Dunno, david. I was raised Southern Baptist and never heard of a "free will" offering. My parents were not allowed to continue teaching Sunday School because they refused to commit 10% of their income to the church. Nevermind that they gave in so many other ways and to so many other causes.
Free will offering's in TWI weren't really that either. They were expected.....kind of like the outcome suffered by Adam and Eve.
Not a poor joke, David. Just a poor audience. I apologize.
Ya know, that's funny because when I started attending a Methodist church, my grandmother used that as a difference between the two. Not that she was discouraging me, but just talking about the difference. Turns out she was actually raised in the "country" church growing up which wasn't really denominational....it was merely the only church in her hometown growing up. She became Baptist when she married my grandfather. My great uncle, Paw Paw's brother, is an ordained Baptist minister.
Funniest, is I never knew we believed in predestination. :)
I"m still looking for the article. I know I posted it here before, a year or two ago - but I haven't found it yet.
But if I recall correctly, it had something to do with the yearning for greater knowledge, which God built into us. The idea was that prior to eating of the "tree of knowledge" we were much like the rest of the animals, operating by and large on instinct. Likewise, we did not know of duality "good" and "evil". That isn't to say it didn't exist yet, because it did at least in the spirit realm - we simply didn't know of it.
The article went on to say that where it says that God commanded Adam and Eve not to eat - another way to translate that is to read it as God "warned them". In other words - it was their choice, but God wanted them to understand that once they ate of it, a change would take place that could not be undone. That change would include a greater knowledge, an understanding of duality, but would also include the eventual death of our earthly bodies.
There's more too it and I will keep looking for it.
There is a theory within Judaism, I will explain it as best I can, but please bear with me.
You have to start with the idea that the first few chapters of Genesis are figurative, not literal. There was no literal "tree of life" or "tree of good and evil".
When God told Adam not to eat of the tree of good and evil, it was not so much a command as a "warning", or perhaps better yet an "explanation". Eating of the "tree" had to do with a choice regarding an action. If you eat of the tree, these things are going to occur. .
a) you will have a higher level of knowledge/thinking
b) you will eventually die, or perhaps simply have an awareness of the fact that eventually you will die.
It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences.
In this way, we all now have the ability to think, we all have a greater sense of self awareness, and we all have free will choice as opposed to basic instincts.
Many Jews do not believe in the concept of original sin and almost none believe we are all born sinners.
Yeah, Clay, thanks. I will also keep searching for the original article where I got that from, which I am fairly certain is somewhere on the Chabad.org website.
Another "version" from the Midrash is that God did intend for Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit, but not until the Sabbath. In other words - the "tree" wasn't there simply to "tempt" them, there was a purpose. But they ate before the proper time.
That is one of the things I love about Judaism - there are tons and tons of arguments regarding what particular verses mean. It is the job of the individual to study and consider and decide for themselves. While you may find within a few temples, those who would force their interpretation down someone else's throat, the overall idea and tradition is to "debate". In doing so, we are given greater insights.
Just searching through the articles on Chabbad.org you can find a variety of "translations", "interpretations", "ethical considerations", and insights into what took place in the Garden of Eden. Some of the are cohesive with one another and others contradict each other. But I get to choose what to believe, free of outside pressure from others.
"I think free will was exactly what God was counting on"
CM, do you care to clarify? because all i get from that statement is exactly what belle was talking about--a set up. God was counting on them to sin, so he could put his jesus plan into action? so then the garden wasn't perfect, wasn't God's ultimate plan. and it really was all an elaborate sting operation (as dmiller so aptly put it)!
my problem with all of this is that it's just so silly. the only reason ANYONE believes it is because they WANT to. it certainly isn't because it's rational or logical. i'm sorry, but it's true. it's funny, i think it was in the way that i first heard the saying "people don't think; they just think they think." and it was the truth, especially in christianity. i wrote about this somewhere in one of my first posts here. the only way i could ever come around to the way's way was to CONSCIOUSLY shut off part of my brain. the part where honest, critical thinking is done. i remember the decision. i remember reading I Corinthians 2:14 in one of the pfal books and telling myself "you can't know this stuff with your mind." and then CLICK, off it went. of course, over the years, i had to RE-shut it, over and over again, as things came up. so it wasn't until i left in 1987 that i was able to truly examine all the things i'd stuck in the "DO NOT THINK ABOUT" closet. one by one, until i was finally faced with the BIG ONE, basically the question i posed as the subject of this thread. and once i gave up making excuses for the real big problems and massive holes in the story, and was willing to challenge even the most sacred cows, the answer was pretty obvious. but religion doesn't typically allow for that "nothing's sacred" kind of thinking. in fact, it discourages it. it has to.
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith; as it is written , THE JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
Do you think Adam and Eve were better off eating of the tree or not eating of the tree? And then as a whole everyone after them, every person.
And would you consider that free will is not exactly what was in play in the garden? I mean who put the tree there anyway? And didn't it bring life through death?
I think it's worded fine and is waiting to be unlocked like a door to greater understanding.
22And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: 23Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
Who has the courage to go for that Flaming Sword?
It's STILL HERE! Who is willing to take on the Flames?
14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth
bliss, i'm glad you finally replied. well, sort of replied. i'm sorry, but from where i stand, it feels like you're unwilling to really engage in the discussion. one of those "don't go there" kind of things. i could never understand why we were always so afraid of challenges to our belief system--if it really was GOD'S TRUTH, surely it could stand up to examination. but somehow we were always terrified it'd be overcome by "evil." and that NEVER made any sense to me. i'm sorry, bliss, but your response makes me think that your bliss might be proof of the old adage.
and CM, please don't answer my question with a question. i'd appreciate it if you'd respond to me without trying to manipulate the conversation. but to answer your question, i think the first few chapters of genesis are a wonderful study in human nature. but i don't think any of it happened. and if it did, i want nothing to do with that sneaky, tricky god.
CM, i know nothing about you. but you're giving me good reason to think you're not interested in communication at all. maybe you don't realize it, but you're coming off as a complete weasel.
if you really want to communicate your thoughts to me, take the time to construct a reasoned explanation. don't just throw off a line you think sounds clever or wise or cryptic, or drop a couple of verses you think are revelant, without any explanation. as it stand right now, you're not giving me any reason to consider a word you say. is that your intent? or are you truly interested in communicating? if you are, then do so. if not, why not just keep your mouth shut?
If you would take the time to read the responses from more then just me you would see some things. But it seems you can't, so instead of keeping my mouth shut I'll open it to someone else.
Bull, you just want it your way and not explore anything. You have one purpose and that it seems is to discredit and put down what you think the bible says.
Yes ditch what you have been taught and start over with a fresh clean look at some things.
I answered the question in my first post of why "I think" we need Jesus. If you don't like my answer, sorry, there is nothing I can do about that. Seems you don't want to learn or know what others think, you just want to debate back and forth. To me, I don't engage in that kind of useless banter. I know what I believe, and that is the end of it. Just like you have a right to believe what you want. So I stated my opinion, and that is all I have to say.
Why does that bother you so? I believe God, his word and His Son, period. Just because you don't, doesn't make me right and you wrong. I have considered "other" things, questions, etc..........
They left me feeling empty and lost.
I love my life, and my beliefs. They bring me peace, joy, comfort and hope.
I don't believe that God would ''trick'' anyone and I am sorry you are so bitter.
I enjoy, "digging'' , research, and exchanging thoughts as CM and Sirguess do here. I may not always agree, but it is food for thought.
For some reason, it seems you are not interested in scripture at all, you just want to wipe your butt with it.
CM, i guess it's just me. i just don't understand you.
Bliss, i am interested in what others think, that's why i started this. but that doesn't mean i'm just going to agree. i thought what you and sunesis originally wrote was very interesting, and i gave it some thought. after giving it a day or so, i responded honestly. and expected a response. if that's what you mean by "debate back and forth," then yes, that's what i want. what's wrong with that? would it only meet with your approval if i just listened and agreed? otherwise, it's "useless banter?" i'm sorry, i can't agree with that.
i can see that it's very difficult to really communicate across the gulf between our two positions. perhaps you, like CM, think you're communicating by quoting scripture verses. but it doesn't communicate to me. i see what you're trying to say, but it doesn't reach me. know what i mean? and while i think i'm being quite clear, you see things that i don't mean at all. for example, you think i'm bitter. but i'm not bitter at all. because i don't believe that God did any of those things. i believe that God is loving and forgiving, and would never set us up for failure. that doesn't mean i want to wipe my butt with scripture, just that i don't want to wash my brain with it.
i could never understand why we were always so afraid of challenges to our belief system--if it really was GOD'S TRUTH, surely it could stand up to examination. but somehow we were always terrified it'd be overcome by "evil." and that NEVER made any sense to me.
Sprawled Out, I may be misunderstanding you - and just wanted to elaborate on what I said earlier about using critical thinking. The "gatekeeper" if you will on a belief system is the individual that holds that belief system. I know I'm stating the obvious - but what I'm getting at is that as we examine ideas, evidence, etc. to figure out if we're going to accept them or not - we have to establish criteria by which to judge them. The criteria we choose usually because of some valid reason or reasons [that's why I referenced Gardner's 7 factors involved in changing minds]...
I am a Christian and believe the Bible is God's truth. I may be totally wrong because that is a viewpoint that came from the basic "kernel" of my belief system. I was raised in a Christian home [so don't know what came first the chicken or the egg LOL on belief in God stuff]. But what has been the impetus for my conviction that there is a God has always been [as far back as I can remember] the belief that there is an Intelligent Designer behind this created order. Again, tracking the "evolution" of my belief system - I ASSUMED [again I may be wrong] this Intelligent Designer had the Bible written...
That being said - I would also like to add my faith has come a long way since I was a kid - and especially since I left TWI. I guess everyone's route to Christianity is different - that's just my story. I just wanted to point out what I thought was a "flaw" in your above premise. My personal belief is that our intellect like everything else we've inherited from Adam and Eve is corrupt and so from the get-go we're at a disadvantage in determining truth. I do believe God appeals to our intellects - both before and after we become a Christian. And I base that on not only personal study but personal experience - also - promised by Jesus Christ in John 7:17 [where he said if anyone would obey the truth they would know it's from God] and I John 2:27 speaking of the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
I personally don't have a problem intellectually with anything in the Bible - I may not understand certain things or subjects but continue to look into them. The subject of original sin, inherited sin, our sin nature, God's forgiveness, etc. - all the stuff you mentioned in your initial post - are things I've wondered about, checked out, studied - but I didn't think I should debate anyone on whether or not those things are so. Perhaps I'm wrong - but I thought it would be logical if you first determined a reference point - like: Is there a God, Is the Bible true, etc.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
8
15
6
15
Popular Days
May 8
30
May 6
9
May 5
8
May 7
8
Top Posters In This Topic
Belle 8 posts
CM 15 posts
bliss 6 posts
sprawled out 15 posts
Popular Days
May 8 2006
30 posts
May 6 2006
9 posts
May 5 2006
8 posts
May 7 2006
8 posts
dmiller
Can a Baptist give a *free-will* offering?? ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
makes me wonder if adam and eve were like two halves of a single seed that was planted in the earth
...the inside and outside of the seed, perhaps
in a sense, adam and eve did not have free will until after they first died once
but in their spiritual death they were quickened
though this conflicts directly with pfal's version of the garden, and vpws' own fear of death
...it is said that one must be a good jew before one can be a good christian
...which means to better understand the jewish versions of the story
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Dunno, david. I was raised Southern Baptist and never heard of a "free will" offering. My parents were not allowed to continue teaching Sunday School because they refused to commit 10% of their income to the church. Nevermind that they gave in so many other ways and to so many other causes.
Free will offering's in TWI weren't really that either. They were expected.....kind of like the outcome suffered by Adam and Eve.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Belle --- it was a joke.
(A poor one, I admit -- but a lame attempt at humor).
The Baptist's I know, believe in pre-destination.
Sooo ---- if they believe in pre-destination, how could it be a free-will offering? ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Ya know, that's funny because when I started attending a Methodist church, my grandmother used that as a difference between the two. Not that she was discouraging me, but just talking about the difference. Turns out she was actually raised in the "country" church growing up which wasn't really denominational....it was merely the only church in her hometown growing up. She became Baptist when she married my grandfather. My great uncle, Paw Paw's brother, is an ordained Baptist minister.
Funniest, is I never knew we believed in predestination. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I"m still looking for the article. I know I posted it here before, a year or two ago - but I haven't found it yet.
But if I recall correctly, it had something to do with the yearning for greater knowledge, which God built into us. The idea was that prior to eating of the "tree of knowledge" we were much like the rest of the animals, operating by and large on instinct. Likewise, we did not know of duality "good" and "evil". That isn't to say it didn't exist yet, because it did at least in the spirit realm - we simply didn't know of it.
The article went on to say that where it says that God commanded Adam and Eve not to eat - another way to translate that is to read it as God "warned them". In other words - it was their choice, but God wanted them to understand that once they ate of it, a change would take place that could not be undone. That change would include a greater knowledge, an understanding of duality, but would also include the eventual death of our earthly bodies.
There's more too it and I will keep looking for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
here it is Abi-
quote:
Originally posted by Abigail:
There is a theory within Judaism, I will explain it as best I can, but please bear with me.
You have to start with the idea that the first few chapters of Genesis are figurative, not literal. There was no literal "tree of life" or "tree of good and evil".
When God told Adam not to eat of the tree of good and evil, it was not so much a command as a "warning", or perhaps better yet an "explanation". Eating of the "tree" had to do with a choice regarding an action. If you eat of the tree, these things are going to occur. .
a) you will have a higher level of knowledge/thinking
b) you will eventually die, or perhaps simply have an awareness of the fact that eventually you will die.
It was sort of an evolutionary step forward which made humans able to think on levels far above what your typical animal can do (beyond basic instinct, etc.) But man had to make the free will choice to take this step forward with full understanding of the benefits and consequences.
In this way, we all now have the ability to think, we all have a greater sense of self awareness, and we all have free will choice as opposed to basic instincts.
Many Jews do not believe in the concept of original sin and almost none believe we are all born sinners.
http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...76entry158876
is that it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Yeah, Clay, thanks. I will also keep searching for the original article where I got that from, which I am fairly certain is somewhere on the Chabad.org website.
Another "version" from the Midrash is that God did intend for Adam and Eve to eat of the fruit, but not until the Sabbath. In other words - the "tree" wasn't there simply to "tempt" them, there was a purpose. But they ate before the proper time.
That is one of the things I love about Judaism - there are tons and tons of arguments regarding what particular verses mean. It is the job of the individual to study and consider and decide for themselves. While you may find within a few temples, those who would force their interpretation down someone else's throat, the overall idea and tradition is to "debate". In doing so, we are given greater insights.
Just searching through the articles on Chabbad.org you can find a variety of "translations", "interpretations", "ethical considerations", and insights into what took place in the Garden of Eden. Some of the are cohesive with one another and others contradict each other. But I get to choose what to believe, free of outside pressure from others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
"I think free will was exactly what God was counting on"
CM, do you care to clarify? because all i get from that statement is exactly what belle was talking about--a set up. God was counting on them to sin, so he could put his jesus plan into action? so then the garden wasn't perfect, wasn't God's ultimate plan. and it really was all an elaborate sting operation (as dmiller so aptly put it)!
my problem with all of this is that it's just so silly. the only reason ANYONE believes it is because they WANT to. it certainly isn't because it's rational or logical. i'm sorry, but it's true. it's funny, i think it was in the way that i first heard the saying "people don't think; they just think they think." and it was the truth, especially in christianity. i wrote about this somewhere in one of my first posts here. the only way i could ever come around to the way's way was to CONSCIOUSLY shut off part of my brain. the part where honest, critical thinking is done. i remember the decision. i remember reading I Corinthians 2:14 in one of the pfal books and telling myself "you can't know this stuff with your mind." and then CLICK, off it went. of course, over the years, i had to RE-shut it, over and over again, as things came up. so it wasn't until i left in 1987 that i was able to truly examine all the things i'd stuck in the "DO NOT THINK ABOUT" closet. one by one, until i was finally faced with the BIG ONE, basically the question i posed as the subject of this thread. and once i gave up making excuses for the real big problems and massive holes in the story, and was willing to challenge even the most sacred cows, the answer was pretty obvious. but religion doesn't typically allow for that "nothing's sacred" kind of thinking. in fact, it discourages it. it has to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith; as it is written , THE JUST SHALL LIVE BY FAITH."
Romans 1:16-17
That is my story, and "I" am sticking to it.
peace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
sprawled out,
Do you think Adam and Eve were better off eating of the tree or not eating of the tree? And then as a whole everyone after them, every person.
And would you consider that free will is not exactly what was in play in the garden? I mean who put the tree there anyway? And didn't it bring life through death?
I think it's worded fine and is waiting to be unlocked like a door to greater understanding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
It's STILL HERE! Who is willing to take on the Flames?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
And don't forget about the Cherubims
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
bliss, i'm glad you finally replied. well, sort of replied. i'm sorry, but from where i stand, it feels like you're unwilling to really engage in the discussion. one of those "don't go there" kind of things. i could never understand why we were always so afraid of challenges to our belief system--if it really was GOD'S TRUTH, surely it could stand up to examination. but somehow we were always terrified it'd be overcome by "evil." and that NEVER made any sense to me. i'm sorry, bliss, but your response makes me think that your bliss might be proof of the old adage.
and CM, please don't answer my question with a question. i'd appreciate it if you'd respond to me without trying to manipulate the conversation. but to answer your question, i think the first few chapters of genesis are a wonderful study in human nature. but i don't think any of it happened. and if it did, i want nothing to do with that sneaky, tricky god.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
I am answering your question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
pfft hardly anyone wants to hear questions and answers that lead to more questions and answers that lead to more questions and answers
Pick the right questions for God's sake!
Or pitch the darn thing and leave it alone.
If God is Love?
Who needs Jesus?
That's a start. What answers and questions are you wanting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
CM, i know nothing about you. but you're giving me good reason to think you're not interested in communication at all. maybe you don't realize it, but you're coming off as a complete weasel.
if you really want to communicate your thoughts to me, take the time to construct a reasoned explanation. don't just throw off a line you think sounds clever or wise or cryptic, or drop a couple of verses you think are revelant, without any explanation. as it stand right now, you're not giving me any reason to consider a word you say. is that your intent? or are you truly interested in communicating? if you are, then do so. if not, why not just keep your mouth shut?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
If you would take the time to read the responses from more then just me you would see some things. But it seems you can't, so instead of keeping my mouth shut I'll open it to someone else.
And I did post my thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
Bull, you just want it your way and not explore anything. You have one purpose and that it seems is to discredit and put down what you think the bible says.
Yes ditch what you have been taught and start over with a fresh clean look at some things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bliss
Dearest Sprawled Out,
I answered the question in my first post of why "I think" we need Jesus. If you don't like my answer, sorry, there is nothing I can do about that. Seems you don't want to learn or know what others think, you just want to debate back and forth. To me, I don't engage in that kind of useless banter. I know what I believe, and that is the end of it. Just like you have a right to believe what you want. So I stated my opinion, and that is all I have to say.
Why does that bother you so? I believe God, his word and His Son, period. Just because you don't, doesn't make me right and you wrong. I have considered "other" things, questions, etc..........
They left me feeling empty and lost.
I love my life, and my beliefs. They bring me peace, joy, comfort and hope.
I don't believe that God would ''trick'' anyone and I am sorry you are so bitter.
I enjoy, "digging'' , research, and exchanging thoughts as CM and Sirguess do here. I may not always agree, but it is food for thought.
For some reason, it seems you are not interested in scripture at all, you just want to wipe your butt with it.
Still love you and will pray for you.
bliss
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
CM, i guess it's just me. i just don't understand you.
Bliss, i am interested in what others think, that's why i started this. but that doesn't mean i'm just going to agree. i thought what you and sunesis originally wrote was very interesting, and i gave it some thought. after giving it a day or so, i responded honestly. and expected a response. if that's what you mean by "debate back and forth," then yes, that's what i want. what's wrong with that? would it only meet with your approval if i just listened and agreed? otherwise, it's "useless banter?" i'm sorry, i can't agree with that.
i can see that it's very difficult to really communicate across the gulf between our two positions. perhaps you, like CM, think you're communicating by quoting scripture verses. but it doesn't communicate to me. i see what you're trying to say, but it doesn't reach me. know what i mean? and while i think i'm being quite clear, you see things that i don't mean at all. for example, you think i'm bitter. but i'm not bitter at all. because i don't believe that God did any of those things. i believe that God is loving and forgiving, and would never set us up for failure. that doesn't mean i want to wipe my butt with scripture, just that i don't want to wash my brain with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Sprawled Out, I may be misunderstanding you - and just wanted to elaborate on what I said earlier about using critical thinking. The "gatekeeper" if you will on a belief system is the individual that holds that belief system. I know I'm stating the obvious - but what I'm getting at is that as we examine ideas, evidence, etc. to figure out if we're going to accept them or not - we have to establish criteria by which to judge them. The criteria we choose usually because of some valid reason or reasons [that's why I referenced Gardner's 7 factors involved in changing minds]...
I am a Christian and believe the Bible is God's truth. I may be totally wrong because that is a viewpoint that came from the basic "kernel" of my belief system. I was raised in a Christian home [so don't know what came first the chicken or the egg LOL
on belief in God stuff]. But what has been the impetus for my conviction that there is a God has always been [as far back as I can remember] the belief that there is an Intelligent Designer behind this created order. Again, tracking the "evolution" of my belief system - I ASSUMED [again I may be wrong] this Intelligent Designer had the Bible written...
That being said - I would also like to add my faith has come a long way since I was a kid - and especially since I left TWI. I guess everyone's route to Christianity is different - that's just my story. I just wanted to point out what I thought was a "flaw" in your above premise. My personal belief is that our intellect like everything else we've inherited from Adam and Eve is corrupt and so from the get-go we're at a disadvantage in determining truth. I do believe God appeals to our intellects - both before and after we become a Christian. And I base that on not only personal study but personal experience - also - promised by Jesus Christ in John 7:17 [where he said if anyone would obey the truth they would know it's from God] and I John 2:27 speaking of the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
I personally don't have a problem intellectually with anything in the Bible - I may not understand certain things or subjects but continue to look into them. The subject of original sin, inherited sin, our sin nature, God's forgiveness, etc. - all the stuff you mentioned in your initial post - are things I've wondered about, checked out, studied - but I didn't think I should debate anyone on whether or not those things are so. Perhaps I'm wrong - but I thought it would be logical if you first determined a reference point - like: Is there a God, Is the Bible true, etc.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.