RevRainbow

Dammit, man, ya confused me again...had to look up "conflating."

I agree with your response, brother Pete, especially about it being confusing. No need to apologize to me, I just wanted to call attention to what was happening. I do think your point about Judaism (as well as mine about ULC ordination) should enlighten us to the fact that whatever belief system you employ, there will be others who just cant see it your/our way. Methinks we certainly can share differences as well as similarities (how else so we gain knowledge, insight and even higher levels of understanding). All in all, I believe we do care for one another around here and we do want to learn, why else would we be so frustrated at times! Is there anyone among us who has been here for a while, who will not agree that whatever our faith, this forum has caused us to grow spiritually? Peace.

So when the challenge was made as to "have you ever met a Jew who believed in an afterlife," it did not include Messianic Jews? Oh, someone should have pointed that out. Cool was not wrong in choosing his answer because the exception was not noted. Pete is not right in reference to Cool's answer since he merely wants to discredit the answer by adding a later stipulation to the question. You guys first have to define your terms and then any conditions which apply. IMO, it was not a good question, it was not a good answer and it was not a good rebuttal.

Well, I'll just say yes, I have met Jews who believe in an afterlife - maybe not eternal, I don't remember - and not quite the same type of afterlife I believe in, but there are Jews whom I've met who believe there is more out there after death. and, no, they were not Messianic (Christian) Jews. There are also so-called Christians who do not believe in an afterlife...how can that be? I think it is confusing at best how we tend to box people in to our convenient little definitions which, by the way, are not compatable one to another. Obviously, a few folks here do not hold the same definition of Liberal, Fundamental, Orthodox, etc, etc, and yet continue to argue before defining, one to another, better definitions of the words they are using. And then there is the nitpicking: one is asked if he ever knew a Jew who beleived in the afterlife and he says yes and then is rebuked because that Jew is not considered "average or typical" when the question did not mention that specific. I too have known Messianic Jews and we should consider that they are more likened unto the first Christians than we Gentiles who have unraveled Christianity into a hundred or more different sects, many abominations of truth. To me, the blanket term "Christian," today (not saying I agree) is taken as anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus to some degree. Just as there are many out there who argue a ULC ordination does not make you a "real" minister, so too, we argue what makes a "real" Christian. It is, in the final analysis, a matter of the heart and only God knows what is really in our heart. Many disciples followed Jesus("Lord; rabbi"), some apostles beleived in Him ("Thou art the Messiah").

I was only playing word games with ya! Just like average Christian...havent seen one lately!

Hey Hex, what's an "average Jew?"

In regards to what? being disciples? Saved? You know them (you say), I do not. Do you think it is wise for me to pass judgment on any factor of their spirituality? It is a leading question, IMO, for you to use to pounce on our differences. I choose not to answer simply for the sake of further argument. Jesus' saying does not imply that all people who love are his disciples. "Even you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children." Knowing as much as you claim to know, you should know why I chose that verse in describing a Christian. There is nothing wrong with being a fundamentalist other than most of the time they fall into a pattern of biblical legalism and have lost their first love.

"By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one to another." -Jesus (John 13:35)

Good to hear! PS: Nice photo (good to see who you're praying for!).

This is where you and I strongly differ in our beliefs, my good friend. Although it would make for a good movie (Charlton Heston didnt do too bad with it), and although I would agree that it is not inerrant, I do beleive the bible to be Divinely inspired. To me, that means what is in the bible is there because God wants it there and He uses what is there to help guide me along my path to knowing Him better. It would be the last book I would trash(and never will). I am not saying that God does not use other means, other sacred writings, or Nature to commune with us. What I am saying is that when I asked, this is what I got from Him. I believe it provides the milk of the word for babies and stronger food as one progresses in their spiritual growth. To say there was no need for the sacrifice of the cross, strikes at the heart of Christianity, IMO, and, if there was no resurrection of Christ, then my faith is in vain. I choose to believe in the finished work of Christ on the cross, His resurrection, and His return. If I am wrong, so be it. Let God be true and all men liars.

Considering that God always was, would it not be logical that perhaps someone heard of Him before the Israelites? Was YHWH no one's God before Moses wrote about Him? Any evidence of Pre-historic existence of the knowledge of God, IMO, does not discredit the biblical God or how He may have communicated with humanity. The similarities of recorded events would, IMO, give more credibility to the written word being more fact than fable, regardless of the myth factor which may have been employed in various cultures. PS to Pete: Sorry, phone books are not innerrant, besides there are too many characters and no plot.

According to my old Scofield bible, the upper case LORD is substituted for YHWH, while the lower case Lord, is a respected title for master, or ones superior.

Will do.

Hey rabbi, wait up!

Perhaps we should term it "Biblical Interpretive Christianity." Here is my FUNDAMENTAL belief: "God IS, and He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

Cool, while I stated I agreed with you in regards to the actions of those who had prayed for Pete, and agree also on the power of prayer, I encouraged Pete that I would pray, if requested. I am somewhat taken aback by your subsequent response especially demanding a reason if someone decided not to pray with you. Methinks you need to reconsider your words. I understand Hex's response, and he is, no doubt, not alone. I would expect the same response had I posted the "call to prayer" as you did. Christians who are as rigid in their fundamentalism as you, are few on this forum and, sometimes, your method of approach to the diverse majority, leaves even other Christians gasping. I understand where you are coming from (I was there, and still am partially). It is not so much that I disagree with you, but with your approach. Others, you must consider, do not understand at all and are offended. Prayer is a personal thing. It can be participated in by groups, certainly, and this can be encouraged. You must remember that in this forum, many are being led (or lead themselves) in different approaches, and different methods of prayer perhaps foreign to us Christians. When someone posts a prayer request in the topic area, I am not required to answer that I will pray even if I do. If I am requested to pray, I will, as led by the Spirit and not someone else. If someone actually posts a prayer, I may give my amen to it and maybe not but that is no indication that I do not have compassion on the requester. I am told, as a Christian, to come boldly to the throne of Grace. I do not have to grovel. Also, as far as fasting, perhaps some do the old fashion way, but I refer you to the book of Isaiah 58: 3-7. While I agree we can fast through denying ourselves food, it is for our benefit rather than God's, as a means to assure ourselves of our sincerity since God already knows our hearts. On this forum, where the call to prayer will result in a diverse response of participants (note the prayer topic) and responses, I feel it is highly presumptuous to expect others to pray as I do, nor would I ever demand a reason for their not praying - their way or mine. And remember, there will be quite a few who will not be praying in Jesus' Name.

Im 100 percent with Coolhand on this. It is a sin for someone to tell you or your parents that it was a lack of faith on their part as to why you were not healed. What a lousy excuse to hand someone for their failure. You are part of this family, as Cool says. We may argue and disagree, but we are family, dysfunctional as it might seem at times. I will join in prayer as the Spirit leads me if you request it, Pete. I am certain others will also. God says to keep banging on the door until He answers and, if we ask for bread, He wont give us rocks. Peace. Been there, done that; see your point. I can understand that definition.

If love is not unconditional, then, IMO, it is not love but possessiveness (lust) and manipulation. Because I love you does not mean that I cannot rebuke you or, if you are my child punish you after fair warning. Unconditional love does not imply a lack or absence of discipline.

It's late. Ill get back tomorrow. As far as another way, I didnt say that, I merely stated I didnt know what "the" way meant in its fullness of understanding. Niters.

Okay, you answered my questions and I get a better picture now. As far as a problem, I am aware there will be at least two judgments, a preliminary judgment of works which will be rewarded or burned up as worthless, and a final judgment. All I know about that final judgment, or anything else for that matter, is what I have read, been taught, and led by the Spirit of God to believe. I believe in hell, because I am told Jesus was there and released the captives who were waiting for entry to heaven. The rest who were there, are still there awaiting judgment. There is a Lake of Fire, but exactly what that means I am not certain. Eternal punishment or total annihilation of the soul.But it is definitely seperation from God (which to me would be punishment enough!). I do not see where unconditional love is not biblical, for God can still judge those that reject Him or hate Him or bring evil upon others in this life. But eternal suffering for the many? I guess its a matter of understanding the spiritual expressed in terms we can understand in our human minds. Let me give you a scenario. At the last judgment, as hoards of mankind were about to be cast into everlasting fire and torment, would you not plead with God to have mercy on their souls and shorten their sentence at least? As an aside: If the bible is inerrant, how did the word agape get in there then?