OT: Bible Discussion (Split from Real World Sensitivities)

[lch]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

God alone has the power to forgive sins. Without that power, Jesus wouldn't be much good as a Savior.

Exactly, only God can forgive the sins. Jesus is the proxy.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Jesus (God the Son) is not the same entity as God the Father. They are both members of the Godhead, but they are different from each other. Three persons, one God.

I don't like the word "Godhead", but I don't like "Trinity", either. Yes, there exist all three, and they share something, but they are not one.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Without a clear understanding of the Trinity (as much as humans can ever understand it), we would be forever confused about God.

Only with that all-are-one-are-not-the-same definition, it seems. I am not confused with my model.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

If you don't believe in the inerrancy of Scripture, what do you believe about it? Are some parts true and other parts false? How do you know which are which?

Well, I'm sorry if my belief system doesn't match yours and we disagree about things. But I don't have to accept yours, in the same way as you don't have to accept mine. My belief in God and Jesus Christ works for me, and I don't regard yours as any "truer than mine" just because you managed to fit more of the bible into it. I am not one for dogmas. I can't believe in the inerrancy of scripture as, first, words are hardly capable to contain what happened concerning what you refer to as "divine", and second, if the scripture was without error, then we wouldn't need four gospels which disagree in parts with each other, then we'd only need one. The bible is a book written by human hands and you have to interpret it, which automatically happens and starts already when you read the words in it that are written down. One may hope to understand some things in it, I chose to decide what I can say I have understood and accept it and I decide to discard what doesn't fit in for me. Those parts are not canonic for me in order to save the whole. It may either be that the source got it wrong, or the written word is presenting it in a bad way, or my interpretation and decision is false. I do understand that a lot of things got into the mix from other religions, like Hell and the Devil. And I decide that parts in the bible, which is a work of many authors, are not valid, in the same vain like I decide that the Quran is not valid for me. And if I'm the only one with my belief system that matters little for me, as I do believe in "my" God.

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Back to the doctrine of the Trinity. God the Son (Jesus) became sin on our behalf. As He hung on the Cross, He became the sins of the entire human race. As God is holy, He cannot be in communion with sin. For those agonizing moments, the eternal unity between the Father and the Son was interrupted, and the Father turned His back on the Son. When it was finished, Jesus said so [John 19:30], and then He surrendered His spirit to the Father's care [Luke 23:46]. The Father and the Son were in unity once more, never to be separated again.

It's strange for me because I'm jumping between "in principle we agree" and "no, that's not it" every odd second. It probably has to do with language as well, but I guess that my simple and working model disagrees with yours after all. I'd probably have to start going cross-eyed before I attempt to understand this in the way that it is meant to be understood. As I already said, I do not agree with dogmas like those that you state.

I don't want to convert anybody to my belief system, though, so let's just give it a rest. If I wanted to battle the dark ages, I'd be playing Dom3 some more.