|
|
Bible Questions and Spiritual Discussion
| |
howard
|
02/03/2012 09:54 |
This whole discussion about the human one makes me think what Mars Hill must have been like for Paul.
Lots of philosophy. I have never been apart of a discussion like this at it is a good check on my faith.
No matter what has been said I still see these facts as the facts.
The bible is Gods word and is not in error
Jesus is the only way to the Father.
Jesus is God.
Peace to you all in Christ,
Howard
|
| |
Lanny Carlson
|
02/03/2012 10:47 |
Prayer Request
I just posted this on the Prayer Requests,
but since I have mentioned it on this thread,
I thought I would post it here as well.
My Wife's Knee
I've shared this in other places on other threads,
but we got some bad news today, and I request your prayer support.
My wife had her left knee replaced three years ago, and never had any problems.
So she had the right knee replaced in March, 2011.
Recovery was going even better than with the left knee -
until she developed a MRSA infection in the knee.
She went on twice a day IV's,
but had a severe reaction to the medicine,
and ended up in the hospital with that.
Afterward, she went on Vancomycin , another antibiotic,
with IV's at 8 AM and 8 PM every day for a month.
Meanwhile she developed a bleeding ulcer,
which landed her in the hospital again,
Also, she became extremely anemic,
and when nothing else worked she ended up
having 6 iron infusions,
once a week for about an hour.
That should take care of the anemia for now,
but will need to be checked regularly.
She also has a heart murmur,
but the cardiologist doesn't think it's a concern right now.
Meanwhile, the MRSA infection keeps coming back.
They had thought and hoped it was just under the skin,
and even removed some tissue.
But the wound keeps draining knee fluid,
so obviously there is a hole in the knee joint that shouldn't be there.
After more tests Wednesday,
they decided today that the knee replacement will have to be removed Monday.
She will be in a cast for 6 weeks,
and there is a 50-50 chance they will then be able to replace the knee again.
Otherwise, she will have a stiff leg for the rest of her life.
During all this time, the MRSA keep coming back,
and she is now on her fourth round of twice a day month long Vanco IV's,
and will continue on those after the surgery Monday.
We were really glad when 2011 ended, and hoped 2012 would be a better year,
but we aren't very happy with the way it has started.
Please pray for strength for my wife and myself during this time,
and pray that the doctors will be able to use their God-given wisdom and knowledge
to guide them through these procedures and find the best solution for this problem.
Thank you and God bless you.
Lanny
|
| |
Craig from Illinois
|
02/03/2012 13:27 |
They Bible may be not be in error, but it certainly is up for interpretation as we have just witnessed in this thread! Lanny does deserve critique for making bold interpretations that run contrary to orthodoxy. He also deserves respect as a fellow seeker for truth.
I'm not too concerned about new believers loosing their way because of one thread. I just saw a quote that said "playing with kittens won't get you ready for the lions den". If someone's beliefs are threatened because of this thread, then good! Just as Howard pointed out, it's a good thing to think, research and test the things that seem wrong to our personal theology. I'm very thankful for Lanny's boldness to write of these things. Going to the same church for 25 years has left me with a "vanilla flavored" way to see God. I'm not sure if Lanny's ice cream is even edible, but it sure has flavor!
When people say something to the effect of "they Bible is the word of God and not in error", I wonder what they really mean. I'm ready for a new thread on that topic.
I'm really sorry your wife is so ill, Lanny. You and your family has my sympathy and prayers. You are a beloved member of the DAB family. Never forget that!
|
| |
Lanny Carlson
|
02/03/2012 13:49 |
Thank you, Craig.I needed that.
I really appreciated your comments,
and your presence in this community.
I've always preferred vanilla ice cream.
As for my theology,
some probably would describe it as rocky road.
I believe it's edible -
I'm feelin fed by Spirit as I grapple with these issues.
But it may be an aquired taste
which some may prefer to avoid,
and that's OK.
There, have I driven that analogy into the ground enough? LOL
God bless you, brother.
Grace and Peace.
|
| |
Lanny Carlson
|
02/04/2012 13:36 |
John T,
Just to set the record straight.
A couple of days ago,you said,
"now you've just said above that the Bible is wrong - is that really what you believe?"
No, re-read the past, and you'll see that's NOT what I said.
I said the writer of Hebrews was wrong in one verse,
where is says "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness." (9:22)
Either that statement is wrong,
or all the verse in Old Testament where people simply repented and experienced forgiveness without blood being shed, or all the times when Jesus extended forgiveness before he shed any blood on the cross (he didn't say, "you're sins WILL be forgiven," but that they ARE forgiven"), even his call to repent and believe the good news, which echoed John's message, doesn't say the "good news
that someday I'll die on the cross and then you will be forgiven" - all of those Biblical statements are wrong if Hebrews 9:22 is right!
Perhaps Hebrews was written to Jews who still believed and practiced the sacrificial system, and was simply using the language they would have understood.
I don't know why the writer used that language.
But it takes all sorts of semantic gymnastics to avoid that clear contradiction between Hebrews 9:22 and the rest of Scripture.
But admitting that one verse is wrong
is hardly the same as saying the Bible is wrong.
I just had to clarify that point.
|
| |
John T
|
02/04/2012 19:44 |
What constrains Jesus blood to time? His blood covers all sins, past, present and future. The Bible is not in error, even Hebrews.
|
| |
Lanny Carlson
|
02/04/2012 21:36 |
John,
I can see there is no reason to belabor the point.
You apparently begin with the conclusion that the Bible is inerrent,
then make any evidence to the contrary fit your conclusion.
My faith is in God, and I love the Bible
(though recorded - not by automotons - but real human beings)
as the story of the relationship between God and the world,
a story which was always in process, and which has to be interpreted through what
we have come to know of God through the Christ we see in the Bible,
as well as through our own experience and our God-given intellect.
I'm not insisting that you agree with me,
but if either of us is going to start from the conclusions we have already reached
and then try to make everything fit those conclusions,
I'm not sure this discussion will do anything but make us both more frustrated.
Grace and Peace,
lanny
|
| |
John T
|
02/05/2012 07:53 |
Thanks Lanny. I was laying up in bed last night thinking about how to explain it - consider this: How many times does someone call into the daily audio Bible for a prayer request, and find it answered even though it plays after the need takes place? Someone goes in for surgery and the prayers of the future effect her present. God is outside of time, nothing constrains him. It would make perfect sense in light of how prayer works to accept that Christ's blood works the same way.
|
| |
Lanny Carlson
|
02/05/2012 09:14 |
Thank you, John, for your post.
We are certainly in agreement over one thing -
namely the timelessness of God.
I love the way Philip Yancey describes it.
(I wish I could quote him directly, but I'm at the hospital computer,
and don't have his book here -
you can look at the footnote in an early chapter on his book on prayer \
for a better statement of his views)
Basically, He suggests that God is present everywhere all the time.
When we see the light from a star, we know we are really seeing into the past.
If the star is a million light years away,
it left the star a million years before we see it.
We have no way of knowing what's going on there now.
But God sees the star at the moment the light leaves
and also sees us seeing the light a million years later
and also sees what is going on with star right now,
a million years before we do!
And all at the same time!!!
That's mind boggling, isn't it?
But it's in keeping with what you said,
and in keeping with what I have to believe,
though I can't begin to comprehend it
with this finite mind.
Our disagreement really isn't over the issue of time, however.
The issue over which we diaagree is the notion of blood sacrifice.
Humans aren't timeless, and it was quite natural
for the ancient Hebrews to adopt the concept,
as blood sacrifice was already being practiced by their neighbors
in relationship to their gods.
But the prophets came to understand that God desired mercy, not sacrifice.
Jesus himself quoted those very words.
I don't think it's irrelevant, either, that Jews today don't practice sacrifice. Nor if the Temple were restored tomorrow,
I can't imagine that the Temple would suddenly start flowing
with the blood of goats and bulls.
Part of being creatures living in time is that, hopefully,
we grow in knowledge and understanding,
and for me this relates to the whole concept of sacrifice.
I don't expect we are ever going to agree on this issue.
You believe in substitutionary atonement.
I believe the power of the Cross is better understood
under the moral influence model.
And I can live with that difference of opinion.
By the way, I DO believe in the Resurrection.
I don't know exactly what happened,
and even he Gospel accounts all tell it a little differently,
but obviously something happened to convince a group
of dejected and defeated followers of Jesus
that Jesus was alive and his cause had been vindicated.
The Cross without the Resurrection experience
would have simply been another martyr's death.
But seeing the depth of Jesus' faith and commitment and love on the Cross,
and seeing that life vindicated on Easter,
a frightened band of people were transformed into a powerful force
which changed the world!
So, let's stop "arguing" about the Cross.
We both believe the Cross is central to our faith,
and though our views about HOW the cross is salvific differ,
we each hold views that millions and millions across the ages have held,
and which have led them and us to call Jesus LORD>
Grace and Peace,
Lanny
|
| |
John T
|
02/05/2012 18:59 |
Sounds like a plan, but it really wasn't the cross that was the main argument. I thought that was the father of Christ - the fact that he is the Son of God, and part of the trinity of the God head. That was the main point. Arguing for Christ's honour.
|
(page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9)
|
