G
geometer
Guest
You need to be honest, you do not have to know everything, god understands.
If you need the truth about something go directly to God.
- Status
If you need the truth about something go directly to God.
G
Ginger2
Guest
I would agree, we should “pray bigger”. All things are possible with God.
But are you suggesting people who aren’t experiencing real miracles don’t know God or are not Christian? What exactly are you saying?
G
geometer
Guest
Well, if you have never experienced a miracle, then how do you know God? Think about it, everything that God does is a miracle.
E
EdOsiecki
Guest
By calling on Jesus name and belief in Him, His blood is applied and atones for sins. That’s something baptism can’t do. Rev 1:5, Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood." ------1John 4:15, “Whoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.” (it doesn’t say also baptism) ------ 1John 4:21,"-----Whoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God;-----".(If one is Born of God doesn’t that mean born again, no baptism is mentioned) Baptism is required to show repentance period.
Which is it? Are we born again by baptism (no Scripture that says so) or by belief in Christ which is quoted above? ED O.
G
geometer
Guest
There is no reason to run everyone around a tree about this kind of thing. What ever you need ask God.
C
Cbailey2
Guest
If everything that God does is a miracle (which I agree with) and God is the creator of all that is seen and unseen, then everyone who has ever taken a breath on this planet has experienced a miracle (which I would also agree with…all life is a miracle). That would mean (by your statement), however, that every human who has ever lived knows God. Is that what you mean to say? All human beings know God?
I’d also go on to say that any Catholic who has experienced the Church has experienced a miracle. The fact that the Holy Spirit has preserved a human-run organization for almost 2000 years is, in and of itself, a miracle, considering all of us are sinners, no government has existed for so long, and most protestant denominations can’t keep theological unity for more than a life-time.
Please return to the former thread topic…I’ve been enjoying reading it.
G
geometer
Guest
Well, I know people who have believed in God because of very small miracles. That is a good thing to believe, that God does exist and has the power to respond.
Jesus however made a call to radical faith, and only through being born again can you know him as your brother and God as your father.
N
Nathan_Wagar
Guest
First off, nobody respond to Ed haha. I’m just playing. Ed seriously. Work yourself out of the Ephesians argument first, then really, really squint your eyes hard and try to “get” what Paul means when he says you are baptized into Christ’s death.
Ginger, to answer your question about responding to Geomoeter, Jesus used similar wording designed to evoke an image from the Old Testament Septuagint. The word there in Greek would exactly match the Greek word that Jesus used, and the only thing that determined which of the two possible meanings the word had was context. Sort of like Jesus’ use of “anothen” in John 3. That is another word that can have two meanings, born again and born from above. Both are correct, so it is wordplay. Jesus does this quite frequently and it is lost through translation, personally I think it’s kind of cool.
Geometer, you called my response wordy to the point of shakespearean, but honestly I was pretty sarcastic and I’m not sure if we are talking about the same post? Your interpretation is exactly what is wrong with “personal experience” opinions. You are not a first century Jew. You never knew a first century Jew. You don’t have friends that knew first century Jews. You don’t think like a first century Jew. You didn’t hang out with, and occasionaly get oppressed by, Roman people with names like “severus sixtus butticus.” That means you don’t know what Jesus probably meant. Personal revelation is great, but if it contradicts the Church, the source was probably that little ziplock of special mushrooms, if not an unfamiliar spirit.
And this is really, the crux of the matter. For a Protestant viewpoint to be correct, you need to not only disprove the Catholic belief and ignore all the early Church testimony, you have to find a good number of people early in Church history (1600’s not being early)that believes the way you do regarding the issue, which in this case is baptism. That’s why the position is usually untenable. This is also why it can be so frustrating debating with Protestants. They miss the bigger picture, and focus on their interpretation.
Their denomination becomes their tradition, and their pastor becomes their Pope. It’s like, c’mon guys, really? God Bless.
Ginger, to answer your question about responding to Geomoeter, Jesus used similar wording designed to evoke an image from the Old Testament Septuagint. The word there in Greek would exactly match the Greek word that Jesus used, and the only thing that determined which of the two possible meanings the word had was context. Sort of like Jesus’ use of “anothen” in John 3. That is another word that can have two meanings, born again and born from above. Both are correct, so it is wordplay. Jesus does this quite frequently and it is lost through translation, personally I think it’s kind of cool.
Geometer, you called my response wordy to the point of shakespearean, but honestly I was pretty sarcastic and I’m not sure if we are talking about the same post? Your interpretation is exactly what is wrong with “personal experience” opinions. You are not a first century Jew. You never knew a first century Jew. You don’t have friends that knew first century Jews. You don’t think like a first century Jew. You didn’t hang out with, and occasionaly get oppressed by, Roman people with names like “severus sixtus butticus.” That means you don’t know what Jesus probably meant. Personal revelation is great, but if it contradicts the Church, the source was probably that little ziplock of special mushrooms, if not an unfamiliar spirit.
And this is really, the crux of the matter. For a Protestant viewpoint to be correct, you need to not only disprove the Catholic belief and ignore all the early Church testimony, you have to find a good number of people early in Church history (1600’s not being early)that believes the way you do regarding the issue, which in this case is baptism. That’s why the position is usually untenable. This is also why it can be so frustrating debating with Protestants. They miss the bigger picture, and focus on their interpretation.
Their denomination becomes their tradition, and their pastor becomes their Pope. It’s like, c’mon guys, really? God Bless.
G
geometer
Guest
I know God today. I do not have to become a history scholar, our God is the God of the living.
I do not look to find a pope. In this life it is wise to recognize the value of your own experiences, this is all you have really. Jesus came so that we might have the best experiences, abundant life.
Paul was a very troubled person, and very influential, but I see no reason to take his advice on anything. James had the right idea, ask God…
C
crazzeto
Guest
that’s not a yes or no, do you need to know what is actually true in order to know you’re on the right path to getting saved. yes or no.
G
geometer
Guest
Well, you have to know what you mean when you say that you want to be saved, and then ask God for that. You will find that there are many salvations that God has done. Read the scripture old and new testament about the many salvations of God. The jews call them the yeshuot of god.
C
crazzeto
Guest
Assume for a minute, that you are the only christian who has ever been “assumed into heaven for a period of time and then later put back on earth”. How does one come to the conclusion as to what is true? With out theology? With out a teaching organization? Assume for a minute that Christ never said people would be assumed into heaven, and be asked by god face to face whether or not you believe in him? Assume for a second that such a thing might defeat the purpose of faith because it would make saying “no” rather difficult.
G
geometer
Guest
There are scriptures in the old testament in which we are commanded to know God through our senses. All of Israel heard God speak the words of the decalogue. If you have faith that this did happen, then jews believe that your soul was present before God when he spoke, and you have good reason to convert.
We are called to know God, but you must trust that he is with you and will respond.
This is faith, that you ask him without doubting. Think of the love that you have for God when you speak to him, he will hear you.
C
Cbailey2
Guest
I encourage you to look at the field of cultural anthropology because, where God does not change, we do. This idea that all you have to do is look to your life experiences and your interpretation of the Bible was not a common view before the Enlightenment and the rise of individualism. You are applying a cultural lens - a way of thinking - that did not exist in the time of Christ and applying it to the Bible (eisegesis, not exegesis).
Again, I apologize for this conversation being entirely off thread topic, and I’m not sure why I’m bothering to respond, considering your system for interpreting the Bible is entirely a closed one (and hinges on your own judgment): anyone who agrees with you has faith and anyone who doesn’t, must not have faith.
As for our conversation on miracles, you are confusing your definition of miracles: on one hand, miracles are anything that God does (I agree on this point); on the other, they must be of sufficient scale/scope or out of the ordinary in order to be truly miraculous? Which is it? Or are some of the works of God’s hands not (by your second definition) miraculous?
E
EdOsiecki
Guest
Wiggle out of what arguments?
Give me the verse that you speak of and I’ll respond accordingly. ED O.
G
geometer
Guest
I know God through my own experiences. I have never needed to search though any books to find God, I was ten years old when I was born the second time, and had never read any bible. God was there the bible wasn’t. Books won’t save you…
C
crazzeto
Guest
Ok, the last time God walked among us in the manner you describe whas when Christ was alive. We do know God, through the Sacraments. You’re just busy doing a song and dance to try and get around this point. I suspect it has more to do with the fact that you “don’t like theology” and I’m guessing by extension the idea of an authoritative church than anything written in scripture.
I’m sorry if that seems direct, but it’s just sitting out there and needs to be commented on. If we read scripture with a premise already in mind then I think one can say that we are not so much “reading” scripture as we are “reading into” scripture.
G
Ginger2
Guest
I have experienced several miracles. It’s very exciting and makes your heart praise God.
I asked because I have encountered people who are very into “huge miracles” thinking this proves they are following God. But I think this can be a dangerous mindset.
Some of these people are so busy convincing themselves of miracles that are not there, they fail to see the real miracles God is working right in front of them.
Not everything God does has to be bigger than life. God can do amazing things through seemingly very small works.
There is a Bible verse that says something like, “what good is it to gain the whole world and lose your soul?”
Ginger
G
geometer
Guest
What if you could forget your books, and live in a place without books? Would you then seek God?
G
geometer
Guest
Well, Jesus had said that a small amount of faith can bring about a great miracle, but he has called to those who would know him to a miracle which requires great faith.
You must move God to move you.
Go with god…
- Status