How Well Do You Know The Bible?

[Truth OT]

Just wondering why this would be of interest to an agnostic.

I am not a theist, but I am interested in religion and faith systems as they have a profound effect on the world in which I live. I am open to being exposed to evidence that provides viability to claims about reality so I can come to know actual truth.

 

[Episkopos]

There is a lot of knowledge about the bible in the Western churches. Lots of bible memorization.

But the important thing remains to live it out. Living it out brings an experiential knowledge of God...directly...not just bible knowledge.

In fact I would say that until one experiences the God of the bible their knowledge is vain. I think the bible is a very valuable book. But most people in the free and easy living countries do all things in that way...in a very shallow non-threatening way. Reality and truth are seen as foreign to this exercise in futility.

The carnal mind can be very curious and interested in bible things. But that isn't the same as following Christ and living in His kind of life.

See, we live this way because we are not under any persecution.

 

[Truth OT]

No it has not....He now dwells within us and walks with us and speak constantly to us.

You do realize what I stated can be found in Hebrews 1, right? Why do you object to scripture?

 

[Episkopos]

I am not a theist, but I am interested in religion and faith systems as they have a profound effect on the world in which I live. I am open to being exposed to evidence that provides viability to claims about reality so I can come to know actual truth.

The society you live in....that we live in...is stacked against you becoming anything else beside a satisfied consumer of superficial pleasures offered to you to keep you sated and un-seeking of the deeper truths in this life. And that is just the churches!
You may have to travel to a place where people give their lives for Christ because of the love they have found in God....an eternal kind of love. A love that satisfies more than the drugs, comforts and conveniences of this world.

 

[Truth OT]

The Church began before one letter of the NT was written, and proclaimed and lived the Truth for many years before the bible as you know it was canonized.

Hi Philip, thanks for chiming in! Though I agree that the called out assembly of the Anointed One came about before the New Testament was written, I'd remind you that the people of that day had the written Old Testament in the form of the Septuagint which was a revelation of God, many are said to have lived with the living Christ, and in the generation within the 1st century, miraculous signs and wonders were done to confirm that messengers were from God. That time frame was the exception, not the rule.

Scripture certainly helps one to know the Lord, but the simplist, illiterate and uneducated can come to know the Lord.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

One doesn't have to be literate to have scriptural knowledge. It can be shared and taught, but it must be imparted somehow else a believing person will create their subjective personal version of god in their own mind that may conflict with what the scriptures say.

 

[shnarkle]

The fact of existence being, just illustrates that existence is.

Quite true! There is no reason to assume this isn't what the biblical authors are pointing out either. In fact, they point out not just that existence is a fact, but that it is "one". It is unified; a unified whole. Being is an existential fact. It's self evident. So why point that out? Because people tend to think it isn't for some idiotic reason.

It doesn't speak to the WHO or WHAT behind it at all.

There is no "what" behind it. Things come into existence. Things cease to exist. Existence is eternal. As far as "who" is concerned, it isn't about identification at all, but simply to point out that there is all the difference in the world between subjective knowing, and those things that are objectively known.

It says nothing about there being a God, many gods, or no gods.

It points out a self evident fact, i.e. that life doesn't just spontaneously come into existence through haphazard undirected chance. That's a scientific fact. There's no good reason to assume that as a possibility.

We need revelation for the details of the WHO or WHAT to be made known.

Who cannot be known. Only things can be objectively known, and "God" doesn't objectively exist.

Why not SOME INDIVIDUALS or SOMETHING, or even SOMETHINGS?

Because things come into existence, and cease to exist. Separate individuals are an oxymoron. They are literally contradictions.

Without revelation one would not know that existence wasn't the result of the accidental undertakings of a pantheon of powerful entities,

Simple reasoning can point out that isn't the case.

a single powerful entity,

Again, to reduce God to a defined entity is asinine. We haven't escaped our own anthropocentric ideas.

or a power source that has no will or persona.

A power source? We can deduce that there must be a source or origin to existence. We can call that source "God" with no fear or being refuted simply because it's nothing more than a convenience to facilitate or expedite discussion. That's what words are for. Ironically when it comes to "God", the gospel writer points out that there is only "the word".

 

[Truth OT]

Others in the OT had to work through the priests and the prophets of God.

A. We're not talking about "others". Adam, Moses, Abraham, Enoch, the patriarchs that are said to have ACTUALLY known and PHYSICALLY interacted with the LORD. SO yeah, the statement I made was accurate.

Because of what Jesus did on the cross and because of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit closer level of contact is now possible for anyone

We need to have a discussion about eschatology and the Last Days. Too much meat there that will get this thread off track.

 

[Enoch111]

I am open to being exposed to evidence that provides viability to claims about reality so I can come to know actual truth.

You seem to be in the same position as Pontius Pilate. Christ -- who is the Truth -- was standing before him. But Pilate said "What is Truth?" instead of "Who is the Truth?" The *actual truth* is Christ Himself -- who He is and what He accomplished in His life, His death, His burial, and His resurrection. And whether you believe it or not, He is seated presently at the right hand of God the Father, from where He will come to Judge the world.

 

[Truth OT]

Christ -- who is the Truth -- was standing before him.

The Anointed One is not being questioned. The viability of what PEOPLE are saying about his qualities as well as the qualities of his father and the relationship/knowledge PEOPLE CLAIM to have is up for debate and is what I am asking to have substantiated.

 

[marks]

Christ is synonymous with existence or being, and is self sufficient. Existence doesn't "get here on its own" because it's already here. Eternal being is always here.

I'm sorry, I am referring to the creation alone, and the Creator is excepted.

 

[marks]

Like Mufasa lives in Simba.........

?

 

[shnarkle]

I'm sorry, I am referring to the creation alone, and the Creator is excepted.

I understand your argument. I'm pointing out that existence is eternal. It has no beginning or end. You are conflating existence with WHAT is created. The word is not excepted or negated by existence. The word exists eternally. I'm refuting your argument.

 

[marks]

I understand your argument. I'm pointing out that existence is eternal. It has no beginning or end. You are conflating existence with WHAT is created. The word is not excepted or negated by existence. The word exists eternally. I'm refuting your argument.

Yes, I understand, that's why I apologized, and restated.

Creation doesn't create itself.

So then, is this a creation?

 

[shnarkle]

Yes, I understand, that's why I apologized, and restated.

I missed the correction.

Creation doesn't create itself.

It's intriguing to me that you grant creation an identity; a sense of self. You, as a work of creation create a sense of self or identity for creation. This sense of self is most definitely created by creation. God certainly didn't create it.

So then, is this a creation?

Is what a creation? A sense of self? It's an idea created in the mind.

 

[amadeus]

A. We're not talking about "others". Adam, Moses, Abraham, Enoch, the patriarchs that are said to have ACTUALLY known and PHYSICALLY interacted with the LORD. SO yeah, the statement I made was accurate.



We need to have a discussion about eschatology and the Last Days. Too much meat there that will get this thread off track.

You know too much worthless stuff without Life. It is no wonder to me that you have lost your way. Dead things cannot see!

 

[marks]

It's intriguing to me that you grant creation an identity; a sense of self.

Not exactly, only a name, "creation". I don't equate that being made means self-awareness.

 

[bbyrd009]

Hello Truth,

Yes. The Church began before one letter of the NT was written, and proclaimed and lived the Truth for many years before the bible as you know it was canonized.

Scripture certainly helps one to know the Lord, but the simplist, illiterate and uneducated can come to know the Lord.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

you too! Are welcome to discover what fruit of the tree of knowledge and "satan's dialectic" mean!

sword!

Hello Truth,

Yes. The Church began before one letter of the NT was written, and proclaimed and lived the Truth for many years before the bible as you know it was canonized.

Scripture certainly helps one to know the Lord, but the simplist, illiterate and uneducated can come to know the Lord.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

wth are you smoking bro? In that mausoleum?

 

[bbyrd009]

Not exactly, only a name, "creation". I don't equate that being made means self-awareness.

boy, i kinda liked the idea myself? Personhood, no imo, but self-awareness? I would say definitely! hmm

 

[shnarkle]

Not exactly, only a name, "creation".

To be precise, you do more than give creation a name. Here's what you posted: "Creation doesn't create itself."

I don't equate that being made means self-awareness.

Quantum mechanics shows us that even at an atomic level, there seems to be awareness, or as Einstein said, "spooky action at a distance". I've watched people walk right into walls, windows, poles, etc. They drive right into the back of another car. They don't seem to be aware of the most obvious things, and yet we wouldn't claim that they have no awareness. Where do we draw the line on awareness?

More to the point, a sense of self isn't necessarily something one needs to be aware of in the first place. It can simply be an idea, and in most cases it is an idea that the awareness we have is ours. We think it is something that we possess. This is not an awareness at all. It is nothing more than an idea, and a contradictory one as well because we think we are separate individuals.

 

[marks]

Here's what you posted: "Creation doesn't create itself."

Curious . . . how would you express this thought?