Shouldn't the Christian Infighting be Over?

[POI]

1213 made an excellent point in post 556 of this thread (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39327&start=550). He stated:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Followed by the given Bible verse to back up his claim (i.e.):

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

******************

Well, some here claim to have such communication with "the almighty."

For debate: If the above verse is true, as well as Christians whose claims also comport with the Biblical claim, then why do Christians not know some Biblical answers? Case/point, I recently asked about the topic of Genesis being literal, vs. not? The Christian, who answered thus far, claims (paraphrased) -- they cannot know for sure, because the author is dead. Why wouldn't this individual simply ask for wisdom, in accordance with the Bible's claim?

Reference (viewtopic.php?t=41373). Post #16.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to 1213 in post #50]
Which bible?

The fabled Joseph Smith bible unmisticably states Joseph Smith as greatest Prophet of all time.

Still, the BoM being a translation work according to Mormon canon, we have to look at J S prophecys. Were they that great?

OK, he prophecied a war between Yankees and Southerners back then, and that England would side with the South.


Or do you rather have in mind the Thomas Jefferson bible?

[1213]

Which bible?

The original scriptures.

The fabled Joseph Smith bible unmisticably states Joseph Smith as greatest Prophet of all time.

Can you give a link to that?

[William]

[Replying to William in post #46]

Who in the heck you are talking to then?

When communicating with intelligence, it isn't so much "who" but rather "what is being communicated" that is the question of greater importance.

"Who" comes across of course, (attitude et al) but it is what is being messaged which is either of value, or not so much/not at all and the value of that is left to the individual personalities discretion (naturally enough).

As one example, Chat GPT. When one is interacting with GPT, one is receiving intelligent data but one is not interacting with a "who" so much as one is interacting with a number of anonymous human beings (sentient information) from which the machine has been trained on.

Putting a name to "who" is simply engaging with the narration being generated to give the reader a sense of two minds interacting - in these cases - The Father and The Son.

No, seriously?

Yes. There is a lot of data to assess - so much that no one individual in one lifetime can sort it all.
So the focus (of the individual) should be on the data, rather than on whatever personality the data is coming/has come from.

Are you speaking or getting your information from someone or something else, or are you speaking to or getting your information by yourself alone?

Why does it have to be the one or the other? Why are such "yes" or "no" questions asked, when better questions can be formed when one expands beyond those institutional norms?

If it is the former, I would like to know from who or what?

How would that knowledge assist you in making a critical examination of the data being presented and the method used to present it?

[POI]

[Replying to William in post #53]

Your answers do not align with other answers. Case/point, between the pastor and yourself about Noah's flood, for instance... At least one of you, who is getting answer(s) from an external source (or) external source(s) is mistaken. Both about the source giver itself, and also the answer given to each of you. Isn't it instead much more logically possible both of you are mistaken, and you both are self-manifesting your own answers alone?

[Mae von H]

1213 made an excellent point in post 556 of this thread (viewtopic.php?f=8&t=39327&start=550). He stated:

"People have enough understanding to get it and if someone thinks he doesn't have it, he can always ask wisdom from God to understand it correctly.".

Followed by the given Bible verse to back up his claim (i.e.):

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

******************

Well, some here claim to have such communication with "the almighty."

For debate: If the above verse is true, as well as Christians whose claims also comport with the Biblical claim, then why do Christians not know some Biblical answers? Case/point, I recently asked about the topic of Genesis being literal, vs. not? The Christian, who answered thus far, claims (paraphrased) -- they cannot know for sure, because the author is dead. Why wouldn't this individual simply ask for wisdom, in accordance with the Bible's claim?

Reference (viewtopic.php?t=41373). Post #16.

There are conditions for getting wisdom and understanding. “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” Not many ask God for either, few claim to have heard God and pride is promoted in churches today.

Great response. it shows how the infighting will never end because Christians are always ready to judge and blame everyone else but themselves.

Just like atheists do, although Christians are commanded to love those with whom they disagree. Atheists are free to do otherwise.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #53]

Your answers do not align with other answers. Case/point, between the pastor and yourself about Noah's flood, for instance...

It is of what importance that you think my answers and the pastors answers "do not align"?
I have already clarified that my position is Agnostic, not Theist/Christian.

Why would you think my answers should align with the pastors?

At least one of you, who is getting answer(s) from an external source (or) external source(s) is mistaken.

Everyone, regardless of position, is in the same boat re this. Me, You, your Son, and the Pastor.

I would add to that, that we are "getting our answers" not only from the external, but also from the internal.

Both about the source giver itself, and also the answer given to each of you. Isn't it instead much more logically possible both of you are mistaken, and you both are self-manifesting your own answers alone?

Yes indeed! I would also add to that, this is the same for you as well (all of us) and the Agnostic position is "more information/data is required" before any of us can know anything for sure.

[POI]

It is of what importance that you think my answers and the pastors answers "do not align"?
I have already clarified that my position is Agnostic, not Theist/Christian.

Christian, agnostic, other, you believe you are receiving messages from some external source(s). Don't you care if such external source(s) is/are real?

Why would you think my answers should align with the pastors?

Truth is truth, right? If you both were getting true answers, the answers should be the same, right? At least one of you are mistaken, likely both? How might you discern that the answers you are receiving from some an external source(s) is both real and truthful?

Everyone, regardless of position, is in the same boat re this. Me, You, your Son, and the Pastor.

False. My son and I do not believe we receive any responses from any external source(s). You and the pastor do. Who is more likely correct, and how might we investigate?

[Mae von H]

[Replying to POI in post #24]

Christian infighting will never be over. Everybody believes they have the truth even though everyone's truth is different. Christianity is the most divided religion on earth. Sad but true.

Actually Islam is the most divided religion in earth right now. The two main branches actually fought a war killing each other for what, 10 years? And this in our lifetime.

[JehovahsWitness]

UNITY A SIGN OF TRUE CHRISTIANITY

Jesus said his followers must be UNITED. Thus reasonably one identifying characteristic of true Christianity will be it exist as an identifiable group that is united on both a theological (believing the same set of teachings) and an organisational level (recognising the same leadership). They would also have love for one another regardless of their nationality or skin colour.

The churches of Christendom may have one or two teachings in common but they recognise many Christian groups as part of the body of their Christian brotherhood while at the same time being divided on ideological detail, teaching and practice. While they may claim these theological differences are of no importance , these have historically lead to conflict and even bloodshed. During the second world war British and American Catholics killed fellow Catholics in Germany and Protestant killed Protestant, rubbishing any claim to being a united body. Even today , claims of "Chritian Unity" ring hollow when it is accompanied by theological, ideologica and organisational disharmony and conflict

Jehovah's Witnesses exist on a global scale as an organised international body of worshippers that hold to the same teachings and recognise the same body of men as taking the lead, regardless of where they live on the planet. They have never paricipated in regional or international warfare - one reason being it would be inconcevable for them to support a war effort that could result in the intentional harm of their brothers and sisters in other countries or regions.

[The Nice Centurion]

Which bible?

The original scriptures.

The fabled Joseph Smith bible unmisticably states Joseph Smith as greatest Prophet of all time.

Can you give a link to that?

It is in Genesis Part of the Joseph Smith bible I try to research the exact verse.
Here some mormon explanation about the book;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/preface.htm

Here the full text;
https://www.centerplace.org/hs/iv/

Meanwhile here some explanations about the book. Seems rather anti mormon but also informative;
https://trisagionseraph.tripod.com/inspired.html