Bible Questions?

Why not? Would this not be the very nature of deception?
And do you not think that all of these other religions and worldviews that OWB has so casually dismissed do not offer their own advice on how to avoid the pitfalls and trappings of illusion and evil?

 

Don't you see the circular logic behind that?
And besides, how does that discredit other religions? Don't you think that they form their faith on the same basis that you do - "because God says so"?

 

Oh it wasn't so casual.

 

Although, yes, "because God says so" is one reason to believe it to be so, there are many other reasons to believe the Bible is the word of God. The main reason I have, in this case, used only this reason is because rudenoodle said I would and I just went along with the "joke".

Probably the best way to prove the Bible is the word of God is that the Bible is a book of prophecy.

 

Even if this is true (and I'm not saying that it isn't) why would the foretellings of a handful of prophets from a specific region discount the teachings of every other religion in the entire world? That's like saying a fisherman is no good at his trade, because the tailor down the street makes good shoes.

Do you believe that prophets need God's grace in order to make prophecies?
I do. Or that they need to be in touch with Spirit.
But then, to put two and two together, that would mean that no other people or cultures in the history of the world have ever accurately foretold something other than the writers of the Bible. Seems to be a bit of a stretch.

 

neodude why dont you read the bible? find the answers yourself??

 

I've read the parts that matter. I think the Bible is a powerful spiritual tool, when understood properly.
My contention with OWB is not that the Bible is irrelevant, but that the Bible does not present a monopoly on spiritual truth, that is to say, that all worldviews and cultures have some level of legitimacy.

 

I have to disagree on the last part. I think this is a tool satan uses in sayin that we all pray to the same god and all religions need to the same thing.....its what Oprah and her new movement is teaching which is false.

have you seen that vid?

 

No, and I'm not really interested in seeing it, because an integrated universal worldview definitely did not start with Oprah. You think this is a tool Satan uses, but what I think is that people deny these other worldviews and cultures out of fear. They fear them because they threaten their own worldview, because they are different. And history has shown us, time and time again, that our differences is what makes us shine, to shun them is what has harmed humanity again and again throughout it's history.
Fear is the destroyer of the mind, and to act out of fear or to let fear motivate you to do something/not do something is a huge mistake.

 

oprahs......the only way.

 

This sounds like it could have come from the mouth of Jack Chick.

If I may modify what you wrote Moses:

"satan is probably the most "religious" person unknow to men."

 

LOL naw its not from jack but its stated

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

this goes to the Pope,Benny Himm and Joel Olsteen.

also Matthew 23 1-3.

seems like the people i stated above sound like these pharisees JC talks about.

 

Hmm, well, no.

The Pharisees were those who said that if you didn't adhere to a very strict letter of the Law and their strict interpretation of the Law, then were not worshiping correctly. The most common critique of these guys (well, at least the Pope and Osteen) is that they are so inclusive that they are what the Pharisees claimed Jesus was doing.

I think Osteen is giving the people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. Everyone knows my opinions about the Pope.

 

Pope is the same thing even worst world leaders seek for his approve like his Jesus or something.

 

Can you give examples?

John Paul II helped bring down the tyranny of communism in Poland. I'd say that's a pretty good thing.

 

In his role as the architect of Catholic dogma, John Paul II adamantly rejected any movement on several key social issues of the day, rejecting changes in social climate in favor of the church's traditional positions on abortion (against it), the pill (against it), homosexuality (agin' it), condom usage (ain't gonna happen), divorce (nope, but please we don't talk about the soaring number of annulments), pornography (ain't havin' none of it), stem cell research (fugheddaboutit), women as priests (yeah, right) and the marriage of priests (no way no how).


With that said I have to admit, the guy had a great hat.

 

.

 

You don't see that as sexist?

 

One can only wonder how that tradition got started.

 

If we work under the assumption that the Gospels reveal a spiritual truth, then Christ's ordination of 12 men (one leaving and then the council of the eleven under the influence of the Holy Spirit voting a new apostle) would the the basis for this theological impossibility (i.e the ordination of women).