[arcura]

Txgreasemonkey and galveston,
I agree that Jesus IS God.
And I agree with the very many highly recognized theologians who say the same thing based on their years of study of the Holy Scripture, the culture and politics of the time, plus the history of Jesus time on earth and the archeological evidence of the time and area.
Really good theologians go not confine there studies just of Holy Scripture.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[Morganite]

Jesus never said that he was God. He was careful to say that he was not God the Father,and that he had a subordinate role to the Father which was to do the will of him thet sent me. When the Rich Young Man spoke to him saying Good master ... Jesus corrected him, saying, Why callest thou me good? There is none good save one who is God! Speaking of the time of the seocnd coming he told his apostles that he did not know the time of his return, and neither did the angels of gheaven, but only the Father knew that. On another occasion he said plainly, My Father is greater than I [am].

He separates himself from the Father in substance and person when he says: And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.—John 17:3

That the three members of the Godhead are separate individuals, physically distinct from one another, is proven by the sacred records of God's dealings with man. One example was when the Savior was baptized. John recognized the Holy Ghost in the sign of a dove while Christ stood before him in the tabernacle of flesh, and they heard the voice of the Father acknowledging the son:.. . This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.—Matthew 3:17Surely this was not ventriloquism where Christ was speaking to and of himself. It was the Father introducing His Son. In this case, the members of the Holy Trinity manifested themselves, each in a different way, and each was distinct from the others. A similar event occurred on the Mount of Transfiguration when members of the Godhead were distinguished in the presence of Moses and Elias, and Peter, James, and John.

Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. (John 14:28.)

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17.)

And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are. (John 17:11.)

These and scores of other passages show the separate personages of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Hebrews 1:1-3

[I] God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;[/I]

Acts 7:54-56

¶ When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on [Stephen] with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.

John 5:20 ff.

For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

John 10:27 ff.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.30 I and my Father are one.

John 17:5 ff.

And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me.26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

Etc.

M:)RGANITE

[Starman]

txgreasemonkey and galveston,
I agree that Jesus IS God.
And I agree with the very many highly recognized theologians who say the same thing based on their years of study of the Holy Scripture, the culture and politics of the time, plus the history of Jesus time on earth and the archeological evidence of the time and area.
Really good theologians go not confine there studies just of Holy Scripture.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Those who hold a different view have also studied the Bible for many years, the social environment of Jesus's time and location and don't reject archeology as a science as you imply.

BTW
Recognition can't be used as a litmus test for truth. Those doing the recognizing might be in error themselves.

[galveston]

Actually, Arcura and Morganite are both right. Elohim, found in the first of Genesis is plural, (God said, "let us make man in OUR image".) But notice that the Apostle John tells us plainly that the Son is the actual Creator, and Jesus identifies Himself as the "I AM" who spoke to Moses out of the burning bush.

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. I see no conflict.

[Maree]

When Jesus was talking to his disciples on the Mount of Olives, and they asked him when the end times would come,he said that he did not know but only his Father which was in heaven knew of that time and day. To me,that separates both God and Jesus into 2 separate beings. Wouldn't he have told them if he was also God?

[Starman]

Actually, Arcura and Morganite are both right. Elohim, found in the first of Genesis is plural, (God said, "let us make man in OUR image".) But notice that the Apostle John tells us plainly that the Son is the actual Creator, and Jesus identifies Himself as the "I AM" who spoke to Moses out of the burning bush.

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. I see no conflict.

God created through Jesus. Proverbs chapter 8

BTW
Actually more important than all this is living a Christian life and letting God clarify the issue for all mankind in his own due time.

[galveston]

I just thought of something relating to the question about whether Jesus Christ is God or not. Notice that all through the Bible, neither righteous angels, nor righteous men, will accept worship. Jesus accepted worship, which is due to God only. Does this help any?

[Starman]

I just thought of something relating to the question about whether Jesus Christ is God or not. Notice that all through the Bible, neither righteous angels, nor righteous men, will accept worship. Jesus accepted worship, which is due to God only. Does this help any?

The Greek word translated as worship is simply a reverence or a behavior of great respect shown high officials, kings, and other persons of high status and does not necessarily carry the meaning that the word worship implies in English.





The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong's Number: 4352 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
proskunevw from (4314) and a probable derivative of (2965) (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master's hand)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Proskuneo 6:758,948
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
pros-koo-neh'-o Verb

Definition
to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
to the Jewish high priests
to God
to Christ
to heavenly beings
to demons

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/

[Morganite]

Yes, I see that reference, but aren't these "authors" just Scholars & Theorists?

My preference of credible sources comes from Theologians with several degrees in Theology.

Such as who?


There is usually not the distinctions you would make between the terms. Most thelogians are scholars who are theorists as well, even with several degrees, one of which is likely to be in theology but is not boubnd to be in that subject.

It is not the degree that makes the theologian but the mind, the intellect, the ability to weigh evidence, formulate proposiions asnd test the, and the ability to contrast, and compare, and all other scholarly skills that determrines whether an author acholar or theologian is a theologian.

You will look invain for complete agreement between them. Some will be Wellhausenists, others Kirkegaardist, Bartists, Tillichists, etc. some conservative, others liberal, some bibliolatrists, others transcendentalists, each having modes of thought and puposes that contend with, support, or outstrip that of others in their field. Every theologian is also a published author.

What a thinking person has to do is to decide whether of these cholars is 'credible,' and which are not, and understand why they make their preferences. Accepting everyhthing a person says because ehe or she has a degree in theology is a certain recipe for theological disaster, and so is spurning scholars and authors whose academic credentials are unknown to you. Neither course makes good sense.



M:)RGANITE

[Morganite]

I just thought of something relating to the question about whether Jesus Christ is God or not. Notice that all through the Bible, neither righteous angels, nor righteous men, will accept worship. Jesus accepted worship, which is due to God only. Does this help any?

What specific examples can you provide that show angels and men habitually reject worshipful attention?



M

[31pumpkin]

Morganite:

I responded further to Mrs. Pennell earlier in this thread. She was referring to "the Jesus Seminar". While she said the group was comprised of scholars with degrees in theology & religion, I commented further that the scholars fall short of answering about Jesus because none of them are ministers in addition to theorists.
I don't think a Christian viewpoint is represented in that "seminar" as there is more attention on disproving Jesus in that seminar.
Yes, I agree that whoever we listen to or consider our religious leaders, should be credible.
My sources were for Mrs. Pennell to consider. All in addition to being theologians are also ministers.
The answer for me still stands. Jesus never SAID he was God. But He was given ALL authority in heaven and on earth. Jesus is Lord in the Trinity. But right now, I believe Jesus is seated at the right of God in heaven and in our hearts and minds.

[Morganite]

According the the Bible, God is the The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. If you seperate The Father and The Son, then you must seperate The Holy Spirit as well. You cannot say that The Holy Spirit is God without admitting that Jesus, The Son, is also God.

Your statement is what the trinity is according to several extrabiblical Christian Creeds, but you will not find those Creeds in the Bible. There is no statement in the Bible defining a triune God. The nearest thing to a triune credal statement in the 'Johannine Comma' that is a known unauthorised interpolation added to scripture by a later hand to make up for total lack of scriptural support for the Trinity.



M:)RGANITE

Indeed we are all entitled to our opinions and beliefs. :D

Schweitzer forgot dogs, small children, friends, and bears of all kinds.

M

To Mrs. Pennell,
It appears that theologians spend so much time trying to study God that they never have the time to get to know Him. Very sad really! Do you want to know what God is like? Just read how Jesus dealt with the various people that He ministered to. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.
Forget the theologians and simply read the Bible with an open mind. It is the most reasonable book ever written!

I disagree with your generalisation. It simply is not so. The Bible is in parts anything but reasonable and that is why Bible scholars can seldom agree, theologians hardly, ministers never, and lay persons can't undertand any of them!

The Bible is a difficult book to know and understand, especially when a modern mindset tries ot make sense of a three thousand year old monograph.


M

The earliest known dated papyrus directly translatable to the New Testament (the John Ryllands) was written in 125 - 130 AD ...

The fragnment to which your post refers is called P52. This small fragment of St. John's Gospel, less than nine centimetres high and containing on the one side part of verses 31-33, on the other of verses 37-38 of chapter xviii is one of the collection of Greek papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester. It was originally discovered in Egypt, and may come from the famous site of Oxyrhynchus (Behnesa), the ruined city in Upper Egypt where Grenfel and Hunt carried out some of the most startling and successful excavations in the history of archaeology; it may be remembered that among their finds of new fragments of Classical and Christian literature were the now familiar "Sayings of Jesus".

The importance of this fragment is quite out of proportion to its size, since it may with some confidence be dated in the first half of the second century A.D. and thus ranks as the earliest known fragment of the New Testament in any language.It provides us with invaluable evidence of the spread of Christianity in areas distant from the land of its origin; it is particularly interesting to know that among the books read by the early Christians in Upper Egypt was St. John's Gospel, commonly regarded as one of the latest of the books of the New Testament. Like other early Christian works which have been found in Egypt, this Gospel was written in the form of a codex, i.e. book, not of a roll, the common vehicle for pagan literature of that time.


M

Actually, Arcura and Morganite are both right. Elohim, found in the first of Genesis is plural, (God said, "let us make man in OUR image".) But notice that the Apostle John tells us plainly that the Son is the actual Creator, and Jesus identifies Himself as the "I AM" who spoke to Moses out of the burning bush.

God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. I see no conflict.

Matthew 3:15-17 - three separate person in three separate places

The transfiguration...

The Garden of Gethsemane (Jn 17)

The cry from the cross - eloi, eloi, lama sabacthani? (My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?)

These and others - "My Father is greater than I am" "Don't call me 'good,' here is none good except One" militate against any conclusion that Jesus and God the father are identical. Jesus did not say "I and the Father is one," but, " I and the father are one." He never said I AM the Father!" etc.


M:)RGANITE

Absolutely, Jesus is God!!! No question about it.

But he is not the Father.



M

Ok, I confess, I've not read all of this so my piping in is just a response to the initial question: "Did Jesus say he was God".

I did search this thread and see that John 20:28-29 is not mentioned:

Thomas said to [Jesus], "My Lord and my God!"

Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

So there Jesus affirms that Thomas believes correctly: That He is God.

I'd like that transcript read back with the understanding that Thomas questioned whether Jesus had actually been resurrected - 'except I see for myself I will not believe - and when he was convinced - 'he thrust his hands into his wounds' - uttered his high Christological statement, but Jesus confirms only his belief in him as resurrected. Taking that to cover anything else than the fact of the literal resurrection of Jesus from the dead is wayward and unreliable.

Let us at least see what was written in the text and what it actually addresses.


M

[TxGreaseMonkey]

Jesus=God
Jesus is the creative element of the Infinite God Head. Very glad the question was asked.

[galveston]

What specific examples can you provide that show angels and men habitually reject worshipful attention?



M

Note my qualifing word "righteous". Satan, fallen angels, and unrighteous men will certainly accept worship. I hope no one out there would attempt to put Jesus Christ in that company. As to examples, I give three off the top of my head. In Acts 28:3 the Apostle Paul rejects worship. In Rev. 19:10 and 22:9 two beings identified as angels refuse to accept worship. The only way that Jesus Christ would accept worship is if He is God. Either that, or He is a liar, and I don't believe that for an instant.

[STONY]

THERE IS A SCRIPTURE VERSE THAT COMES TO MIND WHERE JESUS STATES, "IF YOU HAVE SEEN ME THEN YOU HAVE SEEN MY FATHER..."

John 14:7
If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
John 14:6-8

I THINK THIS IS THE VERSE... STONY

[Morganite]

I'm not sure what you are saying there Acura:

But, I know the scholars fall short if they are not also Ministers.

You can say you, personally, do not trust them but you cannot say they fall short. They have often - and still do - led the way for ministers to follow in understanding difficulties in the Bible. Many ministers are hopeless when it comes to exegesis and rely heavily on erudite scholars.




M:)

[Starman]

Note my qualifing word "righteous". Satan, fallen angels, and unrighteous men will certainly accept worship. I hope no one out there would attempt to put Jesus Christ in that company. As to examples, I give three off the top of my head. In Acts 28:3 the Apostle Paul rejects worship. In Rev. 19:10 and 22:9 two beings identified as angels refuse to accept worship. The only way that Jesus Christ would accept worship is if He is God. Either that, or He is a liar, and I don't believe that for an instant.

Either that or you are infusing more meaning onto the original Greek word than the word warrants.

[31pumpkin]

Morganite:

These scholars noted in the "Jesus Seminar" cannot be trusted. AND also they fall short of convincing me, as a Christian, of any difference between the historical Jesus & the Christian Jesus.
Note how the main author of this seminar is a FORMER professor at the univ. of Montana. And now writing books on their so-called theories. Oh, how very convenient! I'll bet he didn't TEACH this when he was a professor!
Then take a look at the commentator/author writing about this "Seminar".
MINISTER. From Probe Ministries. I don't think this minister who care to use these New Testament scholars opinions at all. AND this minister may even be a scholar himself, right?
Well, the Jesus Seminar wasn't accepted well, according to the author/commentator. But just the thought of a secular person reading something like that & believing it bothers me. What a good excuse to further their disbelief in Jesus, by none other than New Testament scholars to boot!
These scholars are giving a philosophical naturalistic view of the world & deny the supernatural. Well, they might as well throw in how they don't believe that Moses parted the Red Sea too, since they don't believe in miracles!
And Mrs. Pennell's timeline for the N. Testament being written... see page 1, well I don't think she's any where near accurate.
I'm pasting an excerpt from the allabouttruth.org website -

-----------------

"It is generally agreed that the Book of Matthew was the first Gospel written and that it was written between A.D. 50 and 75. Of the four Gospel's, John's is considered to have been the last one written, around A.D. 85. The Book of Acts, a historical account of the establishment of the early Christian church, is believed to have been written by one of the Apostle Paul's associates, around A.D. 62 (near the end of Paul's imprisonment in Rome).

The Pauline Epistles (the Apostle Paul's letters to the early church) were authored between A.D. 50 - 67. The author of Hebrews is unknown, but the book is commonly thought to have been written around A.D. 70. The epistles of the other Apostles were written between A.D. 48 - 90.

The Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ is believed to have been penned by the Apostle John between A.D. 70 - 95."

[RickJ]

These scholars noted in the "Jesus Seminar" cannot be trusted.

I agree. They are not "scholars" at all, but a group with an agenda.

[Morganite]

DrJizzle:

Neurotics build Castles, Whereas Psychotics live in them. No need to analyze it
any further. " sand" was mistakenly remembered by me.

The full quote is:

Neurotics build castles in the air; psychotics live in them; and psychiatrists collect the rent!

M:)

Morganite:

1) These scholars noted in the "Jesus Seminar" cannot be trusted. AND also they fall short of convincing me, as a Christian, of any difference between the historical Jesus & the Christian Jesus.

2) Note how the main author of this seminar is a FORMER professor at the univ. of Montana. And now writing books on their so-called theories. Oh, how very convenient! I'll bet he didn't TEACH this when he was a professor!

3) Then take a look at the commentator/author writing about this "Seminar".
MINISTER. From Probe Ministries. I don't think this minister who care to use these New Testament scholars opinions at all. AND this minister may even be a scholar himself, right?
Well, the Jesus Seminar wasn't accepted well, according to the author/commentator. But just the thought of a secular person reading something like that & believing it bothers me.

4) What a good excuse to further their disbelief in Jesus, by none other than New Testament scholars to boot!

5) These scholars are giving a philosophical naturalistic view of the world & deny the supernatural. Well, they might as well throw in how they don't believe that Moses parted the Red Sea too, since they don't believe in miracles!

6) And Mrs. Pennell's timeline for the N. Testament being written...see page 1, well I don't think she's any where near accurate.

I'm pasting an exerpt from the allabouttruth.org website -

-----------------

A) "It is generally agreed that the Book of Matthew was the first Gospel written and that it was written between A.D. 50 and 75.

B) Of the four Gospel's, John's is considered to have been the last one written, around A.D. 85.

C) The Book of Acts, a historical account of the establishment of the early Christian church, is believed to have been written by one of the Apostle Paul's associates, around A.D. 62 (near the end of Paul's imprisonment in Rome).

D) The Pauline Epistles (the Apostle Paul's letters to the early church) were authored between A.D. 50 - 67.

E) The author of Hebrews is unknown, but the book is commonly thought to have been written around A.D. 70. The epistles of the other Apostles were written between A.D. 48 - 90.

F) The Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ is believed to have been penned by the Apostle John between A.D. 70 - 95."

1) If you say they cannot be trusted you need to show show evidence of why you say that. If it is merely an unsupported opinion, then it is worthless. Why should anyone believe you rather than the professor without you taking the time and trouble to show where he is wrong and why you are right?

2) What is wrong with being a FORMER anything? Why is being a FORMERN professor at MU 'convenient' an dionstea dof betting he didn't tecah such things when he was a PRESENT professor at MU, why not prove that he did? Innuendo and vagrant ooinion is useless. It tells how you feel, and what your prejudices are, but offers no support at all to your position.

3) Your thinking is very muddled here. You are saying you don't like what they teach but you don't know why, except it makes you uncomfortable. That is unhelpful.

4) There you go again, knocking Bible scholars without posting the reasons for your disagreement. If you want anyone to take notice of your objections you need to set them out carefully so that others can follow your lines of reasoning and test your arguments and theories. It is too easy to come out and say "I'm agin it!" but as you have engaged in debate we are entitled to expect a better standard of contribution than a mere airing of your prejudices.

5) They might well offer a naturalistic explanation, but Moses didn't part the Red Sea. As a Bible reader you will know that "Red Sea" is a mistranslation, and the "Reed Sea" is where the Children of Israel crossed from Egypt to Palestine.

6) You express your thinking that Mrs Pennell is inaccurate but you do not take the time and trouble to show where and how. If she is, expose her inaccuracies so that we can see them and either disagree or agree with you. Expressing disbelief is neither scholarly, ministerial, nor Christian unless you cans show good cause for your judgement. Saying 'Pooh pooh' is not discussion.

A) A Marcan priority is generally agreed, although there are a FEW who believe in a Matthean priority, but there compelling reasons for rejecting that view.

B) The Fourth Gospel is the last , but its date is closer to 95 to 100 AD. Revelations was written after the Fourth Gospel, around 104 AD. No one knows for sure who wrote "John's" Gospel. The book itself claims no author.

C) The Book of Acts is an incomplete record of some of the labours of Peter and Paul. Details of the other ten apostles are not cincluded. It was written by Lucas a Greek physician, who also wrote the third Gospel..

D) Basically the accepted dates, with First Thessalonians being the first extant letter. Dating has to be guessed from internal evidence.

E) The author of Hebrews is unknown. It is almost certain that it was not written by Paul because the Greek is different, the vocabulary is unique, and the whole structure of the book is unPauline.

F) Revelations is the last of the present NT books to have been written, and is dated about 105 AD.

The Bible is much too important to be left in the hands and at the mercy of unskilled and uninspired interpreters as many of the 'ministers' who tout their own versions and interpretations of it are. Bible shcolars work with an honesty that some ministers would do well to imitate. The broadening of understanding of the Bible is thanks almost entirely to Bible scholars, many of them who are also ministers, but little progress has been made towards understanding by ministers who are not scholars, and whose bigotry and prejudices permeate all they say, write, and do. From such turn away!

As for the Jesus Seminar, it is a demythologising movement that aims to peel back what Bultmann et all call 'myths' imposed by the faith community to bolster their faith in the supernatural abilites of one who had become accepted as the Son of God, the divine redeemer and saviour. While such an approach seems strange to believers of a different order, it is not entirely an empty or futile exercise, but part of the search for the person behind the stories. Provided that you are sufficiently secure in your own faith position, you might benefit from some of their discoveries and theories without starting a war against them. At the very least, if you disagree, you ought to set out your stall with care and attention to detail so that others can follow your reasoned and sensible arguments against their positions. However, you must not assume that everything they say is wrong, or you could be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

As Paul said, "Test everything and hold on to what is true!" His advice is as good today as it was back then



M:)RGANITE

It seems that the Jews were the first to parcel this little bunch up into one all knowing "Almighty".

You think? In your worm's eye view of mankind's rekigious experience, why did you leave out Akhenaton's monotheism??



M:)