RE:>> * You did explain yourself already, at least I thought that was what you are doing. What you explained was an evil, sadistic god. Certainly not a God that any Christian should be worshipping. *
No. I only explained that I believed the what, I did not explain the why.
The what seems to be clear, I had nothing to add to the text really.
I have much to add to the “why” if you will allow it.
RE:>> * I am just not as dogmatic as you, but I see that I should give more support for the biblical basis of my beliefs. *
I pray that dogmatic is not seen as a negative attribute.
I am in the same boat as you. We all should give more support for the biblical basis of our beliefs. I’m sorry that I did not introduce this reasoning earlier.
RE:>> * However, I see no error in defending what I know to be truth. *
I absolutely agree.
RE:>> * Truth is not God being an evil and childish being. If you want to believe that as truth, then you are sadly misled. *
I absolutely agree.
RE:>> * The bible is not to be worshipped. The fact that you won't come out and agree says to me that you do not understand the Christian faith. *
I’m sorry you did not derive my meaning from my context, but I now say to you,
“THE BIBLE IS NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED !!!” Worship none, but God.
This is skewed and self-serving is your opinion based on what ?
It is skewed and self-serving as shown by Col. 2:13-14,20-23 [excerpts deleted]
Notice that this Pauline scripture clearly shows that Christians regard those ancient texts as human commands and teachings, self-imposed. It is not, as fundamentalists like to say, the word of God, but the word of humans putting their own commandments and teachings in effect. How is it that you are just hearing this for the first time??
You know some of Christianity, but you lack the very basics. *
The very basics is summed up in One – You must be endwelt by the Holy Spirit, agreed ?
Did I say this is the first time I have heard Colossians chapter 2 ?
Will you allow me a reply before drawing such conclusions ?
But and if it is the first time, does that negate that I still have much truth yet to learn. Indeed, the truth in His word is a bottomless wellspring from within -- these words which have been crafted as a thick plush carpet wherein we only see the surface until He guides our fingers down into the lush richness of its full body.
I pray you forgive my love of His knowledge and wisdom that surpasses all I can or ever will know. Truly, He is my Maker and I am only clay.
Is this really claiming that these are the words of humans ? Though clearly it is talking about men putting (or keeping as is the case) “ordinances” which God has changed.
Hebrews chapters 7-8 ( 7:12 of note) explains this change and Hebrews chapters 9-10 describe the result of the change. If God has changed the law and “men” command to keep these doctrines, are they not become commandments and doctrines of men ?
RE:>> * Do you believe the God is a Spirit which can communicate to you ?
Yes, of course. *
Thank you, we agree on one of the most important aspects of Christianity.
RE:>> * Do you believe that His Spirit in not a pure form of truth ?
Yes, it is a pure form of truth, but it is not something which we can know in full. See for example: *
Thanks you again. We agree. I continually have more to learn from Him.
RE:>> * More basics? Galatians 3:25 "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."; Heb.8:11 "No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest."
You need to stop being so much concerned about what I Sam.15 and should be concerned about knowing basic Christian doctrine, which you show almost no knowledge. *
I Samuel 15 is part of basic Christian doctrine.
My concern is that you do not understand the how and why it is truth.
I make no claim to be better than you, just different
My desire is only for your benefit by sharing what I have been taught.
It is not my own knowledge. I would not know any of the how and why of I Samuel 15 had He not taught me. I too have questions and am still unable to comprehend many things in His word, but in my patience, He answers when I am ready
I pray we can become friends though we may disagree. I know of no two fundamentalists that I am likely to agree with on every point, but they are my brothers and dear friends, as are you. If I leave this earth, never to meet you again, I pray we part as friends.
Be not deceived about what I “show”. The scriptures teach me well.
( Proverbs 12:23, Proverbs14:33 Ecclesiastes 5:1-4 Matthew 12:36 )
I am just saying by these references that you and I may not communicate alike based on our understanding and adherence to these teachings.
I am not better than anyone else, but I will try to adhere to these in my communications.
Do not think that I am self-righteous (have I covered this one yet? – my memory of so many posts on different Forums(not just Astronomy.net) along with my human limitations can cause me to be prone to recall short to medium term history).
Please do not ever believe that I do not error. Ask Richard. I thank God for Richard.
RE:>> * I see we do not believe in the same Jesus.
--“at Jesus' birth, the Logos became Jesus”— No, my friend, Jesus, no some “Logos” has always been. At birth, He became human flesh.
Yes, I see that you do. Here is the Christian version: [ excerpt deleted] *
Are you saying “Yes” that we do not believe in the same Jesus”
Or are you saying “Yes, I see that we do believe in the same Jesus.”
I got the impression that you did not believe that Christ existed before becoming flesh.
( I Corinthians 10:4 ) If I drew the inference incorrectly, forgive me.
RE:>> * Maybe you haven't read Paul's writings:
"This is the identity relationship that humans should all seek in their life." *
You have lost me a little in your conveyance with this “Logos”
If you are simply saying that we should allow the Holy Spirit to conform us to being like Jesus Christ, the Alpha and Omega, the creator of all things, then I believe we are in agreement.
RE:>> " If we submit to God's will, then we too will achieve this identity with the Logos, and we will become co-heirs with Christ in the Kingdom of God." *
Again, it is the “this identity with the Logos” that throws me.
I have never heard of “entering into a close intimate personal relationship”
described as “achieving this identity with the Logos”.
Are you substituting Logos for the Trinity ?
RE:>> * These above scriptures would suggest that you don't know the Gospel of Christ. *
I would say instead that the description you provided simply was not received as communicating the same gospel. Nor do I quite believe it is yet. Thus it would serve us both well to try to understand one another’s descriptions in greater depth. I am willing if you are.
Do you concur that I Corinthians 10:4, and I Timothy 3:16 are part of that gospel ?
Peace to my brother. Love to you and your family as well.