[Starman]

If we approach the Bible believing it to be just a hodge podge of men's ideas, we will expect contradictions see contradictions everywhere. But when we approach the Bible with the certainty that it has one author-God, who doesn't contradict himself, then we will rightfully assume that what might seem like contradictions are really based on our inability to permit one scripture from shedding light on another.

For example, the Israelites who were the wilderness for forty years were being punished for their lack of faith. So their condition was a special one and should be viewed that way when we consider the prohibition of drinking wine. The confusion concerning this would emerge if we cast aside our knowledge of this fact or did not consider it relevant-which it is.


Numbers 32:13
And the LORD'S anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the LORD, was consumed.

[Hypatia]

But when we approach the Bible with the certainty that it has one author-God, who doesn't contradict himself, then we will rightfully assume that what might seem like contradictions are really based on our inability to permit one scripture from shedding light on another.

It seems like you have really convinced yourself of this. Is it not already proven that the bible was written by several men and the word "inspired" by God?
Interesting take and manipulation of that theory. This is how man warps everything to reflect his own image. A plethora of interpretation where everyone is right until you are labeled a heretic.

Hypatia

Drink more Wine.

[Starman]

It seems like you have really convinced yourself of this. Is it not already proven that the bible was written by several men and the word "inspired" by God?


Hypatia

Drink more Wine.

Just as you have convinced yourself otherwise.

I never said it wasn't written by men. God inspired men to write via his holy spirit.

2 Timothy 3:16

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Peter 1:19-21

20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

[Hypatia]

I am convinced of nothing, but I do lean to my knowledge and research compared to the thoughts of others.
Did you not just write "approach the Bible with the certainty that it has one author-God"? So this means every man who wrote it was magicly cleared of his interpretative ability and he channeled God while writing his portion of the bible?

You sure can spout bible quotes but do you live in totality by those words? Have you drank wine? Had a beer? Sipped a port? Tossed a shot?

Hypatia

[magprob]

I have been labeled a Heretic as we can see by this message:
This "disapproval" comment you gave:
"magprob disagrees: If that were true, we would have seen Jesus on the Welchs grape juice commercials by now!"

has been reported as inappropriate. You have insulted a religious belief. I gave a fact, and you disapproved with your own insulting opinion. This should not be allowed, and hopefully it will be deleted; not being shown in a Public Post to a valid question.
fredg

I replied that if you will show me proof of this statement, in the bible, I will give a public apoligy. If not, then I still disagree with you. I am sure people have been drinking grape juice for many years but in the bible it says Jesus drank WINE. To change that because someone thinks drinkinking wine is a sin has no basis in fact, only superstition... DOGMA.

"Justinian's despotic control over the Church was such that priests, bishops and even the pope were essentially powerless to resist his imperial doctrinal decrees. Justinian believed he and his wife, the power mad ex prostitute Theodora, were the elect of GOD to whom HE had entrusted the entire Christian empire, including Rome. Together they made dogma and translated it into law-adding clerical approvals as a mere formality."*
* See Milton V. Anastos, Justinian's Despotic Control over the Church...and his letter to Pope John II in 533.

[Starman]

I am convinced of nothing, but I do lean to my knowledge and research compared to the thoughts of others.
Did you not just write "approach the Bible with the certainty that it has one author-God"? So this means every man who wrote it was magicly cleared of his interpretative ability and he channeled God while writing his portion of the bible?

You sure can spout bible quotes but do you live in totality by those words? Have you drank wine? Had a beer? Sipped a port? Tossed a shot?

Hypatia

And your sources are completely devoid of the thoughts of others? Strange!

Of course I have tasted wine and beer. There is nothing in the Bible prohibiting it. Do I believe the Bible is inspired yes. Obviously you don't. But that's OK since everyone has a right to an opinion. So I am not angered by your choice of beliefs. I am simply responding to them for the sake of calm respectful discussion which you seem to have difficulty with.


BTW
What you consider magical is merely a trifle for God. Many things today might seem magical to our ancestors who would not understand how we do it.

[Hypatia]

I have no difficulty with your beliefs or thoughts, I only speak passionately and you are interpreting this as negativity to yourself. I hold passion in my writing and thinking, I simply do not know how to be dull.
I think the bible was inspired but not dictated. It is like watching a sunset and metaphorically comparing it to love in a poem. It is rich with inspiration and divine love and the author might never write such a brilliant thought provoking work again. Is an entire religion founded from this poem? Could be. Christianity was formed this way.

I am not judgemental by nature, I only pick a side and debate from that side. Often I switch sides if I see a valid point over the fence. the purpose of discussion and debate is to learn. The sad truth is most people do not learn but prefer to argue and further cement their beliefs.

I only find it comical when anyone in the world chooses to acknowledge a belief or theory but doesnt follow that belief or theory exactly. It is like a cop who breaks the law. You can't be on the fence and say " I AM" on this side or that side. You either Are completely or Are Not.
I do not aim the above specifically at you, it is only a general statement.

Hypatia

[magprob]

Here Here! I'll drink to that!!

[Starman]

I don't take such displays personally as you accuse me of doing.
I simply said that you seem to be laboring heavily under the restraints of this forum.

BTW

When I am quoted and the person who quotes uses the pronoun "you" I understand it to mean me. Sorry.



I fail to see the rub you are referring to Magprop. Can you please explain what you mean by "rub?" She claimed not to be speaking to me. I said she was because she used the word "you" You jumped in accusing me of having a "rub"? How's that?

You consider her posts intelligent. Good and well. But please grant others to differ with your opinion if they wish to.

[Hypatia]

Shi-at compadre, im not laboring! This is light stuff for me. I can discuss philosophy, ethics, religion, enlightenment, etc etc ad nauseum in my sleep.
Im brilliant, though I have trouble spelling being dislexic with a half broken keyboard that forgets to recognize the freaking shift button.

Heck, Im writing an article on how the theory of Dr Bohm's holographic universe ties into the collective experience that drives man to seek religion. Im also eating a taco, playing with my 2 year old son, working on a cd image for a DC band, posting here and signing petitions in the meantime.

This forum isnt heavy, my life is heavy lol!

Peace to ya!

Hypatia

[magprob]

WOW! Can I have a bite of that taco? I can't find a gooood taco here in Idaho! You just gave me an idea for the name of a band... "Holographic Taco"... cool ugh?

[Starman]

I wasn't referring to your intellectual abilities. Only to your needs to be expressive.

[Hypatia]

Mag you might not like my taco's. They are spinach, rabbit, tomato and sauce. I only eat meat I kill. I will sing in your band, I have an ok voice..lol.
Starman more people need to be expressive like me. We might not live in such an intellectually supressed world if they did.

I wear my heart on my sleeve.

Hypatia

[Starman]

Mag you might not like my taco's. They are spinach, rabbit, tomato and sauce. I only eat meat I kill. I will sing in your band, I have an ok voice..lol.
Starman more people need to be expressive like me. We might not live in such an intellectually supressed world if they did.

I wear my heart on my sleeve.

Hypatia

No problemo!
Hey, I usd to eat a lot of tacos when I lived in Chicago.
Good food!

[Morganite]

If we approach the Bible believing it to be just a hodge podge of men's ideas, we will expect contradictions see contradictions everywhere. But when we approach the Bible with the certainty that it has one author-God, who doesn't contradict himself, then we will rightfully assume that what might seem like contradictions are really based on our inability to permit one scripture from shedding light on another.

I agree that God does not contradict himself. But it is undeniable that the Bible contains contradictions and other errors. It was not the hand of God that put the ink on the parchment, but the hands of men, some who were inspired, and some were obviously more inspired than others because there is not one standard of inspiration throughout the bible.

Many of the original monographs were edited later to refashion the theology to suit the prevailing accepted teachings.

This is only hard to take if one adopts the position that the Bible is God-breathed in every single word, errors and all, and that the present texts represent the texts as originally written.

Such a view cannot be supported.



M;) RGANITE

[Starman]

I haven't yet come across a contradiction that didn't have a logical explanation or that didn't turn out to be a misunderstanding. I don't blindly believe in concepts that lack support.

[STONY]

To Orange On Spirits And Wine:

The Alcoholic Content Is The Only Difference. Wine Has A Low Percentage Of Alcohol And Spirits Are A
Stronger Variety. Remember Jesus Also Said Something About Not Drinkiing "new Wine" With His Apostles Until They Were In Heaven.

[orange]

To Orange On Spirits And Wine:

The Alcoholic Content Is The Only Difference. Wine Has A Low Percentage Of Alcohol And Spirits Are A
Stronger Variety. Remember Jesus Also Said Something About Not Drinkiing "new Wine" With His Apostles Until They Were In Heaven.

What is new wine? I've never heard that term before.

Btw, thanks everyone for continuing to post and discuss in this thread. I appreciate it and have enjoyed reading everything. I'm very close to having my baby at this point (2-3 weeks and they are going to induce me), and I have trouble sitting for long periods, so I'm not on much to contribute. But I do appreciate all the discussion, thanks.

[Starman]

What is new wine? I've never heard that term before.

The new wine mentioned in the Bible is wine which is undergoing fermentation. That's why new wine would produce gasses that would put pressure on old wineskins which lacked the needed elasticity to expand and cause them to burst.

Mark 2:22 (NKJV)

"Jesus said, 'No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; or else the new piece pulls away from the old, and the tear is made worse. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine bursts the wineskins, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins." (Mark 2:21-22)



BibleGateway.com - Keyword Search: new wine

[orange]

Thanks for that answer, Starman. So then is Stony saying in effect that the reason some Christians don't drink wine is because Jesus said they would not drink new wine until they were with him in heaven? Like is all current wine considered new wine?