Scripture!

[IceMobster]

Why use an imperfect tool to write the Scripture which could (and did) result in countless interpretations, out of the blue connections and all 3 of the main Christian denominations do not even have the same Scriptural cannon.
So, yeah, we have 1 group claiming this (choose a book from the Bible) is the inspired book -- literal Word of God!! The 2nd group says a few books should be added because, after long contemplation and by fitting their views (like 2 and 3 Mac), they realized it is also inspired. The 3rd group also adds some books and removes some others.... Annnnnnnd then here comes, idk, you name it, Quran? Muslims claim that is the inspired book! Literal Word of God (and so on you can go with any holy book)

God having foreseen this (omniscience), why did He not choose otherwise? Make a book which will not result in 71256315 Churches?

[patrick]

A lot of this seems like it'd be expected given God's plan for this world. Maybe you're suggesting that people shouldn't be subject to other's immoral choices? I think if everyone had made an honest effort to understand the Bible properly, there wouldn't be so many misinterpretations. Moreover, even among those who do make an honest effort, everyone has things they don't want to accept for one reason or another.

[IceMobster]

A lot of this seems like it'd be expected given God's plan for this world. Maybe you're suggesting that people shouldn't be subject to other's immoral choices? I think if everyone had made an honest effort to understand the Bible properly, there wouldn't be so many misinterpretations. Moreover, even among those who do make an honest effort, everyone has things they don't want to accept for one reason or another.

Uh... Immoral choices? Are you claiming other religions are immoral? I don't see the connection between the OP and "immoral choices".
Fine, which one is the moral choice? Wait, what? What are we even talking about? The Scriptural canon? Which one is the "moral"(?), or rather, correct one?

[patrick]

What I'm saying is that this fragmentation and reinterpretation is due to people being intellectually dishonest. Moreover, I can't understand why you'd think the splitting of christianity into denominations (what I presume you mean by "71256315 Churches") is a problem unless you're suggesting that a) you're an honest seeker trying to understand the Bible and b) you shouldn't have to deal with the confusion of many variegated (and possibly fatally erroneous) interpretations.

Perhaps it'd help if you explained why things shouldn't have turned out this way -- why God ought to have done things differently.

[IceMobster]

What I'm saying is that this fragmentation and reinterpretation is due to people being intellectually dishonest. Moreover, I can't understand why you'd think the splitting of christianity into denominations (what I presume you mean by "71256315 Churches") is a problem unless you're suggesting that a) you're an honest seeker trying to understand the Bible and b) you shouldn't have to deal with the confusion of many variegated (and possibly fatally erroneous) interpretations.

Perhaps it'd help if you explained why things shouldn't have turned out this way -- why God ought to have done things differently.

Obviously it should have been done as it is in Islam. 80% of Islam consists of Sunni Muslims. Allah straightforwardly said do this, don't do that. I am this and that.
Or I don't know, how am I supposed to choose out of all these denominations?

Intellectually dishonest? Do you mind showing me how is one intellectually honest concerning the Scripture? Because, your intellectual honesty will bring a different result than someone else's.

Concerning a), I am obviously trying to understand the Bible?
Concerning b), why not, LOL? If the texts says one thing (e.g. what the majority says) and I believe it says another, how will I know which side is the true side?

[Kurieuo]

If there is significance found in disagreement, then why not significance in agreement?
People focus a lot on disagreement that they often forget much is agreed upon.
The majority of Christian denominations share in the same general message, those who don't are simply cults.

Your question I think is more one of epistomology than specifically Christianity. That is, how can truth be known? Why isn't truth clear? The only theological part really is, why didn't God make it known and clear?

To the first and second questions, theology is just as much a field of knowledge, as the physical sciences, as philosophy -- and so it suffers all the same problems of our ability to truly know. Scripture is considered a source of theology, as is nature, as is reason and tradition. How one procedes to understand the relationship of each and understand the truth of this or that matter often becomes a complicated exercise.

As to the third question, if what you want to know is why God didn't make all truth clear. Patrick is right, that there is a purpose God desires in our temporary world. Part of Christianity is the belief that God calls to us, yet depending on our hearts we either bury the truth of God or respond to it. God allows knowledge of Himself to be buried, even gives people whose hearts are set over to themselves to do as they please in this life. Nonetheless, God can be clearly seen through what has been made, right? Yet not everyone believes God even exists. The Gospel can be clearly seen in Scripture too I'd argue, yet not everyone believes in such hope.

[patrick]

Concerning b), why not, LOL? If the texts says one thing (e.g. what the majority says) and I believe it says another, how will I know which side is the true side?

Kurieuo laid out most of what I was going to say and then some, so hopefully his response answers your question. But if your meaning was morally driven -- i.e. "why couldn't I have gotten this knowledge in a clear, direct way?" you're suggesting that you shouldn't have to deal with the fruit of others' intellectual choices that were driven by what they wanted to see. Which was the point of my initial question. Perhaps my calling those choices "immoral" was misleading, but the point is this is part of how God allows people to bury the truth. And this applies to both Christians and nonChristians, so your request for me to show you how to be intellectually honest is missing the point -- every person is a sinner, so everyone is to some degree going to be intellectually dishonest.

Now that said, if you're simply pointing to the intellectual problem of what denomination to side with in light of that problem, in addition to K's point about the disagreements being often ultimately trivial matters (notice how many denominations feel comfortable simply calling themselves "Protestant" or "Catholic," Catholicism being naturally more cohesive due to its nature), I'd invite you to consider the problem of really describing the truth about God in a way that it'd suffice for people of all walks of life.

You mention Islam -- my biggest problem with Islam is that it didn't seem to go far enough in describing God's reasons for creating the world and why we are called to make moral choices. Too much of the Quran suggested that Allah's message is ultimately "prove that you're worthy of my grace." So while Islam I think you're quite right has more cohesion, it also seems to create much more oppressive cultures, forbidding and requiring things that ought to be just a matter of preference.

[IceMobster]

If there is significance found in disagreement, then why not significance in agreement?
People focus a lot on disagreement that they often forget much is agreed upon.
The majority of Christian denominations share in the same general message, those who don't are simply cults.

Your question I think is more one of epistomology than specifically Christianity. That is, how can truth be known? Why isn't truth clear? The only theological part really is, why didn't God make it known and clear?

To the first and second questions, theology is just as much a field of knowledge, as the physical sciences, as philosophy -- and so it suffers all the same problems of our ability to truly know. Scripture is considered a source of theology, as is nature, as is reason and tradition. How one procedes to understand the relationship of each and understand the truth of this or that matter often becomes a complicated exercise.

As to the third question, if what you want to know is why God didn't make all truth clear. Patrick is right, that there is a purpose God desires in our temporary world. Part of Christianity is the belief that God calls to us, yet depending on our hearts we either bury the truth of God or respond to it. God allows knowledge of Himself to be buried, even gives people whose hearts are set over to themselves to do as they please in this life. Nonetheless, God can be clearly seen through what has been made, right? Yet not everyone believes God even exists. The Gospel can be clearly seen in Scripture too I'd argue, yet not everyone believes in such hope.

Well, I don't want to bury the truth, but I can't accept Christ as God. So, what now? Eternal hell?
Meh...

[Kurieuo]

My wife said exactly the same thing once, "I just can't believe." But, God will continue working in your life, all it takes is one moment of clarity to respond. What you don't accept today, you might tomorrow.

I believe that someone who doesn't accept Christ in this life, the decision of such a person was made as clearly as if they were directly before Christ asking them to be with Him. The only difference is the method, because the method God uses to get our response I can see matters to truly understanding whether or not our hearts will freely respond to God without coercion, fear or threat. We've all heard of princes or very rich men wanting a woman to love him for him rather than his power or wealth, right? Could it be such is similar to what God wants of us?

Now if we in fact die, and God wasn't calling to us at all, well then it was impossible for us to come to Him. Some think that this is in fact what happens to those who have not heard the Gospel, that they had no chance to respond. But, if they'd responded to God's natural revelation, I believe that God would then give them the next step to Himself, and the next step and step after that until they reach Christ. Some are given more, some less, but how do we respond to what we do have? That's the God I believe in, one who doesn't give up on us if there is a way, only it is important for God to not force Himself on us or else it defeats as I see it a purpose of the temporary world we live within, God's desire for us to freely choose. Such I imagine requires a delicate balance that only God could orchestrate.

[RickD]

IceMobster,

If you are truly open to the truth, God will show you that Jesus is God.

Some people are just a little more stubborn than others.

[abelcainsbrother]

Why use an imperfect tool to write the Scripture which could (and did) result in countless interpretations, out of the blue connections and all 3 of the main Christian denominations do not even have the same Scriptural cannon.
So, yeah, we have 1 group claiming this (choose a book from the Bible) is the inspired book -- literal Word of God!! The 2nd group says a few books should be added because, after long contemplation and by fitting their views (like 2 and 3 Mac), they realized it is also inspired. The 3rd group also adds some books and removes some others.... Annnnnnnd then here comes, idk, you name it, Quran? Muslims claim that is the inspired book! Literal Word of God (and so on you can go with any holy book)

God having foreseen this (omniscience), why did He not choose otherwise? Make a book which will not result in 71256315 Churches?

The bible was written in the way it was because God wants us to read and study it in order to dig out the truth and then when you add in man's biases it can lead to different interpretations. But the most important beliefs and doctrines of Christianity are believed and accepted amongst the vast majority of Christians and on these universal truths that Christianity is built on this is what unites us all as Christians.

It is important to know enough of God's word to know when these universal truths that all Christians adhere to are compromised.Most Christians just rely on the denomination they have chosen and pretty much just go by the teachings and doctrines of their denomination and then they tend to grow a bias that aligns with their denomination,and tend to only agree with doctrines that line up with their denomination. Some even think they are part of the best denomination out of them all and tend to not go outside their denomination box. And so it can cause clashes from time to time. It cuts out their study time because others have already done all of the work and bible study for them and they can just rely on them and what they have been taught in their denomination but as long as their denomination teaches salvation through Jesus Christ and they have been saved they are a Christian.

[abelcainsbrother]

Scripture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbKuMSG8Z6g

[B. W.]

If there is significance found in disagreement, then why not significance in agreement?
People focus a lot on disagreement that they often forget much is agreed upon.
The majority of Christian denominations share in the same general message, those who don't are simply cults.

Your question I think is more one of epistomology than specifically Christianity. That is, how can truth be known? Why isn't truth clear? The only theological part really is, why didn't God make it known and clear?

To the first and second questions, theology is just as much a field of knowledge, as the physical sciences, as philosophy -- and so it suffers all the same problems of our ability to truly know. Scripture is considered a source of theology, as is nature, as is reason and tradition. How one procedes to understand the relationship of each and understand the truth of this or that matter often becomes a complicated exercise.

As to the third question, if what you want to know is why God didn't make all truth clear. Patrick is right, that there is a purpose God desires in our temporary world. Part of Christianity is the belief that God calls to us, yet depending on our hearts we either bury the truth of God or respond to it. God allows knowledge of Himself to be buried, even gives people whose hearts are set over to themselves to do as they please in this life. Nonetheless, God can be clearly seen through what has been made, right? Yet not everyone believes God even exists. The Gospel can be clearly seen in Scripture too I'd argue, yet not everyone believes in such hope.

Well, I don't want to bury the truth, but I can't accept Christ as God. So, what now? Eternal hell?
Meh...

Only if you want it - hell is yours...

Jesus came to save you from this - why do you not take the lifeline tossed you from the one sent to rescue you, Ice?

as to your premise...

Why would science use the imperfect tool of writing and compiling books that are subject to endless changes? How can you trust science?
-
-
-

[Philip]

I wonder if Ice is familiar with the prophecies concerning Jesus? Does he realize that the prophecies are VERY, collectively specific. Not only could NOT just anyone show up in history and credibly claim to fulfill them - and, btw, this by JUST BEING BORN, at JUST the right, specific time, with the right lineage, from the right place (statistically EXTREMELY difficult), and be widely renowned for what they claimed He would miraculously do (here's a few: http://www.messiahrevealed.org/miracles.html). AND THEN, He's widely believed by many that they saw Him AFTER his death! Then, please explain why his remaining disciples (after Judas suicide) ALL kept preaching a resurrected Christ that would and DID endanger them to potentially received the very same horrible punishments, UNLESS, they had actually seen the Resurrected Christ???!!! Because they KNEW the truth of that. What could possibly have been their motive - were they all lunatics who invited death? WHAT???!!!

[B. W.]

I wonder if Ice is familiar with the prophecies concerning Jesus? Does he realize that the prophecies are VERY, collectively specific. Not only could NOT just anyone show up in history and credibly claim to fulfill them - and, btw, this by JUST BEING BORN, at JUST the right, specific time, with the right lineage, from the right place (statistically EXTREMELY difficult), and be widely renowned for what they claimed He would miraculously do (here's a few: http://www.messiahrevealed.org/miracles.html). AND THEN, He's widely believed by many that they saw Him AFTER his death! Then, please explain why his remaining disciples (after Judas suicide) ALL kept preaching a resurrected Christ that would and DID endanger them to potentially received the very same horrible punishments, UNLESS, they had actually seen the Resurrected Christ???!!! Because they KNEW the truth of that. What could possibly have been their motive - were they all lunatics who invited death? WHAT???!!!

Well Phil, truth does not matter to critics who use a form of equivalency argument to support criticism. Look at the main premise again Ice uses:

Why use an imperfect tool to write the Scripture which could (and did) result in countless interpretations, out of the blue connections and all 3 of the main Christian denominations do not even have the same Scriptural cannon.

So, yeah, we have 1 group claiming this (choose a book from the Bible) is the inspired book -- literal Word of God!! The 2nd group says a few books should be added because, after long contemplation and by fitting their views (like 2 and 3 Mac), they realized it is also inspired. The 3rd group also adds some books and removes some others.... Annnnnnnd then here comes, idk, you name it, Quran? Muslims claim that is the inspired book! Literal Word of God (and so on you can go with any holy book)

God having foreseen this (omniscience), why did He not choose otherwise? Make a book which will not result in 71256315 Churches?

Why use an imperfect too write ... is the main crux of the argument posed? Therefore, to be true then this must be applied to all writing human beings do.

For example, in philosophy you have Aristotelian, Platonic, Materialist, Existentialist, Nihilist, Rationalism, Idealism, Positivism, Stoicism, Structuralism and the list goes on and on See this Link for on schools of philosophic thought.

So you have one group claims it is right in its beholding of truth and another does the same, so how can philosophy be valid and hold any truth at all?

Therefore, anywhere man write his ideas, say in science or higher mathematics, you branch out in different schools of thought denominations and therefore none can be trusted because human beings write. Even what Ice writes, cannot be valid either - why - Ice, a human being, wrote an opposing view.

The actual premise he uses is that there is no truth, as it cannot exist, because human beings are human beings who have multi-ideas and concepts.

Basically his premise states that mankind cannot be trusted. Isn't that an aspect of sin?

If humanity cannot be trusted, then why would God want un-trustworthy people to live next door with?

Therefore, Ice's premise simply proves human sin nature is true and that humanity cannot save itself by any due to not knowing the way of truth.

Biblical Christianity, unlike all the world's religions, teaches that it is only by God's own hands can human beings can be turned away from error because their own works are all corrupt. Other religions systems all teach that one can work to earn, or control the right to enter heaven.

How can that be when...as Ice stated - Why use an imperfect to write... to do anything for that matter and goes on about differing religions but neglects philosophic, all scientific, and mathematical schools of thought that cannot all agree either?

Therefore, Ice inadvertently proves human sin nature and solidifies the that the uniqueness of the biblical message that man cannot save himself because he is corrupt and that only God himself can save is true. Thus, the very uniqueness of the message that goes against the grain of all human ideology indicates a road, an arrow, pointing the true way to heaven and the cure needed to enter.

Of this cure, humanity needs to be awakened to the need to be cured, the truth, that the human heart is utterly corrupt and twisted if left to its own devises. This cure came by the uniqueness of the message of the cross that God came as a human being to 1- expose the real hidden sin of the human heart, and 2 - pay the penalty for it.

Before the cross Jesus exposed what human beings’ do to utter goodness. How humanity doubts, test, provoke goodness to act contrary to goodness. This is aptly shown in the events just before Jesus was arrested as well as afterwards, as the events exposes the true nature of sin in the heart in us all by an unforgettable act of savagery against all goodness (God himself come as a man:

Expose how we human beings betray, sell each other out, abandon, reject, put on trial (in the mind), bear false witnesses, hold grudges, mock, beat, make others carry a heavy load they cannot carry, steal, form alliances to silence opposition, whip, spit upon i.e. hold others in contempt, selfish pride, and how human beings glory in the crucifying of goodness in exchange for letting rebellion and depravity go...free.

All this proves that human beings cannot save themselves in any shape or form due to this: how can they be trusted because they twist way of truth to suite their own ends? Therefore, just as the bible proves, humanity needs a savior, God himself to release humanity from this shame because all are incapable of seeing the twistedness of each, their own heart, unless seen by a barbaric act that transcends time, era, and cultures - the cross.

All Ices' premise does is simply prove that the way of atheism and other world religions that truth cannot be known. The fact that atheism seeks to murder the knowledge of the one sent to rescue them, expunge it proves the depravity of the human condition hiding behind self-righteous idealism.

The good news that Jesus came to expose the human condition and die in our place for it so we can awake to God’s one way back to Heaven: Jesus Christ. God made it so simple, trust, have faith in him because his act proves God's love and goodness true. Simple faith in Jesus alone is what saves and changes us out of our darkness exposed by the cross into new light of light. By this, his act alone, can one enter heaven as it does not rely on human merit at all - all contrary to all world's religions - so truth established.

How to return to God? See your heart and that you cannot change. Go before God in prayer and call upon the Name of the Lord - Jesus Christ to become saved just as it mentions in Luke 18:13, John 3:16-21, Eph 2:8,9 Romans 10:8-13

It is that simple; Just ask... trust in what he has done because ...Why use an imperfect too ... save?
-
-
-