On morality
-
Originally posted by Daniel88:
So where is this book the men written?The first copy of the book?
As far as I know (someone correct me if I'm wrong), the original manuscripts written by the authors of the bible (Peter, Paul, James, Moses etc) are no longer in existence. What we have are copies of copies, thanks in part to the work of the clergy (eg: monks) who made scrupulous copies (they didn't have photocopying machines back then
) and early Christians who gave up their lives to protect these works from the persecuting Roman empire (before the empire converted to Christianity). -
Eve started things rolling just as God wanted.
She gave us moral sense. She chose to know God instead of remainning ignoran t of right and wrong. The only way to get closer to God. It also created our history. Without her we would have none. She should be venerated above Marie. Withot her we would be as bright as sticks and talking snakes.
I disagree though that evils are different from place to place. Could you give an example.
Regards
DL
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
Hi domon,
Good to know that our discussion hasnt fallen through and we're still having a civil discussion of our differences. Kudos to u for that. =) Just some thoughts on certain issues u raised up.
No, of course not. Even believers now cannot fully understand it. I don't know who are those Catholic scholars u quoted, but the scholars that i've read also say that the Trinity remains a mystery, BUT they choose to subscribe to the revelation of Scripture, and teach what it says.
God is certainly not a God of confusion but Deut 29:29 also says that the secret things belong to Him, and Isaiah 55 tells us His ways are higher than ours, and that there is no One like Him, and there is nothing to which He can be compared. Furthermore, wouldn't you agree that there are certain things that God chooses not to reveal to us? Or as some might say, God has revealed it, but its us Man who are just too damn dull to understand / perceive it?
If this is the way He chose to reveal Himself to us, that's what we've to live with and not impose our man-made conceptions on what God should be like.
Certainly, one doesnt need to be a theologian to understand the Trinity, its the duty of the overseers and the older in faith to teach us that doctrine and help us to understand it. But for the Holy Spirit to illuminate our understanding. Indeed, God did want us to have a relationship with Him, thus sending Jesus to us (e.g. His self-knowledge: "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father") and Immanuel ("God with us", Matt 1:23). As Exodus 33:20 tells us, nobody can see God and live, but in Genesis 18, we see Abraham survived, so did Jacob in Genesis 32 and even wrestled! This can only make sense in the affirmation of John 1:18, which said, "No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side has made him known."
That said, I find this diagram quite useful to understand the Trinity.
When theologians refer to the Trinity as a mystery, it's to say that they cannot adequately explain how God can be one, yet co-existing in 3 different persons. It's not a 3 in 1 kind of equation, but more like infinity + infinity + infinity = infinity. Can there be 3(infinity)? And i'm sure someone out there can find a flaw in this illustration, but hey, i tried.
sory it took me eons to reply..had wat i would called a demon attack...the few verses and examples like abraham who survived seeing God..does it not make it contradict so many other verses tat says no man see God yet live idea??n why does man dies upon seeing God? is it not sin that causes man to perish in God's Holiness?so then how can sinful men lik abraham see God Physically yet lived? so then, doesnt it makes more sense that they actually were more symbolic n in the case of abraham, saw 3 angels who then went on to Lot?likewise..when u write a biography about urself..will u choose to confuse readers what kind of a person u are??or explain clearly what u are??is not the bible a biography of God too??if trinity stands??should he not therefore in his loving kindness tell his, " hey look yo, im not jus 1 God, but there are 3 sides of me.." u get my drift =)
im really glad we are havin this kind of adult discussion where no over passion n irrationality takes place.
as for the rest of others' debate..isnt tat damn hitler a catholic???WW1 n WW2 started bcuz the few cath sects were prostituting themselves for political power isnt it?
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
Part II,
Don't quite understand this part.
There will always be false teachings within the flock. BUT what i was saying is, even more so during the end times. And i do commend the JWs for their discipline. But what was suppressed wasn't JWs, it was the Arians. And those who suppressed them were godly men NOT governments (in fact, in some countries, they're flourishing!). However, it has usually been godly men who refute heresies (Arianism) through biblical councils and conventions.
Trinity is NOT like hinduism. Even Hindus acknoweldge that the Christian Trinity bears any resemblance at all (refer to my previous post), so i don't think you should compare it like that. In fact, Jesus isnt an "aspect" of God. Jesus is God. Not God the Father but God the Son. I refer back to the diagram above for explanation.
was because u asked why didnt those people who worshipped Jesus as God build statues for Him in temples. So i asked u in return, which church would build a statue of God in the first place?
Actually, that would be worshipping me. Think about our modern term "idol worship" and picture crazed fans screaming and jumping at the feet of rock bands and musicians.
How then does worship look like?
U said to determine the act of worship through the "action and heart". So if in this case, it's still not considered worship, then can you tell me how was God worshipped in the Bible? Surely not by just giving "a loud praise" right? If so, i would have "worshipped" a lot of people already. =)
again, each person is fully God but they're not God. Diagram would help.
except that it's not that 1 perfect human's sin Jesus came for, but for multitudes. And anyway, cannot measure it like that. One needs to satisfy God's wrath. Sin is sin. He cannot tolerate any sin at all. Either all or nothing. Don't think there would be an overkill if God the Son was the propitiation for our sins.
much easier if we were talkin instead of typin.
-
Originally posted by Ipirate:
Eve started things rolling just as God wanted.
She gave us moral sense. She chose to know God instead of remainning ignoran t of right and wrong. The only way to get closer to God. It also created our history. Without her we would have none. She should be venerated above Marie. Withot her we would be as bright as sticks and talking snakes.
I disagree though that evils are different from place to place. Could you give an example.
Regards
DL
eve..lol...eve is the mother of mordern women rights n independence...she wanted to be greater den adam n didnt wanna b in subjection to adam as God designed..tats y she ate the damn fruit 1st...only tat fool of adam loved her too much n fell with her..had he insisted in his stand for God, all would still be in God's care. n God might even forgive eve on adam's a/c -
Hi domon,
Welcome back. Sorry to hear about the demon attack, but glad u made it with ur faith still intact.
does it not make it contradict so many other verses tat says no man see God yet live idea??
Correct. Exactly what I'm saying. So question then is, Jacob said he had seen God face to face (Gen 32:30) wrestled but didnt die, Abraham saw God but didn't die. So who was the person that Abraham was talking to? I contend that it was God taking on human form for a while, it was God the Son.
doesnt it makes more sense that they actually were more symbolic n in the case of abraham, saw 3 angels who then went on to Lot?
and you can't say it's symbolic because Abraham clearly calls him 'adonai', meaning Lord, means he understood who that guest really was. Genesis 18:1, "the LORD appeared..." Hebrew, this meant YHWH (u can look up Strong's Hebrew)- appeared to Abraham. He was present! Would Abraham be so bold as to call angels a name reserved only for God? So no, those 3 cannot be all angels.
Actually, only 2 angels went on to Lot. In Gen 18:33, the LORD left. In fact, in Gen 19:2, Lot addressed the remaining 2 angels as "my lords" translated adoni.
Out of the 3 persons that Abraham saw, one of them was clearly God. It cannot be mere angels because Abraham called one of them YHWH. But recall that God doesn't contradict himself, e.g. let humans see him and yet live, so that person he saw must be God who came in human form - God the Son.
will u choose to confuse readers what kind of a person u are??or explain clearly what u are??is not the bible a biography of God too??if trinity stands??should he not therefore in his loving kindness tell his, " hey look yo, im not jus 1 God, but there are 3 sides of me.."
the bible is a revelation of God, tells us who He is (enough for us to believe unto Him). And the bible did reveal Him as trinity - early church understood that Jesus was God (Phil 2:5-11), Paul recognized Jesus as God (Titus 2:9). There are also other attributes of God that are reliably deduced from Scripture but the specific terms were not used within it (e.g. omniscient, omnipresent). There's nothing wrong with the trinitarian understanding, it's not pagan, it's not unbiblical. Faithful Christians were just deducing from the bible what God is.
much easier if we were talkin instead of typin.
pls exclude the other unnecessary details then. But forgive me this... pls explain about "How then does worship look like?" How was God worshipped in the bible? not just by giving "a loud praise" right? other wise i would have worshipped many people already.
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
...as for the rest of others' debate..isnt tat damn hitler a catholic???WW1 n WW2 started bcuz the few cath sects were prostituting themselves for political power isnt it?Yes, I believe Hitler was born Catholic although he obviously wasn't a very good or pious one, seeing how he persecuted and put Catholic priests to death when he was in power (as well as Jews, Gypsies and whoever else he did not like). Your point for raising this ?
-
Originally posted by Omnia:
I fully agree with you that the bible is the inspired word of God and that all scripture is beneficial and good for teaching. BUT (and this may come as a surprise to a lot of Christians), no where in the bible does it say that the bible is the sole source of truth ! On the contrary, the bible says that it is the church that is the pillar and foundation of truth (1Tim 3:15). So we need not settle for the "next best thing" of the bible as we also have the church.
You agree that we "should not only read the bible on our own" as we are "limited" by "our own understanding". Yet you do not seem to agree that any person/entity/organisation/church should be the Authority in teaching the bible. So how do we learn the truth ? Or maybe you do know of an Authority which you can share with us ?
I fully agree with you that all scripture is beneficial and good for teaching and that although the bible was written by men, they were inspired by God. That wasn't my contention. My point is that the choice of books to be included in the bible affects the teachings we get from the bible.
To illustrate simplistically, assuming there was a book X (currently not in the bible) that teaches that we should kill off anyone of no use to society. If that book had been included in the bible, we might not have that many old, invalid persons today.
So trusting what the bible teaches means that we implicitly trust the selection of books that make up the bible. And who did the selection ? Men - the Church (but whom Catholic Christians believe was guided by God in doing so).
I have offered my views on the use of statues and intercessory prayer in your other thread on the "Holy Cross". Let's resolve those first before we move on to other Catholic Christian teachings and practices which in no way contradict the bible.
Precisely. As you've pointed out, Revelations 7:9 talks about (in heaven), "a great multitude, which no one could count, from every nation, race, people, and tongue." Yet, the 144,000 persons mentioned just a few verses earlier comprise folks from every tribe of the Israelites. In other words, the 144,000 are Jewish. But how do we then square that with the multitude which comes from every nation, race etc ?
Conclusion ? We are not meant to read the number 144,000 literally as meaning that only that number will make it to heaven. There will be more than 144,000 in heaven, a whole lot more that "no one could count".
Agreed. May I also add that Satan's evil influences exist not only in 'pagan' religions but also amongst Christians who do not hold fast to their faith and live the kind of lives that they are called to.
I apologise if I sound 'harsh' in my replies. No malice intended.
keep searching man..heehee..answers for para 1-2..
with regard to say your example of book x..as we compare it with the entire collected bible..will it contradict with the personality of God thus far or will it compliement it??there are numerous scrolls lying around claimed to be inspired of God's word..what we need to do is to then compare..thought the 66 books in the bible is consolidated in the bible by the then RCC..we do see there are tons of difference in bible and RCC teachings right??...answers para 3-6
did i mention of the spiritual israel that is formed with JC??that is where the literal 144k will come from and not physical jews..they had lost favour since 2k+ years ago isnt it??...answers para 8-9
intercessors and rosaries..fun topix =) ....answers para 7
as for the rest of the paragraphs..i totally agree satan's influence is not just in paganism..but especially in christiandom..know why i have an issue with christians now??
no malice taken =) we are all openminded adults who wants to know the truth..thus far we have exchanged views that will benefit not just us but also other readers is it not?
-
Originally posted by Omnia:
I'm not sure which part of my post you are referrring to but I want to clarify to readers that I am in no way disparaging the bible. I fully believe the bible to be the inerrant word of God in faith and morals (not in matters of biology, science, geography, what have you). My point to dommonkassyu is that the word of God comes to us through both the bible and the Church.
hmm..just curious..if you believed in the bible...why dont you also believe in the scientific topics mention in there??selective believes??
-
Originally posted by Ipirate:
Eve started things rolling just as God wanted.
She gave us moral sense. She chose to know God instead of remainning ignoran t of right and wrong. The only way to get closer to God. It also created our history. Without her we would have none. She should be venerated above Marie. Withot her we would be as bright as sticks and talking snakes.
I disagree though that evils are different from place to place. Could you give an example.
Regards
DL
lol...what fantastic translation...she did not chose to know God..she chose to have herself to be like a goddess..she directly disobeyed that women to be in subjection to men..thats why she ate the fruit before passing some to adam....to think people would think of it like you is expected though..
the greatness of evil is that it can be completely hypocritical to acheive the bigger picture..hence it is different from place to place..
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
Hi domon,
Welcome back. Sorry to hear about the demon attack, but glad u made it with ur faith still intact.
Correct. Exactly what I'm saying. So question then is, Jacob said he had seen God face to face (Gen 32:30) wrestled but didnt die, Abraham saw God but didn't die. So who was the person that Abraham was talking to? I contend that it was God taking on human form for a while, it was God the Son.
and you can't say it's symbolic because Abraham clearly calls him 'adonai', meaning Lord, means he understood who that guest really was. Genesis 18:1, "the LORD appeared..." Hebrew, this meant YHWH (u can look up Strong's Hebrew)- appeared to Abraham. He was present! Would Abraham be so bold as to call angels a name reserved only for God? So no, those 3 cannot be all angels.
Actually, only 2 angels went on to Lot. In Gen 18:33, the LORD left. In fact, in Gen 19:2, Lot addressed the remaining 2 angels as "my lords" translated adoni.
Out of the 3 persons that Abraham saw, one of them was clearly God. It cannot be mere angels because Abraham called one of them YHWH. But recall that God doesn't contradict himself, e.g. let humans see him and yet live, so that person he saw must be God who came in human form - God the Son.
the bible is a revelation of God, tells us who He is (enough for us to believe unto Him). And the bible did reveal Him as trinity - early church understood that Jesus was God (Phil 2:5-11), Paul recognized Jesus as God (Titus 2:9). There are also other attributes of God that are reliably deduced from Scripture but the specific terms were not used within it (e.g. omniscient, omnipresent). There's nothing wrong with the trinitarian understanding, it's not pagan, it's not unbiblical. Faithful Christians were just deducing from the bible what God is.
pls exclude the other unnecessary details then. But forgive me this... pls explain about "How then does worship look like?" How was God worshipped in the bible? not just by giving "a loud praise" right? other wise i would have worshipped many people already.
thanks for your concern in asking... =)
ever occured that God is using an angel as a screen to shield himself like in the case of moses when he was honoured to see the back of God??IMO...moses was after all a greater man than abaraham the guy who kept using the "sarah is my sister trick" to scam leaders of their wealth..he should be a lawyer..playing with words..yet moses can only see the back of God..but abraham saw God..hmm...i dont know..
the example you gave was only early christians "believed" in trinity..how about dudes in the B.C?? jacob..abraham..moses..joseph..david and solomon guy..did they believe in trinity too??was not only YHWH the father figure mentioned??thats why we got the judaism now different from christians ya??
-
domon:
welcome back once again. with each passing month, i keep forgetting what our discussion is about. seems you're back now with a vengeance ;-)
God cannot be using an angel simply because within the Scriptures, it does not describe anything like that. Which part of the passage gave u that idea?? This is reading too much into the verses, don't you think? if we're not careful with our reading, some people can even claim that Jesus didn't die on the cross but was an angel who died in His place.
As i've written, Abraham called one of his visitors "adonai" meaning Lord, means he understood who that guest really was. Genesis 18:1, "the LORD appeared..." Hebrew, this meant YHWH (u can look up Strong's Hebrew)- appeared to Abraham. He was present! Would Abraham be so bold as to call angels a name reserved only for God? So no, those 3 cannot be all angels.
About Moses being greater than Abraham, i beg to differ. Besides the transfiguration of Jesus, Moses isnt that much different from Abraham - murderer, disobedient to God, failed to enter promised land. On the other hand, to his credit (but really God's), Abraham had no qualms about obeying God and trusting Him enough to believe He will certainly provide the sacrifice for his hard earned son, Issac. This was credited to Abraham as righteousness.
The full revelation of God came thru Jesus Christ. Remember 1 Cor 13:9-10, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears." Before the incarnation of Christ, people knew God to be a compound unity - this goes beyond the discussion of echad. E.g. 1 month has 31 days, 1 man has 4 limbs. In the same way, Christians don't worship 3 gods, but they affirm the worship of only one, who revealed Himself as three persons. They didn't know what was Trinity then (not like we do on this side of time), but they also knew God wouldn't contradict himself - if He said no one could see him and still live, he means it. But there have been people who have and hence, they knew God was beyond their understanding (before the revelation of God thru Christ, John 14:9, 1:18). Refer to my previously listed examples too.
But before we veer further away from topic, pls answer my query from many posts before. Pls explain about "How then does worship look like?" How was God worshipped in the bible? not just by giving "a loud praise" right? other wise i would have worshipped many people already.
-
I'm sorry I have not been following this thread but would like to add my opinion whatever they worth
As far as my understanding goes Abraham in the book of Genesis did not see God in a real sense but saw an avatar of God. It was not God in a full sense.
It's similar to what Jacob had seen when he struggled with a strong man in his tent at night. He thought that he had wrestled with God that made him cripple as a sign. It was not God in a real sense it was His avatar.
Probably similar to Moses seeing the burning bushes. It wasn't God in the real sense which he saw as the burning bushes but an avatar of God.
NOBODY can see face to face with God as far as I believe. People may see God in glory but may never see God in the real sense. Moses is the closest person who had seen God in a full sense. Moses wasn't allowed to see God's face and because he wqould die otherwise and was only allowed to see His back. Even seeing God's back changed the physical appearance of Moses. His face shone such that he needed to cover his face to the Israelis and only took the cover off when he was praying alone in his tent. This lasted a few months or so. When Moses blessed the Israelis he mentioned that the face of God actually shone. This is the first description of God ever known to man.
I don't mean that God is a changeling but when you see a spirit from God much like when you see a messenger from a king, or a minister from a country, that spirit or messenger or minister is actually carrying the same message that His king, or head of state wanted him to carry. A servant of God be it man like a prophet or spirit thinks and speaks much like a channel for God. At least this is how I perceive it or believe it. A channel is not God in the real sense however it is God in some sense. Much like an avatar.
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
keep searching man..heehee..answers for para 1-2..
Do correct me if I have misunderstood you but what does Hitler being born Catholic got to do with the Church being the "pillar and foundation of truth" as described in 1Tim 3:15 ???
And the question raised still remains: You agree that we "should not only read the bible on our own" as we are "limited" by "our own understanding". Yet you do not seem to agree that any person/entity/organisation/church should be the Authority in teaching the bible. So how do we learn the truth ? Or maybe you do know of an Authority which you can share with us ?"
Originally posted by domonkassyu:with regard to say your example of book x..as we compare it with the entire collected bible..will it contradict with the personality of God thus far or will it compliement it??there are numerous scrolls lying around claimed to be inspired of God's word..what we need to do is to then compare..thought the 66 books in the bible is consolidated in the bible by the then RCC..we do see there are tons of difference in bible and RCC teachings right??...answers para 3-6
... intercessors and rosaries..fun topix =) ....answers para 7
Correction. In the 4th century or thereabouts, the Catholic Church consolidated a bible that had 73 books. A 66 book bible was unheard of until the 16th century or so when Protestant Christians threw out 7 books and parts of other books. And as I've mentioned before, Catholic Christian teachings and practices in no way contradict the bible as I have shown in your other thread on the "Holy Cross".
Your suggestion to determine whether a book is the inspired word of God (and therefore to be included in the bible) by comparing it to God's personality to see whether it is complementary or not sounds good on the surface but will it work ? Do we really have that good an understanding of God's personality ? And even if we did, who is going to make the comparison ? Ask ten persons to make such a comparison and you are liable to have half of them saying that the book complements God's personality (and is therefore inspired), and half saying otherwise.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:did i mention of the spiritual israel that is formed with JC??that is where the literal 144k will come from and not physical jews..they had lost favour since 2k+ years ago isnt it??...answers para 8-9
The book of Revelation mentions the 144,000 as being Jewish (Rev 7:4) and virgin males (Rev 14:4). I assume you would also point out that the 144,000 being virgin males should not be read literally as well.
It is strange to say that all the bits about the 144,000 being Jewish, being males and being virgin are not meant to be understood literally but yet insist that the 144,000 number is meant to be understood literally, notwithstanding the fact that they appear in the same book and even in the same sentence. Why is that ? Why should 144,000 be understood literally when the rest should not ?
You are of course entitled to your bible interpretation and beliefs but the reader should be aware that the Catholic Church and Christians in general do not believe that only 144,000 would enter heaven. The number in the book of Revelations should not be taken literally and that is the more reasonable and logical interpretation.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:as for the rest of the paragraphs..i totally agree satan's influence is not just in paganism..but especially in christiandom..know why i have an issue with christians now??
If you have issues with Christians because of Satan's influence, you would also have issues with folks who are Jews, Jehovah Witnesses, Buddhists, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics, Chinese, Americans, Russians; just about every religion, race, civilisation and nationality on this planet :). Satan's influences are not confined to any particular group.
-
Originally posted by 24/7:
domon:
welcome back once again. with each passing month, i keep forgetting what our discussion is about. seems you're back now with a vengeance ;-)
God cannot be using an angel simply because within the Scriptures, it does not describe anything like that. Which part of the passage gave u that idea?? This is reading too much into the verses, don't you think? if we're not careful with our reading, some people can even claim that Jesus didn't die on the cross but was an angel who died in His place.
As i've written, Abraham called one of his visitors "adonai" meaning Lord, means he understood who that guest really was. Genesis 18:1, "the LORD appeared..." Hebrew, this meant YHWH (u can look up Strong's Hebrew)- appeared to Abraham. He was present! Would Abraham be so bold as to call angels a name reserved only for God? So no, those 3 cannot be all angels.
About Moses being greater than Abraham, i beg to differ. Besides the transfiguration of Jesus, Moses isnt that much different from Abraham - murderer, disobedient to God, failed to enter promised land. On the other hand, to his credit (but really God's), Abraham had no qualms about obeying God and trusting Him enough to believe He will certainly provide the sacrifice for his hard earned son, Issac. This was credited to Abraham as righteousness.
The full revelation of God came thru Jesus Christ. Remember 1 Cor 13:9-10, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears." Before the incarnation of Christ, people knew God to be a compound unity - this goes beyond the discussion of echad. E.g. 1 month has 31 days, 1 man has 4 limbs. In the same way, Christians don't worship 3 gods, but they affirm the worship of only one, who revealed Himself as three persons. They didn't know what was Trinity then (not like we do on this side of time), but they also knew God wouldn't contradict himself - if He said no one could see him and still live, he means it. But there have been people who have and hence, they knew God was beyond their understanding (before the revelation of God thru Christ, John 14:9, 1:18). Refer to my previously listed examples too.
But before we veer further away from topic, pls answer my query from many posts before. Pls explain about "How then does worship look like?" How was God worshipped in the bible? not just by giving "a loud praise" right? other wise i would have worshipped many people already.
hihi..whats with the vengence man..haha..i think i replied abit late again and M&P kinda replied for me with the avatar thingy..
still there is no mentioned of a trinitarian God throughout the bible..likewise to the angel being used in my illustration..it can only be implied by humans through their own translation kinda stuff..i dun knw if you get my drift as im losing my mind day by day..
the thing about mo and ab being greater..thats just a personal opinion actually..i believe the answer lies in what JC said about who among his disciples is greatest..
very sory that i had failed to attempt to answer your worship qn..definitely not a loud praise only..neither was i saying that praising God loudly is worshippin God..i believe the main thing is heart condition??
in hebrew culture..when 1 meet a fren in the streets..the greetings extended can be very long and even includes kissing the feet..sounds like worship??actually not.
besides the usual levites ceromonies involving sacrificials to God..when people worship God on their own..it usually reveals their heart when they are talking to God in prayers and stuff..
in the previous eg you cited where the afflicted ones thanking JC worshipping him..i believed the words used were different??thus showing how it differs from the worship used for God alone?
lastly..the truth of God being a singular almighty being with no equal or being a trinitarian being that is 1 yet 3 will soon reveal itself..despite our differences in our beliefs..im sure we can agree that this wicked system is soon ending with God's kingdom arriving ya.. =)
-
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:
I'm sorry I have not been following this thread but would like to add my opinion whatever they worth
As far as my understanding goes Abraham in the book of Genesis did not see God in a real sense but saw an avatar of God. It was not God in a full sense.
It's similar to what Jacob had seen when he struggled with a strong man in his tent at night. He thought that he had wrestled with God that made him cripple as a sign. It was not God in a real sense it was His avatar.
Probably similar to Moses seeing the burning bushes. It wasn't God in the real sense which he saw as the burning bushes but an avatar of God.
NOBODY can see face to face with God as far as I believe. People may see God in glory but may never see God in the real sense. Moses is the closest person who had seen God in a full sense. Moses wasn't allowed to see God's face and because he wqould die otherwise and was only allowed to see His back. Even seeing God's back changed the physical appearance of Moses. His face shone such that he needed to cover his face to the Israelis and only took the cover off when he was praying alone in his tent. This lasted a few months or so. When Moses blessed the Israelis he mentioned that the face of God actually shone. This is the first description of God ever known to man.
I don't mean that God is a changeling but when you see a spirit from God much like when you see a messenger from a king, or a minister from a country, that spirit or messenger or minister is actually carrying the same message that His king, or head of state wanted him to carry. A servant of God be it man like a prophet or spirit thinks and speaks much like a channel for God. At least this is how I perceive it or believe it. A channel is not God in the real sense however it is God in some sense. Much like an avatar.
well said...pretty much what i had in mind..
-
Originally posted by Omnia:
Do correct me if I have misunderstood you but what does Hitler being born Catholic got to do with the Church being the "pillar and foundation of truth" as described in 1Tim 3:15 ???
And the question raised still remains: You agree that we "should not only read the bible on our own" as we are "limited" by "our own understanding". Yet you do not seem to agree that any person/entity/organisation/church should be the Authority in teaching the bible. So how do we learn the truth ? Or maybe you do know of an Authority which you can share with us ?"
Correction. In the 4th century or thereabouts, the Catholic Church consolidated a bible that had 73 books. A 66 book bible was unheard of until the 16th century or so when Protestant Christians threw out 7 books and parts of other books. And as I've mentioned before, Catholic Christian teachings and practices in no way contradict the bible as I have shown in your other thread on the "Holy Cross".
Your suggestion to determine whether a book is the inspired word of God (and therefore to be included in the bible) by comparing it to God's personality to see whether it is complementary or not sounds good on the surface but will it work ? Do we really have that good an understanding of God's personality ? And even if we did, who is going to make the comparison ? Ask ten persons to make such a comparison and you are liable to have half of them saying that the book complements God's personality (and is therefore inspired), and half saying otherwise.
The book of Revelation mentions the 144,000 as being Jewish (Rev 7:4) and virgin males (Rev 14:4). I assume you would also point out that the 144,000 being virgin males should not be read literally as well.
It is strange to say that all the bits about the 144,000 being Jewish, being males and being virgin are not meant to be understood literally but yet insist that the 144,000 number is meant to be understood literally, notwithstanding the fact that they appear in the same book and even in the same sentence. Why is that ? Why should 144,000 be understood literally when the rest should not ?
You are of course entitled to your bible interpretation and beliefs but the reader should be aware that the Catholic Church and Christians in general do not believe that only 144,000 would enter heaven. The number in the book of Revelations should not be taken literally and that is the more reasonable and logical interpretation.
If you have issues with Christians because of Satan's influence, you would also have issues with folks who are Jews, Jehovah Witnesses, Buddhists, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics, Chinese, Americans, Russians; just about every religion, race, civilisation and nationality on this planet :). Satan's influences are not confined to any particular group.
not really sure what you are saying in para 1 about hitler..what i meant is hitler is not a even a god person much less to say a good true christian..and what i meant also are the power hungry whores that were the so called church backing him up. and those from russia side..power hungry just like what the bible says...n im searching still..for the truth..
for books of inspired truth..thus far we see that there is no contradictions..i have only read the 66 books..the other 7 books..im not well versed..also read was the book of enoch which belonged nowhere..
the fact is many people think that God being God cannot be understood by mere mortals even angels cannot understand God..but God is very systematic and likes rules to be set and played by..so much that he even govern himself with such rules like love, justice, wisdom..therefore..though we cannot grasp the thoughts of God..we can know how he behaves or what he will do.and we know what his personality is like..so by comparing the books unselfishly without the motivation of power, greed for recognition..driven by just pure love for God..it can be acheived..it can most probably be acheived by lesser people like you and me rather than the pope.
ah..the 144k..the figure should be literal..the jews are the literal spiritual jews led by JC..virgins males??i dun really remember..have to read that up again..but i believe it is stated that there were righteous "elders" of both sexes up there who are the 144k..
as for issues..haha..u have no idea what i think about the other religions..it is definitely not constrained to christiandom..jus tat 1) this is a christian forum..it is only appropriate to talk about christiandom right? 2)think about God's supposed organization on earth to be saving people from satan's grip.but ended up joining with the enemy...think ancient jews who went after foreign gods..and yes i do have issues with the entire human race as a whole..im not racist to just a particular ethnic group..
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
not really sure what you are saying in para 1 about hitler..what i meant is hitler is not a even a god person much less to say a good true christian..
Agreed. Then my query remains. In your earlier post, you wrote, "as for the rest of others' debate..isnt tat damn hitler a catholic???" ; and I was curious why you raised this point ?
Originally posted by domonkassyu:..and what i meant also are the power hungry whores that were the so called church backing him up. and those from russia side..power hungry just like what the bible says...n im searching still..for the truth..
I'm also curious which church person or group was backing Hitler and in what way ?
Originally posted by domonkassyu:for books of inspired truth..thus far we see that there is no contradictions..i have only read the 66 books..the other 7 books..im not well versed..also read was the book of enoch which belonged nowhere..
the fact is many people think that God being God cannot be understood by mere mortals even angels cannot understand God..but God is very systematic and likes rules to be set and played by..so much that he even govern himself with such rules like love, justice, wisdom..therefore..though we cannot grasp the thoughts of God..we can know how he behaves or what he will do.and we know what his personality is like..so by comparing the books unselfishly without the motivation of power, greed for recognition..driven by just pure love for God..it can be acheived..it can most probably be acheived by lesser people like you and me rather than the pope.
Agree that there are no contradictions in the bible. Agree also that we do know the 'personality' of God to the extent that has been revealed to us. But do we as individuals know enough to be able to judge which book is inspired and which is not ? I don't think so but if you think otherwise, fine.
But the second observation remains. Your conclusions about whether a book is inspired will most certainly differ from the conclusions of other persons who may also claim that they know God's personality and who are also driven by pure love for God. We will be back to square one, trying to figure out which book is inspired and which is not. Either that or every person will have his own collection of inspired books of the bible based on what he thinks is compatible with 'God's personality'.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:ah..the 144k..the figure should be literal..the jews are the literal spiritual jews led by JC..virgins males??i dun really remember..have to read that up again..but i believe it is stated that there were righteous "elders" of both sexes up there who are the 144k..
Revelations 14:3-4 - "No one could learn this hymn except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been ransomed from the earth. These are they who were not defiled with women; they are virgins and these are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes."
"the 144k..the figure should be literal..the jews are the literal spiritual jews led by JC" - Maybe you can explain further, I don't quite catch your justification for taking the 144,000 number literally but not taking the rest of the sentence (where the number appears) literally.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:as for issues..haha..u have no idea what i think about the other religions..it is definitely not constrained to christiandom..jus tat 1) this is a christian forum..it is only appropriate to talk about christiandom right? 2)think about God's supposed organization on earth to be saving people from satan's grip.but ended up joining with the enemy...think ancient jews who went after foreign gods..and yes i do have issues with the entire human race as a whole..im not racist to just a particular ethnic group..
Thanks for the clarification on your disposition towards the human race and other religions. I don't agree of course with your assertion about God's organisation on earth (assume you mean the Catholic? Church) joining with the enemy (assume you mean Satan).
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
hmm..just curious..if you believed in the bible...why dont you also believe in the scientific topics mention in there??selective believes??
Because I do not believe that it was God's plan to teach us about Science, Mathematics, History etc through the bible. Rather, the bible was meant to reveal to us truths about God's plan for salvation, about our relationship with him, about faith, about morals etc.
I need to clarify though that whatever scientific, mathematical, historical topics there are in the bible might very well be true but I do not assume them to be so just because they are in the bible (unless they relate to salvation, faith etc); that is not what the bible set out to do.