CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity

[ATM]

...Christianity is not based on a book as is the Muslim faith, it is based on a person, Jesus. For the Christian, Truth is a person not a book.

A proper reading of the Bible starts with the gospels. The OT and the Epistles must all be understood through the lens of the Gospel.

Quoted for Truth, a person.

 

[Alpo]

Christianity is not based on a book as is the Muslim faith, it is based on a person, Jesus. For the Christian, Truth is a person not a book.

.

Yes, that is YOUR understanding and the understanding of quite a few people, even Roman Catholics. However, one has only to go through the comments here to see that is not the understanding of many sects and many of the people here.

 

[ATM]

The cake


...is a lie.

 

[foszoe]

Yes, that is YOUR understanding and the understanding of quite a few people, even Roman Catholics. However, one has only to go through the comments here to see that is not the understanding of many sects and many of the people here.

It's is the understanding of ancient Christianity which predates the books and the claim of Jesus himself in the Bible.

The perspective is not mine.

It is okay to have beliefs based on differing perspectives on some things until it divides the body of believers then it becomes heresy.

 

[Alpo]

In the year 1917, in a mountainous region at the center of Portugal, the Mother of God appeared six times to three young children.

Yeah that's a reaonsable comparison

You didn't read far enough, perhaps.

The Miracle of the Sun (Portuguese: O Milagre do Sol) was an event which occurred on 13 October 1917, reportedly attended by 30,000 to 100,000 people gathered near Fátima, Portugal. Several newspaper reporters were in attendance and they took testimony from many people who claimed to have witnessed extraordinary solar activity.

 

[Alpo]

It's is the understanding of ancient Christianity which predates the books and the claim of Jesus himself in the Bible.

The perspective is not mine.

It is okay to have beliefs based on differing perspectives on some things until it divides the body of believers then it becomes heresy.

Then what should I do with what GregR said in the last few pages? Hmmmm? He's a literalist. And he's not alone. From the perspective of an independent observer, one might think that the body IS divided and full of heretics.

 

[foszoe]

Then what should I do with what GregR said in the last few pages? Hmmmm? He's a literalist. And he's not alone. From the perspective of an independent observer, one might think that the body IS divided and full of heretics.

I don't recall exactly who said what.

I do disagree with some of what I have read here.

These disagreements may be on terminology or more substantial.

A couple of examples.

There is no such thing as a sin nature. Properly understood but in simple language , nature is natural. Sin is not natural. God created everything is the message of Genesis creation narrative. God said everything was good or in the case of humans very good.

The KJV is not the definitive text. It didn't take until the 16th century to get it right.

The Church Fathers say the literal reading of scripture is the lowest level of understanding.

The diligent outsider must start with the early church and trace that body of believers to see if they still exist. Only then can one say no group still carries the torch.

It's fairly simple to do. Only 2 groups make the claim, Orthodox and Roman Catholics.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

There is no such thing as a sin nature. Properly understood but in simple language , nature is natural. Sin is not natural. God created everything is the message of Genesis creation narrative. God said everything was good or in the case of humans very good..

Romans 5:12 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:”

Romans 3:10-12
“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

 

[ChristianPatriot]

No the KJV is not the definitive text. That would be the Textus Receptus. The KJV is the preserved word for English speaking people.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Lucky, there's nothing in the Bible about needing "Church Fathers" to interpret scripture. Every saved believers is brought into the priesthood with Christ. If you're not using literal translation, then someone is perverting scripture with what they feel scripture is supposed to mean.

 

[foszoe]

Romans 5:12 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:”

Romans 3:10-12
“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.”

Neither verse speaks of a sin nature. The first one clearly refers to death as the consequence of sin. Death is not natural.

Sin nature is not a biblical term.

The consequences of the fall have placed mankind in an unnatural state. Sin is foreign to human nature.

Did God create a sin nature?

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Neither verse speaks of a sin nature. The first one clearly refers to death as the consequence of sin. Death is not natural.

Sin nature is not a biblical term.

The consequences of the fall have placed mankind in an unnatural state. Sin is foreign to human nature.

Did God create a sin nature?

It's right there in plain English friend. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Death passed to ALL men for ALL have sinned. If baby's didn't have sin, then they wouldn't die. Clearly they do, because sin is in the seed of man.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

There's the danger in not reading scripture literally folks. Well I don't think it means xyz so abc must be what it means.

 

[Alpo]

It's curious that you say you don't need Church leaders to interpret scripture, yet you quote from Paul, who wasn't one of the original 12 and never physically met Jesus before the crucifixion.

That is a paradox.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

It's curious that you say you don't need Church leaders to interpret scripture, yet you quote from Paul, who wasn't one of the original 12 and never physically met Jesus before the crucifixion.

That is a paradox.

Wow.

"Give me liberty or give me death" That's a quote. I don't need Patrick Henry to interpret that.

 

[foszoe]

It's right there in plain English friend. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Death passed to ALL men for ALL have sinned. If baby's didn't have sin, then they wouldn't die. Clearly they do, because sin is in the seed of man.

Show me the word nature in the text.

Death is not natural.

 

[foszoe]

There's the danger in not reading scripture literally folks. Well I don't think it means xyz so abc must be what it means.

Again I am reading it literally. Show me the word nature in the text.

You are reading eisegetically.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Show me the word nature in the text.

Death is not natural.

You know what word isn't in the Bible?

Bible.

All means all, even in the Greek.

 

[Alpo]

Either you missed my point or you're ignoring it. Paul is not Jesus, never met Jesus, but is responsible for a good portion of the NT (although some authorship is disputed).

Lots of people call upon the writings of Paul. He witnessed nada. And from my lay reading, Paul and Jesus taught different messages.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Either you missed my point or you're ignoring it. Paul is not Jesus, never met Jesus, but is responsible for a good portion of the NT (although some authorship is disputed).

Lots of people call upon the writings of Paul. He witnessed nada. And from my lay reading, Paul and Jesus taught different messages.

Paul isn't interpreting any scriptures when he wrote those letters. Those letters are​ scripture.