Link: Copy link
Yes, I've seen the same data from non-alternative sites.[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]I think that the first mention of "chemotherapy" in this thread was in relation to a discussion of "faith" (or the lack of it) in conjunction with "healing." "Miracles 'still' happen today!" -- a misleading declaration and popularization by today's televangelists and "miracle workers." As if to say that today's "miraculous" healings are a continuation of and are no different from the miracles done during the time of Christ and the apostles.
(The author of this thread agrees with the known assertion about chemo treatment and the doctors, if they themselves were to face similar medical issues. The mention of "chemo" was only an example or a miniscule part of the overall discussion of faith-related matters contained in both the Old and New Testaments. But Dr. Bill felt the need to dwell on this particular medical subject [of all things] and to [perhaps unintentionally] divert [cf. post on November 25 2013, 7:28 AM]. Now we see what's happened.)
Let's return to the discussion of: "Why I lost faith." This is not a medical forum.
My contention is that the Bible is comprised of segments that deal with: the law, the psalms, the prophets, history (of BOTH good and evil occurrences), narratives of both good and evil characters, doctrine, etc. -- all in there for a reason.[/color]
I can't add much to this discussion, since it has been going on for years. The Nicene people also used this belief as a wedge issue against those who disagreed.Scripture, since we're talking about faith, perhaps you would give us your views on the "selective faith" of some Christians. For example, some Christians readily accept the miraculous, biblical accounts of the burning bush, the Israelites' crossing the Red Sea, Jesus' birth, and His ascension into heaven. Yet those same Christians balk at or flatly deny other passages, for example, where Jesus said that He "came down from heaven" and would "ascend up where He was before" (meaning back into heaven where He originally came). In other words, some Christians have selective faith; they selectively accept in the Bible what makes sense to them and deny what the Bible says about other issues. Any thoughts about why some Christians are so selective?
Ken wrote: "It is idolatry to think of God existing [in] the form of a man." Apparently the Scriptures do not think it is idolatry for God to exist as a man:When God SENDS something from heaven that does not mean that the SENT existed in the SPIRIT World which has NO PERSONS OR PEOPLE. It is idolatry to think of God existing the the form of a man.
When God moved Jesus to the THRONE (not a place but an office) He is still called THE MAN JESUS CHRIST and God MADE Jesus of Nazareth TO BE both lord and Christ.
God sent ALL spirits from heaven but we are not part of a TRINITY which is the only object of trying to make Jesus of Nazareth an ETERNAL member of the godhead. God, FROM HEAVEN, sent Jesus as the SEED (sperm) of Abraham which would be just silly if He sent Jesus from Heaven. Jesus was in the DNA of Abraham before He was born and HEAVEN is up in the air or CLOUDS and that is where they say Jesus go: they assuredly could not see Jesus enter into the Spiritual Dimension.
The Spirit OF Christ warns about the Lying Pen of the Scribes: we are not called to pass judgment because it is LAWFUL for God to use PARABLES: Jesus said that He did just that to KEEP those OF THE WORLD from understanding: it worked pretty well, huh?
When Jesus said He "came down from heaven" and would "ascend up where He had been before," those with selective faith would say Jesus was just speaking "figuratively," that He didn't literally come down as He and the Scriptures said He did, and He literally didn't ascend as He said He would as and the Scriptures said He did.I can't add much to this discussion, since it has been going on for years. The Nicene people also used this belief as a wedge issue against those who disagreed.
Selectivity is common in belief and practice. For example, why not the Holy Kiss, and Footwashing, but Singing? We need to reason from details of scripture to conclusions. Conclusions should not trump over detail, since detail must support conclusions.
Even as the Golden Calf was raised in the Wilderness, so our singular beliefs can be exalted above the clear evidence of the Word. It is hard to overturn our conclusions, at least until an overwhelming number of details do not fit the conclusions.
"Selective literalism" refers to taking some passages literally, while passages we don't agree with are taken figuratively. A perfect example is the nature of the kingdom. When Jesus said that the twelve apostles would sit on thrones judging the nation of Israel, amillenial people take that figuratively. Millenialists take it literally.
If the overriding conviction is that there are no human personalities in heaven, then it would follow that there is a difference between the earthly Jesus and the eternal Word. To convince someone that there are human personalities in heaven would require a change in the stance concerning the Godhood, to believe that there are human persons in the Godhead. In other words, if you say that the Godhead is not human, then there would be no humans in that Godhead. I think that some think to recognize the earthly Jesus as the pre-existing Word, makes the Godhead human, and might lead to Trinitarianism. Muslims make that charge, that Christianity is not monotheistic. Some professing Christians are Unitarians, some Ditarians, and other Trinitarians. Philip's suggestion "If you believe with all you heart you may," would be the sufficient requirement to being a Christian, and "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." See Acts 8:37. Our restoration tradition would lead us to leave this topic to individual conviction--i.e. the belief about the nature of the Christ.
1 Corinthians 15 is helpful in this regard, since Jesus is referred to as the "first fruits"--the first after which many may follow. Paul continues to say in 1 Corinthians 15:35-41. The "body" that we are given is not the same flesh as we have on earth. The glory of the heavenly bodies is greater than the glory of earthly bodies. The heavenly glory (i.e. the stars) are apparently looked at by Paul as above the glory of earthly bodies (i.e. the earth, and sun).
Paul goes on to say that "it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body." It may be critical here that Paul refers to a "spiritual BODY," and this is what moderns would call an oxymoron, or an irony. How can there be a "spiritual body?"