of Hebrews, unique plagues, stange 1st born deaths etc. There is no historical evidence on either side of the Jordan river.

sh

Thanks for describing the Hebrew and Heirtic languages. One wonders how closely the development of languages parallels the dispersal of the genetic cultures from one source. It is interesting that Hebrew had no vowels while a language only 100 miles away gave us our alphabet, but no language tree contains both. I suppose Moses could have taught the Hebrews whatever language he knew and wrote.

Islam competed with Christianity rather than evolving from it. Mo never acknowledged Jesus as Messiah and ignored the teachings of Paul completely.

Yes the Triunity was an early controversy, and I don't think the councils described/explained it very well, ignoring the HS and the Shema, as you noted. My solution is to understand the One God as multidimensional or manifested in physical creation, in the human dimension and in the spiritual dimension. If Mo studied at a monastery, he must have flunked the NT morality course. He and Joseph Smith are of the same ilk.

 

[GWH]

God searches for TSers per 1Tim. 2:3-4
(cf. Heb. 11:6, Matt. 7:7).

 

[SetsFreeIndeed]

I understand you do not like for the word "anal" to refer to a personality type, because you cannot help but associate it with gutter talk. Remind me to share my sermon on cursing sometime.

If you find reference to anything coming out of the rear end objectionable, then you should understand why using that term to describe inappropriate things going into the rear end would help people see that homosexuality is not a "viable alternative lifestyle".

I did not say there is anything wrong with being logical and organized, but being rigid and anxious are not considered desirable qualities generally. Nor did I accuse you or anyone of being anything. I try to discuss only issues and doctrines.

Yes, our opinions about the Bible versions are just that.

Yes, both homosexual and heterosexual fornication are sinful/disgusting in God's eyes.

Over...

The bible told me to get rid of all homosexuality and I find it disturbing that the book life, heaven, love and marriage would context and have such a word. God needs to make heaven between the young woman and man actually work, not tare them apart with sin. I mean thats another open rebuke and me before God.

 

[GWH]

The bible told me to get rid of all homosexuality and I find it disturbing that the book life, heaven, love and marriage would context and have such a word. God needs to make heaven between the young woman and man actually work, not tare them apart with sin. I mean thats another open rebuke and me before God.

Yes, my parents experienced a heavenly marriage, and my wife and I are also happily married,
so we are saddened that our grown son and daughter have not found soulmates, even though
both Jesus and Paul recommended celibacy/platonic relationships.

 

[adamjordan53]

I like you effort if not your conclusions based on the limited scriptures you note. The easiest thing to do for anyone with a fixed Creed to defend is to be highly selective in the choice of "proof texts." As we all know, the use of "proof texts" is the foundation for the shattering of Christian unity. Each Christian sect has their "Magic Salvation formula" based on selected texts that d"totally validate" their predetermined creed. As an example, you only quote a portion of the Paul-Silas-Jailer story. On purpose? If one were to consider the "rest of the story" one would find that the saving faith of the jailer required baptism as it immediately followed a confession of faith. Is that because a claim of faith that rejects obedience is the desired and most easily accepted idea? Is our desire for our Christianity to just be an "Idea" held in our mind or is saving faith always followed by validation, in this case baptism. I know that fat old Monk declare that repentance and baptism are anathema thus settling the issue for some branches of Christianity more closely following him than anyone in the New Testament. Paul when on trial for his life described what he preached was "Repentance and the acts demonstrating repentance." That story, I'm sure gave Martin Luder his famous hemorrhoids. While we love to stake our salvation on the creedal statement we are saved by faith through Grace alone.... The same man who said that said if you don't have the same love in you as in God, your claim of "faith" is just noise. But I don't see loving like God loves in your credal statement.

I see a reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit but it leaves one comfortably dry. In Matthew 3: John the Baptist prophesied that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. Jesus told his followers that after His death to await the baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire. On the next Pentecost, the Apostles filled with the Holy Spirit commanded salvation by repentance and water baptism when the crowd called "what must we do to be saved?" I don't see water baptism in your creed. Paul told the Galatians, "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Jesus instructed his disciples to go and baptize. esus states, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." Ananias tells Paul, "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name" In case the argument is that references to baptism are only baptism of the Holy Spirit, I recommend Acts 8:14-17. Those who had been baptized had not yet received the Holy Spirit so Peter and John came down from Jerusalem, laid hands on them, only then did they get the gift of the Holy Spirit.

I reject that salvation is only based on "what you believe." Our call is to pick up our cross daily. If what we call "faith" does not involve our hands, feet, knees and heart then we can make no claim to have sufficient faith to be converted. Much of what goes around in Christianity today is counterfeit belief masquerading as faith. If faith is not what we do, what we prioritize, how we live, love and serve, it is not faith. At best it is just hope. We hope that our faith claims do not require conversion of Al Mahatta Park Sharjah, commitment, sacrifice and life change. We want to nod our head to a 60 second pulpit prayer and hope we have a free pass to heaven. What Jesus is describing in the entire 25 chapter of Matthew is His definition of what faith is. It makes our pseudo-faith look self-serving, convenient and heartless.

Searching for truth seekers is a journey that goes beyond surface-level information and dives into deeper understanding, critical thinking, and genuine curiosity. In a world filled with opinions, misinformation, and constant noise, truth seekers stand out by questioning assumptions, verifying facts, and staying open to new perspectives.

 

[GWH]

Searching for truth seekers is a journey that goes beyond surface-level information and dives into deeper understanding, critical thinking, and genuine curiosity. In a world filled with opinions, misinformation, and constant noise, truth seekers stand out by questioning assumptions, verifying facts, and staying open to new perspectives.

Yes, TSers begin simply by learning the Gospel and build on that foundation as they continue to learn GW for the purpose of becoming spiritually mature and a better witness for Christ.

Yes, we stand out because we question our beliefs before anyone else has a chance to do so,
asking ourselves such questions as "so what?" or "why believe that?", following the instruction of Paul in 1Thes. 5:21.

 

[biblestudent78]

Yes, my parents experienced a heavenly marriage, and my wife and I are also happily married,
so we are saddened that our grown son and daughter have not found soulmates, even though
both Jesus and Paul recommended celibacy/platonic relationships.

Paul believed Jesus would return in his lifetime, thus his recommendations were to manage the temporary situation.. Paul, the Uber-Jew would not have a clue about anything "Platonic." In fact he fought plato's philosophy everywhere it reared its head.

 

[GWH]

Paul believed Jesus would return in his lifetime, thus his recommendations were to manage the temporary situation.. Paul, the Uber-Jew would not have a clue about anything "Platonic." In fact he fought plato's philosophy everywhere it reared its head.

Celibate and platonic are synonyms.
AI says this about the Greek word for celibate during Paul's lifetime:

"In the first century, there was no single Greek equivalent to the modern word "celibate," but the concept of voluntary, lifelong sexual abstinence was described using terms focused on purity, virginity, and control. Primary terms included parthenia (virginity/purity), egkrateia (self-control/continence), and expressions such as "not marrying" or being "eunuchs for the kingdom."

Thus, Paul was probably clued in to the platonic concept.

 

[biblestudent78]

Celibate and platonic are synonyms.
AI says this about the Greek word for celibate during Paul's lifetime:

"In the first century, there was no single Greek equivalent to the modern word "celibate," but the concept of voluntary, lifelong sexual abstinence was described using terms focused on purity, virginity, and control. Primary terms included parthenia (virginity/purity), egkrateia (self-control/continence), and expressions such as "not marrying" or being "eunuchs for the kingdom."

Thus, Paul was probably clued in to the platonic concept.

There are perhaps 10's of thousands of celibate people in the Christian community today. I dare say, none are doing it out of any awareness of "platonic." One can obviously apply any framework to any historical event. However, that does not indicate that those living at that time subscribed to today's frameworks.

 

[GWH]

There are perhaps 10's of thousands of celibate people in the Christian community today. I dare say, none are doing it out of any awareness of "platonic." One can obviously apply any framework to any historical event. However, that does not indicate that those living at that time subscribed to today's frameworks.

Well, perhaps there are many people living in platonic relationships not doing it because of desire to be celibate,
but what difference does the terminology make?

 

[biblestudent78]

Well, perhaps there are many people living in platonic relationships not doing it because of desire to be celibate,
but what difference does the terminology make?

 

[biblestudent78]

The word is anachronism. A modern word or concept retroactively applied to ancient people and cultures. Platonic as you use it as a marker of sexual behavior is both inaccurate and misguided.

Platonism:
Dialectic: This is the primary tool for attaining knowledge of the Forms. It involves a rigorous method of cross-examination (the Socratic elenchos) to strip away false beliefs and intuitive notions, eventually leading to a direct apprehension of the Form of the Good.
Intellectual Abstraction: Practitioners use fields like mathematics and geometry as "preparatory" studies to train the mind to focus on immaterial realities rather than physical objects. This process, called anamnesis (recollection), is the act of "remembering" truths the soul knew before its physical incarnation.
Cultivation of Virtues: Ethics in Platonism is the practice of aligning the soul with the Form of the Good. This requires balancing the "tripartite soul"—ensuring Reason governs the Spirit and Appetite—to achieve personal and societal justice. The four cardinal virtues are:
Wisdom (Prudence)
Courage (Fortitude)
Moderation (Temperance)
Justice.
Theurgy (Divine Work): Particularly in later Neoplatonism, this involved ritual practices intended to draw the soul toward union with the One or the gods. It focuses on "one-pointed" concentration to internalize philosophical insights and raise the soul's energy level.
Contemplative Meditation: This practice aims for "inner transformation" and union with the divine source of all things. It involves moving beyond discursive reason to a state of direct, intuitive insight (noesis) into eternal patterns.
"Practice for Death": Many Platonists viewed the philosophical life as a literal preparation for death—the final separation of the soul from the distractions and "evils" of the material body.

The transition of the word platonic to specifically describe non-sexual relationships between men and women took place primarily during the 17th century. While the term "platonic love" (amor platonicus) was coined in Latin by Renaissance scholar Marsilio Ficino in 1469, he originally used it to describe a high, spiritual bond between men—reflecting Plato's original focus on same-sex intellectual relationships. In the 1800s, writers like George Henry Lewes noted that the term had "degraded" from its high philosophical meaning to describe "sentimental" relationships between the sexes where marriage was not an option.

Thus to describe motives and definitions that were invented 1,700 years after those living in the 1st century is anachronistic.

 

[GWH]

The word is anachronism. A modern word or concept retroactively applied to ancient people and cultures. Platonic as you use it as a marker of sexual behavior is both inaccurate and misguided.

Platonism:
Dialectic: This is the primary tool for attaining knowledge of the Forms. It involves a rigorous method of cross-examination (the Socratic elenchos) to strip away false beliefs and intuitive notions, eventually leading to a direct apprehension of the Form of the Good.
Intellectual Abstraction: Practitioners use fields like mathematics and geometry as "preparatory" studies to train the mind to focus on immaterial realities rather than physical objects. This process, called anamnesis (recollection), is the act of "remembering" truths the soul knew before its physical incarnation.
Cultivation of Virtues: Ethics in Platonism is the practice of aligning the soul with the Form of the Good. This requires balancing the "tripartite soul"—ensuring Reason governs the Spirit and Appetite—to achieve personal and societal justice. The four cardinal virtues are:
Wisdom (Prudence)
Courage (Fortitude)
Moderation (Temperance)
Justice.
Theurgy (Divine Work): Particularly in later Neoplatonism, this involved ritual practices intended to draw the soul toward union with the One or the gods. It focuses on "one-pointed" concentration to internalize philosophical insights and raise the soul's energy level.
Contemplative Meditation: This practice aims for "inner transformation" and union with the divine source of all things. It involves moving beyond discursive reason to a state of direct, intuitive insight (noesis) into eternal patterns.
"Practice for Death": Many Platonists viewed the philosophical life as a literal preparation for death—the final separation of the soul from the distractions and "evils" of the material body.

The transition of the word platonic to specifically describe non-sexual relationships between men and women took place primarily during the 17th century. While the term "platonic love" (amor platonicus) was coined in Latin by Renaissance scholar Marsilio Ficino in 1469, he originally used it to describe a high, spiritual bond between men—reflecting Plato's original focus on same-sex intellectual relationships. In the 1800s, writers like George Henry Lewes noted that the term had "degraded" from its high philosophical meaning to describe "sentimental" relationships between the sexes where marriage was not an option.

Thus to describe motives and definitions that were invented 1,700 years after those living in the 1st century is anachronistic.

Platonic as I use it means celibate--not much more than a handshake or peck on the cheek.

 

[biblestudent78]

Platonic as I use it means celibate--not much more than a handshake or peck on the cheek.

Exactly. You have to provide your definition. Woman to woman and man to man?

 

[biblestudent78]

Yes, TSers begin simply by learning the Gospel and build on that foundation as they continue to learn GW for the purpose of becoming spiritually mature and a better witness for Christ.

Yes, we stand out because we question our beliefs before anyone else has a chance to do so,
asking ourselves such questions as "so what?" or "why believe that?", following the instruction of Paul in 1Thes. 5:21.

 

[biblestudent78]

Perhaps a more productive question for a "truth seeker" should be what does my life demonstrate what I claim to believe. If you say you believe in something yet it is not evidence of it in your life, then it's safe to assume you do not believe what you claim. A man can tell his wife and kids "how much he loves them" but their experience with the husband and father is what validates the reality.. the rest is just words...or as Paul so clearly, without actual love, what we claim is just noise. It is exactly the same for Christians. If we claim to have "saving faith" and it would come as a big surprise to our social circles, relatives and checkbooks, then we can safely assume we have misunderstood the difference in belief in the "right dogmas" for "saving faith." I know a thrice divorced man who claims that "I loved all my wives."

 

[GWH]

Perhaps a more productive question for a "truth seeker" should be what does my life demonstrate what I claim to believe. If you say you believe in something yet it is not evidence of it in your life, then it's safe to assume you do not believe what you claim. A man can tell his wife and kids "how much he loves them" but their experience with the husband and father is what validates the reality.. the rest is just words...or as Paul so clearly, without actual love, what we claim is just noise. It is exactly the same for Christians. If we claim to have "saving faith" and it would come as a big surprise to our social circles, relatives and checkbooks, then we can safely assume we have misunderstood the difference in belief in the "right dogmas" for "saving faith." I know a thrice divorced man who claims that "I loved all my wives."

Yes, we should examine ourselves to see if our faith is genuine per 2Cor. 13:5.

 

[GWH]

Again I wish grace and peace to fellow Christian truthseekers/spiritual siblings on CC, who are seeking to learn the truth about ultimate reality. Humble attitudes, agreement about the essential Gospel truth and congenial discussion are a positive witness for Christ. I look forward to continuing interaction/fellowship with you.

Parameters of truthseeking include:

TSers seek to learn the best belief and most logical answer to questions concerning ultimate reality. (Matt. 7:7, John 8:46, 1Cor. 2:6&13)

TSers are grateful to all people including famous philosophers, anonymous acquaintances and inspired authors of Scripture who help answer these questions. (Acts 17:26-31, 1Pet. 1:10-12)

TSers share their fallible faith with others, hoping they will find what they have learned helpful for understanding ultimate truth. (1Pet. 3:15b, 1Tim. 2:3-6)

TSers hope the Christian view is correct, because there is no better (credible and desirable) way of attaining heaven than NT theism aka the Christian Gospel. (Acts 7:51-53, Rom. 1:16-17)

TSers use logic, because they believe God is One/Logos, so right reasoning leads to all truth, both scientific and spiritual. (Isa. 1:18a, Acts 17:17, 1Thes. 5:21)

TSers want to learn the best belief, so when a contradictory view is deemed to be better, they change their opinion. (1Cor. 13:11, Heb. 6:1-3)

TSers love everyone and thus want to share knowledge with other truthseekers, so they may fellowship (2Tim. 4:3-4, 1John 1:3).

TSing begins with the admission of ignorance and fallibility, because in order to learn truth one must be willing to repent of old misunderstandings. An example I cited recently is that as the result of being raised in SBC churches I believed in OSAS until I read parts of the Bible they conveniently ignored and learned about the possibility of apostasy.

Do y'all have any examples of learning new truth and therefore amending previous beliefs due to discussions on CC?