Originally posted by SwissGambitInbteresting that you point that out.
Hmm. Church members [in the book of Acts] were selling all their possessions and giving the money to the apostles. Nope, no motivation there. 😛
In the early days of the church in Jerusalem the believers had all things in common. In exchange they enjoyed a fantastically joyful communal living with trust in one another and in their leaders.
Selling all and giving the proceeds to the apostles was not mandatory. It was done by those who had the faith to do so. Annanius and Saphira envied the exuberance of those who did and attempted to deceive the congregation that they too were so given.
They were dsiciplined for attempting to deceive the Holy Spirit and the apostles.
A few important lessons occur to me from this incident.
1.) This was arguably the first problem encountered by the Christian church - hypocrisy - pretending in order to impress others in the congregation.
This shows that the church was a place of reality and not play acting. The first problem the church faced was someones pretending outwardly to possess what they did not have inwardly.
And there was no law that they had to sell all things.
2.) This incident also shows that to be a Christian did not mean that one could not be disciplined or punished by God. The couple was chastized with dying. They may have been eternally saved but they could still be disciplined by God.
The same is true ever since. Having eternal redemption does not have to mean that the heavenly Father cannot dispensationally punish such a saved son in need of correction..
3.) The incedent shows that God is not always locked into doing one thing only one way. Latter Paul told the disciples in Thessolonika to work at a living. Others were told not to steal. Otherers were taught that if they did not take care of their relatives they denied the faith.
Just because God prompted the disciples to practice a communal living of all things in common does not mean that He always must do things that way.
4.) Peter said that to lie to the Holy Spirit was to lie to God. So the incident proves the truth of the Trinity. The Apostle Peter considered the Holy Spirit to be God.
5.) As a result of what happened to Ananias and Saphire people were wary of joining the Christian congregation in a loose and superficial way. They realized that these people meant business to consecrate their entire lives to Jesus.
Originally posted by knightmeisterI may have been born at night, but not last night.
Scriabin,
Do you not realise that the central image of the Christian faith is that of God walking right into suffering and death itself. You seem to portray Christianity as a coping mechanism but in it's raw form it's right in there with all the grief , loss and hurt that is in the world. Jesus was acquainted with grief and suffering. He knew what ...[text shortened]... th and suffering itself. Chrisitianity encourages us to face up to our mortality and humanity.
I know a lot about images and image-making. For some years in government my job was to change the image of my program and create a new one -- which I did -- and so I was awarded what in Washington DC is sometimes called an S.P.h.D.
That stands for Spin Doctor.
You may see what you like in the imagery of the myth of Christianity -- but all I see is what is happening around me as it happens -- tired, old images from ancient words offer cold comfort to those who do without.
Do you not realize that much of the suffering and death in the world is preventable, needless, and, worse, happens because one small powerful group of people decide to set into motion events that cause such widespread misery and death just to gather more stuff for themselves.
sorry, but I look at what is happening and how people behave -- what they do, not what they profess to believe.
For example, churches don't always protect the innocent. Sometimes these sanctuaries shield the guilty and even lure predators to a place where young people gather. The Catholic Church has been widely criticized for how it handled instances of priests sexually abusing young people. And a six-month investigation by a news organization found Protestant ministers, supposed men of God from every denomination, sexually abusing the children who trusted them. The investigation uncovered "preacher predators" in every corner of the USA.
Or, just google: preachers, priests, ministers found guilty of fraud. No lack of cases there, either.
I don't think these misbehaviors are accidental or exceptional - they are more often the rule. The golden rule and the law as handed down by Christ is more often honored in the breach because that is what humans do: talk out of both sides of their mouth. Religion is just a pretext, most if not all of the time. Vanity, vanity, all of it.
So, I don't see Christianity as anything other than a mask you put on as it suits your purposes. The mask differs depending on whether you are at the top or the bottom of the food chain, but it is a mask, nonetheless.
As soon as a person starts spouting this kind of religious-speak, my suspicions are instantly enhanced and my caution increases.
We may have been created equal, but we're not born that way and we certainly don't live as equals.
Those who are a lot more equal than others often have the biggest Christian masks -- and it is all vanity and causes vexation of my spirit.
So I complain -- and I doubt and I won't be persuaded by poetry and quotations that come out of the mouths of those who wear golden threads, wear funny hats, sexually abuse children and cover it up, or act all sanctimonius, saved and righteous while raking it in and living high on the hog.
As the poet sang:
Well the deputy walks on hard nails and the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it's doom alone that counts
==================================
So I complain -- and I doubt and I won't be persuaded by poetry and quotations that come out of the mouths of those who wear golden threads, wear funny hats, sexually abuse children and cover it up, or act all sanctimonius, saved and righteous while raking it in and living high on the hog.
=======================================
Well, since you boast so much of superior logic and know all your logical fallacies, let's check out your reasoning.
Are you saying that if you become a follower of Jesus you will end up like one of these negative types of religious people? Are you afraid that you will not have self control but will rather end up wearing strange cloths and molesting children?
I don't see how this is too reasonable. We don't see Christ teaching anything along these lines. We don't see Christ Himself being an example of any of these things.
So you seem scared that your self control will leave you and you'll become the worst kind of religious hypocrit.
My approach was different. I asked God to lead me to Christians who would help my faith rather than hurt my faith.
If I could attach a logical fallacy to this kind of attitude it is an illogical fear of the loss of all self control which establishes your reason not believe in and follow Christ.
But the New Testament says that self control is one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit.
Originally posted by ScriabinI may have been born at night, but not last night.
I may have been born at night, but not last night.
I know a lot about images and image-making. For some years in government my job was to change the image of my program and create a new one -- which I did -- and so I was awarded what in Washington DC is sometimes called an S.P.h.D.
That stands for Spin Doctor.
You may see what you like in the image ...[text shortened]... the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it's doom alone that counts
I know a lot about images and image-making. For some years in government my job was to change the image of my program and create a new one -- which I did -- and so I was awarded what in Washington DC is sometimes called an S.P.h.D.
That stands for Spin Doctor.
You may see what you like in the imagery of the myth of Christianity -- but all I see is what is happening around me as it happens -- tired, old images from ancient words offer cold comfort to those who do without.
Do you not realize that much of the suffering and death in the world is preventable, needless, and, worse, happens because one small powerful group of people decide to set into motion events that cause such widespread misery and death just to gather more stuff for themselves.
sorry, but I look at what is happening and how people behave -- what they do, not what they profess to believe.
For example, churches don't always protect the innocent. Sometimes these sanctuaries shield the guilty and even lure predators to a place where young people gather. The Catholic Church has been widely criticized for how it handled instances of priests sexually abusing young people. And a six-month investigation by a news organization found Protestant ministers, supposed men of God from every denomination, sexually abusing the children who trusted them. The investigation uncovered "preacher predators" in every corner of the USA.
Or, just google: preachers, priests, ministers found guilty of fraud. No lack of cases there, either.
I don't think these misbehaviors are accidental or exceptional - they are more often the rule. The golden rule and the law as handed down by Christ is more often honored in the breach because that is what humans do: talk out of both sides of their mouth. Religion is just a pretext, most if not all of the time. Vanity, vanity, all of it.
So, I don't see Christianity as anything other than a mask you put on as it suits your purposes. The mask differs depending on whether you are at the top or the bottom of the food chain, but it is a mask, nonetheless.
As soon as a person starts spouting this kind of religious-speak, my suspicions are instantly enhanced and my caution increases.
We may have been created equal, but we're not born that way and we certainly don't live as equals.
Those who are a lot more equal than others often have the biggest Christian masks -- and it is all vanity and causes vexation of my spirit.
So I complain -- and I doubt and I won't be persuaded by poetry and quotations that come out of the mouths of those who wear golden threads, wear funny hats, sexually abuse children and cover it up, or act all sanctimonius, saved and righteous while raking it in and living high on the hog.
As the poet sang:
Well the deputy walks on hard nails and the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it's doom alone that counts
Originally posted by jaywillAnd who's to say the apostles didn't hook themselves up with some nice new robes? There are natural advantages that come with being in charge of the treasury, after all. And when you're also writing all the holy books, there's no need to mention little things like that.
Inbteresting that you point that out.
In the early days of the church in Jerusalem the believers had all things in common. In exchange they enjoyed a fantastically joyful communal living with trust in one another and in their leaders.
Selling all and giving the proceeds to the apostles was not mandatory. It was done by those who had the fai ...[text shortened]... l way. They realized that these people meant business to consecrate their entire lives to Jesus.
They were dsiciplined for attempting to deceive the Holy Spirit and the apostles.
"Disciplined" - a great PR word choice. Sounds so much better than "killed on the spot".
The first problem the church faced was someones pretending outwardly to possess what they did not have inwardly.
And the Holy Spirit spake unto them and said, "Admit not these two into thy church, for they are liars." Is there some reason the problem had to be solved by killing?
And there was no law that they had to sell all things.
Yet another motivation for apostles to create a faith - they had the influence to persuade people to change their whole lifestyle based on a mere suggestion.
2.) This incident also shows that to be a Christian did not mean that one could not be disciplined or punished by God. The couple was chastized with dying. They may have been eternally saved but they could still be disciplined by God.
The whole passage is interesting because it's the last time you see OT-style God make an appearance. That God preferred to solve his problems by killing.
I'm sure the later disciples were relieved to discover that God was no longer locked into doing things the same way. Plus, the Gentiles might not have bought in to the faith if there were lots of ugly stories about quick deaths amongst church members. Good on Paul for recognizing that whole 'kill immediately' thing was played out.
Just because God prompted the disciples to practice a communal living of all things in common does not mean that He always must do things that way.
Today's capitalist disciples are relieved to hear this.
5.) As a result of what happened to Ananias and Saphire people were wary of joining the Christian congregation in a loose and superficial way.
Well, yes, a nice, clean, quick, killing does convince people you mean business. They just might not be sure of exactly what type of business it is.
Originally posted by jaywillWe do not know what we do not know. Everything you claim is based on assumptions you cannot defend except through an appeal to authorities and supported by nothing of your own knowledge.
Propose to me a motive for them doing so fraudulently. We'll see how logical your explanations are.
Did Matthew want money for the fraud? If so why would Matthew record that this fictional person taught that we cannot serve God and mammon?
What did faking the resurrection do for Peter except get him crucified by the Roman Empire?
Did being an ...[text shortened]... c. were these the coveted benefits Paul enjoyed for propogating a hoax of a resurrected Christ?
You accept what others have written about who wrote these things -- you cannot prove the truth of a proposition by assuming a priori the truth of the premise from which your argument follows. If that premise be false, no matter how valid your argumentation, your logic, your conclusion is still false.
But thanks for citing all these verses from the Bible; I'll waste no time reading it.
Originally posted by jaywill(sigh) You've never taken a college level course in elementary logic, have you? Of course not. So you invent what you call a logical fallacy and in so doing yourself break the rules of logic once more. What you have done is first put words in my mouth -- I did not say if you become a follower of Jesus you will end up, etc. -- you did. Then you proceed to knock that argument down. Two fallacies there: 1. presenting the false dilemma by raising an issue I did not present, and 2. the strawman argument wherein you change the subject and then knock down the argument based on the false premise you obtained by error # 1 above.
[b]==================================
So I complain -- and I doubt and I won't be persuaded by poetry and quotations that come out of the mouths of those who wear golden threads, wear funny hats, sexually abuse children and cover it up, or act all sanctimonius, saved and righteous while raking it in and living high on the hog.
================= t the New Testament says that [b]self control is one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit.[/b]
Tsk Tsk.
Far from being afraid of my self control, I am certainly not about to become any sort of religious person of any kind. I don't speak with the planet Jupiter or the asteroids, nor the comets, and I've nothing to say to the star we orbit around. I'm quite sure I've heard nothing from any of these celestial objects, either. Now, without having to list all the other billions and billions and even trillions of celestial objects in a universe too vast and complex to be grasped by the mind of human beings, I can say with confidence there is no evidence that anyone ever has had a conversation with that which brought all these things into being, all matter and energy in the universe, and all the forces that appear to govern their relationship to one another.
There are just assumptions, assertions, and "logic" based on a priori beliefs. None of this is of value, it is vanity and vexes my spirit.
And you strike me as a solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious iceberg who looks like you're waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity.
Originally posted by CalmHabourI thought I said that.
I may have been born at night, but not last night.
I know a lot about images and image-making. For some years in government my job was to change the image of my program and create a new one -- which I did -- and so I was awarded what in Washington DC is sometimes called an S.P.h.D.
That stands for Spin Doctor.
You may see what you like in the ...[text shortened]... he preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it's doom alone that counts
You quote me and then you put the same thing in the message window.
Oh, well, some folks seem to have descended from the chimpanzee later than others.
Originally posted by ScriabinWhat? Where did all that come from?
I may have been born at night, but not last night.
I know a lot about images and image-making. For some years in government my job was to change the image of my program and create a new one -- which I did -- and so I was awarded what in Washington DC is sometimes called an S.P.h.D.
That stands for Spin Doctor.
You may see what you like in the image ...[text shortened]... the preacher rides a mount
But nothing really matters much it's doom alone that counts
I am simply saying that Jesus knows what hurts us , he is acquainted with our suffering. He weeps within us. He feels our anguish.
He is not remote. He get's his hands dirty.
SwissGambit,
==============================================
And who's to say the apostles didn't hook themselves up with some nice new robes?
============================================
There are plenty of congregation shepherds or leaders who do not "hook themselves up with nice new robes".
The fact that some cardinals, bishops, popes did so does not mean that all disciples had or have such a tendency.
======================================
There are natural advantages that come with being in charge of the treasury, after all.
========================================
You are assuming that no disciples ever wanted to follow in the footsteps of thier Master. Jesus came to serve not to be served. He had no where to lay His head.
You should not assume that no disciple of Jesus loved Him to the extent that they would want to live as He lived on earth.
Where I meet there is no special garb worn by the elders of the church. Outwardly, you would not be able to tell who were the elders of the church by any physical means whatsoever.
We have no podium or pulpit. We sit in a large semi circular arrangement. And the elders of the church do not even always sit in the front row but usually they sit towards the front.
You must be sophisticated enough to realize that there are many manner of Christian gatherings. Quakers, for example, do not practice clergy / laity system as also the Brethren do not or the Disciples of Christ.
You must be sophisticated to know that there are different practices among Christians on the proper way to church together.
=======================================
And when you're also writing all the holy books, there's no need to mention little things like that.
==========================================
I am not following your point at the moment. I don't think anyone at whim can write a "holy" book. The Bible is not a common, run of the mill "holy book".
The Old Testament spoke something about the manner of priestly garb. The discriptions are detailed. And that is a holy book - Leviticus.
The New Testmament stresses the inward life of the Holy Spirit - regulating, leading, instructing, and inwardly training by grace all manner of outward behavior and expression. So Paul says "put on the Lord Jesus Christ"
The "clothing" that NT emphasizes is the spiritual clothing of "putting on" Christ the living Lord.
=========================================
They were dsiciplined for attempting to deceive the Holy Spirit and the apostles.
"Disciplined" - a great PR word choice. Sounds so much better than "killed on the spot".
======================================
If you prefer the word "punished" then I will say punished.
With the believer such puunishment is a discipline and an instruction that they may be perfected. With the unbeliever punishment is simply destruction -retribution is the word.
The killing of Ananias and Saphira was not divine retribution or perdition. But it was a disciplinary punishment. What father does not have to sometime discipline his children, if he is a good father?
The example was set there in a severe way. They were not the last hypocrits to church. God's attitude has not changed. It is just that not everyone has been made such a public example of as that couple.
Since you can be a hypocrit too, you should be encouraged to receive instruction should you want to be a disciple of Jesus.
========================================
The first problem the church faced was someones pretending outwardly to possess what they did not have inwardly.
And the Holy Spirit spake unto them and said, "Admit not these two into thy church, for they are liars." Is there some reason the problem had to be solved by killing?
===================================
I am sure that it was not the only situation that came up. And I am sure that not every situation was dealt with by God in this manner. This one was and was recorded for instruction to the church for years to come.
To whom much is given much will be required of them. They enjoyed a tremendous outpouring of grace. Along with that exceptional outpouring of grace there was responsibility.
===================================
And there was no law that they had to sell all things.
Yet another motivation for apostles to create a faith - they had the influence to persuade people to change their whole lifestyle based on a mere suggestion.
=====================================
It may surprise you that some people desire to live a life in obedience to God for the purpose of God. They see something higher than a vain godless life chasing after the wind.
Jesus said to His disciples to go to all the world and spread the gospel to all nations. He also said that the one who is ashamed of Him He will be ashamed of in His second coming.
So if I am ashamed of the commission of Jesus to preach the gospel then when He comes again He also will be ashamed of me.
So I hope I would obey Christ not only to live the gospel but to preach the gospel as well.
=====================================
The whole passage is interesting because it's the last time you see OT-style God make an appearance. That God preferred to solve his problems by killing.
===================================
The good news is that the death of Jesus is really all the killing that we need. If we allow His Spirit to fill us His cross will kill off all the negative things in our being opposed to God.
Paul grasped this and said "I am crucified with Christ". OF course he realized he was also raised with Christ too. God solves His problems not only with death but with resurrection as well.
It may be a tough truth to accept that you need to be crucified with Christ. All that you have and all that you are is only good for death and burial. God cannot use any of it.
The good news is that though union with Christ we are terminated and resurrected WITH Him in what He did for us 2,000 years ago.
Paul got it right - " I am crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith of the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself for me." (Gal. 2:20)
"Knowing that our old man has been crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should no longer serve sin as slaves" (Rom. 6:6)
"We have been buried therefore with Him through baptism into His death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father so also we might walk in the newness of life." (Rom. 6:4)
All these passages and more show that the killing of Christ can be appropriated within our souls to kill off the negative things in our personality which are opposed to God and which also make us misreable.
So Christ's death and His resurrection can become our inward co-experience as He transforms our souls. To receive Him is to have all that He has obtained and attained as ours to be appropriated.
===================================
Today's capitalist disciples are relieved to hear this.
========================================
You sound like a sore loser.
Some religious types, having flunked at being religious dispise all people of faith.
There's hope though. Even the man who was too weak to crawl down to the water for 40 years, to be healed, Jesus healed.
Some disgruntled religious folks waste the rest of their lives away licking their wounds and self rightoeusly condemning everyone who has faith.
Tell me. Because you can point out all of these things does that make you superior to them?
=======================================
Well, yes, a nice, clean, quick, killing does convince people you mean business. They just might not be sure of exactly what type of business it is.
=================================
That's right. And sometimes we see a nice clean and quick resurrection too. And we see quite a few instances of a clean transformation and Christ glorifying life.
So many positive examples to muse on. I don't hardly know where to start. Praise the Lord for His word.
================================
sigh) You've never taken a college level course in elementary logic, have you?
==================================
I have a college book on Logic (my 26 year old son's text). It is a good book.
You should know that God's salvtion is and the truth of life is not reserved only for those who complete a college level course on Logic.
I bet I could show you that whatever world view you do have is based on circular reasoning.
Do you have a world view? What are your presuppositions? Of course no position is the easiest to defend. So what do you have as an alternative to life's meaning as spelled out in the Bible?
=======================================
Of course not. So you invent what you call a logical fallacy and in so doing yourself break the rules of logic once more.
======================================
What do you have as an alternative to what I portray as the truth about God and human life?
================================
What you have done is first put words in my mouth -- I did not say if you become a follower of Jesus you will end up, etc. -- you did. Then you proceed to knock that argument down. Two fallacies there: 1. presenting the false dilemma by raising an issue I did not present, and 2. the strawman argument wherein you change the subject and then knock down the argument based on the false premise you obtained by error # 1 above.
========================================
Then I will simply wait for you to tell me what you have as a world view of the truth of human life which you think is more adaquate than what the Bible says.
======================================
Far from being afraid of my self control, I am certainly not about to become any sort of religious person of any kind.
=======================================
I don't think that being a follower of Christ is being religious. I think it is more like simply being in love.
The tension between Jesus and religion is quite explicitly outlined in the New Testament. And generally man's attempt to work for God to please God is juxtaposed against the enjoyment of His grace to enable us to live godly.
Perhaps you missed that the main opposition to Christ came from religious circles.
I may be still religious. But for certain Christ saves from being religious into the freedom of simply enjoying His supporting and enabling Spirit.
=======================================
I don't speak with the planet Jupiter or the asteroids, nor the comets, and I've nothing to say to the star we orbit around. I'm quite sure I've heard nothing from any of these celestial objects, either.
===========================================
Were you mentioneing something above about strawman arguments?
I don't see what this has to do with anything. I mean talking to celestial bodies? What has that have to do with anything in the Bible? I thought the Old Testament condemned astrology.
Make you a deal. I'll read a few chapters of my Logic book if you would read a few chapters of the Bible.
====================================
Now, without having to list all the other billions and billions and even trillions of celestial objects in a universe too vast and complex to be grasped by the mind of human beings, I can say with confidence there is no evidence that anyone ever has had a conversation with that which brought all these things into being, all matter and energy in the universe, and all the forces that appear to govern their relationship to one another.
=========================================
You lost me. I don't get the point of you going down this road about talking to astronomical physical entities.
If there is a logical connection you'll have to explain it. God is Spirit and they who worship Him must worship in Spirit and in reality.
=======================================
There are just assumptions, assertions, and "logic" based on a priori beliefs. None of this is of value, it is vanity and vexes my spirit.
====================================
No there is more than that, O Logical One. There is HISTORY. There is the events of HISTORY and the impact and meaning of those events.
The New Testmament is not a "Once Upon a Time in a Far Off Land" kind of document. It is rooted in historical events.
We have good reason to believe tha God was revealed interacting with mankind in human history. Did you notice that the Western world divides history into two periods - B.C. "Before Christ" and A.D, "In the Year of Our Lord."
We don't think this is accidental or based on something that happened in a corner somewhere. We hold that the impact of human history of the birth, life, and death (and resurrection) of Jesus of Nazareth was near cataclysmic.
Why does this one man from whom we hear little of except for three and one half years have such an impact on the calender? This is not to say everyone who has historical enfluence is Son of God or even good. But the Man Jesus occupies a class of people in human history of which there may be only ONE member - Himself.
Now why?
I think it has to do with His claims, His deeds, the deeds of His followers. I think it has to do also with actual historical miracles of God associated with this man - for instance His resurrection from the dead. My faith is rooted in history not merely existential thinking on abstract philosophical issues.
=================================
And you strike me as a solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious iceberg who looks like you're waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity
========================================
Solemn, maybe about the subject of God. I think others have heard me branch into humor in this forum.
Not smiling? I'm smiling to even read that from you.
You strike me as someone who wants to paint a certain picture of those he does not agree with to put them in an unfavorable light.
And this is not atypical of skeptics like yourself.
And I have seen a lot of skeptics like you smiling. That's nice. But most of them have a big question mark on thier forehead too.
Originally posted by jaywillThe fact that some cardinals, bishops, popes did so does not mean that all disciples had or have such a tendency.
SwissGambit,
[b]==============================================
And who's to say the apostles didn't hook themselves up with some nice new robes?
============================================
There are plenty of congregation shepherds or leaders who do not "hook themselves up with nice new robes".
The fact that some cardinals, bishops ...[text shortened]... ardly know where to start. Praise the Lord for His word.[/b]
That wasn't the point. The point is that greed is a potential motivation to promote a faith, even if the promoter knows it is false.
You are assuming that no disciples ever wanted to follow in the footsteps of thier Master. Jesus came to serve not to be served. He had no where to lay His head.
No, you assigned this assumption to me so you could go off on another tangential sermon.
I am not following your point at the moment. I don't think anyone at whim can write a "holy" book.
The point wasn't that any chucklehead can write a holy book; it is that those who do get the chance to write them would likely cover up corrupt behavior by themselves or other significant church leaders.
But it was a disciplinary punishment. What father does not have to sometime discipline his children, if he is a good father?
Hmm. What chance is there to learn from discipline and behave more morally if you're dead?
They were not the last hypocrits to church. God's attitude has not changed. It is just that not everyone has been made such a public example of as that couple.
Does this mean there are still [now secret] killings going on in churches? How interesting.
To whom much is given much will be required of them. They enjoyed a tremendous outpouring of grace. Along with that exceptional outpouring of grace there was responsibility.
This is your defense? An 'outpouring of grace'? Do you know what the word 'grace' means? Why was there none available for Ananias and Saphirah that day? Did the 'outpouring' hit a dry spot?! 🙄
--proselytizing ignored-
You sound like a sore loser.
No, my true personality flaw is that I can't resist the temptation to goad sanctimonious religious people. 😛 As for my leaving the Christian faith, it was one of the best decisions I ever made.
==================================
That wasn't the point. The point is that greed is a potential motivation to promote a faith, even if the promoter knows it is false.
========================================
That may be a motive for establishing a religious power center. But that was not my point.
If Jesus taught us to call no man "Father" and that all the disiples are brothers, this negates that those cardinals and popes wrote the New Testament.
That is my point. The may have had motice to abuse the test and lock it away for 1,000 years as in the dark ages. Then the Bible was not accessible to the common people.
What you discribe is motive for hiding the Bible and locking it away. It is not a logical motive for writing the New Testament.
Even the idea of Peter being some kind of permenant established leader, let alone a first pope, is hard to justify in the New Testament.
Motive for abuse of parts of the Bible and concealment of parts of the Bible is not the same as motive for writing the Bible.
==================================
No, you assigned this assumption to me so you could go off on another tangential sermon.
==========================================
Beats your going off on a positive non tangential error.
So far you have failed to establish motive for the fictional creation of Christ or for writing the New Testament.
==================================
The point wasn't that any chucklehead can write a holy book; it is that those who do get the chance to write them would likely cover up corrupt behavior by themselves or other significant church leaders.
============================================
I think your thought is too superfiscial.
Not anyone can predict 800 years earlier the redemptive acts and works of a God sent Savior as the prophet Isaiah did.
Not everyone can produce 66 books over a period of 1600 years with a common theme and unmistakable underlying structure of unity.
If you mean anyone can write a book and title it "This is a Holy Book", sure. I agree. Not everyone can produce such a library of books as the Book we call the Bible.
You remind me of the sort of people who, the less they read the Bible, the more they consider themselves an expert on its contents. This is a perculiar kind of foolheartiness.
I don't think there is much more that you have. I'll cut it short here.
=========================
Hmm. What chance is there to learn from discipline and behave more morally if you're dead?
=========================================
Physical death is not the end nor is this age the final age in which a man can have dealings with God.
If you bothered to read the Gospels you might notice a few parables refering to Christ's dealing with His servants in terms of reward or lack thereof, or even chastizement, AFTER His coming back. Obviously this would include dealings with those disciples who expired during the church age and were resurrected.
Eternity does not begin immediately after the second coming. Six times the Scripture mentions 1,000 years as a period BEFORE the eternal age of the new heaven and new earth. The six mentions are in Revelation 20 just before the climax of Revelation 21 and 22.
Read the 20th chapter and count the number of times it mentions the 1,000 year millennial kingdom.
Careful readers of the Scripture notice that during that time there is still time for God to dispensationally perfect some of His naughty children.
You seem to have no clue as to exactly how wise of a Heavenly Father God really is.