Amigo42

Well, I don't think the Bible is faulty. It is inspired by the Spirit of God in general, but it doesn't mean every single word is perfect and direct from the mouth of God. For example, I'm sure God has inspired all of us who serve Him. God may have inspired some of us to write books, but we wouldn't necessarily claim every word in the book we wrote is perfect because we know some of it contains our own ideas and concepts. However, the inspiration behind the work is of God. Another example, humans and all life forms on this planet are made and created directed by the Master Mind, God the Father. Our design is perfect. However, because of sin our bodies are dying and people sometimes get sick. Does that mean God's design and creation are not perfection. No! It is perfect, but sin has brought corruption. I see the Bible in the same way which you must note was not directly created by God's own power. Do I still trust the Bible? Of course, I trust that is gives us all we need to know to believe and trust in the High King.

I think that sometimes people forget that the prevailing culture at the time also weighed heavily on people. It doesn't mean that everything that was said was a commandment or even an inspiration from God, and that's ok.

What I would ask in why on earth would we trust the word of faulty man with an agenda to tell us how old the earth is. 4.5 billion years!!? Seriously. I mean I was a science major in college, and a lot of this so called "proof" is greatly exaggerated, misinterpreted, and misguided understandings of things they don't fully understand. I mean if you really think about it. How on earth is a man with a lifespan of 70-80 years going to tell anyone with certainty that anything is over 1 billion years much less 4.5 billions years. Also, I think common sense would be enough. 4.5 billions years of existence would show real proof like a human population of 1 trillion or something along those lines. I mean in the 1920s, the world's population was 2 billion, and now in about 100 years it is 7.5 billion. In addition, where is the history of ancient civilizations or even a scant history of human settlements from even 30,000 years ago.

I agree that Mr. Ehrman is an interesting character. In one hand, he comes across as a even handed, fair-minded person who gives both sides of a story. He does bring to light some issues that help Christians strengthen their understanding of the Word through the lens of wisdom. However, he also appears to be a disciple of the enemy to attempt to lead some Christians to doubt and disbelief even though he doesn't really say anything new. His arguments have been discussed for centuries, but he sensationalizes it for the masses who are not as well-versed in the spiritual depth of Christianity. My personal opinion is that he was a strict fundamentalist who thought the Bible was word for word perfect, and when he found that wasn't the case he couldn't handle it and went the other way. However, I think common sense would show that God himself did not write Bible though He certainly inspired it. Just because He inspired doesn't mean that every detail is inerrant. Humans are still imperfect, but God used them to present an overall message of His love for mankind. Let me give another example. God created this world and all life perfect because he is perfect. The design and creation of this world and all life is perfect. However, just because our creation is perfect doesn't mean that humans won't get sick or die. Because of sin, it has impacted even the perfect creation that God has made. So, I look at the writing of the Bible in the same way.

I ask this question because I believe that a lot of Christians are not prepared to respond to skeptics or people like Bart Ehrman who are scholars of the New Testament. I think that some Christians are too fundamentalist or narrow in a strict definition of inerrant. Is every single word in the Gospels exactly accurate and specific to exactly what occurred in history? Maybe not exactly, but that's not important. The point is that the Gospels give us a general and sometimes specific Outline of the ministry and purpose of the Lord Jesus Christ. All of the details in the between are not as important for Christians to twist themselves into psychological or spiritual knots. Did Jesus walk 20 paces and preach or did he walk 40 paces? How many paces he walked is not important. In reality maybe he only walked 25 paces and neither account of the 20 or the 40 is correct. This is not important or relevant to the Gospel message.

Hi I'll say this. Sometimes, Christians, seekers, and non-Christians alike miss how God speaks to us every single day. Sometimes God speaks to us through the small things in life that we may miss or think are just coincidences. It's so important not to miss the small ways God speaks to us. It could be as simple as someone calling you when you weren't expecting it. It could be a butterfly landing on your finger as your contemplating the awe of God's creation. There are so many ways that God speaks to us.

The Bible indeed does not say anything about people being taken prior to a tribulation. The teaching is a stretch of interpretation and don't have a real theological foundation.

Hi Jayne, I certainly wasn't comparing southern people to those who attacked the US on 9-11. I was simply comparing the confederacy with those who attacked the US. I don't believe a majority of southerners support the "heritage" of the confederacy. So, I wouldn't compare them to the 9-11 hijackers.

That's very introspective and honest to try to put yourself in others' shoes. Too many people make decisions only thinking of themselves.

I've got to say your post gave me a little chuckle. I don't mean that in a negative way. I don't think that democrat equates to wanting to loot and riot. lol. In fact, I'm a conservative Christian from Georgia originally who has lived in other places too. I will certainly not be supporting the bigot-in-chief in November. I'll be supporting the honorable J. Biden. I have to disagree with you in the sense that the South made an effort to secede to keep the State's rights for decisions. The only right they wanted was to take away rights of African slaves, and they were willing to shed their blood to uphold an evil practice. No Christian should support the confed flag (not saying you do) if any just for the reason that it is a stumbling block to your African American brothers and sisters in Christ along with people of all races. For most people, the confederate flag is a symbol of evil and hate, and that's just what it is. So, even if people have innocent intentions for displaying it, that's not the point. For a Christian, our number goal is to serve Jesus and be a witness. A confederate flag is an automatic negative witness for the Lord. So, Christians should certainly be the main one in the south burning those wretched flags down. Anyway, it is good to fully understand how one's witness for Jesus can be impacted by impressions.

Do you all as Christians feel that support of the confederate flags and monuments is the same as building memorials to honor the 9-11 hijackers in the US? It can be stated that honoring confederate generals who literally tried to destroy this country and caused the deaths of 600,000 people because of their rebellion is much worse.

Thank you for your thought Neighbor. That is an interesting concept in that you brought up the Sabbath. The majority for Christendom now continues with a pagan tradition that started with the early Christians of the Roman Empire thrived in pagan Rome. The majority of Christians do not honor the Seventh Day of the week to rest for the Lord.

Very reasoned and thought out response. Kudos!

Well, let's fire up that grill with those Octopus brains and sluglets! No clean or unclean anymore. Actually, I think I'll stick to the common sense practical teaching of Biblical dietary guidelines because God knows what's best, and scavengers carry diseases. It just doesn't make sense to eat creatures of sin when there are creatures of cleanliness freely available. It's not just about legalism. It just makes sense to not eat refuse foods.

Amen! I completely agree with you on that. I just don't see how the earth with its resources can sustain another 500 years of humans. I believe the end is near. I could maybe see the earth being here 100 or 200 years more. I believe even human population growth is a harbinger of the end along with climate change and other signs.

You gave some very thoughtful answers in the response. It is true that even with clean meats, people don't want to overeat due to health related issues, but the problem is exacerbated with unclean meats for the reason you've outlined. Not sure why anyone sees something that looks like an overgrown roach(lobster) and says "oh that looks so delicious."

I agree with your point about people finding reasons to blame for the virus and all. I also understand the symbolism of clean and unclean doctrines, but in the most literal sense it still doesn't negate that God required those who he has set apart to abstain from unclean meats. this is partly due to the unclean meats representing not just unclean doctrines but sin itself. For example, pigs are by nature some of the filthiest creatures on the planet, but God decided them to be nature garbage cleaners. They help keep the environment clean by consuming trash and other refuse. Pigs not only have diseases in nature like trichinosis and are unhealthy, but they also represent the symbolism of filth and sin. God doesn't want His people swim in the filth of sin. He wants better for them, and he wants them to be holy. So, it more than just a command. In addition, just from a perspective of loving God, why would anyone want to consume a creature that He at one point declared unclean. It just doesn't make sense from that point of view regardless of whether they can be raised sanitarily on farms now. It's just the principle. Why would anyone choose to do something God said not to at some point when they are more clean and healthier opitions.

I actually edited my response from before. Those were of the words of Jesus written by Mark.

Yes, I see your point, but I think we fail to recognize that sometimes Paul even admitted But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. (1 Cor 7:12). So, sometimes Paul is giving his commentary and not speaking on commandment from God. In addition, the entire point is that Jesus was trying to affirm that legalism or keeping the law in and of itself doesn't save a person. It is empty without the love of God. He was stating that what one eats does not defile the soul, but sin defiles the soul. He was NOT however giving blanket permission to disobey God's words that were already spoken and affirmed.

For discussion, most Christian today eat unclean meats including pig, crayfish, lobster, and even some exotic creatures such as snakes. However, how do those of you who do so justify eating unclean meats when the Bible so clearly lists those not to eat. Before, you mention it. I know that most people will say we're no longer under the law but under grace and that Peter had a vision that said it's ok to eat unclean meats now. For the concept of being under grace, it's clear from the words of Jesus and Paul that this does not mean that Christians are free to sin willy nilly. It's clear that God still expects us to obey His commandments not because of duty or legalism but rather because we do so willingly out of love and devotion to God. For the point about Peter's vision, there really isn't much to say about it because it not unambiguously clear. The vision is not referring to anything literal at all in terms of eating. It was symbolic to refer to accept the gentiles into the fold and not viewing them as unclean anymore from the Jews' perspective. It is absolutely clear from the context.

The sooner this wretch rock is vanquished the better. This planet has just been a big experiment of what NOT to do for the rest of the unfallen worlds.

Yeah, I hear you. Whenever we go who love Jesus is essentially when the Lord returns for us. I do believe though that the signs point to the end. Even looking at population growth is an indication. Human world population was 2 billion in the 1920s, and in a mere century it has expanded more than threefold. Human population growth is exponential, and by 2050 it's supposed to be 11 billion. I don't think the world can sustain humans much longer. This is ok though because Jesus will return soon.

When do you all think Christ will return? How much time do you think there is till the end. I believe the end is very near, maybe 100-500 years. The Bible in Daniel says that in the last days "knowledge shall increase and people will run to and fro throughout the earth(Daniel 12:4). There has not been a time in history where human knowledge has expanded like this. In the last 200 years humans literally from horse and buggy to the moon.

Yeah, his crazy budget is so corrosive. The republicans give billions of dollars in tax breaks to the super wealthy who truly don't need it while trying to cut support for those who truly need it. It's disgusting. What's sad is how so many people from poor States blindly support his agenda without realizing its detrimental affects to their livelihood.

I'm sorry, but your statements here are totally not grounded in facts at all. The house managers proved overwhelmingly that he was guilty of the thing they accused him. I mean the proof is right there out in the open. He even admitted it and asked if China could even interfere in a US election. In addition, those articles were related to actual crimes. The Impoundment Control Act and Campaign Finance laws. Even Republican senators stated that he was guilty, but they didn't think it rose to the level of impeachment.