WRIT

Acceptance? Where does it say accept sin? The Bible says flee from sin.

Matthew 9:

[10] And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.

[11] And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?

Context is everything. For example, does the following sentence occur in the Bible?
“There is no God.”
Yes, twice actually. Psalm 14:1 and Psalm 53:1 as follows:
“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”
Context is everything.

I totally agree! So what comes right after Psalm 14:1 ?

Psalm 14:2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

A god worthy of worship would already know if anyone did seek him.

The scripture says, “there is none that doeth good, no, not one” (Psalms 14:3). Therefore, none of us can stand before the Lord in our own righteousness. But through the righteousness of Christ, we can come boldly before the throne of God’s grace (Hebrews 4:16).

Job 1:1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.

Correct and the Bible and Christianity teach that children are innocent and go to heaven no matter what. You were talking about children, not sinners.

On the contrary, it is written (Psalm 51:5): Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Pss. 88

[5] Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand.

[10] Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? shall the dead arise and praise thee? Selah.

[11] Shall thy lovingkindness be declared in the grave? or thy faithfulness in destruction?

[12] Shall thy wonders be known in the dark? and thy righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?

King David is urging God to listen to him, because at least it’s more interesting than trying to listen to the dead, who are unable to praise God, or declare what a great fellow he is, or to know his wonders and righteousness.    And that’s a problem for Christians who believe the dead can do just that.

[13] But unto thee have I cried, O LORD; and in the morning shall my prayer prevent thee.

The essence of prayer was summarized quite succinctly by Robert Heinlein in his 1985 novel “The Cat Who Walks Through Walls”:

“The details of revealed religions differed wildly but were essentially the same: Somewhere up in the sky—or down in the earth—or in a volcano—any inaccessible place—there was an old man in a nightshirt who knew everything and was all powerful and created everything and rewarded and punished…and could be bribed.”

We have prayer for the same reason we still have the sin of idolatry, it’s a vestige of an earlier theology when there were many gods and heaven was like City Hall.  God is omniscient and omnipotent and has the perfect plan, but if the perfect plan isn’t to our own personal liking we can ask for a modification.  Don’t let the hurricane hit Pensacola because it will kill Pentecostal true believers.  Let it go hit those Catholic libtards in New Orleans.

But when the temple got zapped by the surrounding kingdoms (Babylon, Rome), Yahweh was re-interpreted to be the only God of the whole Earth to explain why he would send soldiers from outside of the Chosen to punish the Chosen with genocide for skipping a Sabbath or two, or helping themselves to some bacon. The attacking armies were agents of this larger God even as the Chosen were.

Nobody stopped to question why a single real God would be “jealous” when other fake gods received worship. Television series often have early continuity errors like this before they get their story straight by the third or fourth season.

Eventually this newly universalized God was given the attribute of omniscience. Yet we still make requests of this God as though he were just an old school tribal deity. Ain’t inertia grand?

The very first scientists were christian. Science doesnt contradict christianity but rather proves it. Not all of creation is mentioned in the bible. But there are countless scientific discoveries in the bible that were mentioned far before they were ever known to mankind.

On the contrary, it is written (Psalm 93:1): The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

Science: “Eppur si muove.”

A strange theory, given that the oldest books in The Bible only mention the afterlife briefly in passing and give no real details about it.

The details it does give about it are quite explicit:

Psalm 88:5 Free among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand.

Pastor Stephen Broden Preaches on the Immutability of God

Psalm 106:44-45 Nevertheless he regarded their affliction, when he heard their cry: And he remembered for them his covenant, and repented according to the multitude of his mercies.

Saying the Bible is not a book about science is like saying a cookbook is not a book about chemistry. – Robert J Marks II

Bible science—>

Proverbs 6:

[6] Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:

[7] Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler,

[8] Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.

“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”

2 Peter 3:10 KJV

Also Bible (Ecclesiastes 1:4): One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

Ecclesiastes 9

“And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:7)

According to this verse, man is a “trinity” consisting of a material body, the breath (or spirit) of God, and together these comprise a soul.

The word “spirit” is bound up with the word “respiration” and is nothing more than breath, which was a mystery to the authors of the Bible. They thought that that which causes breathing was given by God, and returned to God when a person died. They did not ascribe consciousness to this spirit or breath at first.

The Israelites of the Old Testament did not think much about the survival of the identity after death, saying the dead’s view of God is that “…for in death there is no remembrance of thee…” (Psalm 6:5) and having God return the favor, saying of the dead’s relationship to God, “…whom thou rememberest no more: and they are cut off from thy hand…” (Psalm 88:5), a view that is affirmed by Solomon thus, (Ecclesiastes 9:5) “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.”

And so things stood until the Levant was conquered by Alexander II and passed on to two of the three Diadochi who followed in his wake, and there was among the Jews a massive injection of Hellenistic ideas, especially Plato’s “ideal forms”. Just as an actual chair was held to be a poor copy of a perfect “ideal” chair which existed somewhere in a remote mathematical mindscape, so was the psyche held to be the ideal, “true” human being, temporarily imprisoned in a corruptible body. These ideas of a dichotomy between the mind and body were embraced by the Pharisees in the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE, even as the Sadducees retained the Hebrews’ original lack of belief in spirits and angels.

Whereas in the time of David “an evil spirit from the LORD” was considered to be, essentially, a bad mood, spirits after Hellenization came to be seen as disembodied beings of pure intelligence. The spirit hypothesis arose from the paradox of a thinking mind contemplating the end of its own life and trying to imagine not thinking. This impossibility leads directly to the belief that consciousness will somehow continue even after the very organ of consciousness, the brain, has turned into worm-ridden tapioca pudding.

Against this background, aided by a Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures, Jesus Christ fashioned a proselytizing variety of Judaism, yet still he taught that God could destroy both body and soul in the grave and that any future dealings with God would occur after a bodily resurrection. His ideas where further spiced by the dualistic ideas of Saul/Paul of Tarsus, which he got, in part, from the Persians along with a refined doctrine of angels complete with principalities, powers, virtues, and the like.

All this in turn set the stage for further developments by the Catholic Church which firmly entrenched the idea of man’s soul as an immaterial entity, incapable of annihilation yet still subject to being bound in bodies or physical places like purgatory or hell. No one, however, has given much thought to the exact composition of a soul, the guage bosons that would be exchanged as force carriers of the soul, how the soul could be confined in a body or lake of fire, or any other such things. Perhaps everyone, all along, knew the soul hypothesis was only so much Bolshevik and didn’t bother with the details.