>This is why I dont deal with other doctrines or faith. If
>you think about, what doctrine has laws, statues and
>commandments more righteous then the ones in the Bible.

How do you know this if you haven't studied other religions? How can you say Christianity and the Bible are the most righteous without studying the other religions?

>No
>other doctrine deals with a Sabbath day.

I know Judaism does. Not sure about the others.

Im not closed
>minded just strong in my conviction. This is what I beleive
>to be truth! no other doctrine can dispute with what God has
>to say.

I can respect that, certainly. I'm not trying to be disrespectful. But I don't see how you can be so certain that the Bible is the one book that REALLY contains divine truth when you haven't looked into the other holy texts.

>you need to understand people who are about Christ business,
>are not down about "living their life according to God's
>standard". It is a life long process, you cant just say for
>the next 3 months Im going to serve God.

Well, of all the people who claim to be living according to God's standard, and who claim to be Christians, I'd say virtually all of them sin, some in major ways and some in minor ways. I think it's virtually impossible to live without sin.

>You may not be able
>to put your faith and belief in something you dont
>understand, (how can you call yourself a Christian?)

I call myself a Christian on my own terms. That's all that matters to me. I believe in God and Christ, but I am open to the possibility that other religions are also equally valid and acceptable ways to understand and be close to God. I think the most important thing is to live a good, moral life.

but once
>you have an understanding like Christ said, you can move
>mountians, you dont second guess what you believe, you
>believe it! peep the subject line again,this is what you
>must believe in order to call yourself a Christian, and once
>you do, then you walk in his ways.

Like I said before, I call myself a Christian on my own terms. Maybe I am more of a deist with Christian tendencies, I don't know.

>>Dont
>>>worry about the translation, trust me once you start reading
>>>it you will catch on and God will direct your path.
>get a concordance and find a good teacher! Hungry and thirst
>after rightousness, and wisdom will feed you!

That seems overly simplified. My point is, there most definitely are differences in meaning when you read the Bible in English vs. Hebrew vs. Aramaic vs. Greek etc. All translations fail to capture the meaning perfectly. This is well known among linguists, since all languages are inherently different.

>>For example (and this one is huge!):
>>
>>the Greek translation for Isaiah's Hebrew "young woman" was
>>a word that can also mean either "virgin" or "young woman."
>>In other words, Isaiah never prophesied a virgin birth, and
>>he wasn't even talking about the Messiah when he prophesied
>>tthe birth of a child to King Ahaz of Judah. But to fulfill
>>the mistranslated prophesy, the author believed Jesus must
>>be born of a virgin. Since neither John, Mark, or Paul in
>>his writings discuss the Virgin Birth, some theologians have
>>suggested that this aspect of Jesus' birth was a later
>>invention, as with the relocation of the birth to Bethlehem,
>>to fit the Nativity events in a prophetic scheme. Once
>>again, the entire episode of Jesus' birth reminds readers
>>that the Bible is a work of faith, not history or biology.
>>{quote taken from Don't Know Much About the Bible, by
>>Kenneth C. Davis}
>
>this is what theologians beleive! I will deal with what the
>bible says. What scripture are you referring to? Isaish
>prophesy of the Messiah is Chap.53.

My point is that this shows a discrepancy between what most people believe (based on the English translation), and what the original Greek Bible said. Theologians didn't make it up, they just noticed the difference in meaning between the two different languages.

>>I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
>>-Genesis 32:30 (Jacob speaking)
>>No man hath seen God at any time. -John 1:18
>>And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my
>>back parts; but my face shall not be seen. -Exodus 33:23
>>(God speaking)
>
>the only person anyone saw is Jesus including what Jacob is
>talking about. We can deal with this more if you would like.
>I have a lesson on it! this is where you must search the
>scriptures to put everything in the proper context.

How could Jacob be talking about Jesus? That was in the Old Testament. Jacob wrestled and was blessed by God - he definitely saw him face to face. Maybe it was some kind of avatar of God, but saying that it was Jesus is just not supported by the actual text at all. Nothing in that chapter suggests Jesus at all.

>>...thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for
>>tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning,
>>wound for wound, stripe for stripe. -Exodus 21:23-25
>>... resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy
>>right cheek, turn to him the other also. -Matthew 5:39
>>(this is the classic contradiction between new and old
>>testament)
>
>again, not put in the proper context! dont take it literal!

It was taken as literal for a long time. Laws were made based on the Old Testament "eye for an eye." The New Testament and Jesus teach to "turn the other cheek" when you are wronged. These seem like complete opposites to me.

>these are not contradications, you just have to put
>everything in it's proper context. I understand why you
>think they are. How about we go thru each one on a
>individual bases I would like to show you thru the
>scriptures how they are not. Can I inbox you?

Sure, you can inbox me if you want. After today, I probably won't be around Okayplayer again until the middle of next week sometime, so if I don't respond, I'm not ignoring you.

>when you made your convanent you had conditions, you may not
>want to punish your wife and it is not the Lord's will to
>want to punish us. But he set forth conditions (Deut. 28),
>if you do this then this will happen, if you dont do this ,
>then this will happen! it's a vow.

I understand this. But it still seems like He is not always a kind, loving merciful God, like He is supposed to be.

Now the Lord's convanet
>with Isreal was deeper then what most people think. You may
>not think it is fair to punish decendents but understand the
>vow made by Israel, they promise they would be obeident and
>knew what would happen to them and their decendents if they
>broke that vow. They agreed to it.

That doesn't make it any less fair. If I make a deal with someone, and I agree that if I don't fulfill my part of the deal, the other person can hurt my kids, that is still horribly unfair to my kids, isn't it?

It's just like now, if
>we as parents are not good examples for our childern, if we
>are not teaching them what is right and what is wrong then
>how can you be upset when they dont do well.

You can still be upset, you just have to accept some of the blame. Some kids find the right path and make the right choices even without guidance, but it is rare.

The Lord chose
>Israel. It's not as cut and dry as you may think. But the
>more we communicate the more you will understand what I am
>talking about. God is good his way of life is good. people
>keep forgetting that becasue they lean toward their own
>understanding and not reading, "thus saidth the Lord".

This makes sense, but it seems like most people who try to live God's way of life end up stumbling along the way, some worse than others. We're all subject to temptation, and sometimes people who believe in God and love God still choose to do evil.

>These people are not Christians!

How can you judge them? They call themselves Christians. Presumably they do TRY to live the right way. They just make mistakes, like we all do. That doesn't make them not Christians. Christians are capable of any evil act that a non-Christian is.

>Using you for example (no
>disrespect) you call yourself a Christians but dont beleive
>in the Bible or have any understanding of it.

I believe in some of the Bible, but I certainly don't think it's flawless. I think it has a lot of good in it, and it is a holy text, but I'm not convinced it's the only source of wisdom and religious truth.

The books
>says, "If you love me keep my commandments" if you love him,
>you wouldnt be molesting childern, commiting adultery and so
>forth. Again these are not Christians.

Plenty of Christians break the Commandments. They are still Christians. You can't just say, well anyone who sins is not a Christian. It would be a pretty small club then.

This is the most
>frustrating thing for me you cant serve God and man!

Everyone who tries to serve God makes errors along the way to make his/her own life better.

>>Read the book for yourself and see how his
>>>followers are really suppose to conduct themselves.

For the most part, I know how God wants us to act. And I probably follow most of God's edicts, without even knowing them all by heart, just because I live a pretty good life. I have strong morals.

>Following after God's righteousness is no easy walk, I will
>be the first to admit. If you know how they are suppose to
>act then recognize them for what they are, LIAR'S!

I don't think this is fair. It's not anyone's place to judge someone else, and judge their "Christianness" for them.

>you can
>always knock anyone off with the Bible.

Why would you want to? That doesn't sound very Christian...