Nope. I HAVE read other works by Josh and several others who think like he does. If you ask me nice, I'll d/l it into my Kindle and do an honest and open-minded reading of it, then report back.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
|
Nope. I HAVE read other works by Josh and several others who think like he does. If you ask me nice, I'll d/l it into my Kindle and do an honest and open-minded reading of it, then report back.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I tend to discount and ignore reviews, good or bad, but wonder why supporters cannot articulate themselves after having read the works, and raving about it. Care to share?
Don't mind doing your homework I see. I started with His YouTube videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I think the resurrection of Christ is a good place to start. The best evidence of that event to me is the fact that all the authorities had to do was produce the dead body to refute the claim of resurrection. They couldn't do that. I could add that, if Jesus was just being deceptive, He would have never told them he would physically rise from the dead. He would have simply said He would spiritually rise, which would have been practically impossible to refute. And there is the fact that the witnesses of the resurrection so firmly believed they saw and interacted with Him that they led lives of deprivation and, eventually, were executed for their belief. Even at that, the message they preached changed the world. And then there is the case of Saul of Tarsus, whose life was changed as radically as any man who ever lived because he met the risen Lord.Quote:
I tend to discount and ignore reviews, good or bad, but wonder why supporters cannot articulate themselves after having read the works, and raving about it. Care to share?
Great idea, will do that!Quote:
Don't mind doing your homework I see. I started with His YouTube videos.
I must be honest that in my own studies over the years I have run into many scholars making very good arguments and presenting them as facts. Ones faith is not always about forensic evidence that can be demonstrated or proven. I surely have no proof of my own, so I offer none. I'm no boy scout, and have enough flaws to fill a rather thick book, so I have no intention of blasting the faith of good people, or dismissing it if it works well for you. We can discuss but don't take it personally.
I find very little references to the guards in the bible, but know of people having life changing spiritual experiences, or awakenings. That alone is enough for me to be aware of things that are greater than I am. Obviously I am no prolific scholar.
Really, facts are facts, some would say irrefutable, but there are always detractors who want to take a different path and follow their own desiresQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Who was it who once said, "Facts are troublesome things."
I was always taught that belief in the teachings of the Bible is a matter of faith, not because they're irrefutable facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
If they are not irrefutable facts, then why on earth would anyone want to believe them? It is like saying that 2 + 2 = 4 most of the time, but not all of the time. When you come from that point of view, and many do, it just seems to rob the Bible of any authority. Wouldn't it set me up as judge of the Bible rather than the Bible being the governing authority in my life? Jesus rose from the dead only if I believe He did, which is just another version of, "Who knows?"
I used to have a point of view similar to that until I discovered the amazing historical accuracy of the Biblical documents. It's not blind faith to believe the teachings of scripture.
I don't question your FAITH JL, nor the historic value of your bible as a whole, but I can refute what scholars present as irrefutable facts. How you treat them is of course your right.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Arguing over "irrefutable facts" is the main reason there are so many denominations.Quote:
If they are not irrefutable facts, then why on earth would anyone want to believe them?
Great point!Quote:
Originally Posted by wondergirl
OK. Let's hear you refute one.Quote:
I can refute what scholars present as irrefutable facts. How you treat them is of course your right.
Quote:
Arguing over "irrefutable facts" is the main reason there are so many denominations.
Actually, it's more the details that people divide over. The core teaching of the Bible is generally not in dispute unless you get into liberal churches who do not believe in the inspiration of scripture and are convinced the Bible is full of non-facts. So we end up with silly disputes, for instance, about the true nature of marriage.
So you would be just as happy as a Methodist or a Lutheran or an Mormon or a Catholic? Their "divisive details" don't matter to you since they all have the same core teaching about salvation?Quote:
Actually, it's more the details that people divide over. The core teaching of the Bible is generally not in dispute
They all have the same core teaching about salvation?? Hardly. Mormons do not claim to adhere to the Bible at all and do not believe in salvation that belongs to all who genuinely have faith in Jesus, so that's a false comparison. Catholic doctrine only exists because they put the claims of the Popes alongside the claims of the Bible, and they also do not believe that faith alone in Christ alone is sufficient for salvation, so that's another false comparison. As to Methodists, they have largely abandoned the Bible as being the sole source of doctrine and have consequently drifted into error. Not real familiar with Lutherans, but it's hard to argue with a group who, I suppose, claim to follow the lead of Martin Luther!
I would love to hear your understanding of the "core teaching about salvation". What is your belief in that matter?
They are all listed as Christian.Quote:
They all have the same core teaching about salvation?? Hardly.
Mormon, e.g.: "He suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross under an immeasurable weight to ransom us from our mortal burdens. After three days Jesus Christ overcame death, emerging from the tomb resurrected and winning for us that same reward; He made possible our own resurrection, the permanent union of our spirit and perfected physical body. Jesus was sent by His Father to offer eternal life to all of His children; His sacrifice empowers the plan of salvation."
https://www.mormon.org/beliefs/jesus-christ
No, they don't. And you belong to which group?Quote:
Not real familiar with Lutherans, but it's hard to argue with a group who, I suppose, claim to follow the lead of Martin Luther!
I was quoting you. And I've told you my belief.Quote:
I would love to hear your understanding of the "core teaching about salvation". What is your belief in that matter?
You quoted me about the core of salvation? I must have missed it.
As to Mormon doctrine, you disappoint me. They are very plain about this. "salvation from sin, or spiritual death, is conditional. Entrance to the highest Heavenly Kingdom, the "Celestial Kingdom" (See 1 Corinthians 15:40), is only granted to those who accept Jesus through baptism into the Church by its priesthood authority, follow Church doctrine, and live righteous lives. Faith alone, or faith without works, (i.e. dead faith), is not considered sufficient to attain exaltation. (See James 2:26.)"
By "church", they of course mean the Mormon church.
I used your terminology, "core teaching about salvation."Quote:
You quoted me about the core of salvation? I must have missed it.
I used to live near Palmyra, NY, the place where the LDS church began. I've been to their visitor center, have walked through the sacred grove, have climbed the Hill Cumorah (but didn't catch site of the angel Moroni). I posted their belief about salvation from their site.
Jesus wept
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:11 AM. |