Prayer

[Moonlit_Angel]

My own younger sister believes in God but she's not a Christian.

I'm the same way .

Angela

 

[coemgen]

A little more for you to consider: You've already thought of this, but let me remind you that a deep, personal, and very satisfying and meaningful relationship with God does not have to be based on Christianity at all.

At all.

I'm sorry Martha, but I have to disagree with you.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're essentially saying is that all religions, faiths, whatever, lead to the same place, right? Think about this though, if all paths lead to the same place, why do they contradict each other so much? Are you saying truth contradicts itself?
Think about it — you have Buddhism telling you there is no personal God and everyone can reach a state of being like God on their own. Then you have Islam telling you that Jesus was just a prophet and not the only way to God. Then you have Christianity telling you that there is a personal God AND the only way to him is through Jesus. Jesus himself said this according to John 14:6 "Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Consider these verses as well: Galatians 3:26 says "You are all sons of God through faith in Jesus Christ."

John 1:12 says "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."

John 8 42-47 says "Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."

Think about this too, why would God allow us to choose another way to him if he sent his son to die for our sins?

 

[nbcrusader]

I think it is clear that we all have different definitions of God (and for ease of discussion, I'll just use "God" in all places instead of God and god) and rely on different sources for defining God, be it sacred texts or our own intuition.

 

[Irvine511]

I'm sorry Martha, but I have to disagree with you.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're essentially saying is that all religions, faiths, whatever, lead to the same place, right? Think about this though, if all paths lead to the same place, why do they contradict each other so much? Are you saying truth contradicts itself?
Think about it — you have Buddhism telling you there is no personal God and everyone can reach a state of being like God on their own. Then you have Islam telling you that Jesus was just a prophet and not the only way to God. Then you have Christianity telling you that there is a personal God AND the only way to him is through Jesus. Jesus himself said this according to John 14:6 "Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Consider these verses as well: Galatians 3:26 says "You are all sons of God through faith in Jesus Christ."

John 1:12 says "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."

John 8 42-47 says "Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."

Think about this too, why would God allow us to choose another way to him if he sent his son to die for our sins?

i don't think it's terribly logical to use scripture to prove scripture.

 

[nbcrusader]

i don't think it's terribly logical to use scripture to prove scripture.

Actually, it is a better form of analysis. Internal consistency underscores elements and limits the use of single passages to establish doctrine.

 

[Irvine511]

Actually, it is a better form of analysis. Internal consistency underscores elements and limits the use of single passages to establish doctrine.

so it's all about faith in a self-contained, self-referential, self-justifying system? there's no need for anything external?

 

[nbcrusader]

I don't expect you to get to a scientific conclusion on matters.

With Text revealed over hundreds, if not thousands of years, history itself provides an external check showing fulfillment of prophecy.

Also, there is the Holy Spirit.

What would you suggest as the proper "external" check?

 

[Irvine511]

I don't expect you to get to a scientific conclusion on matters.

With Text revealed over hundreds, if not thousands of years, history itself provides an external check showing fulfillment of prophecy.

Also, there is the Holy Spirit.

What would you suggest as the proper "external" check?

there isn't an external check, i don't think, and i also think the "fulfillment of prophecy" lies very much in the eyes of the beholder, in how the text is written, and how events are then retroactively grafted onto scripture.

i'm saying that Faith is a personal thing, as is interpretation of scripture, and this reasserts, to my mind, one of the fundamental claims of postmodern literary theory -- there are no correct readings, only valid ones, and they all exist in contention with one another.

to me, i find this liberating, and as i mentioned before, perhaps a path back to God.

 

[coemgen]

i don't think it's terribly logical to use scripture to prove scripture.

I wasn't attempting to use scripture to prove scripture, I was using it to make a point that the Bible is clear that Christ is the only way. This sets it apart from all other religions.

nb, you make some great points.

 

[coemgen]

there isn't an external check, i don't think, and i also think the "fulfillment of prophecy" lies very much in the eyes of the beholder, in how the text is written, and how events are then retroactively grafted onto scripture.

So what you're basically saying is that the writers of the NT all lied about Jesus? There's a problem with that assumption — how do you account for the writers' teaching about truth, love, honesty, giving, etc. being based on lies? Why would they suffer hardships like beatings, starvation, shipwreck, imprisonment and execution for a bunch of lies? That doesn't make much sense and it raises more questions than it answers.

Also, how do you account for these two fulfilled prophecies surrounding his birth and death that are recorded outside of the Bible that the writers couldn't have just "written in."

Born as a descendant of David, Jeremiah 23:5; Luke 3:31

Hands and feet pierced, Psalm 22:16; John 20:24-28

 

[Irvine511]

So what you're basically saying is that the writers of the NT all lied about Jesus? There's a problem with that assumption — how do you account for the writers' teaching about truth, love, honesty, giving, etc. being based on lies? Why would they suffer hardships like beatings, starvation, shipwreck, imprisonment and execution for a bunch of lies? That doesn't make much sense and it raises more questions than it answers.

Also, how do you account for these two fulfilled prophecies surrounding his birth and death that are recorded outside of the Bible that the writers couldn't have just "written in."

Born as a descendant of David, Jeremiah 23:5; Luke 3:31

Hands and feet pierced, Psalm 22:16; John 20:24-28

no, that's not what i'm saying. what i am saying is that matters of faith and prophecy cannot be objectively proven to be true. all those teachings are based upon a version of events, and we all know human beings are flawed recorders of history. anyone who studies history seriously will tell you how flawed it is. i don't see the bible as any sort of credible historical textbook, and i know you've said things to the effect of "nothing in the bible has been disproved" -- but i think the burden of proof is on the author, not on the reader.

all i'm getting at, here, is that the Bible, to me, seems much like prayer -- it exists in the mind of the reader. there is no Bible unless someone reads it (words are meant to be read, if a book is never opened, it doesn't exist ... as is true with all articles of mass consumptiopn), and whenever we read anything we bring our own biases and prejudices to the text.

i'm not out to prove anything right or wrong, but more to assert that there isn't a right or wrong. there are valid readings, and invalid readings -- a valid reading is something i think NBC does all the time, as his arguments are very well supported by text, are logical, etc. however, to me, they operate solely within a particular system of thought, logic, and fact, and this system (the Bible) is simply not objective. that's not to say right or wrong, but simply to say that no one reading is "correct."

i'm not an expert on this topic, so i can't pretend to debate specifics with you. (calling Melon...) what i am doing is applying my knowledge of literary theory, and how we read, and applying that to the Bible, since it is a text.

it's times like these that i wish i had taken "the historical Jesus" class in college.

 

[Irvine511]

I wasn't attempting to use scripture to prove scripture, I was using it to make a point that the Bible is clear that Christ is the only way. This sets it apart from all other religions.

nb, you make some great points.

yes, that's what the bible thinks. i understood your post as you saying that there was only one true religion, because the bible says so. well, that's fine, if you believe in the Bible, but not everyone does, and as such, your assertion (as i understood it) can only be proved with words from its own text.

 

[nbcrusader]

to me, i find this liberating, and as i mentioned before, perhaps a path back to God.

I hope we can share many more discussions together

 

[martha]

Think about this too, why would God allow us to choose another way to him if he sent his son to die for our sins?

Christians do not own God. They just seem to think they do.

 

[pax]

Christians do not own God. They just seem to think they do.

I don't think this is really true, Martha. I identify as Christian but I believe, and I suspect that many other Christians do as well, that God is available to whoever wants a relationship with God. To me, that includes everyone--Christian, non-Christian, whatever.

I don't know how people who are not Christian come to God. But I really do believe that God works through and for people who do not necessarily identify as Christian--the same God in whom I believe. How does that work? I have no idea. But that's for God to determine, not me.

 

[coemgen]

what i am saying is that matters of faith and prophecy cannot be objectively proven to be true.

But if we look at ancient copies of the OT that tell us that the Christ would be a descendent of David and that his hands and feet would be pierced, and then we look at evidence outside of the Bible that supports these claims, how can it not be objectively proven?

i don't see the bible as any sort of credible historical textbook

What are you basing this on? Have you studied it? Also, keep in mind the writers didn't write it on their own, they had the Holy Spirit, a.k.a. God. I think God would want things recorded accurately.

all i'm getting at, here, is that the Bible, to me, seems much like prayer -- it exists in the mind of the reader. there is no Bible unless someone reads it (words are meant to be read, if a book is never opened, it doesn't exist ...

I'm sorry, but how can you honestly believe this? It always exists, one just hasn't been exposed to it yet. The fact that someone hasn't been exposed to it certainly does not mean they have authority over it, you know? If I misunderstood you hear, I'm sorry.

 

[nbcrusader]

Christians do not own God. They just seem to think they do.

Christian's don't own God.

I can understand your perception of such if Christians hold true to the teachings of the Bible.

 

[coemgen]

Christians do not own God. They just seem to think they do.

Remember Martha, I didn't claim Christ was the only way — he did.

 

[Irvine511]

But if we look at ancient copies of the OT that tell us that the Christ would be a descendent of David and that his hands and feet would be pierced, and then we look at evidence outside of the Bible that supports these claims, how can it not be objectively proven?

What are you basing this on? Have you studied it? Also, keep in mind the writers didn't write it on their own, they had the Holy Spirit, a.k.a. God. I think God would want things recorded accurately.

I'm sorry, but how can you honestly believe this? It always exists, one just hasn't been exposed to it yet. The fact that someone hasn't been exposed to it certainly does not mean they have authority over it, you know? If I misunderstood you hear, I'm sorry.

as i said i am not an expert in this, but i know people have debated at length on this topic. i think it's fairly safe to say that, no, the world wasn't created in 7 days, or that there wasn't a flood nor a Noah's Ark, etc. i also think that reading is a very subjective process, and people often set out to affirm their beliefs. but i can't have an in-depth discussion on this -- i'm simply out of my depth. but i am basing my criticisms of the Bible on my understanding of the nature of history, and the way in which people read.

i just don't buy the Holy Spirit argument. sorry, i can't accept the objectivity of a text on the presumption of an article of faith (the Holy Spirit).

you misunderstood my last point. what i'm saying, is that if i write a book, and no one reads it, it doesn't exist. obviously, people read the bible, so it exists. my point is that reading is less about words on a page and more about the interaction of a human being with words on a page. the "book," if you will, is in the interaction, not in the paper and ink.

 

[coemgen]

Irvine, I know you're not an expert on this stuff (neither am I!), but I did enjoy our little debate/discussion here. I hope I haven't come across to harshly, I was just trying to make some points. Sorry I misunderstood your last point as well.

Should get back to discussing prayer again?

 

[Irvine511]

i've enjoyed this discussion very much.

you've not come off harshly at all.

happy to continue to discuss whatever.

 

[coemgen]

Today's the national day of prayer, do you think it's a good idea for a nation to have a day of prayer?

 

[nbcrusader]

Just one?


Heck, even the most casual Christians show up to church twice a year....

 

[martha]

Today's the national day of prayer, do you think it's a good idea for a nation to have a day of prayer?

Every day with a fractions test is a day of prayer.

 

[martha]

Remember Martha, I didn't claim Christ was the only way — he did.

He's the only way for you.

 

[coemgen]

Every day with a fractions test is a day of prayer.

He's the only way for you.

John 14:6: "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. NO ONE comes to the Father except through me.' "

(no, "no one" isn't capitalized in the Bible.
)



Let's get back to prayer now though.

 

[Irvine511]

so for people who believe in the Bible, that might be true.

Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, etc., would all disagree with you.

that's what i meant earlier about objectivity predicated upon articles of faith.

 

[coemgen]

You're right, Hindus, Jews and Buddhists disagree. That was my whole point in bringing it up in the first place! If all paths lead to God, why do they all conflict?

Since we're going in circles now (And I know I'm the one causing us to turn the corner again) lets get back to prayer, since people might see the thread title and actually want to talk about prayer.

 

[martha]

You're right, Hindus, Jews and Buddhists disagree. That was my whole point in bringing it up in the first place! If all paths lead to God, why do they all conflict?

This is too complicated to explain here.

Since we're going in circles now (And I know I'm the one causing us to turn the corner again) lets get back to prayer, since people might see the thread title and actually want to talk about prayer. [/B]

Only Christian prayer? Or does your God hear the prayers of those of us who are not Christians?

 

[coemgen]

You can talk about any kind of prayer you want to talk about.