GCM Home | Bible Search | Rules | Donate | Bookstore | RSS | Facebook | Twitter

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Christian Politics Forum / Re: Why I vote Democrat
« Last post by Jaime on Yesterday at 12:05:53 PM »
I would take a moral acting Mormon any day over what we have in power now. Not my first choice, but when faced with the choices we had, it was a no brainer. Yeah, I could have cast a third party vote or wrote in someone, but that would be a 100% effective vote for the very person I could most not abide. I voted against Obama by voting for Romney.

Least bad? Absolutely - everytime. I vote my conscience in the primaries and vote pragmatically in the General Election.

It would stagger the present Democrat electorate if they could see WHO opposed the Civil Rights Act back in the 60s. Mostly Southern Democrats.
Churches of Christ Forum / Re: Female baptizers?
« Last post by yogi bear on Yesterday at 11:45:09 AM »
Sorry I will try to refrain from pointing to scripture in the future.
Churches of Christ Forum / Re: Female baptizers?
« Last post by Snargles on Yesterday at 11:40:03 AM »
While it bothers me that our strict devotion to CENI means that women can't baptize, serve communion or speak up, what bothers me even more is that we can't have a decent discussion on women's roles or IM or the other little quirks that set us apart as a peculiar people. "Its right there in the scripture in black and white" is used to shut down any attempt to discuss why Paul said the things he did.
Theology Forum / Re: Evolution
« Last post by Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Yesterday at 11:37:09 AM »
I've come to believe as the Jews teach - that Genesis 1 is the story of the formation of the country of Israel, rather than the earth.  The product of a lot of study into ancient writings.

FWIW, the story of the physical creation does appear in the Bible.  It's in Job, a book which is older than Genesis.

You believe that Genesis is misinterpreted? By who?
Currently, by pretty much all of Christendom.  The rabbis seem to have a better grasp on it.  Assyriologists, experts in near East language and customs, also seem to have a pretty good handle on Genesis.

God told Moses to write down the events of creation.
Book, chapter and verse, please?

Here is the problem.  Scientists believe that the complete universe came into existence in a split second.  They accept the fact that against all logic, something as complex and immeasurably large as the universe can come to be in a blink of an eye.
I don't really want to argue the science of this, but you might want to check and see if you're creating a strawman there.  The last time I cared enough to look at what science had to say on the matter, they were very fixated on a process taking "billions and billions of years."

In the NT testament some claims are made that are even older than Genesis or Job.
For example 1 Peter 1:20 "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was manifested in these last times for your sake"

We know that 1 Peter is newer than Genesis or Job, and we also know that similarly to Genesis, 1 Peter was inspired by God.

So, if we take 1 Peter to be true due to inspiration, why think Genesis is misinterpreted?
1 Peter doesn't have much of anything to say about the creation.  I'm not sure why you're bringing it into the argument? 

Job contains the creation story (chapters 38-42), which was why I mentioned it.  But that isn't an argument for Genesis being misinterpreted.  Job is just an interesting point of reference, since it allows us to compare the two accounts.

Genesis is misinterpreted because we interpret it badly, using Western and modern norms on a text that is neither Western in origin nor modern in its genesis. 

By that same logic we may as well state that much of the NT is misinterpreted, such as the apostles writing about 6 days creation, or even the genealogies they post all the way back to Adam.
By all means, let's take some erroneous logic that you invented out of thin air, and then take it to logical extremes... that seems like a fair way of arguing...

I reckon the flood can than also be misinterpreted even though the NT writers take that to be a real event.

Every NT writer, all considered inspired by God, take the events and people mentioned in Genesis as real straightforward events and people.

Then, if we consider the gospel the NT preaches as a real straightforward true event, should we then not logically also take the apostles inspiration on the creation event as literal?
Mmmm hmmmm...

You know what's interesting?  This is actually what gets taught to Christians in church on this topic.  They tell you - if Genesis isn't 100% literal, then that must mean that the entire rest of the Bible is a fairy tale! 

That isn't actually true.  If Genesis isn't 100% literal, then that means that we must work at understanding each book and chapter and verse for what it says, in context, to determine what is literal and what is not. 

But, gosh, that's a whole lot of work!  Know who isn't willing to put in that much work for the sake of understanding the Bible?  Pretty much everyone, it turns out.  From choir boys to doctors of Theology.

It's much easier to create a simple set of high level rules of interpretation, even though blanket rules of this kind break down and fail when used on individual portions of Scripture.  There's even a couple names for doing this - it's called Systematic Theology, or Hermeneutics.  You can go take a class (or 12) in how to do it.  You too can create your very own paradigm for interpreting the Bible!  Or if you're feeling ambitious, you can divide history into sections, and assign different rules for each part!

The Jews taught a lot of things, and as Jesus showed us...they had it all wrong.
Jesus literally wiped the floor with Jewish theology and interpretation. For the Jews everything written in scripture was exclusively written for Jews and to Jews.
And they studied, and studied, and argued, and studied...and build a complete false theology around all their studies and wisdom.
Then Jesus came...and did away with it all.
Yep, the Pharisees had a very literal interpretation of all this, and Jesus came and smashed it to bits, and reinterpreted it all according to the spirit rather than the letter.  Mmmm hmmm.

General Discussion Forum / Re: Vicky Beeching
« Last post by MeMyself on Yesterday at 11:35:25 AM »
His book are still available at online Christian book stores, and I remember seeing them at our local one too...
I don't remember that he gave blessing to homosexual activities...but I am not a big fan of his anyway and don't follow everything he has said.

I am praying that her music wont be played on Christian radio...the station I listen to, will pull artists if their walk prove them to be fake or false in their claims of being a Christ follower.
General Discussion Forum / Re: Vicky Beeching
« Last post by JohnDB on Yesterday at 11:26:46 AM »
She is unknown except for her recent claim. ..which is the only reason she has 2 minutes of fame.

Other Christians wont touch her music nor will it be given airtime on radio.

Rick Warren lost all due to being accepting of homosexuals active in their perversion.

His books were pulled from all Christian bookstores.
General Discussion Forum / Re: Vicky Beeching
« Last post by chosenone on Yesterday at 11:04:15 AM »
Its creeping in more and more. Of course its not right that God loves the way she is if she is actively living a gay life style. Her as a person yes, but her sinning and actively promoting gay marriage, no.
General Discussion Forum / Re: Vicky Beeching
« Last post by DaveW on Yesterday at 10:38:22 AM »
This thread was the first I heard of her.  But this is not unlike the revelation a couple of decades ago with "For Those Tears I Died" composer Marsha Stevens.   IMO Stevens was much higher profile in CCM than Beeching was.

We survived that and we will survive this as well.


Interestingly both women tried/are trying to make the same gender lifestyle more accepted in mainstream protestant christianity.
Sex in Marriage Discussions and Topics / Re: Eunuchs?
« Last post by MeMyself on Yesterday at 10:08:57 AM »
OK - I went back and read response #6 to refresh my memory and was VERY disturbed by it.

What scripture you posted in #6 was a paraphrase - what someone thinks it is saying using loose terminology. While it may amount to the same thing on one level, it certainly falls apart on other levels.  But that was not what I found upsetting.   Aside from your idea that " ... we can modify His Word" violates Psalm 119:89; the idea that Our Lord taught against the OT is even more troublesome.  If that were true - If HE ever taught contrary to the OT, we are all lost in our sins forever. Galatians says HE was born under the Law and for a Jewish man under the law to teach AGAINST that Law was a sin.  If He ever sinned he invalidated himself from being that perfrect spotless sacrifice; thus making his death meaningless. We are all lost.

Yeah...I very much agree.
Churches of Christ Forum / Re: Female baptizers?
« Last post by Snargles on Yesterday at 09:48:45 AM »
As I see it, if God approved of musical instruments in worship once, which He clearly did, He surely still still does.  ::smile::
The argument people will use to counter your logical reasoning is that God once commanded animal sacrifice, dietary laws and stoning for sins and we don't do that anymore. We also don't meet on the Sabbath and have priests. The CENI people overlook that Jesus replaced the animal sacrifice, Peter had the animals and sheet vision that did away with dietary laws, Sabbath was replaced with the Lords Day (Sunday) and we are all now part of the priesthood. IM and stoning are still viable options.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]