News-Record.com

Hoo boy.

"For the sick, hungry and suffering, faith offers the hope of a better world. For those who have lost loved ones, it offers the hope of a family reunion like none other. Why would someone try to take that hope away from another human? It seems hateful."

Isn't it really hateful to stand idly by while someone lives a life based on a false hope? Every day, I see people on TV telling the poorest people in the world that they can be wealthy if they just pray to God for money... and promise to give $1000 to a church. If that isn't hateful, I don't know what is.

"All of the superficial arguments by atheists have been shot down by scholars who are willing to examine the evidence more deeply and sincerely. In "The Case for Christ," Lee Strobel, who was an atheist when he started, uses his law and journalism background to answer some important questions."

I've read Mr. Strobel's ridiculous work. It's pathetic, and is only seen as interesting by people who are already convinced of its truth before they even read the dust jacket.

"Is the Bible historically accurate?"

Um NO. Modern archeology has mountains of evidence showing the Bible is far from being historically accurate. The Old Testament is a book of myths that the Jews developed over centuries of living in the crossroads of civilization. The New Testament is barely better as far as "historical accuracy" is concerned. If you are basing your faith on this aspect of the Bible, you're on shaky ground.

"Was Jesus resurrected? The overwhelming evidence was yes..."

There's no evidence that this happened, beyond what is written in the Bible. It has already been established that the Bible is thin on historical facts... there's no reason to accept it as factual on this claim.

"If you want to commit spiritual suicide, do it alone."

If you want to dream your life away and call it "comforting," don't bother us with it.

Eric, Could you lead us to where these "stacks of evidence" are that disprove the existence of God and the Bible? Also, could you explain the origin of the universe to us as well?

The writer wrote: "It doesn't bother me that he chooses to believe that. However, it is disturbing that he would try to drag others down with him."

I agree totally that we should embrace all who believe, no matter what they believe, as long as they live good lives and make the world better. I wonder if the writer believes *that* or if he believes in OTW-ism? (One-True-Way) Perhaps he could clarify.

Mr. Dickson would you please give me the name of the church in Chicago where Jesus is preaching, I'd like to go up and attend a service.

Sue, Please clarify your view for me on who will go to Heaven and by what means they will go. I'm not 100% sure what you meant by your statement "I agree totally that we should embrace all who believe, no matter what they believe, as long as they live good lives and make the world better." Thanks.

The only crackheads I've known to go straight and so far stay that way (5+ years now) will tell you that it was by establishing a personal relationship with Jesus via the Holy Spirit.

I find Mr. Dickson's letter disturbing. There are statements contained therein telling what Mr. Sexton believes. In rereading Mr. Sexton's letter, I find no specific mention of Mr. Sexton's beliefs. Thereby invalidating Mr. Dickson's letter, at least from my perspective.

When a writer presents a valid viable argument in counterpoint to Mr. Sexton, then it will be worthy of printing.

ECUMAN:
"Eric, Could you lead us to where these "stacks of evidence" are that disprove the existence of God and the Bible?"

I'm not going to play semantic games with you, sir. I think I clearly stated that evidence from archeology disproves the "historical accuracy" of the Bible. I said nothing about evidence regarding the existence of God, nor the existence of the Bible. If you want to reply to what I say, I suggest you do so without attacking any of your worn out, ratty strawmen. Good day.

Eric, you made certain assertions that there is archaeological evidence that shows that the Bible is not historically accurate, that the OT is full of myths and that there is no evidence outside the NT to prove that Jesus' resurrection occurred. I think this fairly represents what you said above. These are merely assertions on you part, not "facts". I am merely asking you to produce those "facts" that you claim. Otherwise, I'll assume that they either don't exist or that they are not well supported.

Also, there are plenty are evolutionary and naturalistic "myths" about how the universe began. I was merely, pointing out that this is not an issue of the rationality of atheists versus the myths of Christians. I think I'm one of the most rational people you'd ever want to meet and yes, I am a Christian and more importantly, a follower of Jesus.

I've observe a pattern on your posts of unsupported assertions. When you are asked questions or for support for you position, you change the subject, are evasive or jump to another post. It happens with others as well, so I don't want to pick on you.

BTW, I also don't care for Word-of-Faith-Send-Me-Money TV preachers either. At least we have that in common.

There is more proof that the Bible is inaccurate than there is to the contrary.

If you believe the Bible to be the word of God and without error, then why does the genealogy of Jesus change from book to book in the Bible?

Why does the Bible contain historical and scientific inaccuracies?

Even historical "facts" contradict each other from book to book in the Bible.
A few examples are:
crucifiction of Jesus
creation of the universe

Would a perfect God be a jealous God?
http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=Ex%2020:5&version=9;

The only reason I became a non-Christian (I once wanted to be a preacher) was because I actually read the Bible and began to see that it cannot be taken as 100% fact.

eric,
along with ecumanm i would be interested in the material(s) you cite as historical evidence against the historicity of the o.t & n.t. writtings. i am currently reading 'the bile as history' by werner keller, many new techniques and methods of discovery are employed in this work. please read an excerpt from one who read the book.......

.................................................

"Not only Christians can enjoy this, either. The skeptic will still gain a lot. The purpose of this book is not to prove or disprove the existence of miracles, nor is it really sufficient to prove truth in the Christian faith. All it does is allow you to look at the Bible as a historical document, and evaluate its validity from unbiased grounds, whether you agree with the religion or not. From this point of view, it is quite amazing, and should be respected as one of the most complete and continually corroborated pieces of history we have."
i believe as new technologies are discovered and new methods found to decipher evidence, the bible as history will continue to unfold as being accurate. much is unknown and some of which was thought to be incorrect has been dispelled by modern science as now being accurate. the jury is not yet in on this subject

more research

briankeithharper,
thank you for not pursuing that profession, you made a wise choice.

I commend the writer for his faith! If you have it and you know it, it does not matter what others think. You will sleep well tonight!

Others? I don't want to be in their shoes. Faith makes us strong and sure. We know where we are and where we are going.

As Christians, we must point the way, the only way, and back up and let them make their choice.

We have then done our job! Then its up to God to finish the work we have started.

God Bless You!

Christopher wrote: "It doesn't bother me that he chooses to believe that. However, it is disturbing that he would try to drag others down with him. For the sick, hungry and suffering, faith offers the hope of a better world. For those who have lost loved ones, it offers the hope of a family reunion like none other. Why would someone try to take that hope away from another human? It seems hateful."

You are right, Christopher. Faith does offer hope to those who have none in this life. It also awards those of us who follow Jesus to put our faith into practice. There are plenty of volunteer opportunites where we can be "Jesus" to those who are in need. Locally, there is Urban Ministry, Triad Health Project, FaithAction, Lutheran Family Services.

I would invite you especially to help at Urban Ministries if you are not already volunteering. Each night, meals are served to the homeless. Lots of work goes into this and lots of folks are needed.

Perhaps we can show the world that it is not so much what we hold to in terms of doctrinal purity that makes us followers of Jesus. But, is the life we live...the sermon we preach every moment of every day. I know of no one who has ever been persuaded to believe in Jesus by debate. I know lots of folks who were persuaded by Christians reaching out with the way they live their lives. Remember, "faith without works is dead."

"It is tine Christians were judged more by their likeness to Christ than their notions of Christ." --William Penn

Hi, Buz:

"i would be interested in the material(s) you cite as historical evidence against the historicity of the o.t & n.t. writtings."

The latest books I've read on the subject are from 2000, and they looked pretty substantial when I read them. "The Bible Unearthed" and "The View From Nebo." The first is by a professional in the field, the second is a book that collects and reported findings by several researchers in the field.

My most recent reading materials have been regarding scientific analysis of the relationship between faith and the human brain. Many say that faith can't be explained... I'm finding that this is far from true. This may be off topic, but I thought I'd mention it in case anyone asked me why I haven't read any more recent archeological material. So many books and only 30 or 40 more years (I hope!) to read 'em in. {;-)

I have never understood why people fight over this. getting mad and saying 'the bible is fact', or 'the bible is false'...what does this accomplish?

If you are a believer, then be a believer and don't attack the non-believers. If you are a non-believer, then be a non-believer and don't attack the believers...it accomplishes nothing.

Faith can be a very private thing...at least it is for me. Because I know God can hear me whether I am in the shower at home or in the front row at church. But if you are one of the people who doesn't believe in God, that is totally your right, and the last thing I will do is try to convice you otherwise. Because you have come to your belief for a reason that I will probably not be able to associate with. Just as you will not be able to associate with the reasons for my believing.

But we need to respect each other, regardless. It will come to a point when our faith, or lack of will be proven. The problem is, nobody but the person experiencing it will know the truth. We will all just have to wait our turns to see what the 'truth' is.

Brian Keith, I will try to address some of the points you brought up.

First, Matthew's genealogy of Jesus was written primarily to first century Jews. His geneaological record was probably through the legal father Joseph. Luke's account was written primarily to a Gentile audience. He probably recorded the genealogy through the line of Mary. Mary and Joseph shared some common ancestors, but there is a divergence later down the line. There are other possible resolutions as well, such as citing legal versus natural fathers, etc.

As far as your last point, why can't a perfect God be jealous?

As far as your other points, you'll have to be more specific for me to respond.

eric,
i suppose we often read materials with biases towards our beliefs (me included). the book i mentioned i am currently reading was given me as a gift and the author is a non theologian and says he has no bias other that to present the archaeological findings. he honestly deals with some very difficult issues and is not disposed to try to force the facts, he sometimes discloses that current knowledge does not support certain stories in the bible. it is the faith that you referred to that allows me to accept that which my finite mind cannot fully understand and provides comfort to me even when i 'can't prove' what i believe. the burden of proof is not mine, i'll leave that to the Holy Spirit. the authors of the bible unearthed seem to be an unlikely pair to write such a book....strange bedfellows. thanks for the response.

to gaytony,
"We will all just have to wait our turns to see what the 'truth' is." - this statement does not show a strong faith on your behalf....if you do not presently know the truth ( that truth is a person ), perhaps your faith isn't as stong as you confess.
your statement "Faith can be a very private thing" demonstrates a lack of knowledge of what the bible says concerning faith.....our faith is demonstrable, is should not be private or withheld. our lives lived in demonstration of what we believe is a public confession of our faith. i encourage you to come out of the closet with you faith and let the world see gaytony demonstrating the love of God !

Buz
Faith can be, and IS in my case very private. I know where I stand with God. I also know I have a long way to go. Faith in itself is a belief, not a fact as you would like me to believe. This remark validates my statement about everyone having to wait their turn to find out the truth. My faith does not dictate truth. My faith, as I 'confessed', is very private...and obviously, it is MY faith. I believe I know what will happen upon my death, but I do not KNOW what will happen.

I think you missed my point. And perhaps I missed yours.

I think many of you are treating beliefs in a spiritual sense different from all other types of beliefs. There are true beliefs and false beliefs. Just because you believe something does not make it true. I could sincerely believe that the Carolina Panthers won this past year's Super Bowl. That would be a false belief. There are certain characteristics about God that are true and if you believe otherwise, then you would hold a false belief about that particular characteristic. I think if those beliefs are about major characteristics, then you could be guilty of idolatry. I you believe that I am 5'5" Chinese man that graduated from Bejiing University, you have the wronf ECUMan since I am a 6'2" white man from East Carolina University. However, you could have a false belief about what I ate for lunch today and still essentially know who I am if you are correct on other major characteristics about me.

Similarly, God does not somehow morph into whatever we believe about him. It is our job to learn more about who he truly is, not who we want Him to be. It is the object of our belief that is important and should shape our beliefs, not our subjective opinions and desires about Him.

gaytony,
it is a fact that i have faith, it may not be so for you. my point is that an individual who states they are a believer in Jesus Christ (are you stating that?), should not hide or make private their faith. gaytony consider this...."Luk 8:16 No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth [it] under a bed; but setteth [it] on a candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light." - please tell me what this scripture says to you.
i can honestly say that i know that when i die i will be in the presence of the Lord, because the bible tells me so. i do not qualify it with i 'believe' i know, because i've never seen air, electricity, light, atoms, etc. but there is ample evidence for me to know they exist. let me state it this way...faith is invisible and i can tell you and the rest of the whole world that i have faith and i ask you to believe that i have faith, but you say to me, the only way i can know you have faith is for you to demonstrate it or else it is only unsubstantiated words. so for me i believe faith requires a demonstration (works) to validate it....remember Jesus half brother james said " Jam 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

ECUCman wrote: "Similarly, God does not somehow morph into whatever we believe about him. It is our job to learn more about who he truly is, not who we want Him to be. It is the object of our belief that is important and should shape our beliefs, not our subjective opinions and desires about Him."

I couldn't agree more with you, ECUMan. But don't you find it interesting that many people study who God is yet come up with entirely different views. Even within evangelicalism, the God of the Lutherans hardly resembles the God of the Presbyterians.

I suggest that learning alone will not lead you to know the Truth. The Pharisees were the best scholars around in Jesus' time, yet we know what he had to say about them.

What is needed is a day to day walk with Jesus. We need to listen. And how do we know that we are truly followers of Jesus? Certainly not by how much we "know" about God, but how much our lives reflect the life Jesus taught. A good place to see what that life looks like is the Sermon on the Mount.

You are also right about the fact that our belief should not be shaped by our subjective desires about God. But what we see as objective "truths" may change as we get older or spend more time with God. Perhaps the Truth I currently hold is an objective Truth. But, perhaps not. I do believe that we can never know completely the Truth of God..."We see through a glass dimly." That doesn't mean we shouldn't try...it just means that we should cut each other some slack and not pretend that we know all Truth and have perfect knowledge of the heart of God.

Craig, Thanks for your comments. I think that a daily walk with Jesus in a part of the learning process I'm talking about. However, experience alone can be very unreliable. That's why I try to test my experiences against what God has revealed in Scripture. I also think trying to learn more about God is an expression of love. Because I love my wife, I try to learn more about her. I don't completely understand her, so I know I can't completely understand an infinite God either. That doesn't mean I give up and say that everything people say about God is true because nobody can know for sure. I think many things in Scripture are very clear and to ignore those things is to be in denial about what God said. Others things are not as clear and people can disagree on those things and still have an overall accurate view of who God is. I'm not saying that you disagree with me on these points, but some on this board obviously do. I'm just trying to clarify my view for you.

Buz,

Just because my faith or beliefs may differ slightly from your faith or beliefs, doesn't make me less of a Christian than you. Also, stating your beliefs for all the world to see doesn't make you a Christian any more than stating you know how to work on cars makes you a mechanic.

The difference between you and me, I think, is that I know where I stand with God, I have had several conversations with God after struggling with faith for a while, and I feel comfortable with my private relationship with God.

Quoting statements from the bible means nothing to me, because God does not live in the bible, he lives in my heart. The bible, in my opinion, was written by men who interpretted things they saw at one point or another.

I will NOT degrade or even question somebody for their lack of belief, or difference of belief, because that is not what I feel God wants. Because I have struggled with my faith, I understand that every person has to come into a relationship of their own free accord and in their own time. Forcing it is what drives many people away. I know this first hand.

You and I have discussed faith in the past, and we will just have to agree to disagree. For me, faith is not truth. The definition of faith is 'belief in truth'. That is exactly what my faith is.

When you write a book that sells as many copies of the Bible and is interpreted in as many languages (and many intepretations in the same language) as the Bible, and that stands the test of time as much as the Bible, and that people believe in and base their lives on like the Bible, then I'll think you are as smart as you think you are.

gaytony,
first i want to apologize if i have offended you, that wasn't my intent. i hope i have not degraded you.
your most recent post actually clarifies much for me. you stated "The difference between you and me......, gaytony it is now apparent to me where were differ in our theology...you said (and i paraphrase) that the bible was written by men and it means nothing to you b/c God lives in your heart. for me the bible is the word that God gave man (thru the Holy Spirit)and that word is the blue print of His plan for His creation. when you state the bible means nothing, in essence you are saying that each individual is left to his or her own devices (i.e intellect) to formulate your own theology of who God is and what His expectations are of His people. it is at this juncture that i find it difficult if not impossible to discuss with you spiritual concepts which are scripturally based, b/c the bible means nothing to you and all the precepts that God has revealed to man mean nothing to you...for this i am sorry for you. i would quote some scripture to validate my point(s) but it would be futile. i now understand why your faith is private.

Buz,

Why should I be offended? I don't expect you to understand my view...how could you? I believe you find it impossible to discuss spiritual concepts with me because you feel your faith is absolute, and you feel I have valid arguements that you don't want to listen to.

I guess I feel sorry for you in a sense. Because perhaps you have followed blindly instead of questioning. Perhaps you have never had anything happen to you in your life that was so horrible that you wondered how a caring loving God could allow such horrifics to occur. Perhaps you are one that feels if it is written in the bible, it must be true. Yes, I feel sorry for you. Because you have not had the courage to question God, and then wait for his answers. I was mad at God for a very long time...and because I questioned him, and listened, I have my personal relationship with him. I feel I am closer to God than most who attend church regularly, and follow blindly. Maybe I am wrong, but I doubt it.

I am thankful that I do have such an opened mind, and can think for myself. I am thankful God made me smart enough to question him and his existance. I am thankful that I was patient enough to listen when he did talk to me. As a result, I am able to live a good life, do good things and treat people right.

Thanks for the chit-chat.

gaytony,
the last thing i want to happen is for our conversation to become an argument. but yes my faith is absolute in relationship to my limited understand of the written word (bible). my faith must be absolute because God is perfect, therefore His word is perfect and it is that word that i base my beliefs ( i can hear bkh chiming in here ). i can honestly say that i have followed no human blindly, i have read , reread and researched and read again the bible and pray constantly for God to reveal Hmself to me thru His word, so i have blindly followed no one ! i have not been exempt from tragedy and hurt in my life and i have had conversation with the Father, asking WHY ! and like you i received my answer. gaytony if you want to feel sorry for me that is your choice but i'd much rather you pray for me and save the pity for the unbeliever. and just for the record, i do not believe that living a good life, doing good things and treating people right has anything to do with salvation, but i do believe those things become an offshoot of being saved. i am happy you have a relationship with God. the chit chat is good !

ECUMan wrote: "However, experience alone can be very unreliable. That's why I try to test my experiences against what God has revealed in Scripture. I also think trying to learn more about God is an expression of love."

I would tend to agree if we were on our on having experiences of God. However, it is in the Gathered Community, such as the was the early church, that these experiences, or openings, as Quakers call them, are tested. I understand that you test your experiences by scripture. I would agree with that as well. BUT, even that can be subjective. You've heard the old joke about the guy who opens his bible to: "And Judas went out and hanged himself."...then, "go thou and do likewise." These seem to be very straightforward passages.

My understanding is that we test our experiences by scipture, yes. But, we mirror the first Christians by relying on the Spirit to give interpretation of those Scriptures which is then tested through the Gathered Community..i.e., the church.

Ecuman writes: "Because I love my wife, I try to learn more about her. I don't completely understand her, so I know I can't completely understand an infinite God either. That doesn't mean I give up and say that everything people say about God is true because nobody can know for sure."

But how we approach it is VERY important. Do we "speak for God" with seeimingly inerrant authority? Or, do we humbly present our case taking care to not show any arrogance or anger? (Not saying you have.) I remember in I Corinthians that Paul talks about how folks spoke ill of them and of his faith. What was his response? He took it! He answered with kindness and humility.

It is not our debating, our arguing, that will persuade people to believe in Jesus. First, it is His Spirit that softens hearts, then it is the lives of those who represent Him...us...that will bring people to a knowledge, and yes, experience of God.

Take Care,
Craig

hello craig,
is it your understanding that the 'openings' (experiences) you refer to can only be experienced in the Quaker community or is it possible to experience God in other faith communities ? also when the gathered community tests these experiences, i assume these experiences either pass or fail the test ( am i correct? ). i am not trying to be funny here but rather trying to understand.....is the passing or failing of the test done by majority consensus or is there another method employed ? to your comment " First, it is His Spirit that softens hearts, then it is the lives of those who represent Him...us...that will bring people to a knowledge " i completely agree. i believe the one common thing the Holy Spirit speaks to every heart is "conviction" and then each person makes their choice to accept or reject that message. peace.........

Craig,

That was one of the best pieces or writing on this subject that I've seen.

No, no...experiences/openings can be experienced in other communities. Quakers don't hold the patent on Truth...well, maybe (just joking).

BUT, the community has to be set up so that experiences can be shared and talked about and then consensus reached. That is hard to do in a mega-church or larger group. I would also think the Quakers might have a bit more experience with this since they've been doing it for 350 years. There is a way to bring this to the community and a way to properly deal with any openings. Deep listening is the key. Also, knowing those in the community well is a good thing.

I know I am oversimplifing, but it seems that protestant groups have an experience with God's Spirit at conversion. And then have little or no direct contact with God experientially. The early Christians had a day to day, minute to minute connection with the Holy. Now I'm not saying that I am there yet. But I believe it is possible to live in such a manner.

And Buz, I didn't think you were trying to be funny. There is no such thing as majority consensus. It is either consensus or not.

Also, not every whisper of the Spirit needs to go before the Meeting. Only things which are pretty major. If God is telling you to work at the soup kitchen...well, work at the soup kitchen. If God is tellling you to build a multi-million dollar cathedral, then you might want to bring it before the Meeting. Also, there is such a thing as "eldering" where if someone is doing something that the Meeting might not be in agreement with, the person is taken aside and LOVINGLY eldered. Interestingly enough, I have never seen this happen. Quakers tend to take very seriously any leadings/openings/experiences they have....VERY seriously.

It might be of interest to note that this is the way business is conducted in a Friends Meeting. Things move along at a snail's pace (much to my chagrin sometimes). But, all in all, it works well. It also confirms, or as best it can be confirmed, what is God's will and what is not.

I didn't mean to make all of this a treatise on Quakerism. The most important thing for me is not being a Friend, but knowing The Friend, the Light that enlightens every person...Jesus.

God's peace,
Craig

craig,
thanks for your response. and thank you for correcting my faux pas (majority consensus....what could i have been thinking!). i am a little miffed though when you say that mega churches or larger groups would have a hard time sharing, talking and reaching consensus. this leads me to believe that either the Holy Spirit is limited in His ability to speak to a large group of Gods people and incline them to consensus or the larger the group of God's people who meet are apt to not be able to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit or perhaps some other reason that i may be missing. i appreciate your candor and sharing how the gathered community operates. i can't help but think about Job and his friends and wife, i would say there was a consensus amongst them, his three friends believed he was being punished by God and his wife said curse God and die (ouch !).here is the problem i personally have with depending on consensus, they were all wrong but believed they were right. i do believe that God will not direct me to do anything that does not agree with the written word, but that said i also believe that God may direct me to build a multi-million dollar cathedral and not to expect or want me to seek a consensus amongst my peer Christians ( here think how difficult it would have been for Noah to reach consensus ). someone once said never to put a question mark on something God has put a period on.
i fully agree that God's people shouldn't forsake the assemblying together and seeking God's will corporately, but i don't believe it prerequisite. i appreciate the manner in which you minister and i am not trying to convince you of my point of view but rather sharing a differnt point of view. be happy !

Buz wrote: "i am a little miffed though when you say that mega churches or larger groups would have a hard time sharing, talking and reaching consensus. this leads me to believe that either the Holy Spirit is limited in His ability to speak to a large group of Gods people and incline them to consensus or the larger the group of God's people who meet are apt to not be able to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit or perhaps some other reason that i may be missing. "

LOL..if you had ever worked within a consensus model you'd know what I mean. And I am not saying that in a cutting way...really, consensus is easier to get when there is a small group of people. Deep listening and responding to someone seems that it would be better done in smaller groups. I do see what you are saying. But, if a few people in a small group disagree, then it is easier to discus the matter and really listen to each other. That is NOT from the Bible or direct revelation...it just seems to be the way things work.

"here is the problem i personally have with depending on consensus, they were all wrong but believed they were right. i do believe that God will not direct me to do anything that does not agree with the written word, but that said i also believe that God may direct me to build a multi-million dollar cathedral and not to expect or want me to seek a consensus amongst my peer Christians ( here think how difficult it would have been for Noah to reach consensus )."

Again I see what you are saying. However, every time we compare our leadings to Scripture we do so in a subjective way. For me, it helps to have other Christians around with whom I am in community, to bounce these leadings off of...to test them, if you will. Friends ususally do not have other things to do to occupy church life. We don't have men's ministries, or clown ministries, or a big budget to worry about. Ours is a spirituality of subtraction...taking away anything that may be in the way of hearing from God. In our homes, many of us do not have TV's, many do not engage in competative sports, etc. There is no hard and fast rule about this, but it does free up time to listen to God and to our brothers and sisters. By the way, Friends were not the first to come up with the "spirituality of subtraction." The Puritans, which in many ways influenced the early Quakers, had the same understanding.

"someone once said never to put a question mark on something God has put a period on.
i fully agree that God's people shouldn't forsake the assemblying together and seeking God's will corporately, but i don't believe it prerequisite."

And there is where we would differ. I think that in order to really hear the voice of God we must listen and be in community with those who would support us...it seemed to be a prerequisite for the first Christians. Of course, as a matter of salvation...it is not a prerequisite.

"i appreciate the manner in which you minister and i am not trying to convince you of my point of view but rather sharing a differnt point of view. be happy !"

Likewise...by the way,I have enjoyed "talking" with you. It's nice to carry on a civil conversation in these days where civility seems to be quickly deminishing from our society.

Peace...

craig,
thanks for the response. i'll attempt a little humor here....although we must each wear glasses with a different prescription ( for we see things differently ), we are still looking at the same thing (Jesus) and whatever difference we have does NOT take away from the work that Jesus did for both you and i. it's been fun and informative talking with you also. maranatha !!

I love reading posts about the Bible. It just always amazes me how people fight for its very truth and existance. Of course the Bible exists - but is it all fact - of course not. When there are many other religions (older ones at that) and when there are more non-Christians in the world than Christians, one would think that the Bible worshipers might just question the validity of this book and its fanciful stories. Maybe they should just relax and understand that it is simply a guide just like all of the other holy books (written by other humans that came before us not mystical spirits) The miracles and other stories are simply there to inspire people. These books were not meant for people to twist into perverse viewpoints that really don't benefit anyone. Everytime I read posts like "the Bible this and the Bible that" it just urks me. Have people completely lost their ability to think on their own? The one thing that sets humans apart from the animal world and the one gift that "God" truly gave us is the ability to reason. I ask - why do people not use this ability anymore??

well said Max!!!!!

max,
" The one thing that sets humans apart from the animal world and the one gift that "God" truly gave us is the ability to reason. I ask - why do people not use this ability anymore?? ".
perhaps you could tell us max, it appears from your post that you have it figured out. by the way if the bible is just a bunch of stories made up by men, what then do you 'base' your theology on ? seems like God's children would be in total chaos if each one could make up whatever they want Him to be like and what His plan is for His creation. you have an avid supporter in gaytony, he also says the bible means nothing to him.
my philosophy is ....you wanna be a mechanic, go read a book on mechanics.....wanna be a Christian, go read the bible.