What then, Darius, is the truth that we must stick to?

I trust you will give a contstructive reply to my question and to other questions and comments here, otherwise.....

The truth is simple. We must live up to who we are. We must be honest to the imprint of the Creator in us. I am very disappointed when I hear people claim that they follow when it is clear that they decide which parts of the book they should follow. The Bible is a newcomer in recent history so it cannot be true that we need it to direct our lives. Even the Bible contains the message that we see the hidden things of the Creator in the things He made.

The Bible is a newcomer in recent history?

Is that what the Bible says of Itself?

Daryl, I don't know what you mean by "respect" the Bible. Men decided what to include in it and they decide how to interpret it. Much of what it says they twist out of its meaning. They don't believe Jesus when He said that He expected to return to earth before all His disciples died that He had finished His work of salvation before He went to the cross. They preten that Rom. 1:20 is not a part of the book.

BTW, I noted the threat or warning in the other post.

Daryl, when was the Bible compiled?

Darius
It is pointless becourse we work from two different worldviews. Just like a theist and an atheist have assumptions about how the world is functioning that are mutually exclusive, likewise do we. I believe sertain things about God and the creation and I believe these things becourse God has revealed them to us trough prophets and in the way He has dealth with people in the past, and that these things are known to us trough the books that are gathered into the volume that is now known as "the bible". From nature we can learn that there is a God and that is enough to make everyone guilty of accepting or rejectig Him as it is said in Romans. But nature by itself is easily missunderstood as can be seen in all the different views of God that exists outside of christendom.
It appears to me that you believe nature is the only reliable source of information about God (you may correct me if this is wrong).
Therefore I find it pointless to continue discussing things that deal with God or the information about Him we recieve in the bible untill we found a common ground that both agree to agree about.

/Thomas

I am saying that information I can check independently (found in nature) is more reliable than information that is out of my reach (in somebody's head). Then you say "But nature by itself is easily missunderstood as can be seen in all the different views of God that exists outside of christendom." Have you taken a look at "all the different views of God that exists inside of christendom?"

The Bible was compiled whenever God inspired men to write what they wrote beginning with Moses, therefore, the Bible was obviously compiled in stages.

Quote:

---

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

---

In Christ's time here on this planet, the Scriptures obviously consisted of what we know today as the Old Testament.

Christ obviously both accepted and acknowledged the authority of the Scriptures, therefore, we should do likewise.

Here is your problem. We don't know exactly what "the Scriptures" refers to. It certainly did not include the New Testament but it could have included other writings from the earlier period. That aside, there is no requirement that we accept whatever interpretation a preacher or church attaches to said Scripture, and that is the problem we have here. The Bible is not the issue but the creative interpretations placed on it.