# The truth of God for a lie?



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Romans 1:26 That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires.

25For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions.

Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either – women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men – all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it – emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.

My question is can sinners be so bad that God will quit calling or opening the door? Was it because they worshipped the wrong God? Will God not let Hindus become Christians?

If this is so that God would do this, then why did he use the same group that he turned over to their degrading passions to make this point:

The point being given right after in Romans 2:1.
Romans 2:1
You may think you can condemn such people, but you are just as bad, and you have no excuse! When you say they are wicked and should be punished, you are condemning yourself, for you who judge others do these very same things.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Why would God punish sin with sin on non-believers to begin with?  Sinners are already depraved or totally depraved and need God to open the door so to speak. Why didn't God just save these depraved people or at least call?
Maybe God's  abandonment was temporary. Maybe it was to show us we are just as bad. I don't believe God made them bad but Paul was able to use the depraved group to make his point that we are all unrighteous and hence need the righteousness of Jesus.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

I've read this passage many times and it appears these people commited the sin of Idoltry, perhaps reverting back from Christianity which opens the door to other questions.
Regardless their sin was punished with more sin. They wouldn't acknowledge God so he punished them with the penalty of more sin. They were filled with all manner of wickedness.


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

No sinner, no matter how bad, upon repentance will not be welcomed back by the father as a prodigal son.  When that sinner does come home, there will be more rejoicing in heaven than for the many that did not stray.  

Did they worship the wrong god?  No, there is but one God.  Their sin is that they worshiped human creations and neglected to worship God.  Some created idols or worshiped ideas that were human creations.  Others tried to worship God but did so incorrectly.  They tried to humanize God.  Worshiping human precepts, human ideas, protocol, procedure and laws instead of worshiping TRUTH.  

God is not egotistical.  Hindus, Buddhists, whoever, are not wrong for calling God by a different name or worshiping according to local culture or custom.  They are only wrong if they worship human inventions instead of TRUTH.  

God's laws execute themself.  They are out of time, out of space and not subject to circumstance.  (Emerson, I've referred to this before) By refusing to know God, the sinners create their own suffering.  By living a lie, they are punished by God's self executing laws.  As long as they continue to fail to see the truth they continue to suffer.  Is this God punishing them?  Yes but not as direct cursing but as a result of their failing to obey truth.  Imagine this, I stick my hand in a fire.  I get burnt.  Any intelligent person would quickly learn to stop sticking his hand in the fire and he stops getting burnt.  These people, still being of the flesh, continue to stick their hands into the fire, trying to satisfy human passions.  The way God punished them for sin with more sin is by not changing his unalterable law of truth.  All these people need to do is to realize that they are not living truth.  Then by discovering  that truth and living according to it, the suffering stops.  The truth could be learned by the observant and active person through many years of random trials.  They would be quite beat up in the end but if they lived long enough, they could learn to follow God's law, TRUTH. Or they could follow the example set by Jesus, the road map to salvation.


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

And to avoid the idea that God set the world in motion and now sits back and watches, realize that he does provide us with opportunity to see his truth.  Almost constantly, we just fail to see it.  
Luke 12:54-57  "when you see a cloud rising in the west, you say immediately that rain is coming - and so it does.  When the wind blows from the south, you say it is going to be hot - and so it is.  You hypocrites! If you can interpret the portents of earth and sky, why can you not interpret the present time?  Tell me, why do you not judge for yourselves what is just?"


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> God is not egotistical.  Hindus, Buddhists, whoever, are not wrong for calling God by a different name or worshiping according to local culture or custom.  They are only wrong if they worship human inventions instead of TRUTH.



Say What???  Do you believe that Hindus, who worship over 3 million gods and goddesses are worshiping the one true and only God of the Bible?

If they are, why is the commandment not to have any other gods there?  Why not say we are all worshiping the same god, we just call him a different name?

Is Baal, Allah, Budda, Krishna, Vishnu, Beelzebub and Astaroth the same as God?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> Yes but not as direct cursing but as a result of their failing to obey truth.  Imagine this, I stick my hand in a fire.  I get burnt.  Any intelligent person would quickly learn to stop sticking his hand in the fire and he stops getting burnt.  These people, still being of the flesh, continue to stick their hands into the fire, trying to satisfy human passions.  The way God punished them for sin with more sin is by not changing his unalterable law of truth.  All these people need to do is to realize that they are not living truth.  Then by discovering  that truth and living according to it, the suffering stops.  The truth could be learned by the observant and active person through many years of random trials.  They would be quite beat up in the end but if they lived long enough, they could learn to follow God's law, TRUTH. Or they could follow the example set by Jesus, the road map to salvation.



So even though God gave them over to degrading passions they can eventually pull themselves out of this lifestyle? Won't they at least need God's help in doing so? Maybe they went from being somewhat depraved to being totally depraved and will again or the first time need God to send them to Jesus for salvation.

It appears when God gave them over that he removed some type of shield or care or from under his wing. Without this shield they went hog wild.


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

NE Ga Pappy, your questions are too important for me to answer right now, if you don't mind I will respond when their is adequate time to answer. (I'm at work) 

Art, great question and I can only say that my intuition suggests that they do need God's help.  My intuition is that He provides it by subtle little tests and experiences that if they pass, will lead them closer to truth.  But, too often they remain in the flesh and fail to see the help provided by God therefore they fail to accept the help.  
To put it in less vague terms, one example may be the story of the Good Samaritan.  God presented several people with the opportunity to help the hurt traveler, the sinners declined God's offer by adhering to lies.  The Samaritan, living truth, living the word ( even if he didn't know that's what it called by humans) did what was right and in the process he grows.  By doing what is right, we are blameless, we are above the law.  We come to realize that acting rightly and justly in all of our endeavors we move out of sin and into the light of Christ, true peace.   By doing evil or neglecting to do what is right we continue to wither away.


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Say What???  Do you believe that Hindus, who worship over 3 million gods and goddesses are worshiping the one true and only God of the Bible?
> 
> If they are, why is the commandment not to have any other gods there?  Why not say we are all worshiping the same god, we just call him a different name?
> 
> Is Baal, Allah, Budda, Krishna, Vishnu, Beelzebub and Astaroth the same as God?




Mahatma Gandhi, probably the most famous Hindu said, "Men can only conceive God within the limitations of his own mind.  What matters, then, whether one man worships God as a person and another as a force? Both do right according to their lights.  One need only remember that God is the force among all forces.  All other forces are material.  But God is the vital force or spirit, which is all pervading, all embracing and therefore beyond human ken."  
And, "There are innumerable definitions of God but I worship God as truth only"

Does this sound like someone who believes in many gods? 
Hindus do have many "gods" but they are really discriptions or subsets of the one true God.  So all though they are polytheistic in one sense, they actually acknowledge the one true God.  

Why not say we are all worshiping the same God, but we call him a different name?  

There is only one God.  Anybody, anywhere who acknowledges God and worships him is worshiping the same God.  Obviously this does not apply to pagans and devil sects so let's not discuss them.  All the variations in religions throughout the world are due to mans attempt to quantify God.  All of the different names and customs are human invention attempting to understand life according to their experiences.  

Consider this, if I held up a common object in the middle of a room of people and asked them to describe only what they see, what answers would I get?  Lets take a pencil.  Some would describe an elongated object with a tapered end and a squared off end.  Another would describe a perfect circle ( looking at the pencil from the end). Who is correct?  They both are from their points of view.   But who can truly understand what a pencil is without looking at it from all points of view, picking it up, handling it and using it.  Now imagine something infinitely more complicated, the kingdom of God.  How many opinions are we going to get from all the various points of view?  Not only various points of view but cultural differences, educational differences, life experience differences, language differences, etc.  You could get as many discriptions as there are people.  

So in all of the attempts to understand God, mankind tries to creates God in his own image.  But there is only one God.  There is only one truth.  Each religion, with all of therir customs, laws, procedures and sacraments are trying to know God according to the best of their abilities.  

If I am born in a poor town in India, raised as a Muslim or a Hindu and spend my life searching for truth and doing the best of my ability to abide by that truth, am I going to burn in he11 because I had the misfortune to not be introduced to Jesus?  I cannot imagine such an unjust God.  To the one with much, much will be expected and to the one with even more, even more will be expected.  We as Christians have the Word of God.  Much will be expected from us.  These other religions who do not have the Word of God will be judged according to their abilities not according to ours.  Does that mean that they are excused?  Absolutely not!  We ALL have the ability to know God, to know TRUTH.  Even if we call him by different names.  I believe God himself told Moses, "I AM".  So why do we call him God?  

I hope this makes sense, it's been a long day and I wanted to get this in so I can get you guys opinions.  Notice I didn't bring the Bible in until the end.  I'm talking about all the religions trying to make sense of God from their experiences.  There is only one God,  no matter how people try to worship him, right or wrong they are worshiping the same God.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

I can understand the concept of polytheism in a Christian sense as Christians themselves worship or at least ask for the intervention in prayer of Jesus or Mary. 
I myself do not believe Jesus is his Father but even Trinity believers must make God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit equal parts of the same God to feel comfortable dividing God in the first place. Oneness believers don't divide God into equal parts as like you suggest he is just manifesting himself different ways.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Place no other Gods before me makes one wonder if there are other Gods or as you suggest it only means Idols. In that respect a God could be money or another material thing like sex.
In Isaiah God says there are no other Gods yet gives us a command to place no other Gods above him. Can we place them below him?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

I'm a pretty liberal guy in regards to Christianity & God and would love to think anyone around the universe who believes in God, believes in the Father of Jesus as he is the only God there is. How can someone believe in any other God if there isn't any other God to begin with?

As a Christian my only problem is John 14:6:
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

The cross kinda puts Jesus as the reason and only way to salvation. Even believing in the one and only true God isn't enough.
I wish it was but I didn't write the rules.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

My hope is that everyone in the universe will have a chance to hear about Jesus. I too can't see God not granting everlasting life to an individual who never heard of his Son to begin with.

Then again God said in Romans 9:18
Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

Plenty of examples of God hardening individuals and nations hearts for things to go his way. We can debate all of this but God still gets to be God. He is no respector of man. No man is righteous. No one comes to Jesus except who God sends. 
Final decision-God's.
From my understanding of the scriptures and how Christianity works,  it's not about being good or righteous like Ghandi but believing that everyone is as evil as the Roman perverted sinners and thus needing a savior by the name of Jesus. No one can save themselves by even believing in God. No one can save themselves but Jesus can. Thus bringing this back to the OP.
We can also explore the aspect of God and his manifestations in this thread too.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> Mahatma Gandhi, probably the most famous Hindu said, "Men can only conceive God within the limitations of his own mind.  What matters, then, whether one man worships God as a person and another as a force? Both do right according to their lights.  One need only remember that God is the force among all forces.  All other forces are material.  But God is the vital force or spirit, which is all pervading, all embracing and therefore beyond human ken."
> And, "There are innumerable definitions of God but I worship God as truth only"
> 
> Does this sound like someone who believes in many gods?
> ...


Very interesting post with a lot of good points. 
Gandhi's point and yours is that there is one God. And all are worshipping that one God in their own ways.
In simple words its basically everybody is in the same boat just rowing differently.
But here is where you lost me -
While Gandhi's and your point for the entire post had been one of inclusion and togetherness in the same goal,
with this paragraph - 


> We as Christians have the Word of God.  Much will be expected from us.  These other religions who do not have the Word of God will be judged according to their abilities not according to ours.  Does that mean that they are excused?  Absolutely not!  We ALL have the ability to know God, to know TRUTH.


You just did a 180 and separated out Christians as having the Word of God. And that the others didn't. Despite the fact that they also have their "books".
You went from inclusion to separation. You negated the whole concept of everybody is in the same boat by separating out Christians from the rest.
You just reversed the words of Gandhi that you used in the beginning.
More from Gandhi -


> Belief in one God is the cornerstone of all religions. But I do not foresee a time when there would be only one religion on earth in practice. In theory, since there is one God, there can be only one religion.
> Gandhi





> The Allah of Islam is the same as the God of Christians and the Ishwara of Hindus.
> Gandhi


One God, worshipped differently, all equal.
The opposite of -


> These other religions who do not have the Word of God


Am I reading it wrong? Although you gave it a noble effort you negated your own point by clinging to the Christian God. When Gandhi's whole point that you used is that there is only GOD.


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm a pretty liberal guy in regards to Christianity & God and would love to think anyone around the universe who believes in God, believes in the Father of Jesus as he is the only God there is. How can someone believe in any other God if there isn't any other God to begin with?
> 
> As a Christian my only problem is John 14:6:
> Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
> ...



Wow!  That really throws a wrench into my theory.  It's kind of like all the other religions are stuck in the Old Testament.  For some reason, I just cannot imagine holding a man accountable for eternity because he did not have the opportunity to know Jesus.  To deny Christ is one thing, to just not know about him is another.  I guess we Christians better get to work spreading the word.
I still wonder, since Jesus is Truth, could man obey truth and not know it was Jesus he was emulating? Would that be worthy of salvation?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Some Christians believe that God has revealed himself to the whole universe through nature. One only needs look at the trees, and all of his majesty to understand that there is the one true God. 
That too can explain God but still leaves out Jesus. I don't really know of any other way for revealing to the universe about Jesus unless God himself does the revealing. 
This is the basic concept of Calvinist that God will reveal as he sees fit Jesus to the universe and thus we don't need to witness. It kinda makes sense as individuals are coming of age daily around the world. I don't know of any other way for the world to find out daily about Jesus unless God has mercy on them.
I'd hate to think some poor child's salvation coming of age in Africa depended on me, you, or themselves.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

One concept of Christianity I have trouble with is that since God is no respecter of man and none are righteous, Hitler could have accepted Jesus as his savior receiving everlasting life and the poor little Jewish girl Anne Frank would die when she died.

The concept "I have trouble with" means the concept that my sins are equal to Hitlers. We are both equally bad. We can both seek forgiveness. We can both have everlasting life. We are both saved by God's grace. 

What's that law where all internet discussions eventually include Hitler?


----------



## Day trip (Jun 13, 2014)

Hi Walt, no your reading it as I meant it.  My opinion is that although there are many religions who worship one God, there is a "right" way to do this.  The Christian advantage is the example set by Jesus Christ in the Gospels.  If you look at it like "Word of God=The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John"  then you would see I mean that it's like we all are taking a test and Christians have the answer sheet.  Not that our God is different but its about how to follow the Truth.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> Hi Walt, no your reading it as I meant it.  My opinion is that although there are many religions who worship one God, there is a "right" way to do this.  The Christian advantage is the example set by Jesus Christ in the Gospels.  If you look at it like "Word of God=The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John"  then you would see I mean that it's like we all are taking a test and Christians have the answer sheet.  Not that our God is different but its about how to follow the Truth.



I would have to say being a Christian is more than having an advantage when it comes to salvation.

God loves sinners and is no respecter of man is true but only if he has opened the door to their salvation by sending them to Jesus.

I wonder what precepts God uses to send someone to Jesus if works don't factor into the equation?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> Did they worship the wrong god?  No, there is but one God.  Their sin is that they worshiped human creations and neglected to worship God.  Some created idols or worshiped ideas that were human creations.  Others tried to worship God but did so incorrectly.  They tried to humanize God.  Worshiping human precepts, human ideas, protocol, procedure and laws instead of worshiping TRUTH.
> 
> God is not egotistical.  Hindus, Buddhists, whoever, are not wrong for calling God by a different name or worshiping according to local culture or custom.  They are only wrong if they worship human inventions instead of TRUTH.



This is the concept of the Freemasons, one only believe in the Great Architect who is called by many names depending upon one's local culture. Regardless of what one calls the Great Architect he is one in the same different in name only.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 13, 2014)

Day trip said:


> Hi Walt, no your reading it as I meant it.  My opinion is that although there are many religions who worship one God, there is a "right" way to do this.  The Christian advantage is the example set by Jesus Christ in the Gospels.  If you look at it like "Word of God=The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John"  then you would see I mean that it's like we all are taking a test and Christians have the answer sheet.  Not that our God is different but its about how to follow the Truth.


If you get to the same place you don't have an advantage or the ONLY answer sheet. If your answer sheet gets to the same place their answer sheet does then they are both right and they both contained the Truth. You have to think broader. One sheet might say 
2 + 2 =4 and the other sheet might say 1 + 3 =4. They say something different but they both end up at 4. That makes them BOTH the truth but got to the truth in a different way. Neither had an advantage and neither is "more right" than the other. 
Which is Gandhi's whole point.
But of course I understand you are going to view it in your own way. As you said its your opinion.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 13, 2014)

This is my hope for all of creation:
Romans 8:28
But we know that he helps those who love God in everything for good, those whom he preordained to be called.

I can only hope all who love God are preordained to do so including people around the world who will be preordained in a timely fashion as God reveals Jesus to them.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 14, 2014)

This type of religious diversity is so prevalent in Christendom today. When one becomes sensitive to it, it makes it almost impossible to find a Christian house of worship.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 14, 2014)

They Exchanged the Truth of God for a Lie.

How does one do that? Totally depraved people can't do that as they never had the ability to know the truth. Christians can't do that because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure.


----------



## Israel (Jun 14, 2014)

Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? 21 Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? 22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction: 23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory, 24 [even] us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he saith also in Hosea, I will call that my people, which was not my people; And her beloved, that was not beloved. 26 And it shall be, [that] in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, There shall they be called sons of the living God. 27 And Isaiah crieth concerning Israel, If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that shall be saved: 28 for the Lord will execute [his] word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short. 29 And, as Isaiah hath said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, We had become as Sodom, and had been made like unto Gomorrah.


What if God?

Maybe the thing that says "God only shows his mercy to these..." has not yet met the God that says "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."

Can God even have mercy on such a one?
If one needs a good exercise tell God how, and to whom, he is allowed to be merciful. Talk about being out of breath, it could take you three days to recover. But who can live without breathing for three days?


----------



## Israel (Jun 14, 2014)

Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? 21 Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? 22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction: 23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory, 24 [even] us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he saith also in Hosea, I will call that my people, which was not my people; And her beloved, that was not beloved. 26 And it shall be, [that] in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, There shall they be called sons of the living God. 27 And Isaiah crieth concerning Israel, If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that shall be saved: 28 for the Lord will execute [his] word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short. 29 And, as Isaiah hath said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, We had become as Sodom, and had been made like unto Gomorrah.


What if God?

Maybe the thing that says "God only shows his mercy to these..." has not yet met the God that says "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."

Can God even have mercy on such a one?
If one needs a good exercise tell God how, and to whom, he is allowed to be merciful. Talk about being out of breath, it could take you three days to recover. But who can live without breathing for three days?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 14, 2014)

All has/have the same origin, yet not all have the same religions and beliefs. So what is different between religions that Christians and Jews and Muslims and unbelievers can say, your God is false, you are without Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth?

Or who has the finer truth? Who has a better grasp of the truth? How do we know to measure Truth by means other than the truths of various beliefs regards what is Truth?


I think Christianity has two basic things going for it. First it acknowledges that it does not know all truth, as its adherents "see through a glass darkly" to paraphrase a famous christian. 

And like with Judaism, Christianity has as an essential element the spiritual necessity called faith which justifies the believer.

Christians are agents of justice and their God sees that they get it. Now, for example, it might take time, centuries to groom out of Christians that they should not make of their brother a prize of war and a physical slave. It must take many more centuries to groom out of him slavery from oppressive beliefs.

Now at anytime in non-christian or non-jewish communities is it possible to institutionalize physical slavery or to have no objection to it anytime soon, today? I think so. Can this be the case today for christian people? I don't think so. A call to our origin has blotted it out of our being.

God is informing Christians to ever increasing goodness. Just as he groomed the Hebrews to become the Jews, the Creator of origin continues to groom Christians. The common link of this process since Abraham is faith and this faith is an emotional and intellectual relationship with the origin, the originator, the Creator of all.

I don't see such a faith in any other tradition. In other traditions man is abandoned to the mercy of his brother who's patience is unseen as a basic design of our origin. It depends more on temporal temparement, an individual's personality caused from the worries and the comforts of good or bad weather. 

So what is Truth? Man cannot live by bread alone. Also, man cannot live by intellect alone. Man also lives by emotion, a spirit as it were which fashions his intellect and his bread.  And in this man senses injustices and justice, right and wrong, discovery and sloth.

But the greatest of these is justice because all religions pray for it, the rich and the poor, the low and the mighty, the offended and the captured criminals -- all have a need for justice. Everyone wants a hearing. So all have the truth in their prayers and  in their hopes, because all have the same origin. But not all have faith and those who don't are at the mercy of benevolence, benevolent man at his basic needs--which he falsely believes that is what life is all about,  life in the here and now...

So what is Truth? It is justice. Not just any justice, but the justice of the origin of all. And for the christian this Truth has its genesis from what is called God's Grace with its origin the Cross, because once all christains. or before they were christians we gentiles or faithful jews and their ranks held the beliefs and the religions of all others, and more. But for the cross their human spirit was changed and for faith this community carries on with the oracles of God, of the origin of all,  and the greatest of these oracles for the present generation is justice. My .02 cents.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 14, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> All has/have the same origin, yet not all have the same religions and beliefs. So what is different between religions that Christians and Jews and Muslims and unbelievers can say, your God is false, you are without Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth?
> 
> Or who has the finer truth? Who has a better grasp of the truth? How do we know to measure Truth by means other than the truths of various beliefs regards what is Truth?
> 
> ...


My .02 cents -


> So what is different between religions that Christians and Jews and Muslims and unbelievers


It is not the difference in the religions and beliefs, it is what is the same -
1. All those groups are compromised of people.
2 All those groups are based on BELIEF not FACT.
Since many people feel the need to be right or agreed with or have their beliefs validated (arrogance, pride, fear), that pretty much guarantees this -


> Christians and Jews and Muslims and unbelievers can say, your God is false, you are without Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth?


Of course there is also the group who doesn't claim to be right but can or will point out you aren't universally right/factual either.
It all boils down to when there is only BELIEF, there is only what is right/true for YOURSELF.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 14, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> My .02 cents -
> 
> It is not the difference in the religions and beliefs, it is what is the same -
> 1. All those groups are compromised of people.
> ...



 Facts are not belief?

Mark, 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be - D a mn e d.

Is it fact that people are motivated by belief? If yes, then belief is fact as is unbelief.????


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 14, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> Facts are not belief?
> 
> Mark, 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be - D a mn e d.
> 
> Is it fact that people are motivated by belief? If yes, then belief is fact as is unbelief.????





> Facts are not belief?


Are you called a Believer or a Facter?
Some beliefs are a universal fact
Some beliefs are a fact to the individual but not a universal fact


> Is it fact that people are motivated by belief?


Sure some people are motivated by what they believe.
Some people are not.


> If yes, then belief is fact as is unbelief.????


I have no clue what you mean by that. Im gonna guess and use an example -
I don't believe Brussels sprouts taste good. I know people who believe they do. 
Which is a fact? Which is a belief? Which is the universal fact? 


> Mark, 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be - D a mn e d


I generally don't bother with scripture as there is almost never complete agreement on what it says but -
You don't actually know you are saved until you get to Heaven (the gate is narrow right?) and correct me if Im wrong but Im assuming you never met a person that is actually in he11.

I don't get what the aversion is to saying "I believe it, I believe its a fact , but I admit its not a universal fact".


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 14, 2014)

For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.

They worshiped and served the "creature." I guess this means they worshiped and served themselves. I do truly think this is the worse and most selfish thing a person can do. Disregard to God and fellow man. Just do whatever feels good at the moment. Do everything, eat whatever, say whatever, sleep with whatever. Nothing matters to this type person. This selfishness and serving the creature is the most terrible thing possible.
Is it possible I could  be  or my sin equal to someone like that? Does judging make me equal to someone like that? What can I do to cleanse myself so that I can't be compare with someone like that?


----------



## Israel (Jun 15, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.
> 
> They worshiped and served the "creature." I guess this means they worshiped and served themselves. I do truly think this is the worse and most selfish thing a person can do. Disregard to God and fellow man. Just do whatever feels good at the moment. Do everything, eat whatever, say whatever, sleep with whatever. Nothing matters to this type person. This selfishness and serving the creature is the most terrible thing possible.
> Is it possible I could it be  equal to someone like that? Does judging make me equal to someone like that? What can I do to cleanse myself so that I can't be compare with someone like that?


How much we so often are moved by what we "don't want to appear as" can only be revealed.
One might argue convincingly that all our (own) industry is based upon that.
But we have been given to see something other than simply what "not to appear as".
Attraction to that, may even deliver us from repulsion to "the other"?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 15, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.
> 
> They worshiped and served the "creature." I guess this means they worshiped and served themselves. I do truly think this is the worse and most selfish thing a person can do. Disregard to God and fellow man. Just do whatever feels good at the moment. Do everything, eat whatever, say whatever, sleep with whatever. Nothing matters to this type person. This selfishness and serving the creature is the most terrible thing possible.
> Is it possible I could  be  or my sin equal to someone like that? Does judging make me equal to someone like that? What can I do to cleanse myself so that I can't be compare with someone like that?



At the very beginning of Genesis, the first book of records, in the judeo christian paradigm, or cosmology, there is this simple inscription or statement regards the creature:

Genesis 1:25-26



[25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.]

................ Now when the creature has dominion over man, then man is putting on his shirts backwards. He is travelling to his universities in a short bus. Simple.

So why would the spiritual man do this foolish thing which is pinning his hopes in the creature, in lieu of the design--- the design of Genesis 25-26.

I think that is the million dollar question. I know that when I was a child girls played with human baby dolls, by instinct or for copy of their mothers, and it was that motherhood was instilled into them. And young boys would put their dad's, fresh from the hunt, deer antlers on their heads and run like the wind as if the life of the deer had run into them! 

And then there was Jonas and the whale, Abraham and Moses and things settled down to different order. It was a calling out of the wilderness. It was a finer thing than running around with antlers on one's head.

And then there was Jesus and his calling. Calling, " Who's paid attention so far?" and " I have come to take back those who take the short bus to university."

Hope, faith, demands that we cannot live in the moment completely. It orders us to free the wilderness to its origins. In doing so we return to our's.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 15, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Are you called a Believer or a Facter?
> Some beliefs are a universal fact
> Some beliefs are a fact to the individual but not a universal fact
> 
> ...



Your last point is very interesting. Perhaps it all boils down to our belief, our understandings, our conventions, our differing consciousness of what is the fact of this item called a human being?

I wonder what an alien might find? What detachments to us would it require to provide sufficient purchase and veracity for the task?

The air! Let the air judge us! Though many would say we are full of it, the air has no sight! It is blind to prejudice then! What a judge it would make.

Or water! Let the lake or the rivers judge man who has been loitering their shores, yet with indifference the waves lap and the way runs. Such that we are full of it also, would water judge us?

Or a tree and the fowl that home to it? What are they closer to us then water or the air itself? Would the sound of   a bird going by be sufficient independence yet of a perspective finest to scientific cause to define us?

Or a man? What is man? Some say he is no more than a tree? No more than a wise raptor. A puff of smoke! Yet man has a season every day, he cannot agree with himself on what to have for breakfast, let alone be his own judge?

Or Science! Is Science sufficient? Independent of itself? Are we not full of it, however? And Science being our judge it would judge itself man?  Or the veritable blood and flow of all his understandings, including mat pinning definitions of itself as the essential makeup of a human being.

What is left? What is right? What is outside of us sufficient to make an assessment with authority on who we are, were we're at, and where we are going, what is taboo and what is right, some item with a mind to the micro and the macro, with the short term and the long term, with portent on options that can sufficiently capture our attention to give us perspectives about all aspects of life in the past, now and in the future?

The markets? No wait, the markets sell air and bottled water. Geesh! I'm back were I started. 

Geometry maybe? Ancient and fractal geometries... or a crossbreed of these...Now there's a candidate for an assessment tool? Imagine if we could all agree to plant our vineyards to its perfect rules. Imagine it as the model of one kingdom, the fundamental kingdom as ours and by it, the definition of who we are and the source of all our hopes, and our faith,--- a source to compass all.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 15, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> At the very beginning of Genesis, the first book of records, in the judeo christian paradigm, or cosmology, there is this simple inscription or statement regards the creature:
> 
> Genesis 1:25-26
> 
> ...



I would say "the creature" you speak of is one aspect of what they worshiped as their idols were made to look like animals but isn't man also "the creature?" 
Did these Romans once worship God and returned to idol worship?
Could not part of worshiping the creature instead of the  Creator also be self worship?

In regards to this terrible creature worshiping person Paul goes on to say:
You may think you can condemn such people, but you are just as bad, and you have no excuse! When you say they are wicked and should be punished, you are condemning yourself, for you who judge others do these very same things.

Am I just as bad? Can I take what Paul said to mean me? Was Paul talking to me when he wrote those letters to Rome, Corinth, and his co-worker Timothy? 
Why were the others just as bad? Is it because they still sinned? Do we still sin? 
Paul also said to the Corinthians "and such were some of you but you have been washed."
This washing is an interesting concept. I think I like it.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 15, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> I would say "the creature" you speak of is one aspect of what they worshiped as their idols were made to look like animals but isn't man also "the creature?"
> Did these Romans once worship God and returned to idol worship?
> Could not part of worshiping the creature instead of the  Creator also be self worship?
> 
> ...



Yes we are what we eat. We eat creatures to the exclusion of the body of Christ we are creatures.

I often think of Maslow's definition of man's lifespan or man's needs, on this subject. 


1 Physiological needs
2 Safety needs
3 Love and belonging
4 Esteem
5 Self-actualization

Since 1 to 4 are very important and like other creatures we seem to manage them in spite of ourselves, the last item is really where free will comes into its own.

Like lots wife we have a tendency to look behind regards sin, even when we have repented of it. Imagine if we could repent sufficient, our own sins forgiven, for  sin not to exist in us, having been rubbed out of our will but not our consciousness--our being? And our interactions with others full of grace? Would we be patient with our judgements?


----------



## Israel (Jun 15, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> At the very beginning of Genesis, the first book of records, in the judeo christian paradigm, or cosmology, there is this simple inscription or statement regards the creature:
> 
> Genesis 1:25-26
> 
> ...


Now, that's poetry.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 15, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> Like lots wife we have a tendency to look behind regards sin, even when we have repented of it. Imagine if we could repent sufficient, our own sins forgiven, for  sin not to exist in us, having been rubbed out of our will but not our consciousness--our being? And our interactions with others full of grace? Would we be patient with our judgements?



We have repented sufficiently when we accept that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. I see repentance as a one time change not something I need to do daily or weekly.
Salvation is of grace and only grace. That's why Paul was telling the Romans & Corinthians they were just as bad and such were some of you but you have been washed.
It's the washing that only takes place once. The Christian living continues beyond the washing but it's not a part of our salvation. The washing assures us of that, "and such were some of you."
The change is finally believing that you can't be good enough, you can't do it yourself, you are equally wrong, Repentance is realizing this, that you can't quit sinning and even if you were able to, you still aren't righteous.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 15, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> We have repented sufficiently when we accept that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. I see repentance as a one time change not something I need to do daily or weekly.
> Salvation is of grace and only grace. That's why Paul was telling the Romans & Corinthians they were just as bad and such were some of you but you have been washed.
> It's the washing that only takes place once. The Christian living continues beyond the washing but it's not a part of our salvation. The washing assures us of that, "and such were some of you."
> The change is finally believing that you can't be good enough, you can't do it yourself, you are equally wrong, Repentance is realizing this, that you can't quit sinning and even if you were able to, you still aren't righteous.



Ok, but if this was an offer of tires for  my car, I'd buy another brand.. I mean, I suppose it would permit me to go where I'm going. However, my chariot wears different rubber. What ever works I guess.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 15, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> I have no clue what you mean by that. Im gonna guess and use an example -
> I don't believe Brussels sprouts taste good. I know people who believe they do.
> Which is a fact? Which is a belief? Which is the universal fact?


Walt, is it a fact that you have tasted Brussels sprouts?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 15, 2014)

Israel said:


> Now, that's poetry.



I did not mean it to be pretty or poetry. Happy accident only.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 15, 2014)

gemcgrew said:


> Walt, is it a fact that you have tasted Brussels sprouts?


Yes I have. That why I believe and its a fact to me that they don't taste good.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 15, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Yes I have. That why I believe and its a fact to me that they don't taste good.


Do you realize just how much faith is required of you, in order for you to claim it as fact?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 15, 2014)

gemcgrew said:


> Do you realize just how much faith is required of you, in order for you to claim it as fact?


Regardless of my personal experience with a Brussels sprout or the faith required that my taste buds are telling me the truth or that the Brussels sprouts I ate are representative of what all Brussels sprouts taste like, I still recognize its a personal experience. 
Therefore I would not tell anybody else that they should think they taste bad or that there is some penalty if they think they taste good or that thinking they taste good is somehow wrong.
That they taste bad is not a universal fact therefore it would be dishonest of me to act like or judge or insist that it is.
That doesn't lessen what I think about them or make my belief any weaker.
Its just being honest.
Is there a penalty or a result or what happens if a Christian says " I recognize what I believe is not a universal fact, its just what I believe and is a fact to me personally?" (and I don't know, I'm asking)


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 16, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Regardless of my personal experience with a Brussels sprout or the faith required that my taste buds are telling me the truth or that the Brussels sprouts I ate are representative of what all Brussels sprouts taste like, I still recognize its a personal experience.
> Therefore I would not tell anybody else that they should think they taste bad or that there is some penalty if they think they taste good or that thinking they taste good is somehow wrong.
> That they taste bad is not a universal fact therefore it would be dishonest of me to act like or judge or insist that it is.
> That doesn't lessen what I think about them or make my belief any weaker.
> ...



You are honest about what your body tells you regards a sensory experience. Is the source of your idea of honesty or dishonesty due to your trust in what your body tells you or some other convention?

Your body is unique to you, therefore your personal truth is not universal, but the truth of Christianity is not unique to single individuals or indeed Christianity itself.

My personal truth might be derived from my physical body. (I can tolerate gout causing foods or I can't.) But universal truths come from universals common to all human beings. And in the case of Christianity the truth is that all of humanity is spiritual, all human beings are, have been and will be spiritual.

Now it is easier to make declarations regards brussel sprouts for example than it is to do so regards Jesus. It is much easier to  physically taste sprouts and make declaration, than to know Christian spiritually or any spirituality.  Universal are more complicated.

From the get go one assessment requires universals, the other not. The judgement of each are quite different in implication. Although small, unseasoned cabbage might be strong tasting and ok to avoid, spiritually they are good for you-- to the extent you should find cause to like them other than from first impressions of your pallet.

My assessment of Christianity is not a personal belief. It is due to my appreciation of its spirituality-- its  universal influence on mine which is checked by the greater christian community and other  major religious-spiritual traditions from the present as well as those of the past. The degree I wish to act within the reality of a spiritual tradition, christian or otherwise stems from my personal belief however. Some act not and to the extent that some believe it renders spirituality as not universal, some act some and some alot... yet it does not change the fact that universals  are independent of belief.


----------



## Israel (Jun 16, 2014)

On the ground, upon the terminal, on the runway, it poured. Grayest skies, dimmest of noons.
Not 10 minutes from wheels up, I had to pull the shade down for relief from the beaming sunshine.
Yes, one could say, add an additional 240 thousand some odd miles to the dark side of the moon, and again your experience would change.
Yes. But once I was sure it was only a rainy day. Does the leaving open for any and all other experience at the power of another to lift make me better? Wiser?
Not when that power also has in it the will to drive down, if need be.
One may fight to the death for the right to surrender.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 16, 2014)

Israel said:


> On the ground, upon the terminal, on the runway, it poured. Grayest skies, dimmest of noons.
> Not 10 minutes from wheels up, I had to pull the shade down for relief from the beaming sunshine.
> Yes, one could say, add an additional 240 thousand some odd miles to the dark side of the moon, and again your experience would change.
> Yes. But once I was sure it was only a rainy day. Does the leaving open for any and all other experience at the power of another to lift make me better? Wiser?
> ...



Cool! Nice story. Lots of people don't believe in stories. They say stories are just stories--fables, entertainments, pacefiers. 

I like love stories. I don't care for fiction too much except in song to music. I like non fiction--which is why I like the Gospels. But I also like fictions put to song because I love man.

In my tradition when people get married the priest often compares the love the married couple have for each other as not unlike the love between the Devine and man. And so love stories are the greatest stories ever told and why I shall share this one now:


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 16, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Regardless of my personal experience with a Brussels sprout or the faith required that my taste buds are telling me the truth or that the Brussels sprouts I ate are representative of what all Brussels sprouts taste like, I still recognize its a personal experience.


But does it remain a personal fact? Did you accept it as fact, personally, without regard for the reliability of your "taste buds"? If so, is that rational?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2014)

gemcgrew said:


> But does it remain a personal fact? Did you accept it as fact, personally, without regard for the reliability of your "taste buds"? If so, is that rational?


You can really go down a rabbit hole with that line of questioning.
Its natural and normal to rely on your taste buds. Its why you have them. Just as when you feel pain you don't stop and ask yourself if it really hurts or not. You just say ouch or something more "colorful"
Would it be rational to say something taste good despite the fact that it doesn't?
With that line of questioning/reasoning you couldn't say anything is a fact to you.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> You are honest about what your body tells you regards a sensory experience. Is the source of your idea of honesty or dishonesty due to your trust in what your body tells you or some other convention?
> 
> Your body is unique to you, therefore your personal truth is not universal, but the truth of Christianity is not unique to single individuals or indeed Christianity itself.
> 
> ...


We are starting to go around in circles and getting further and further away from the point and that's when I lose interest.
However -


> My assessment of Christianity is not a personal belief. It is due to my appreciation of its spirituality-


What you appreciate is based on what you personally believe. 


> it does not change the fact that universals  are independent of belief.


That's been my entire point.


> I don't get what the aversion is to saying "I believe it, I believe its a fact , but I admit its not a universal fact".





> That they taste bad is not a universal fact therefore it would be dishonest of me to act like or judge or insist that it is.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 16, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> Its natural and normal to rely on your taste buds. Its why you have them.


Thanks Walt. I've enjoyed the conversation.


----------



## Israel (Jun 16, 2014)

WaltL1 said:


> You can really go down a rabbit hole with that line of questioning.
> Its natural and normal to rely on your taste buds. Its why you have them. Just as when you feel pain you don't stop and ask yourself if it really hurts or not. You just say ouch or something more "colorful"
> Would it be rational to say something taste good despite the fact that it doesn't?
> With that line of questioning/reasoning you couldn't say anything is a fact to you.


yep. think about that. I, and perhaps others, couldn't agree with you more. There is a "why" in that statement that contains all the unanswered questions...not only for you...but for us all.
You assume...for a reason.
As do I.
(and yes, in keeping with your metaphor, that Red pill will take you places beyond all imaginings)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 16, 2014)

gemcgrew said:


> Thanks Walt. I've enjoyed the conversation.


Same here.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jun 17, 2014)

Israel said:


> yep. think about that. I, and perhaps others, couldn't agree with you more. There is a "why" in that statement that contains all the unanswered questions...not only for you...but for us all.
> You assume...for a reason.
> As do I.
> (and yes, in keeping with your metaphor, that Red pill will take you places beyond all imaginings)
> ...


I don't disagree with you.
By the way, I do want to make sure its understood that I hold myself to the same ideas Ive been talking about.
You wont hear me say or tell you that there is no God or that Christians have it "wrong".
At this point in our knowledge Christians could be absolutely correct. As could any of the other religions or none of the religions.
On this subject there is no universal fact/truth yet and there may never be.
There is only what we believe.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jun 17, 2014)

Day trip said:


> No sinner, no matter how bad, upon repentance will not be welcomed back by the father as a prodigal son.  When that sinner does come home, there will be more rejoicing in heaven than for the many that did not stray.




How many believe this to be true?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Jun 17, 2014)

HawgJawl said:


> How many believe this to be true?



I do


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 17, 2014)

HawgJawl said:


> How many believe this to be true?


Not in the way I am reading it. With more clarification, I may agree.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 17, 2014)

That's one question I had about God abandoning them to their shameful lusts.
Will he welcome them back? The people in Romans? The ones we are just as evil as?

Does Jeremiah 32:40 apply to these sinners in Romans that God abandoned to their shameful lusts? The ones we shouldn't judge because we are equally guilty?

Jeremiah 32:40
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them: I will never stop doing good for them. I will put a desire in their hearts to worship me, and they will never leave me.

Jeremiah 32:40
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 17, 2014)

Psalm 81: 9-12
9You must never have a foreign god; you must not bow down before a false god.10For it was I, the LORD your God, who rescued you from the land of Egypt. Open your mouth wide, and I will fill it with good things.
11"But My people did not listen to My voice, And Israel did not obey Me. 12"So I gave them over to the stubbornness of their heart, To walk in their own devices.
12So I gave them up unto their own hearts' lust: and they walked in their own counsels.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 17, 2014)

Acts 7:41-42
So they made an idol shaped like a calf, and they sacrificed to it and celebrated over this thing they had made.42 Then God turned away from them and abandoned them to serve the stars of heaven as their gods! In the book of the prophets it is written, 'Was it to me you were bringing sacrifices and offerings during those forty years in the wilderness, Israel?

It appears worshiping idols is what makes God abandon people. If God abandons someone and gives them over to their own lusts, would not God have to place the desire back in their heart?


----------



## StriperAddict (Jun 18, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> That's one question I had about God abandoning them to their shameful lusts.
> Will he welcome them back? The people in Romans?


Certainly. Consider David, a murderer and adulterer...
Consider the thief on the cross...
Consider Peter and the crow, and especially that time (recorded in Galatians) where he shamefully re-embraced the tenants of the law with the Judiaizers...



Artfuldodger said:


> The ones we are just as evil as?
> 
> Does Jeremiah 32:40 apply to these sinners in Romans that God abandoned to their shameful lusts? The ones we shouldn't judge because we are equally guilty?


If you still have a condemnation 'check' going on about old (and new) sins, have a better look at the cross and what was done for you... in its entirety.  
That blessing of being made brand new is open to the self righteous AND the most horrendous of sinner...  but the former camp usually doesn't "get it": consider: Luke 7:36 - 50


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 18, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> We have repented sufficiently when we accept that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. I see repentance as a one time change not something I need to do daily or weekly.
> Salvation is of grace and only grace. That's why Paul was telling the Romans & Corinthians they were just as bad and such were some of you but you have been washed.
> It's the washing that only takes place once. The Christian living continues beyond the washing but it's not a part of our salvation. The washing assures us of that, "and such were some of you."
> The change is finally believing that you can't be good enough, you can't do it yourself, you are equally wrong, Repentance is realizing this, that you can't quit sinning and even if you were able to, you still aren't righteous.



I understand What Paul is teaching but I'm asking these questions to convince others.

Romans 2:5
Since you are stubborn and don't want to change the way you think and act, you are adding to the anger that God will have against you on that day when God vents his anger. At that time God will reveal that his decisions are fair.

Romans 2:5
But because you are stubborn and refuse to turn from your sin, you are storing up terrible punishment for yourself. For a day of anger is coming, when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

Most Christians agree somewhat to the latter, I look at the interpretation of the first one as better.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2014)

They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator.

I can't fully understand how this is possible but somehow feel it is a key in many of our differences in what Paul is teaching.

Exchange being the key word. Paul uses it again:
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones.

Twice people perhaps even Christians have exchanged good things for bad or unnatural things.
I would hate to believe that I, as a Christian, could transgress or exchange God for an idol or could abandon my natural desires with my wife for unnatural sexual relations. I see a really really lot of idolatry/lust/selfishness etc. going on for this to happen.
Again I'm not doubting my salvation but would like to know what would make someone exchange God for idols & exchange natural desires for unnatural lustful desires? How would this behavior manifest itself?  Is the key word "exchange?"


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2014)

If we as Christians must dwell on sin, even though we are washed, then let's get on with the discussion.

Here is a good place to start:
Never mind that this passage will end up as usual with our new selves and this message:
Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all,

let's discuss the sin parts:
Colossians 3:5-6
So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with sexual immorality, impurity, lust, and evil desires. Don't be greedy, for a greedy person is an idolater, worshiping the things of this world.6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.

A greedy person is an idolator. That could cause a person to abandon their natural desires. And somehow we as Christians are worried about some vague 5% of the population who haven't abandoned their natural desires.


----------



## Israel (Jun 26, 2014)

Artfuldodger said:


> If we as Christians must dwell on sin, even though we are washed, then let's get on with the discussion.
> 
> Here is a good place to start:
> Never mind that this passage will end up as usual with our new selves and this message:
> ...


I am not sure what you are asking/saying.
Is it that since greed is a root manifestation of idolatry, and perhaps more pervasive than many other more seemingly repulsive sins...we may do well to heed the warnings about such...lest we fall into idolatry?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 26, 2014)

Israel said:


> I am not sure what you are asking/saying.
> Is it that since greed is a root manifestation of idolatry, and perhaps more pervasive than many other more seemingly repulsive sins...we may do well to heed the warnings about such...lest we fall into idolatry?



Don't be greedy, for a greedy person is an idolater.

I guess greed is a form of idol worship. Once we are overcome with idolatry, we could be left to our own lusts and selfishness. Possibly going so far as to abandon our natural desires. Natural meaning the way God made us. 
We are all born to be gay or straight. God makes us one or the other. Regardless of the way we are born, we could abandon or exchange our natural way that we were born with for another way that God didn't assign to us.
We would exchange the truth for a lie.We would go against God's nature.


----------



## Israel (Jun 28, 2014)

You are responsible, I am responsible, in any way you care to use the term, for our intercourse. That God, through Christ, has clearly instructed us in this is plain to the believer.
If we find our natures such as we "must" share our physical seed, it again, is plain the concessions made to such a one, "take a wife".
What a man may learn in this taking of a wife by concession is that indeed, such a concession comes with consequences. He quickly learns the proclivities of his flesh now affect another flesh to which he has engaged in that becoming of one. "Sauce for the goose" and all.
How he beholds and esteems now this "other" flesh, taken for pleasure will manifest, must manifest, cannot help but manifest whether he has entered into the truth of "he who finds a wife finds a good thing". Many men have taken many women, even in ceremony, but the man who has "found a wife" in her, has indeed, found a good thing.
But I don't speak to men who have not yet learned that the reflection of their own flesh is plainly visible in the woman, men who do not yet recognize all their own incontinence's are on display. 
A man may be sobered, must be sobered, as much by the instruction to "the wife" as he is to himself as husband. The instruction to love "the wife" as Christ himself loves the church is weighty indeed, but no more weighty than her instruction to "submit to the husband as unto the Lord". Thus, what the man may enter as pleasure in the taking, he now finds in the Lord, both weighty and sobering. Yet, it is also here he may discover a means of unspeakable glory.
To love "her" as per instruction, as Christ loves the church, must compel a man to the glorious searching out of the same. "How does, in what measure...to what depths, then, does Christ love the church?" A man discovering this, seeking this, now, persuaded of the rightness of knowing this...now...finds he has been invited by his pleasure to know a pleasure, again, unspeakable. Such a man comes to understand what a help mate is, even in all the things that drive him in (seeming) desperation to his command. But, if again, a man knows nothing of desperate (not dreadful) need of the Lord in his relationship to the woman, he may be already departed from his flesh, or yet to learn. 
The Lord does not take lightly a man who has kinder words for his boss at work, (or customers) than his wife, at his home. But we all know this.
What then, why then, from whence the invitation to all these needless words?
Marriage is given as a pleasure, for it is not good for the man to be alone. But in that is the revelation of the Lord's relationship to his people, head and body, Lord and savior to those instructed in being washed, as a wife submitting to her husband, as a husband truly loving his wife.
This is not and can never be demonstrated in what is not, that is, a "marriage" between man and man, nor woman and woman. 
Christ alone is the head of every man, as the man is the head of (his) woman.
But, we all know this.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 28, 2014)

Israel said:


> You are responsible, I am responsible, in any way you care to use the term, for our intercourse. That God, through Christ, has clearly instructed us in this is plain to the believer.
> If we find our natures such as we "must" share our physical seed, it again, is plain the concessions made to such a one, "take a wife".
> What a man may learn in this taking of a wife by concession is that indeed, such a concession comes with consequences. He quickly learns the proclivities of his flesh now affect another flesh to which he has engaged in that becoming of one. "Sauce for the goose" and all.
> How he beholds and esteems now this "other" flesh, taken for pleasure will manifest, must manifest, cannot help but manifest whether he has entered into the truth of "he who finds a wife finds a good thing". Many men have taken many women, even in ceremony, but the man who has "found a wife" in her, has indeed, found a good thing.
> ...



Your wiseman, simple saint, preacher, sharing hat is put on right lately. This little piece on marriage should be tied to a hook and snagged to your hat so you will always know which end is front. I really like your "exploration" here. And I would like it even if it was another, other than Israel, who said it... just in case some might think that I'm a paid-up member of your fan club.


----------



## Israel (Jun 28, 2014)

gordon 2 said:


> Your wiseman, simple saint, preacher, sharing hat is put on right lately. This little piece on marriage should be tied to a hook and snagged to your hat so you will always know which end is front. I really like your "exploration" here. And I would like it even if it was another, other than Israel, who said it... just in case some might think that I'm a paid-up member of your fan club.


Bless you Gordon. 
May those kind words of encouragement continue as the precious reminder to me that they are, and be multiplied in the abundance of grace to the heart from which they issue.


----------

