AlexanderJ

Another concept which radically opposed the Eastern mindset concerning women was the Pauline teaching of all believers' oneness in Christ: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:28

On the contrary, God did say that (that he is against sexism), both in deed and word. Telling husbands to love their wives as they love their own bodies was a revolutionary concept in that age. Jesus' association with women, such as the Samaritan woman (John 4:1-43), the woman who was about to be stoned for adultery (John 8:3-11), and his relationships with Mary Magdalene and many other women in the NT, were in polar opposition to the Jewish teachings and ideas of the day.

When you say "Nothing I've said contradicts Scripture only what your teachers have added to it" you say it without having provided the Scriptural support that you claim that your "revelation" has. I will present my view and support it with Scripture, and it is my hope that you will do likewise. Every believer has died with Christ and has been raised up with him to walk in newness of life. This process of resurrection is not instantaneous and is called Sanctification - the process by which we are made (while still on this earth) more and more like unto Christ: Romans 6:3-11 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life... Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: This process will not be completed while we are yet on this earth because of the sin principle in us: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Romans 7:23 After we die, however, the sin principle will be destroyed, and we will be raised with incorruptible bodies at the final resurrection: 1 Corinthians 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. However, before this corporeal resurrection, I would suggest that the spirits of the believers await this ultimate resurrection in Paradise. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Luke 23:43 Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

The statement "true Christian" is tautalogical. It is like saying that a ball is a "round circle" or that a pyramid is a "triangular triangle".

.

Just because some Christians believe in the rapture (myself included) does not mean that they/we are a cult. Christians will always have different viewpoints on spiritual matters because of our limited perception of the eternal.

A Christian can and should prove he is right by using God's Word - the Bible. For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Hebrews 4:12

Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is pure... Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

There is a serious problem with this reasoning. Let me explain. Let's say that I attend Grace Church in TimBuckTwo. Suddenly I recieve (or think that I recieve) a revelation from God telling me that I need a Mercedes-Benz and that the congregation must provide the funds to pay for it. I present my revelation to the leadership and they are understandably incredulous. They ask me to substantiate my claim by providing Scripture to show how they can trust that what I am saying is from God. I reply that I am there simply to inform them of the revelation I recieved from God and that they must pray to God for substantiation. I don't think that this is a good way of working things - especially because it doesn't have precedence in Scripture. We have a Revelation from God - the Bible. Any new revelation must conform or be shown to conform to God's existing revelation to man.

Hmm... Well, just make sure that you're not using this (I have not been called to "convince") as a way of getting around having to substantiate your claims.

Those who present what they believe to be the truth should attempt to do it justice by presenting it to others in a cogent, substantiated way. As an example, most everyone has had the experience in school of being taught by teachers. Some are good teachers and some are not. What is it that makes them good or bad teachers? Is it the material that they present? Probably not. Most teachers teach using the same basic raw material. What defines them as a teacher is how they present the raw material that they have been given. Good teachers substantiate, try to explain, and present their material in a way that can be understood by most. Teachers aim to convince, not just present raw "facts".

I know that I'm getting off on a rabbit trail, but the word "Dispensation" comes from the Greek "oikonomia" which is translated as such: oikonomia -- pronounced: oy-kon-om-ee'-ah administration (of a household or estate); specially, a (religious) "economy": KJV -- dispensation, stewardship. God generally does bother to write his Word down - and its called the Bible.

Besides, the burden of proof is always upon the one who is introducing a "new" or "different" or doctrine or revelation. Indeed, we are warned by the Apostle Paul: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine... Ephesians 4:14 Don't confuse my reluctance to accept your "revelation" as hardheartedness, it is not - It is caution.

Dispensations is not a Biblical term or teaching. I did not post what I have been told to debate it but to inform. If you don't like the term "dispensation", substitute it with its definition: "a period of time during which God deals with men in a certain and specific way". For the record, the term "dispensation" is found several times in the Bible. (see: 1 Corinthians 9:17, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 3:2, and Colossians 1:25) I find your statement "I did not post what I have been told to debate it but to inform." as an easy way of getting around having to explain fully and/or substantiate (Biblically) a claim of divine revelation.

"The trumpet shall sound and the dead in Christ shall rise........" Unless I am mistaken, we are still in the same Dispensation of time as the Apostle Paul. The verse above uses the future tense - evidently refering to a future event that has not come to pass yet. If I read the complete picture presented by Paul, I cannot understand how it could be supporting what you have proposed. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. We have not, as I understand it, experienced any of the occurrences in this verse.

They are either a part of the New Jerusalem or in the Lake of Fire. And renewed is more correct than remodeled. The old earth will be burned away and all of its works as well, and the unsaved inhabitants will be cast into the Lake of Fire. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 2 Peter 3:10

If there is no Scriptural support for what you claim (I'm not saying that there isn't, I simply wish to see it myself), how can we know that it is the truth and not an invention of man? New revelation must be held up against Scripture to validate it. Acts 17:11 ...they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things (the teachings of Paul and Silas) were so.

Can you present Scripture to substantiate this claim? I'm not challenging in a negative way - just curious. Are you refering to our being "seated with Christ in the heavenly places"? (Ephesians 2:6)

Somehow, I don't think that this would be a major difficulty for a God that spoke the universe into existence.

I would agree in a certain sense, God is a God of logic, however, there is a serious problem with pushing this sort of reasoning because human logic and reasoning is flawed by sin. So, in essence, what you would be saying is "God conforms to my (possibly flawed) viewpoint of Him", which is not a good attitude to have. When you say "It defies logic", it would be more correct to say "It defies my logic or my way of looking at things". There are many, I repeat, many aspects of the spiritual world and God that we with all our human logic and understanding cannot fully comprehend while still in this mortal form: For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 1 Corinthians 13:12 God may not (and often will not) make sense to us, but that is simply because of our flawed natures. That is why, as believers, servants, and students of the Most High we should look to God as such - "Not to what I think you are but to what you know yourself to be".

When are the dead ressurected? I have encountered the idea often (esp. among Jehovah's Witnesses) that the dead remain in an unconcious state until a certain time in the future when Jesus returns. I have always thought that the souls of the dead go to Paradise (not Heaven) immediately and in a conscious state i.e. ...Jesus said unto him...To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Luke 23:43. Then, at the final ressurection, those souls in Paradise and those who die in the time around the Tribulation will recieve a glorified physical body, and will be caught up into heaven. I have a hard time understanding how it is that the dead could be in an unconscious state of "limbo" before the Ressurection especially when Jesus says things like this: Mark 12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. I suppose that it is possible that the those Christians who die depart immediately from the realms of time and find themselves in Heaven right away, because they would not experience the duration of time (as physical beings do) and would find themselves at the end of time immediately. Any thoughts or ideas regarding this?

I think that you might have misunderstood several of the aspects of this poll. I don't read anything in the article that supports your statement that "being less religious is actually better for the economy of a country." The article does say, however, that religion helps people in more adverse circumstances cope with life, which, seems to contradict what you propose. If the people were not able to cope, the situation (economic, social,...ect) would be in fact much worse. To say that that "being less religious is actually better for the economy of a country" in the context of this article would be like someone who does not understand medicine saying that antibiotics must be bad because most of those who take them are ill. I quote from the article: "Implications Social scientists have put forth numerous possible explanations for the relationship between the religiosity of a population and its average income level. One theory is that religion plays a more functional role in the world's poorest countries, helping many residents cope with a daily struggle to provide for themselves and their families. A previous Gallup analysis supports this idea, revealing that the relationship between religiosity and emotional wellbeing is stronger among poor countries than among those in the developed world."

I base my actions on God's principles and the desire to obey them. What I sought to accomplish by quoting Dahmer was to propose that once you take God and his principles out of the equation, morality does become subjective and/or difficult to define. "Right" is defined by God and is doing what pleases God and helps my neighbor.

I wouldn't use the word "de-evolution"; I would use the word "degradation". Any culture (Japanese, Roman, Western...ect) degrades when it departs from God's principles. The basis for Christian Morality can be summarized as follows: (Jesus) ...said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. Luke 10:27 Culture degrades when individuals begin to only think and care about their own selves, and not of their God and their neighbor. "Right" becomes not what pleases God and helps my neighbor but rather what pleases me and "to hell with the standards of God and others, why should I care?". Like the notorious serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer said: "If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…"

Neither technology nor biological urges are the real problem. Paraphrasing the words of a well-kown Christian author: They are all holy when God's hand is on the rein. They all go bad when they set up on their own and make themselves into false gods."