Pan, bear with me here. I'm just curious. Do you believe that your conclusions(about whatever) are the only ones that could possibly be true?

Creative question. (pun intended).

I can not speak for Pan.

For me God puts Rocks in the Path from time to time.

My truth is my path.

the truth of another be as a Rock.

When I find a Rock upon the Path it is certain that God wishes me to learn something else he would have removed it.

In this way my truth can adjust to the path as it is in reality,.

Instead of the imagined way.

Well AB, I wholly agree that each of us will walk our own path, so to speak, and that path will be littered with rocks that need be removed so that we can continue on our way.

I genuinely asked Pan, whom I also cannot speak for, exactly what criterion can be used in order to determine which verses are divinely inspired and which ones are not. It seems clear to me that many different people judge matters with their heart(conscience) and arrive at opposite conclusions. Now given this much, in addition to knowing that verses cannot be both, divinely inspired and not divinely inspired simultaneuosly, we can only conclude that the heart(conscience) does not necessarily serve to give us true answers.

If person A concludes that a verse is not divinely inspired, and person B concludes otherwise, then at least one is wrong. It's that simple.

This is the reason why I've asked Pan to address these things.

How does he know that his judgment is sound, when it is quite clear that the heart(conscience) can cause one to make an error in judgment.

It is irrevelant.

You must believe for Creativesoul and let Pan believe for Pan.

God has room in his eye for both of you.

If Pan sees a truth in one line that excites the spirit...

And you see a truth in another line that excites the spirit.

would not God have been the motivator of both.

and all lines be inspired?

Even if another does not see that portion of the inspiration.

Well, it could be looked at in that way. If however, one believes that the enemy has planted false teachings within the pages of the Bible, then one takes up the difficulty of ascertaining exactly which ones are of divinity and which ones are not. Pan claims that some scripture is lie.

According to one theory, early man believed his recently passed on relative did not actually die. They used to set the table for him or her, and talk to him. Then when the corpse started to smell, they cut it off from his head and shrank the head.

This evolved to such things as pyramidal tombs being filled with goodies and slaves; then it further evolved into a belief that gods were hungry for food and drinks.

That evolved into making it symbolic, like "we share our food with you".

Christianity is the first religion where god gives humans the sacrifice in his flesh and blood at communion. Bread and wine, basically. It's unique, coz basically he offers the sacrifice to us. Instead of the common and ordinary way of humans feeding the gods.

Then again, we can't have satisfying sex, or gay sex, or the fun of killing each other at random even, and we absolutly MUST respect our elders.

You can have all the gay sex you want wux...

Aye...

Scripture is changed often by the scribes.

Yet the work is inspired (we are assured of this by Yahweh through his prophets).

so...

When you read it the holy spirit will inspire you along the way.

Inspiring comes from the breath of God.

Pan has a diferent breathing cycle than do you.

Your lungs are not the same.

Adventure wrote:




NO SCRIPTURES WITHIN THE HOLY BIBLE HAVE EVER BEEN CHANGED

BY ANY SCRIBES!!!!

EVER !!!


PAN IS MISCONSCUING AND TWISTING SCRIPTURES ON HERE!!!!!

AND IT IS ACTUALLY QUITE SAD TO SEE HIM DOING THIS ON HERE !!!



THE HOLY SPIRIT INDWELLING BELIEVERS NOW, SHOWS US THE

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRUTH AND A LIE NOW... ..AND WE ARE

THERFEORE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCE.


AND WE KNOW THRU THE HOLY SPIRIT INDWELLING US, THAT THERE ARE

NO LIES CONTAINED WITHIN THE PAGES OF THE BIBLE WHATSOEVER !!!!



THE HOLY SPIRIT IN US BELIEVERS, LEADS US INTO ALL TRUTH NOW!!!!

GOD'S WORD IS TRUTH!!!!!



LISTEN UP:

HOLY GOD AND LIES DON'T AND WON'T AND CAN'T MIX !!!!


AND SINCE GOD IS ALSO THE WORD OF GOD ,

GOD'S WORD AND LIES DON'T AND WON'T AND CAN'T MIX EITHER!!!!


EVER !!!!!

"NO SCRIPTURES WITHIN THE HOLY BIBLE HAVE EVER BEEN CHANGED

BY ANY SCRIBES!!!!

EVER !!! "
--------------------------------------------------
I will say it as I see it.

Balderdash... (check history).

The Holy Bible that you hold as you read it has indeed been in whole and in part, completely written by scribes. (search 'Niceia', Constantine and other things from that time).

The closest book of the Abrahamic religions that has little of the scribe in it is the Torah. That 'works' exists in near exact match when one reads back to it from the Koran or the Bible.

As you are inspired by the spirit when you read it... so is the 'veil' lifted.

You don't read anything I repond to you, huh?


creative said:

I answered:

instead of answering, creatived asked this:

This was all after I said the Bible states that every man has God's law written upon their heart. So your questions were answered before you asked those things.


You seem to be more concerned about the how and why as opposed to the what. I already told the how and why, you were supposed to give me the what.

You want to imply that I think only my conclusions could be true? That's funny 'cause that's always been my position when debating you. You question another's logic and attack their evidence. You ignore the fact that everyone has their own opinion.

Adventure gets it, pay attention to his words...


Regarding Biblical matters, I've challenged you a few times to read scripture for yourself and come to your own conclusion, yet you refuse to read or refuse to answer. I figure any logical person would see it as clear as I do, but "logical" people think they know everything so they never check for themselves.

Do you think that you do not have the capability to determine which scriptures are devine and which ones aren't?

Ok...Adventure NOW you say WRITTEN.

BUT EARLIER, you said CHANGED!!!!

WRITTEN...YES !!!!


CHANGED...NO!!!

SCRIBES DID NOT NOT NOT CHANGE THE WORD OF GOD!!!

MEANING.... SCRIBES DID NOT CHANGE THE WORDING OF GOD'S WORD !!!!

THE SCRIBES WERE VERY METICULOUS IN WRITNG THE WORD OF GOD , TO

BE SURE IT WAS EXACTLY AS THE ORIGINAL SCROLLS !!!



BUT I REPEAT....THEY NEVER NEVER NEVER CHANGED ANY OF GOD'S WORD !!!

THEY WOULD NOT DARE !!!


Read this, Adventure...this will help see just how meticulous

the scribes were.


http://www.kenscustom.com/bible/authen.html





here is just part:


"...By the time Jesus was born, the most recent Old Testament book

(Malachi) had been copied and recopied over a span of more than

four hundred years; the books that Moses wrote had been copied this

way for more than fourteen hundred years. Yet during that time the

scribes guarded the Old Testament text very well. It has been

computed that, on the average they mistakenly copied one out of

every 1,580 letters; and they usually corrected these errors when

they made new copies.


Jeremiah is the first to mention the scribes as a professional

group: "How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the Lord is with

us? Lo, certainly in vain make he it; the pen of the scribes

(sopherim) is in vain" (Jer.8:8).


The word sopherim literally means "the counters"; the early

scribes earned this title because they counted every letter of every

book of Scripture to make sure they didn't leave out anything.

After the Jews returned from Exile, they formed communities of

scribes to preserve and circulate the Scriptures that had become so

precious to them. These scribes ( later called the Masoretes )

tried to explain the variations in different manuscripts. They

eventually developed a system of vowel pointing that preserved the

pronunciation of the Hebrew words.



Before he began his work each day, the scribe would test his reed

pen by dipping it in ink and writing the name Amalek, then crossing

it out (cf. Deut. 25:19). Then he would say, "I am writing the

Torah in the name of its sanctity and the name of God in its

sanctity." The scribe would read a sentence in the manuscript he was

copying, repeat it aloud, and then write it. Each time he came to

the name of God, he would say, " I am writing the name of God for

the holiness of His name." If he made an error in writing God's

name, he had to destroy the entire sheet of papyrus or vellum that

he was using.



After the scribe finished copying a particular book, he would

count all of the words and letters it contained. Then he checked

this tally against the count for the manuscript that he was copying.

He counted the number of times a particular word occurred in the

book, and he noted the middle word and the middle letter in the

book, comparing all of these with his original. By making these

careful checks, he hoped to avoid any scribal errors."


http://www.kenscustom.com/bible/authen.html

All you have written is true.

Yet...

Was the same care taken when the words were written in english?

More important... the book you quote was not treated in this way...

rather was it 'scribed' by a council of men...

who watched the tip of the sword of an emperor to see if their work pleased him.

Do not be so sure it has no inaccuracies.

Bibe translators were/are also very meticulous and

careful in translating the bible into different languages.

Translators make very sure the MEANING of scriptures does not

change whatsoever.

Translators are very careful so as not to take away from the

meaning of scriptures in any way.


However, there are some cults who have changed God's Word.

Sadly, these cults don't believe in the DEITY of Christ,and

have re-writtien their own version of scripture, intead..



But we are not talking about cults ...we are talking LEGIT

bible translators....who are very careful in

Translating Gods' Word, in order to MAKE VERY SURE that the THE

MEANING OF SCRIPTURES IN THE TRANSLATING OF GOD'S WORD,

REMAINS EXACTLY THE SAME.

To quite the contrary, I read all of the responses very carefully. Sometimes I agree, and sometimes I do not. If your claim seems suspect for some reason, then I ask questions to make sure that I understand your position. Sometimes the 'answer' received looks like one(is helpful) and sometimes it doesn't. For instance, the response above in no way serves to answer the question. Rather, it neglects answering and focuses instead upon what you believe about my actions - which has nothing to do with the question. I'll try again, but phrase it differently this time, perhaps a little more generality will help move things along...

Do we, as fallible humans, have good reason to think/believe that we've gotten things right when we seek to understand the world around us(which entails understanding divinity)?

If so, what would those reasons be?






What else could be reasonably concluded from that Pan? I asked a clear question that gets directly to the 'heart' of the matter at hand(pun intended), and you answered by asking an irrelevant question. I mean, surely we all know that it is quite certain that my thoughts on the matter do not serve as your answer to the question that I asked you. So, based upon your previous testimony in addition to the question you asked, I figured that you meant that own's own thought could properly judge divinity. I mean, how else could that question constitute being an answer? However, I was unsure, so I asked if you meant human thought determines divinity, because I wanted to know if I had understood you correctly.






Yes, and as already noted in this post, that was obviously being taken into consideration. In fact, the heart claim(s) are the basis upon which subsequent questions are being asked. The entire conversation was began by me with the intent to find out what you meant by the claims that you had been making. Quite simply, I do not find that your claims are worthy of belief, and none of your answers have served as reason to change my mind. I do not accept that one;s one's heart, thought, or conscience(however you'd like to put it) serves as a dependable guide, because that quite simply does not pan out when we look at real life. So, you can save the 'historical account' of our conversation, it is not necessary. It seems to me that I've a good grasp upon what has been discussed thus far.






A bunch of words that say nothing at all. Such ambiguity serves in opposition to clarity, which is what I'm seeking.






You're sorely mistaken, and it may be "funny" to some, but it serves as a clear sign to others. I mean, now you're going to tell me what I want? How could you possibly know that?

It does not follow from the fact that that's been your position when debating me that it's mine.

To quite the contrary, questions do not necessarily imply anything at all Pan. Although questions can imply lot's of things, they cannot do so all by themselves. Knowing that much should serve as caution against thinking that we know what's going on in the mind of our interlocutor. Since it has come up, I'll offer my own thinking so that you'll be able to have more accurate information about my wants rather than just what you (falsely)believe them to be.

It was not a rhetorical question, it was a legitimate one(which has yet have been answered, by the way). I asked whether or not you thought/believed that your conclusions were the only ones that could possibly be true because I wanted to know that, not because I already thought it. The question was aiming not at you personally as a target, but rather it was meant to serve as a segue to bigger and better things. Namely, what sound judgment takes.

So, I did not necessarily think that I already knew the answer to the question. I asked because I wanted to know the answer. Your response offered much more than that.






Some call that doing philosophy.






I'm well aware that everyone has their own opinion, but that is trivially true. I mean, it offers nothing more than showing how they're all the same. The differences shed light. What does offer more, is our knowing that not all opinions are equally well thought out. Opinions are about the facts, and not all can bear the weight of careful inspection. Not all opinions have what it takes to answer the pivotal questions, the answers of which will clearly show how well we understand what it is that we think/believe.






This is false.

In order for it to be true, I would have had to have refused to read scripture for my self and come to my own conclusions. Seeing how I've read the Bible several times over, and studied about it as well, the above claim clearly does not have what it takes to be true. Given what the facts are/were, it cannot ever obtain truth, for the claim cannot possibly correspond to that which it contradicts. Claims are expressions of belief. The one contained in the above quote is false.






Well, you've figured wrong.

The opinion here is based upon your belief regarding what you think "logical people" are, and more importantly it shows that you also believe that all "logical people" are same since you've clearly claimed that "logical people think they know everything..."







What I think about my own capability is utterly irrelevant. Knowing what it takes to be able to render sound judgment is what is at stake. That being said, in order for anyone to be capable of determining which scriptures are divine and which ones are not, sound judgement must be capable of being rendered. The judge would have to have a true understanding of what constitutes being each of those things. In other words, in order to be capable of judging whether something is or is not "divinely inspired", one must first know what being "divinely inspired" looks like, or it seems in your case 'feels' like.

If a 40-year-old devoutly religious man wholeheartedly believes in the Word, and partakes in developing a personal relationship with a 14-year-old female and that relationship has a sexual aspect, isn't that man's and that female's 'hearts', so to speak, that are judging(determining) whether or not the relationship is acceptable?

If a murderous villain sets out to maim and slaughter as many people as s/he possibly can and does so, isn't that person's 'heart', so to speak, judging that that behavior is acceptable?

If a woman chooses to get a partial birth abortion, isn't that woman's 'heart', so to speak, judging that that is acceptable?

--

I mean the examples are virtually endless, but the point is only to show that the claim that God's law is written upon the 'hearts' of every man is highly suspect. It certainly cannot be said, even if it is true, that we can use our 'hearts' in order to render sound judgment. That quite simply is not necessarily the case, as facts clearly show.

So, the point here is to guide the conversation towards what sound judgment takes, because we can know that it takes more than just one's 'heart' and/or thought. Those are necessary, but insufficient.

God's law is NOT just automatically written on

just anyone and everyone's heart !!!!


God will NOT intrude on man's free will like that,and just write

his law on just anyone's heart,regardless of whether man

believes and accepts Him or not.


God would have to go completely against His Word in order to do

that....God would have to completely go against man's free

will to choose to believe in Him and His Word, or not believe.


But God doesn't work that way.


That is why God writes His laws ONLY on the tablets of the

hearts of those who believe and accept Him and His Word.


God then is able to write His Law on the tablets of the hearts

of those who believe and accept Him and His Word.


Those who seek after God with all their heart and hunger and thirst

for God's Word.... and meditate on God's Word day and night...

those with a willing heart to Obey God's Word with a loving heart

towards God now (because of a new nature within )....

those are the ones upon whose hearts God will write His Laws .


Hebrews 8:10-12

"But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel

on that day, says the Lord: I WILL PUT MY LAWS IN THEIR MINDS,AND I

WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS . I WILL BE THEIR GOD,AND THEY WILL

BE MY PEOPLE."


......................


2nd Corinthians 3:3

You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our

ministry, written NOT WITH INK but WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE LIVING

GOD , NOT ON TABLETS OF STONE BUT ON TABLET OF HUMAN HEARTS.


........................


Ezekiel 36:26

I will give you a NEW HEART and put a new spirit in you; I will

remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.




http://www.oldpaths.com/archive/davison/roy/allen/1940/written.html


http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/2506.htm

And btw.....

God's Law is LOVE......and His Gospel is Peace.


Amen.

We are are only enemy.

If a scribe worked upon the works and his mind was filled with peace. so also would his work.

If a scribe worked upon the works and his mind was filled with the arguement he just had with his wife... perhaps a bit of anger bias would slip in.

If a scribe worked upon the works and hated another race...

the enemy behind the tree becomes the hated one... and it becomes harder for one who but reads to see the Gem of Truth... Yet the scribe understands not... but the hate blinds him to the need of the next generation.

......Now, as you all know right well, the FIRST covenant

was broken all to pieces; it was unable to stand by reason of the

weakness of our flesh and the corruptness of our nature. So God set

aside that FIRST covenant and he brought in a NEW covenant,—the

covenant of GRACE; and in our text we see what is the tenor of

it:

"I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS,

AND WRITE THEM IN THEIR HEARTS."



This is one of the most GLORIOUS PROMISES that ever fell from the

lips of infinite Love !!


God said not, "I will come again, as I came on Sinai, and thunder at

them." No, but, "I will come in gentleness and mercy, and find a

way into their hearts." He said not, "I will take two great tables

of stone, and with my finger write out my law before their eyes."

No, but, "I will put my finger upon their hearts, and there will I

write my law."


He said not, "I will give promises and threatenings that shall be

the safeguard of this new covenant;" but, "I will with my Spirit

graciously operate upon their minds and their hearts,and so I will

sweetly influence them to serve me,—not for reward,nor from any

servile motive, but because THEY KNOW ME , and THEY LOVE ME , and

they feel it to be their DELIGHT to walk in the way of my

commandments."



O dear sirs may you all be shares in the blessings of that new

covenant! May God say this of you, and do this to you; and if so,

we shall meet in the glory-land, to sing unto the grace of that

eternal God who has wrought so wondrously with us, and in us, and

for us!


exerts from


http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/2506.htm