Questions on the bible

[ACubed]

Hello all, back again as have had some thoughts on my mind lately , would love any thoughts on this.

If God is omnipotent why would he need to ask people things (Adam for example) or test people's faith?

If he does love us, again why test the faith?

This leads on to: if the bible is the true word of God, why would he go out of his way to get things wrong - for example saying that there are two lights on the sky which go around the earth. Surely god could have told us the earth goes round the sun. It's like he's going out of his way to convince people the things written are not true.

Does anyone's know Of any creation stories which say the earth is round and orbits the sun?

...people who have been sexually abused as children often go on to abuse...

No they don't OP.

Sorry I didn't phrase that well - I meant most of the people who abuse children have been abused themselves. That's my mistake, I'm really sorry.

But I can't see any positives from being abused, which is what we were discussing- i.e. I wouldn't call it character building

I was abused as a child and I have no idea what good could come out of it. I was bullied at school by a christian, funnily enough, and I can see some good that came out of that. I was divorced as an adult and I have no idea what good could come out of it. I was diagnosed with a horrendous illness that changed my life forever, and I can see how good could come of that, just a little, already.

CS Lewis said the testing of my faith isn't to prove anything to God because he knows already. But it's to prove it to me because I didn't know. I can see a bit of how that might be true. It comes back to trials developing character, perseverance and hope. They shape and mould us, they refine us as gold in the furnace becoming more pure through the process.

Sometimes we see it and sometimes we don't. In the times that we don't, faith in God knowing what he's doing and in his purpose and his plan, holds us. That's what faith is all about.

Its the passage which I grew up hearing being used to teach that faith without proof was superior to needing evidence.

Then I wish you'd had a better teacher, Errol. God says to test the spirits (meaning what's taught), and to diligently learn so you can give as answer to the hope within you. Not blindly follow anything man says at the pulpit.

Now before you get the wrong end of the stick, I do believe God can use people at the pulpit to deliver his message. But I never accept anything preached without first going home and testing whether it stacks up against the God of the bible, or whether it's man-made religion and therefore only fit for the bin.

When I say 'mainstream christianity' I refer to the Christianity that follows the God of the bible and not man-made extras twisting the word of God. From that viewpoint, Catholicism does not follow the bible fully because it adds it's own bits and twists others, making it not 'mainstream' in the biblical sense.

https://carm.org/is-catholicism-christian

So presumably there is no church or denomination you follow, fresh? You're a "loan believer" - to coin a phrase.

How/when did you feel you knew god existed? I'm so keen to hear!

For me it was when I began to look into the bible for myself. I had heard an awful lot about the book but never really read anything other than the Christmas story at school, or psalm 23 which I found strangely comforting when life was really hard as a kid.

It started with realising one thing I thought the bible said wasn't true: the bible didn't say you have to be good enough to qualify for heaven. In fact, it said there is nothing you can do to earn your way to heaven. It is a free gift. And like any free gift there comes a choice. Do you reach your hand out and take the gift, or do you turn your back and refuse?

I didn't want to accept any free gift if it wasn't based on the truth though, as I didn't want to waste my time. Or my life, thank you very much! But I was intrigued about what was offered and so looked into it further. I saw that the free gift was total and utter acceptance from a Holy and powerful God. A God that by all rights should be rejecting me, not the other way around! But yet he wasn't. He was doing the opposite, and reaching out to me in love.

The next step was to decide whether I could possibly believe this is who God really is. But it's like calling for a doctor. When the doctor arrives you see his ID, and know he's responded to your phone call, but you also know he could just be pretending. Maybe a neighbour heard your phone call and decided to masquerade as the doctor so they could break in and get your money.

So at that moment you have a choice. You either take the risk that he is the doctor and let him in to treat you, or you slam the door shut and yell "I don't believe you're the doctor, send me the REAL one!"

I then looked further into the ID claims that God makes in the bible. I read some of the many prophesies and found to my astonishment they were found to be true. I read how the historical and archeological claims were accurate. This book was starting to look pretty reliable to me. I then checked out some atheist websites where they cut and paste biblical inaccuracies. They sounded pretty convinced but it didn't take long to see they'd twisted the context quite badly. This also supported the truth and reliability of the bible.

I then saw how John 3:16 says "for God so loved the world that he gave his only son, so whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." I saw how it doesn't say 'whoever goes to church' or 'whoever loves a good life' or 'whoever is christened/confirmed/baptised' it was 'whoever believes'. I looked up the word 'believe' and saw it described words like; to trust in and rely upon with full assurance. I realised we all believe something, as in, we all trust in and rely upon something. If not God then a false god or a person (usually yourself). I've always been pretty realistic about humanity and myself, and whilst seeing my value, I also see my inadequacies (all those new year resolutions over the years!). I understand it can be uncomfortable to be that honest with yourself though, and some find it harder than others! It felt like I was standing at the top of a cliff and an exciting but scary prospect at the idea of trusting in God, I can see why it's called a leap of faith sometimes!

Fresh, I have not been baptised as a Roman Catholic, (baptised C of E) and most usually describe my religious faith just as Christian, without reference to denomination. However I do think you might want to think over your views on the Catholic Church a little. They come over as very dispassionate.

On my previous post, regarding how to interpret Bible passages, I said how I think it is worth keeping Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 13 in mind and I think this is also true when you consider denominations other than your own. Remember there is a particular culture and tradition present in just about any church, since we are all people.

Many people find God from within the Catholic Church and do not forget the Catholic Church was established right from the very first followers of Christ. No matter how many corruptions have occurred within it (and ther churches) we can't forget it is part of Christian heritage.

I think, as a Christian, it is important not to alienate anyone from the faith but rather encourage them to draw closer to Christ.

Does the bible define 'mainstream Christianity'? can you be sure that the bible you're so dependent on doesn't itself contain 'man-made extras'? Different versions - even leaving aside the question of which books are in the canon - have differences which can make a significant theological difference.

The main question for me has always been 'Why are we(or the universe) here?' If someone answers that with "because a god created us" I would just think "why is god here?". It doesn't answer anything for me, though I know this is a question that cannot really be answered.

Are you creative at all, OP? Artistic perhaps? A keen gardener or musician? Do you do anything that gives you satisfaction as you stand back and survey your handiwork?

If you do, then you will probably more easily understand how God, the ultimate source of creativity, got genuine pleasure from creating the world and us. This doesn't mean we're toys made in a whim, but rather thoughtfully and considerately, God made the world and all of us in his own image. And he has a deep love for us.

Perhaps the best picture of this is being a parent. You 'create' that little being, and you perhaps can sometimes see yourself in them and more importantly you love them fiercely. They bring you pleasure, as well as pain, but you still love them all the same. It's not the full picture but perhaps a glimpse of our relationship with God.

Our purpose is to come to know him, and be more like him, and to bring him honour and praise because he is worthy of our praise. Unless you've embarked on that journey it's probably like trying to motivate a couch potato to see how great running is. They're just not going to see it until they do it! Then they'll be hooked.

Disclaimer: Probably a bad example as I am neither couch potato nor a runner.

The website you are quoting fresh is a very conservative Protestant one. Mainstream Christianity is usually defined as those denominations that are able to subscribe to the Nicene creed. That includes the vast majority of the nonconformist churches, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Pentecostals and with a small clause amendment, the Orthadox. It does not include the JW. It includes some but not all Quakers. Some conservative Christians want to define who is and who isn't a Christian more tightly than this and it usually involves a view on the Bible and atonement. So mainstream becomes them and everyone else is a heretic or apostate as I was once called to my face. Which denomination are you fresh.

Rockpebblestone

I think, as a Christian, it is important not to alienate anyone from the faith but rather encourage them to draw closer to Christ.

Of course I agree. However the bible says if you add anything to the gospel you nullify it, meaning you render it meaningless. If the Catholic Church add works to the gospel of grace then they make it null and void. Pointless. If you're going to do that then you may as well follow anything you like, make your own religion up if you have to, because it won't be any different!

If the Catholic Church follow the bible the great, if they don't then they've become man-made religion. That goes for any church, not just the Catholic Church.

"I then looked further into the ID claims that God makes in the bible. I read some of the many prophesies and found to my astonishment they were found to be true. I read how the historical and archeological claims were accurate. This book was starting to look pretty reliable to me. I then checked out some atheist websites where they cut and paste biblical inaccuracies. They sounded pretty convinced but it didn't take long to see they'd twisted the context quite badly. This also supported the truth and reliability of the bible."

Can I ask-are you a historian? An archeologist? A linguist? If not, how can you be sure that the historical and achaeological claims in the Bible are accurate?

Fresh, hence, in my earlier post I said balance is needed. And remember no church is immune to this issue (of twisting the Christ's message), that is, this is not just an issue for the Catholic Church but for all Christian believers. I believe people should grow as Christians, do not condemn anyone ahead of time.

Fresh sorry, slightly cross post. I see you acknowledge the issue is important for all churches - so, please, do not single out just the Catholic Church, in that case.

With respect, Fresh, although you haven't gone into much detail, it looks very much as though you've created a straw man picture of the Catholic Church. I can, in charity, only put this down to the fact that you don't know what the Catholic Church actually teaches and are representing a misrepresentation which you have picked up without checking the original sources.

What do you think the Catholic teaching 'add[ing] works to the gospel of grace' actually is? If you believe that 'follow[ing] the [B]ible' is the first principle of being a Christian then why are your own statements on justification based solely on a particular interpretation of a Pauline theme and not on the Bible as a whole?

You can answer these questions, or not, as you want. To yourself or on the thread, it's up to you. I don't want to detract from the genuine questions coming up from the OP and others. And if you don't want to consider it then fine, but in that case I think it might be better to stick to commenting on your own church's theology and your experience of God, in which I presume you have a good grounding, rather than commenting inaccurately on another church's theology which you do not appear to have actually studied.

If you believe that 'follow[ing] the [B]ible' is the first principle of being a Christian then why are your own statements on justification based solely on a particular interpretation of a Pauline theme and not on the Bible as a whole

It is based on the bible as a whole. Genesis 15:6 says "Adam believed the lord and it was credited to him as righteousness"
This is the same credited righteousness we see described in the New Testament (Romans 5:4).

The OT believers trusted God would send the messiah promised to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3:15, and the NT believers trusted God had send the messiah, Jesus. Both were believing in him. They put their trust in Gods word.

Fresh, what church do you belong to?

I can, in charity, only put this down to the fact that you don't know what the Catholic Church actually teaches and are representing a misrepresentation which you have picked up without checking the original sources.

I know quite a few Catholics and hear what they tell me. I also have read their websites and see that mostly they believe baby baptism saves, that good works earn you a place in heaven, that penance is necessary for salvation, that Mary is to be prayed to, and so on. Surely you don't deny all of this?

http://www.aboutcatholics.comm*

http://www.catholicity.com/catechism/motherofthe_church.htmll*

Does the bible define 'mainstream Christianity'? can you be sure that the bible you're so dependent on doesn't itself contain 'man-made extras'? Different versions - even leaving aside the question of which books are in the canon - have differences which can make a significant theological difference.

The slight differences in versions are the difference between saying "my house is on top of the hill" and saying "at the top of a hill you will find the home I live in" - it means the same even though the words are rearranged slightly.

When you look into completely different bibles like Mormon bible, you will see clearly that they've added to the original text, which Revelations (the last book) warns against doing. That then becomes entirely false.

Both Bertrand and I have asked you fresh which denomination you belong to.

Is there a problem with answering?

But a single change of one word makes a huge difference-as in the case of the text from John we were talking about earlier.

Fresh, in your version Jesus says to Thomas "blessed as those who do not see yet still believe", whereas in most versions of the Bible, he says "blessed are those who do not see yet still believe"

The difference in meaning is significant.

ACubed, I know other people have said it, but just to reiterate that Fresh's Christianity is not the only one. And many of the questions you have would be shared by other Christians (myself included). Which is why lots of us don't think the same way.

For a start the bible isn't a single book. It means library, and is a collection of writings written over a long period. Even within books of the bible there can be more than one author, writing at different times. I view it as a record of human interaction with God, written from their perspective, which is bound to be influenced by the times they are writing in.

So you can't read these stories without taking into account the context. e.g. you shouldn't look at Noah and the flood without also looking at other flood myths such as Gilgamesh.

And you shouldn't look at Gilgamesh without seeing the other side to that http://creation.mobi/article/40755*

By the way, it's not 'freshs' Christianity, it's the BIBLE's Christianity that fresh chooses to follow. Big difference.

And while we're on differences, I wrote that verse out by hand rather than cut and paste, and it should read blessed are those who have not see but still believe. However you can't extrapolate that to Jesus condemning Thomas because he was kind, he gave him what he wanted (evidence) and like the OP rightly pointed out, said "peace be to you".