There are competing religions with at least God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Catholics claim God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one. Baptists claim Jesus is essentially God. Lutherans think people always need Jesus forgiveness. Methodists are happy as long as you think Jesus is God's son. Jews think Jesus is a false messiah. Unitarians have God as their God.

Some groups use the Old Testament. Other groups use the New Testament. A number of groups selectively choose stuff from the Old Testament.

The groups cluster into Catholics and Baptists, Lutherans and Methodists, Jews and Unitarians. One group is right and the other two are wrong; or, all of them are wrong: all of them cannot simultaneously be correct.

Is any group right or are they all wrong? Why or why not?

GodLied.

I think all the groups you mentioned believe in the <a href="http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/trinity.html">Trinity</a>.

Originally posted by okinrus
I think all the groups you mentioned believe in the <a href="http://home.nyc.rr.com/mysticalrose/trinity.html">Trinity</a>.

All groups do not believe in the Trinity because Jews do not beleive in Jesus as a messiah.

GodLied.

This is from a Muslim's view.

They are all wrong about the conception of Jesus(pbuh). He is not God, he is not God's son, he is not a false messiah. It is a very simple answer. He is a prophet sent from God. There is no other explantion than this.

The Christians have broken into different sects because of their view of Jesus. In Islam, there are only two different sects. It is because of who they thought should be first Caliph. Other than that, they all believe in the same thing.

When I would ask a Christian about what they would believe, one would say we believe in Jesus(pbuh) as God while another will say Jesus(pbuh) is God's son.

The Christians have broken into different sects because of their view of Jesus. In Islam, there are only two different sects. It is because of who they thought should be first Caliph. Other than that, they all believe in the same thing.

There are more sects than two. There is the Nation of Islam and few minor ones. I don't think taht most muslims consider them a part of Islam though.


When I would ask a Christian about what they would believe, one would say we believe in Jesus(pbuh) as God while another will say Jesus(pbuh) is God's son.

He's both. Confusing yes, but read the explanation of the site I gave you.


The Christians have broken into different sects because of their view of Jesus.

The schism between the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox Church was mainly because of who was the Pope. The division between the Roman Catholic church and the protestants was mainly debate about salvation by faith alone. As to the indentity of Jesus, all mainstream christians believe in the Trinity.

Originally posted by okinrus
... As to the indentity of Jesus, all mainstream christians believe in the Trinity.

Christians fundamentally believe in Jesus, hence their name. The Holy Bible has two parts, Old and New. Depending on the basis for a particular group, one group using the Holy Bible may be Christians and another group may not be Christians. For example: Baptists versus Jews.

GodLied

pakman. don't perceive god thru your own eyes. the holy spirit of jesus ( the holy ghost ) only, can reveal the truth. there is no other truth bar that. adam was natural, jesus spiritual. jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world.
this discourse is not to prove or disprove u, but simply a flower in a desert storm, ( i would rather have said nothing ). this is the power of the cross- love.
u think a moslem can't be in tune with the spirit of christ. in the end it is not only the honor of the religion but man's heart on open display.
god could and would not destroy a good soul.
reference- the gospel of jesus christ.
the holy spirit ( in the teaching of christ ) is also an affirmation.

Originally posted by firingseeds
pakman. don't perceive god thru your own eyes. the holy spirit of jesus ( the holy ghost ) only, can reveal the truth. there is no other truth bar that. adam was natural, jesus spiritual. jesus said, my kingdom is not of this world.
this discourse is not to prove or disprove u, but simply a flower in a desert storm, ( i would rather have said nothing ). this is the power of the cross- love.
u think a moslem can't be in tune with the spirit of christ. in the end it is not only the honor of the religion but man's heart on open display.
god could and would not destroy a good soul.
reference- the gospel of jesus christ.
the holy spirit ( in the teaching of christ ) is also an affirmation.

firingseeds, you've fired off your mouth again in ignorance. Who are you to tell anyone else not to perceive god through their own eyes? Do you hold the copyright on God? You are so sadly ignorant of the power of the spirit of God! It would have been better had you said nothing rather than to jump in where you are the most ignorant! And what's this bullshit with 'simply a flower in a desert storm?' You certainly couldn't be referring to your own innocent position! I think you're delusional.

A Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu are as much a sacred vehicle for the spirit of God just as all God's creations are vessels for the One Spirit. In the end, your religion will be worth squat. It is the human being who represents God on Earth. There are no good and evil souls! There are people who don't recognize the great spirit they have been given as human beings, but there are no bad souls!

Your reference--'the gospel of jesus christ' is a new joke on me. I've heard of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John--even Thomas, Philip and Mary Magdalene, but not the gospel of jesus christ! Did you just make this shit up? How stupid do you think the rest of us are?

The Spirit of God is so great in and of itself, there is no way that this great positive force of energy would need to be channeled through one man for the salvation of all. There is no need for the salvation of anyone. By your present appearance on this planet, that should be all the confirmation you need to realize that as a human being, you are so far above any need for salvation. I am truly sorry that your god has lied to you and that you ignorantly continue to believe those lies.

only thru the power of the holy spirit can one say jesus christ is lord.
hey, i enjoyed your ticking off. u pretty darn good- wrong but good; ya' know what i mean.

Originally posted by firingseeds
only thru the power of the holy spirit can one say jesus christ is lord.
hey, i enjoyed your ticking off. u pretty darn good- wrong but good; ya' know what i mean.

So, firingseeds, Jews and Unitarians lack the Holy Spirit as they do not acknowledge Jesus as Lord or even as God. Also, if you are Christian, your enjoyment of sinnister activity suggests the evil nature of Christianity. Hmm, since fire is God's food, God might be Satan himself.

GodLied.

Pure Trinitarianism (three gods in one) is just as unacceptable (Biblically) as Pure Unitarianism (one god exclusive to himself).

The complete Christian doctrine including all three our experiences of God, is found in Titus 3:

4But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy.
He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior,
7so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.

Since God is God, Jesus is the same God, and the Holy Spirit is the same God, the Spirit will not be "poured out" on anyone who does not believe in God by accepting Jesus.

By introducing this Unity (I use the word deliberately), God effectively made sure that only He was believed in and submitted to. Since there will be no other Saviour than God, there will be no other Saviour than Jesus. Since there will be no other authority to pour out His Spirit than God, nobody can be cleansed from sin by any other means (any other "god"). Thus "God is all in all" as the Scripture says.

You cannot believe in the "wrong God" by accident. Muslims might believe Jesus was a real prophet, but they don't believe the people who he prophesied to! What power or authority could His message have had then? Unitarians deny the same. Their intentions are well-meaning, but God's salvation remains "veiled" to them for precisely this reason (ask them, they will be able to confirm this). If there can be no trustworthy revelation from God, then what knowledge could we possibly "construct" about God that would be trustworthy? There is only one Saviour in the OT, and only one Jesus in the NT - to believe anything else and still call yourself a Christian empties the message of its truth, and makes you a liar.

Godlied
Also, if you are Christian, your enjoyment of sinnister activity suggests the evil nature of Christianity.
This is a vain attempt at implicating God with his followers, but completely non sequitur. If Christians were part of the Trinity, we would indeed have suggested a sinister God. If the Bible was written about and by angelic beings, it would indeed not have included wars, rapes, injustices and hatred. Why do you think we needed a Saviour? M*W says we don't, but obviously she can only speak for herself. Maybe everybody are "sacred vehicles", but very few carry any sacred passengers. The Holy Spirit is no "New Age energy". Jesus' Church is a hospital - you don't find perfectly healthy people in a hospital.

M*W
If you can achieve godliness on your own, then do it without belittling others. Show some patience, understanding and compassion. You can't "recognize" God's Spirit if you don't recognize God himself, that's just logical. If you say "yes, there is a God" then you must be able to differentiate between yourself and God self. You are not the same; we are not God, nor have we the ability to save ourselves from death.

15To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure... 16They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him.

This applies to Christianity as well. Nobody is exempt from judgement.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
The Spirit of God is so great in and of itself, there is no way that this great positive force of energy would need to be channeled through one man for the salvation of all. There is no need for the salvation of anyone. By your present appearance on this planet, that should be all the confirmation you need to realize that as a human being, you are so far above any need for salvation. I am truly sorry that your god has lied to you and that you ignorantly continue to believe those lies.

MW,
Your words are so logical and powerfull that they must stem from a true solid believe. You have added to me a new prespective of looking at the spirit of god. The spirit of god is truly so great that it can never be channeled through one, yet is enough to fill us all and beyond. The chrisitans wants to limit the human potential but applying a lower denominator of evil to everyone and thus require one man to issue salvation from us from this low setting. They are so negative beyond belief that they attribute sins to a newly born child and think that through baptism and church doctrination they can wash away a child's sin. They are so evil that they can comprehend an ill concept that a god can hurt and crucify a child in the name of saving humanity? How rediculous.

Originally posted by Jenyar
Since God is God, Jesus is the same God, and the Holy Spirit is the same God, the Spirit will not be "poured out" on anyone who does not believe in God by accepting Jesus.


Without reading the rest of your post, your basic idea is sick.

Jesus is not the same God. Jesus is not even good by his own account. How do you go so stray Jenyar? I don't blame you, your bible is full of contradictions, where half of it says that Jesus is in no way god, while the other half says that Jesus is god. For your convineance, the wrong half is the one written under the nose of the Romans, who were the biggest enemy to Jesus Christ.

John.8
[54] Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:


Mark.10
[18] And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.


Luke.18
[19] And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

Answer me jenyar, straight without dancing. What is the importance of Jesus's sentence that no one is good save ONE, which is god. Why didn't he say three, or god through me?, or the three god in one? Don't dance and tackle the one verse and tell me why did Jesus say, none is good save the one god?

Why is the first commandment have no mention of the trinity?

Mark.12
[28] And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?
[29] And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
[30] And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

It's the first commandment for god sake spoken by jesus himself and doesn't mention the word believe in god through me. Please explain to me the first commandment, the essense of what Jesus what is trying to say. Out of all what was claimed that Jesus said, when he was asked the direct question, of what is the most important rule, he replied, believe in the one god, mine and your god.

Answer me jenyar, straight without dancing. What is the importance of Jesus's sentence that no one is good save ONE, which is god. Why didn't he say three, or god through me?, or the three god in one? Don't dance and tackle the one verse and tell me why did Jesus say, none is good save the one god?

Why is the first commandment have no mention of the trinity?
The "Trinity" is only an understanding of the means of salvation - not part of the salvation itself

Jesus did say:

"I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture."

5Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."

We only know the salvation of God through Him. As a human, he could not compare himself with God (neither can we). But Jesus could associate with God through his knowledge and relationship with Him - something He intended to pass on to those who believed.

Flores, if your faith is sufficient to you then hold on to it. May God be merciful to you because you believe in Him. But I cannot think of Jesus as a Prophet and a liar at the same time, so I have to believe what Jesus said was true, and that His message was given for a reason.

Originally posted by Jenyar
Flores, if your faith is sufficient to you then hold on to it. May God be merciful to you because you believe in Him. But I cannot think of Jesus as a Prophet and a liar at the same time, so I have to believe what Jesus said was true, and that His message was given for a reason.

How can Jesus be a liar Jenyar. Jesus as a prophet of god pure enough to act as fliter of god's light was one of the most noble humans. Don't attribute lies in the bible to Jesus, he is innocent of the corruption of the bible and your lies. Jesus is not the light, god is the light. Jesus is not the way, Jesus only showed us the way, but to each of us the responsbility of travelling the way.

Jesus was strengthened by the light of god, which is the strongest light that guides us humans. And instead of you following in Jesus's footsteps and strengthening your self with the same light that strengthened Jesus, you elected to dishonor god and look at a human Jesus for salvation and guidance. That human became your temporary light and on the day that only god light will shine, your weak light and all other lights will dim in comparison. You are like a man who made up his own fire for guidance in the darkness, but when god decide to send the rain to your fire, you will be left in utter darkness.

You never explained to me the first commandment nor the testimony of Jesus that he is not good and none is good save one who is god. I take it you have no grasp on the essence of the message that Jesus tried to deliver and prefer to rely on the marginal contradictions that you so efficiently memorized.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jenyar
[b]M*WIf you can achieve godliness on your own, then do it without belittling others.
----------
(Since you're dancing around the issues again, I'll repeat myself for the zillionth time. The only reason we are here on Planet Earth is to achieve godliness. Godliness cannot be achieved on one's own. I have made myself clear about that. You are too busy dancing around everyone else's posts, that you don't take the time to digest what they're saying. Like all Xians, you can't see the forest for the trees. Godliness comes with the gift of life. It is something to be achieved in our lifetime. Godliness is something to be attempted while we're here in bodily form. Our godliness was with us before we came into bodily form. Again, there may be some rare individuals who can attain godliness without the help of others, but I believe these people to be few and far between. We are not individual gods, we are all part of the Godhead. We are all part of the one spirit of god. Therefore, we are in essence God on Earth. I have explained this in detail in many of my previous posts, but I realize because you are a Xian, you don't understand nor will accept this concept. Now, I'm having to explain it again! The entire human race is interconnected through the one spirit of god. There is only one soul, the spirit of god, and we are all vessels carrying the spirit of god on the face of the Earth. Godliness is something we should try to obtain while we're here in bodily form. There will come a time that we will discard our bodies, but we will remain in the same spiritual state as we did before we were born. There is no beginning or end to our spirit, only our bodies are temporary Earthsuits. Enough said on this, I hope.)
----------
Show some patience, understanding and compassion. You can't
"recognize" God's Spirit if you don't recognize God himself, that's just logical.
----------
(I am still a human being with personal weaknesses and frustrations. I am a very patient, understanding and compassionate person, but where Xians are concerned, I find them to be pushy, redundant, and lack the 'inner-knowing' that they would have if they understood the concept of one god-one spirit-one interconnected human race. It is you, the Xians, that fail to recognize god's spirit and god on the face of the earth. You claim that I don't "recognize" God himself, and my concepts are not logical. That is precisely how I see you Xians. Xians believe in the messenger but not the message.)
----------
If you say "yes, there is a God" then you must be able to differentiate between yourself and God self. You are not the same; we are not God, nor have we the ability to save ourselves from death.
----------
What makes you think that I can't distinguish between myself and God? You don't know me. You assume because you're a Xian. The goal here is to "attain godliness on Earth." The aim is to realize the potential we have. The fact that you are a living, breathing human being, and a vessel for the spirit of god (in your words, "Holy Spirit"), and you are interconnected with every other human being on this planet, how can you say we are not god? If we are not part of god, then what are we, and what is our purpose here in bodily form? I will also disagree with your statement that we don't "have the ability to save ourselves from death." Oh, but we do! That's why we're here! The cumulative intelligence of the human race has made wonderful scientific progress in understanding the molecular basis of longevity. We can now regrow damaged organs within a person's body with the harvesting, transplantation, survival and differentiation of one's own bone marrow stem cells. We can build new hearts, livers, pancreases, etc. What's even more than that, scientists have found that the length of the telomers in one's body determines the longevity of that person. The aim of science is to study how to find the causation of shorter telomers and find what it takes to make these telomers longer to extend the lifespan. So, contrary to your negative understanding about 'eternal physical life' and 'eternal spirituality,' we do have it in our collective consciousness to prevent death of the body or at least extend life dramatically in the next few years. But, this was all in the greater scheme of things. There are no accidents, and there is synchronicity in the universe, and we are so much a part of it, we are it--God. So, how do you explain the rate of knowledge the past 100 years is equal to the rate of knowledge in the past 20,000 years? If this is not a manifestation of God within us, I don't know what is. You can go ahead and keep your god sitting up there on a big fluffy white cloud casting lightening bolts down on those of us who believe we are one with god. It must be those lightening bolts that give us the spark to create new ideas for humankind. But I just don't believe that God is distant from us. God is Us-We are God. God wouldn't strike himself with a lightening bolt, would he? No, I don't think so. Everything was pre-arranged even before we came here. We were shaping our personal destiny as well as our interconnected destiny before we were born, and we are living out our destiny now. There is no death of the spirit. To believe in an all-powerful God who created the massive, wonderful universe, yet believe that we are mere lowly sinful creatures who should cower in fear at the Great Creator God but still need a fantasy savior to save us from our sins and lowliness is, in fact, denying God! How sad. The ones who claim to know God, don't know it at all! And, this is the source of my lack of patience, understanding, and compassion for Xians. Xians are determined to distance themselves from the power and unity of God. This is based on fear. You fear the power of God within yourselves! It is when you realize your mighty purpose for existence that you come to know God. When this happens, you will discard your man-made religions, because they won't be needed any longer for your 'salvation,' because 'salvation' was already yours from the beginning! You had it before you came here. You'll have it after you leave here. It is eternal. It is You. You are God.

It's Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth.


Creator God but still need a fantasy savior to save us from our sins and lowliness is, in fact, denying God! How sad. The ones who claim to know God, don't know it at all!

Of course no one knows it All. However the christian standpoint is that God had to reach down with his right arm to save us. We had to see to him, listen to him and live with him. Also even if scientist are able fix our genetic aging there will still be hunger, car accidents, over crowding, etc. So the basic question are, how are you going to save yourself. By love or by your own knowledge.

Originally posted by Jenyar
Jesus did say: "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture." Really? According to whom? Witnessed by whom? Reported when?

According to the Bible. we are all under a death sentence (eternal separation from God) due to our sins. The Bible says, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”(Romans 3:23) God does not judge people for failure to believe in Jesus, but because they have sinned against him. And because of Adam’s disobedience, we are all born with a tendency to sin, therefore, we are separated from God.
Examine the Ten Commandments and be the judge of your own life. Did you break any of the ten? Then examine the interpretation Jesus had of them (Matthew 5:17-48) where even the words from the mouth, the thoughts in the head, and the desires of the heart can cause someone to be condemned to hell. And what about a person’s actions? Are they good enough? The Bible says, “There is none who does good, no, not one.”(Psalm 14:3), and “For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.”(Isaiah 64:6)
And what about people who have not heard of Jesus? What happens to them? They will be judged on what they know is right and wrong. According to Romans 2:14-16, what they know in their conscience, what they know to be right and wrong, will be used as a law to judge them.
So what will happen if someone keeps them all but breaks only one? According to James 2:10, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.”
So what is God looking at in our lives? What is being judged? God is looking at the intentions of our hearts. According to the Bible, “… God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.”(1Samuel 16:7)
Because of sin, we have placed a death sentence on our heads. And because of our rebelliousness, we have placed ourselves as enemies to God.
If God is cruel, He would indeed keep us in our own wretchedness, or wipe us all off the face of the earth. But God did not do that or allowed that. God allowed Jesus to die for our sins in order to fulfill the requirements of the law and settle the judgment demanded by the law. According to the Bible, “For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” (Romans 5:6-10)
Now mercy is extended to man because our sins were placed on Jesus. Our response to God is either to accept it by faith and re-establish the relationship God had with man in the beginning, or reject it, with full knowledge of what will happen from that choice.
Christianity is a re-establishment of the relationship God had with man. It is getting to know God, His nature, and His will. Like all relationships, it is built on trust, love, communication, and friendship. It is not the rules handed down from organized “Xian” religions. It is not a “carrot and stick” philosophy.
God has provided the way for everyone to turn back and re-establish a communication with God through the redemptive power of the crucifixion of Jesus. It is a free gift for those who sincerely ask for it from God’s grace. That is the message throughout the Bible.

Jenyar-of-the-70-Books, where did Jesus say (as you proclaim) "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture."? When was it reported? Who reported it?

Originally posted by SVRP
According to the Bible. we are all under a death sentence (eternal separation from God) due to our sins.That is the message throughout the Bible.

It's your God, your Bible, and your Hell.

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books

Jesus did say:

"I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture." For the third time: Jesus said this where? ... reported by whom? ... written when?

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Jenyar-of-the-70-Books, where did Jesus say (as you proclaim) "I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture."? When was it reported? Who reported it?
It comes after the parable of the good shepherd in John 10 (:9), which has a clear connection with the shepherd messiah prophesied in Ezek. 34 and Jer. 23.

John (before 90AD) -> Jesus (between 30 and 33AD) -> Prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah (during the exile to Babylon, ca 598 BC) -> Israel (God's chosen) <- God's creation <- God

You can trace it back as far as you like, but with each step it will only become harder for you to believe.

Originally posted by Flores
How can Jesus be a liar Jenyar. Jesus as a prophet of god pure enough to act as fliter of god's light was one of the most noble humans. Don't attribute lies in the bible to Jesus, he is innocent of the corruption of the bible and your lies. Jesus is not the light, god is the light. Jesus is not the way, Jesus only showed us the way, but to each of us the responsbility of travelling the way.

Jesus was strengthened by the light of god, which is the strongest light that guides us humans. And instead of you following in Jesus's footsteps and strengthening your self with the same light that strengthened Jesus, you elected to dishonor god and look at a human Jesus for salvation and guidance. That human became your temporary light and on the day that only god light will shine, your weak light and all other lights will dim in comparison. You are like a man who made up his own fire for guidance in the darkness, but when god decide to send the rain to your fire, you will be left in utter darkness.

You never explained to me the first commandment nor the testimony of Jesus that he is not good and none is good save one who is god. I take it you have no grasp on the essence of the message that Jesus tried to deliver and prefer to rely on the marginal contradictions that you so efficiently memorized.
I also believe Jesus came to show us the light of God, and He didn't lie. He said He was the light of God made visible:
35..."You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. The man who walks in the dark does not know where he is going. 36Put your trust in the light while you have it, so that you may become sons of light." (John 12)

Through Jesus we are able to walk in the light. God's light, which Jesus filtered enough to make visible and protects us from dying, because nobody can see God and live - like the veil that covered Moses' face. Jesus pointed out the way, but also walked it himself so that we could follow in his footsteps and would not stray from the light.

I don't want to argue with you. The Christian understanding is and will remain foreign to you. I know that calling God "Father" seems like shirk, but we can only do it because Jesus has. Jesus is a stumbling block to Jews and Muslims because of this. We still only look to God for our salvation, but we recognize God's salvation in Jesus.

I think what M*W believes is far more dangerous, as she is equating creation with God himself.

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
Godliness comes with the gift of life. It is something to be achieved in our lifetime. Godliness is something to be attempted while we're here in bodily form. Our godliness was with us before we came into bodily form.
Why should we "attempt to attain it" if we will return to it when we die anyway, or if it is a natural state that is part and parcel with life itself?

Again, there may be some rare individuals who can attain godliness without the help of others, but I believe these people to be few and far between. We are not individual gods, we are all part of the Godhead. We are all part of the one spirit of god. Therefore, we are in essence God on Earth. ... The entire human race is interconnected through the one spirit of god. There is only one soul, the spirit of god, and we are all vessels carrying the spirit of god on the face of the Earth. Godliness is something we should try to obtain while we're here in bodily form.
Why call it "god" if it is merely the Great Intertwined Human Soul? Since according to your theory we share the pain and poverty of majority of people on earth, why is this Godhead in such a terrible state, if we are God? All you seem to be saying, is that "god" is the ideal, and why must try to achieve that ideal state as a unified human race - death and all. As long as there is life on earth, it seems, we are prolonging suffering and postponing "God".

I am still a human being with personal weaknesses and frustrations. I am a very patient, understanding and compassionate person, but where Xians are concerned, I find them to be pushy, redundant, and lack the 'inner-knowing' that they would have if they understood the concept of one god-one spirit-one interconnected human race. It is you, the Xians, that fail to recognize god's spirit and god on the face of the earth. You claim that I don't "recognize" God himself, and my concepts are not logical. That is precisely how I see you Xians. Xians believe in the messenger but not the message.

Does that even matter if my contribution and place in the godhead is just as valid as yours? If you and I share the same "godness", can anybody be wrong? Isn't my consciousness only a manifestation of yours, and vice versa? Or is our common god divided within himself?

What makes you think that I can't distinguish between myself and God? You don't know me. You assume because you're a Xian. The goal here is to "attain godliness on Earth." The aim is to realize the potential we have. The fact that you are a living, breathing human being, and a vessel for the spirit of god (in your words, "Holy Spirit"), and you are interconnected with every other human being on this planet, how can you say we are not god? If we are not part of god, then what are we, and what is our purpose here in bodily form?
Our purpose is to love God and love each other because we are equally valuable in His eyes. We are vessels of God, but some arestill empty vessels waiting to be filled with God's Spirit.

We are creations of God, made to love as He loves us. We are not gods, we are humans. Not "godhead" - humanity.

My experience is that people don't hesitate to trample each in their quest to "attain godliness on earth". People should stop trying to be God, and just start being human!

I will also disagree with your statement that we don't "have the ability to save ourselves from death." Oh, but we do! That's why we're here! The cumulative intelligence of the human race has made wonderful scientific progress in understanding the molecular basis of longevity. We can now regrow damaged organs within a person's body [etc.] ... to extend the lifespan.
Let me get this straight: we are essentially (optimally) spiritual beings before and after death, but our goal is to try and remain physical beings for as long as possible - fighting off natural death - while also trying to reach our intrinsic spiritual potential :bugeye:. Why were we even born in the first place, if being a purely spiritual "god" was the most energy efficient configuration?

Here's my take on it: we, and the earth we live on, were created, and we were meant to be physical, conscious people (not "beings" or something other than we seem to be), to exhibit the vast potential to love we have been endowed with, to share, explore, live, learn and respect our existence here on earth using all our intellectual potential, and to hold on to God using all our spiritual potential. The totality of all of this, is to act in accordance with God's purpose in creating us.
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' and 'Love your neighbour as yourself."

So, contrary to your negative understanding about 'eternal physical life' and 'eternal spirituality,' we do have it in our collective consciousness to prevent death of the body or at least extend life dramatically in the next few years. But, this was all in the greater scheme of things. There are no accidents, and there is synchronicity in the universe, and we are so much a part of it, we are it--God.
Wait, stop right there: which is the "negative understanding" - that we are all together an insufficient, inept and inadequate god trying to reach his own disembodied potential, struggling against a force of death that has infiltrated our harmonic existence and is cutting us up from the inside out ...
or we are created beings who are missing our goal in life by chasing after power and "peace" so hard, that instead of accepting our uniqueness, realizing that we have to work on relationships (not energies), and that our wish to act independently from our Maker is causing us and our fellow creations immeasurable agony and suffering.

What "greater scheme of things" could there be, if we are it? Have we, as god, decided to play a little game with ourselves: give each of our "cells" a consciousness and a will of its own, thereby giving them an individual sense of purpose and direction, and try to puzzle ourselves back into one harmonious being again?

You've got one thing right, though: in both cases we are striving against ourselves and our intrinsic value. But we have that value because we are creations of God, not because it is an unrealized potential of our own godliness.

So, how do you explain the rate of knowledge the past 100 years is equal to the rate of knowledge in the past 20,000 years? If this is not a manifestation of God within us, I don't know what is. You can go ahead and keep your god sitting up there on a big fluffy white cloud casting lightening bolts down on those of us who believe we are one with god. It must be those lightening bolts that give us the spark to create new ideas for humankind. But I just don't believe that God is distant from us. God is Us-We are God. God wouldn't strike himself with a lightening bolt, would he? No, I don't think so. Everything was pre-arranged even before we came here. We were shaping our personal destiny as well as our interconnected destiny before we were born, and we are living out our destiny now. There is no death of the spirit. To believe in an all-powerful God who created the massive, wonderful universe, yet believe that we are mere lowly sinful creatures who should cower in fear at the Great Creator God but still need a fantasy savior to save us from our sins and lowliness is, in fact, denying God! How sad.
So we are an evolving god?

I don't believe in Zeus, I believe in "I am". Who is not distant from us. Immanuel means "God is with us". The distance is one people are enforcing, not God. God has overthrown this distance by bridging the rift between life and death.

You say "everything was pre-arranged even before we came here" - how or by whom? "Arrangement" suggest an imposed order. I think we are constantly disarranging ourselves into lies like "we are god" instead of accepting that we are fallible and fragile human beings in need of God's sustenance.

We weren't created "lowly sinful creatures who should cower in fear" - that was the result of our arrogence to suppose we could assume the authority of God himself. Our description fits our circumstances. We are only "sinners" because we have sinned. We are only "lowly" because we have lifted ourselves up. Likewise, we only have to fear God if we rebel against Him.
"There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. We love because He first loved us."

We don't have to be lowly and sinful, but trying to be God is not what is going to make us great and worthy. Just look at history.

The ones who claim to know God, don't know it at all! And, this is the source of my lack of patience, understanding, and compassion for Xians. Xians are determined to distance themselves from the power and unity of God. This is based on fear. You fear the power of God within yourselves! It is when you realize your mighty purpose for existence that you come to know God. When this happens, you will discard your man-made religions, because they won't be needed any longer for your 'salvation,' because 'salvation' was already yours from the beginning! You had it before you came here. You'll have it after you leave here. It is eternal. It is You. You are God.
Great, then nobody needs to worry. Why should I bother realizing my own godliness? Someone more qualified than I is likely to do it, and since I am in essence a part of him, I will just assume my natural place in the order of things. If it doesn't happen during my lifetime, I'll just wait for death to claim my rightful spiritual place. If I am my own salvation, my own god, and my own judge, then why are you trying so hard to get me to understand? My ignorance and obstinance doesn't make me any less god, does it? Or am I a disgrace to our name?

Why not let sleeping gods lie?

I have been speaking to Raithere, and I must say, he's one of the most understanding and wise people I have spoken to in the area of religion. He told me something that opened my eyes. Raithere told me that the message or the way is known and fixed regardless of the messangers, and while prophets or Jesus can travel the way to show us, the existance of the way is independant of the prophet existance. That's why I don't agree with the biblical verse that states that Jesus is the way. Jesus is not the way, yet he knows the way by the permission of god and thus delivered to humanity the gospels and good news of the way. yet to each of us, we still must travel the way, not through jesus, but guided by the message of Jesus, and we will be judged based on our understanding, afterall, god gave us a complicated brain so that we must be accountable for our action, and not to follow a cookie Jesus cutter blindly...With or without Jesus, the way to god exist.....

Originally posted by Jenyar
I think what M*W believes is far more dangerous, as she is equating creation with God himself.

You both are very very similar, although you might not think it. Both of you are avoiding god and closing your eyes and ears to god. Both of you would rather cling to something that you seem to have familiarity or control over. Total reliance on your own selves seems pretty sufficient, and reliance on another human living prophet seems comfortable to many. But I know that I'm not in total control of myself. I can't even set my date of birth or death, or grant myself happiness or misery. I do have some free will within the context and permission of god, but truly by myself, I'm nothing. To that extent, I agree with you that believing that I'm godly is a dangerous thought, but so is believing that I'm a son or daughter of god, cause I dare not prejudge myself while god have no judged me yet. I'm but a servant of god totally under god's mercy. All the good deeds in this world couldn't save me, and another may not intercede for me. It's totally up to my god to show me mercy or condemn me.

Both of you don't know the meaning of the word submittion yet. Submittion means unconditional believe and reliance on an object, if the submission is true, it must remain unchanged no matter what life brings you. So you chose a human beneath god to grant your submittion to. And I ask you, what would happen to your believe if that human, jesus, would tell you, I'm just a servant of god just like you....What would you do, if he told you that???....Please answer this last question for me, and don't tell me, but he said such and such in the bible.......What would you do, if Jesus told you, I'm just a servant of god and of needing of god mercy just like you. What if Jesus told you, I can't do anything for you, and you have to please my father and master in heaven. If your faith is true, and I doubt it is, then you would tell Jesus, regardless of that statement, I still believe that you are my only way, but if you change your mind, then your faith have no feet.

Originally posted by Jenyar
It comes after the parable of the good shepherd in John 10 (:9), which has a clear connection with the shepherd messiah prophesied in Ezek. 34 and Jer. 23.

John (before 90AD) -> Jesus (between 30 and 33AD) -> Prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah (during the exile to Babylon, ca 598 BC) -> Israel (God's chosen) <- God's creation <- God

You can trace it back as far as you like, but with each step it will only become harder for you to believe.
----------
Jenyar, you've just made an amazing statement! You have finally admitted to the fallacy of Xianity. "You can trace it back as far as you like, but with each step it will only become harder for you to believe." What you are saying here is that when one learns more about Xianity, one believes it less! That's what I've been saying all along! Maybe there is hope for you, Jenyar!

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
John (before 90AD) -> Jesus (between 30 and 33AD) -> Prophets Ezekiel and Jeremiah (during the exile to Babylon, ca 598 BC) -> Israel (God's chosen) <- God's creation <- God So says the person previously taught us what the "Septuagint" meant. For those looking for a better source ...The Gospel according to John is quite different in character from the three synoptic gospels. It is highly literary and symbolic. It does not follow the same order or reproduce the same stories as the synoptic gospels. To a much greater degree, it is the product of a developed theological reflection and grows out of a different circle and tradition. It was probably written in the 90s of the first century.

< ... >

Critical analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person. John 21 seems to have been added after the gospel was completed; it exhibits a Greek style somewhat different from that of the rest of the work. The prologue (John 1:1-18) apparently contains an independent hymn, subsequently adapted to serve as a preface to the gospel. Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies, e.g., there are two endings of Jesus' discourse in the upper room (John 14:31; 18:1). To solve these problems, scholars have proposed various rearrangements that would produce a smoother order. However, most have come to the conclusion that the inconsistencies were probably produced by subsequent editing in which homogeneous materials were added to a shorter original.

Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style. For instance, some of the wondrous deeds of Jesus have been worked into highly effective dramatic scenes (John 9); there has been a careful attempt to have these followed by discourses that explain them (John 5; 6); and the sayings of Jesus have been oven into long discourses of a quasi-poetic form resembling the speeches of personified Wisdom in the Old Testament.

- see New American Bible: John - Introduction (http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/intro.htm)So, what we have is redacted gospel containing an unverified 2nd hand rendition of a dialogue purported to have occurred over half a century earlier. Pretty damn impressive.

originally posted by Flores
And I ask you, what would happen to your believe if that human, jesus, would tell you, I'm just a servant of god just like you....What would you do, if he told you that???....Please answer this last question for me, and don't tell me, but he said such and such in the bible.......What would you do, if Jesus told you, I'm just a servant of god and of needing of god mercy just like you. What if Jesus told you, I can't do anything for you, and you have to please my father and master in heaven. If your faith is true, and I doubt it is, then you would tell Jesus, regardless of that statement, I still believe that you are my only way, but if you change your mind, then your faith have no feet.
Jesus did say that. In fact, He was himself totally and completely submitted to God:

Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.

Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.
(John 5, 8)

We do not glorify Jesus - God does. We thank Jesus, and glorify God for sending Jesus. Jesus is only, I repeat: only our salvation because God has authorized Him to be the means of our salvation. God saved... how? Through Jesus - whom people could see, touch, hear, and identify with - so that nobody has an excuse not to be saved. Our submission to God can't be conditional, it has to be unconditional - if God chose Jesus to be the messiah, we have to accept it. If God chose Mohammed to point to God, people have to accept him. You can't reject the Quran and say you believe in God, because you wouldn't know God if it weren't for the Quran. The messenger might not be the way, but he represents the way. If God sends you a message, He means for you to listen to it. To ignore the messenger is to ignore God.

originally posted by Medicine*Woman
Jenyar, you've just made an amazing statement! You have finally admitted to the fallacy of Xianity. "You can trace it back as far as you like, but with each step it will only become harder for you to believe." What you are saying here is that when one learns more about Xianity, one believes it less! That's what I've been saying all along! Maybe there is hope for you, Jenyar!
The more you learn about God, the more you realize how little you know. The more you try to climb to God's level, the more futile your progress will become. But that does not invalidate the knowledge you are allowed to have, or the progress you have made - nor does it make faith weaker; it strengthens it. Don't worry, M*W, my faith is not based on how I got to God, but on how He got to me.

originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
So, what we have is redacted gospel containing an unverified 2nd hand rendition of a dialogue purported to have occurred over half a century earlier. Pretty damn impressive.
False conclusions, CA. Please substantiate unverified. PS. You may not have noticed, but all references to a source is necessarily "2nd hand". Do you have first-hand knowledge of a tree? No, unless you are a tree. Everything you know about trees have been "redacted" - accumulated, verified and written down, usually more than 50 years ago...

You'll notice that your irreverent quote says: "difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form", not "any eyewitness content". Have you ever seen a journalist write his report on the spot? I can assure you reports are never finished without redaction and peer-review. You'll read about the ones that weren't redacted, corroborated and reviewed in the news of the day, but you won't still find them 50 years later in authoritive circles...

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
False conclusions, CA. Please substantiate unverified. Nice dance - dumb tune. If you have any verification, feel free to supply it.

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
You may not have noticed, but all references to a source is necessarily "2nd hand". You're an idiot.

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
You'll notice that your irreverent quote says: ... Jenyar-of-the-70-Books calls the New American Bible's Introduction to John "irreverent ". Oh, well ...

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
"difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form", not "any eyewitness content". This is simply disingenuous rubbish. What action of, or conversation by, 'Jesus' do you claim to have been witnessed by John?

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Nice dance - dumb tune. If you have any verification, feel free to supply it.
Do you refuse to be held accountable for your own claims? The burden of proof is on you.
You're an idiot.
Do you make that conclusion from first-hand or second-hand sources? But if you are the resident authority on idiocy, I guess I must be one.
Jenyar-of-the-70-Books calls the New American Bible's Introduction to John "irreverent ". Oh, well ...
No, I call your quote of it irreverent.
This is simply disingenuous rubbish. What action of, or conversation by, 'Jesus' do you claim to have been witnessed by John?
The kind of information that could only be given by eye-witnesses, such as dialogue and actions. But as you have noticed, a great part of it is theological, and theology is developed as study and insight increases. The redactor used eye-witness information, mainly from John (the "disciple whom Jesus loved"), but takes care that it is interpreted as Christian, and not gnostic (who had similar theologies about Jesus). Something that was clear on its own before, might have to be explained in more detail later, as a result of heresies which are built on the original information. There is a possibility that an earlier version of the fourth gospel existed, which was used by Cerinthus (a gnostic). But the version we have now cannot be used to promote heretic gnostic interpretations.
(The Gospel of John (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/john.html))

As I understand it, the term “redaction” is to edit and revise in order to clarify or stress a point that was made from the original author before it is published so the reading audience will understand what is meant. It does not mean to rewrite or alter the phrasing of the passage so that it changes the meaning the original author had intended. The objective of redaction is to clarify the passage before it is published. So when did the implication that “redaction” now means an untrustworthy alteration of the phrases? Please explain, Jenyar or ConsequentAtheist.

Medicine Woman wrote It's your God, your Bible, and your Hell. Interesting response. And so what is your god, your bible, and your hell?

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
The redactor used eye-witness information, mainly from John (the "disciple whom Jesus loved"), but takes care that it is interpreted as Christian, and not gnostic ... I'm pleased to see you frequenting Kirby's excellent site. Perhaps you'll learn something, though you've shown no evidence of doing so to date. Nevertheless, it is at least mildly amusing that it you who are now speaking about biblical redactors, though you are clearly clueless as to the implications of such an admission. Oh well, back to your presumptuous little response.

Tell me, Jenyar-of-the-70-Books, is your claim that the apostle John wrote the gospel simple ignorance or do you have some special insight unavailable to biblical historians?

The direct chain of tradition claimed by Irenaeus between himself and the apostle John, with Polycarp forming the principal link in the chain of tradition, finds no support in the few writings that have come to us from Polycarp himself. It is aslo remarkable that Ignatius, in his letter to the church in Ephesus written around 110, makes no reference to a residence of the apostle John in that city. Thus the tradition that John the son of Zebedee, the Beloved Disciple, published his Gospel in Ephesus when he was at advanced age during the time of Trajan (89-117 CE) is not documented prior to the time of Irenaeus himself.

- see The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=1RYOTA3EGT&isbn=0800629523&itm=2)And, from Kirby's site ...Robert Kysar writes the following on the authorship of the Gospel of John (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 3, pp. 919-920): The supposition that the author was one and the same with the beloved disciple is often advanced as a means of insuring that the evangelist did witness Jesus' ministry. Two other passages are advanced as evidence of the same - 19:35 and 21:24. But both falter under close scrutiny. 19:35 does not claim that the author was the one who witnessed the scene but only that the scene is related on the sound basis of eyewitness. 21:24 is part of the appendix of the gospel and should not be assumed to have come from the same hand as that responsible for the body of the gospel. Neither of these passages, therefore, persuades many Johannine scholars that the author claims eyewitness status. There is a case to be made that John, the son of Zebedee, had already died long before the Gospel of John came to be written. It is worth noting for its own sake, even though the "beloved disciple" need not be identified with John, the son of Zebedee. In his ninth century Chronicle in the codex Coislinianus, George Hartolos says, "[John] was worth of martyrdom." Hamartolos proceeds to quote Papias to the effect that, "he [John] was killed by the Jews." In the de Boor fragment of an epitome of the fifth century Chronicle of Philip of Side, the author quotes Papias: Papias in the second book says that John the divine and James his brother were killed by Jews. Morton Enslin observes (Christian Beginnings, pp. 369-370): "That PapiasÂ’ source of information is simply an inference from Mark 10:35-40 or its parallel, Matt. 20:20-23, is possible. None the less, this Marcan passage itself affords solid ground. No reasonable interpretation of these words can deny the high probability that by the time these words were written [ca. 70 CE] both brothers had 'drunk the cup' that Jesus had drunk and had been 'baptized with the baptism' with which he had been baptized." Since the patristic tradition is unanimous in identifying the beloved disciple with John, at least this evidence discredits the patristic tradition concerning the authorship of the Gospel of John.

If the author of the Gospel of John were an eyewitness, presumably the author would have known that Jesus and his compatriots were permitted to enter the synagogues. But at one several points it is stated that those who acknowledged Jesus as the Christ during the life of Jesus were put out of the synagogue. This anachronism is inconceivable as the product of an eyewitness.

Basically all theist religions believe the same thing, there is a main God and his minions. They are all right or they are all wrong, you have free will to decide for yourself what is right for you. Choose whichever one gives your mind the most peace.

Originally posted by SVRP
As I understand it, the term “redaction” is to edit and revise in order to clarify or stress a point that was made from the original author before it is published so the reading audience will understand what is meant. It does not mean to rewrite or alter the phrasing of the passage so that it changes the meaning the original author had intended. The objective of redaction is to clarify the passage before it is published. So when did the implication that “redaction” now means an untrustworthy alteration of the phrases? Please explain, Jenyar or ConsequentAtheist.
The term has no negative connotations to me. As a publisher, it means to me that the content has been verified and reviewed. CA, evidently, disagrees:

originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Nevertheless, it is at least mildly amusing that it you who are now speaking about biblical redactors, though you are clearly clueless as to the implications of such an admission.
You seem to think it means the disciples and early Christians have worked against themselves, in order to deceive everybody after them as to what really happened.

Tell me, Jenyar-of-the-70-Books, is your claim that the apostle John wrote the gospel simple ignorance or do you have some special insight unavailable to biblical historians?
No, I don't have any information they, or you, don't have. The difference is that you seem to believe they were a lying, deceiving and dishonest bunch (based on what, I'm not sure), while I think they tried their best to bring forth a message that should be understood as it was intended to e understood. And I think that whatever the "redactors" did or did not do, they were using John's testimony (as the text claims) as it was received by them.

Originally posted by SVRP
As I understand it, the term “redaction” is to edit and revise in order to clarify or stress a point that was made from the original author before it is published so the reading audience will understand what is meant. 'That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

'When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'I always pay it extra.'

'Oh!' said Alice. She was too much puzzled to make any other remark. Redaction can be for any number of reasons. I assume that, in the majority of cases, the redaction of Biblical text was well-intentioned and often transparent, but intention, particularly in the context of doctrinal disputes, can easily involve efforts to harmonize script with doctrine. Noted examples of this can be seen as far back as Deuteronomy.

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Redaction can be for any number of reasons. I assume that, in the majority of cases, the redaction of Biblical text was well-intentioned and often transparent, but intention, particularly in the context of doctrinal disputes, can easily involve efforts to harmonize script with doctrine. Noted examples of this can be seen as far back as Deuteronomy.
I would like to point out that no doctrine would exist without intention. Disputes have the advantage of forcing a decision. Fortunately, throughout the Bible most of the involved opinions/perceptions are presented, and the reader can weigh the evidence himself, trace decisions and options, and formulate/test the golden mean against premises that are very clear and unambiguous. The truth is in there...

Wisdom and understanding cannot be spoonfed. They have to teazed out. My favourite example:

4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you will be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes.
(Prov.26)

Makes you think twice :p

Originally posted by Jenyar
Fortunately, throughout the Bible most of the involved opinions/perceptions are presented, and the reader can weigh the evidence himself, trace decisions and options, and formulate/test the golden mean against premises that are very clear and unambiguous. Absolute garbage.

I thought the bible said do this, this, and this, don't do all these things, or you're going to hell.

Mm.. I've never really seen the bible as letting you weigh things, really..everything is set out very strictly, yet it is vauge in the strictness, which just muddles and confuses things.

If you just read the parts that you can associate with, i.e. "laws", you only get half the picture. And then it becomes muddled. Let me give you an example:

In the beginning God creates A, B and C. These are put into context, described using certain words or metaphors, and then we move on.

Now event E happens. It usually shows some kind of relationship with A, B, or C - whether contrasting or reinforcing. And then you read how it is treated. In isolation, that event or decision doesn't fit, and our first impulse is to compare it with more familiar territory: everyday life. And it becomes even more muddled. Do you know why? Because the closest reference to what happens is not what you know now, but the immediate past and future of the event: D and F. What do you have now?

You have the premise: God exists (the Bible never questions or answers "if", if you can't accept the premise at least in principle, go back to square one and try again)...
You have premises A, B and C,
Events D, E and F (call it hypothesis if you want)
and your own reference X, Y and Z (the control)

What happens when connect the dots? You find out where the lines are straight, and where they diverge. And when you read what the prophets said, you see that they tell the people to keep those lines straight, to keep the control sample pure: because God's will is A-Z and anything besides is rebellion: sin.

This is very simplified, but you'll see what I mean. The vagueness is the result of not remembering the premises or taking things out of its context without anything to measure it by. The premises are never vague, but the laws were always insufficient (their strict enforcement is a compensation) and the people were usually analphabetic :) Things haven't changed much.

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
And it becomes even more muddled. Do you know why? You are such a joke. :D