<The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness>

You need the Spirit to reveal the truth to you. Why? Because

<and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit>

What you seem to be saying is this:

<The person without the Spirit does accept the things that come from the Spirit of God and does not consider them foolishness>

You need the Spirit to reveal the truth to you. >

This is a straight-forward Christian doctrine.

Until this day, people still need the Spirit of God to reveal the Truth to them.

Well, you didn't take my main point head on (aside from the fact that there are many truths to know about many things - all spiritual).

I drew a contrast between what you said and what the bible says. Your words are almost polar opposites and I want your thoughts on it.

In particular, this:

<The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness>

The Bible

<The person without the Spirit does accept the things that come from the Spirit of God and does not consider them foolishness>

When you are born of God you receive a new nature; God's nature. 1 John 3:8-10.

Nowhere in the bible does it say that the Spirit will come to only those of the first century.

Nowhere in the bible does it say only those in the first century will be born of God and receive His nature.

Further, you didn't comment on the comparison (direct opposites) between the Bible verse and your own:

<The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness>

The Bible

<The person without the Spirit does accept the things that come from the Spirit of God and does not consider them foolishness>

<ohio>

The reason your words are in direct contradiction of the bible is because you believe a church dogma rather than reading the bible plainly.

knowing what you know about the Bible.

Knowing what you know about people in the real world.

That's a real tough question. Many Christian theologists would exclude Moslem, Hindus and Buddhist altogether base on Jesus' statement "I am the way the truth and the life".

However, that does brings us to a question of "Should people who has committed no crime, (except be born in a different religion) suffer torment in hell forever and ever, as in eternity?" This does not seem fair to me.

No. As I read the Bible, I understand God doesn't hold those under 20 years old guilty, so those who die before that age are safe.

I think I am in agreement with <Sugar> in that I understand Jesus to be 100% sovereign and he doesn't need my input. I will go so far as to say I think Jesus has the authority to throw open the gates of heaven for 100%.

We don't agree. You keep taking your understanding and plugging that into other verses and saying they don't hold up. Well, yeah, but that's sort of the point.

<This also goes to show that the bible is not enough because without the Spirit to reveal the truth, you can read the bible and convince yourself that it says <exactly the opposite> of what it says.>

Sure.

<So my conclusion on Jesus' "I am the way" statement is, it's up to Jesus to welcome them to heaven or not.>

To get back to the gist of the question, the point that I think you're driving at, I think a very small number of people will be saved according to the conditions of the New Testament, that have a promise, is tiny, a single digit %. Something very small.>

Yeah, that's the impression I was getting.

It seems like much of the talk is wasted on the insignificant. When I see statements like this:

<So my conclusion on Jesus' "I am the way" statement is, it's up to Jesus to welcome them to heaven or not.>

Good question.

I don't the number, but I think the percentage is very low. Wide is the way to destruction but the path to heaven is straight and narrow.

I'm showing a contradiction between what you say and what the bible says, and you are avoiding it.

<The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness>

That's what the bible says.

<The person without the Spirit does accept the things that come from the Spirit of God and does not consider them foolishness>

That's what you say.

The Christian Dogma says that Jesus is God and God is Jesus.

The bible does not say that Jesus is God. It says that Jesus is the son of God.

God is the Father. Jesus is the Son. A father is not the son and a son is not the father.

Christian Dogma has most Christians believing things that aren't in the bible and don't make sense. Most people would have a better chance of finding God and knowing God and being saved if they didn't attend church.

This is what I see as the problem:

The Church teaches about Christianity but it also adds its own doctrine to it, corrupting the truth, obscuring it with non-truth.

Then, the people of the church, wanting to please God and be good Christians (and go to heaven) learn as much as they can from the minister, preacher or priest. This becomes part of their worldview, usually from a young age but not always.

At some point, the believers are challenged in the world by atheists, liberals and agnostics. They defend their beliefs that they've been taught over and over, refining their arguments. They make them *their* arguments. They become personally invested in these arguments over time.

Sooner or later, the believer has invested a lot of pride in these arguments and a lot of pride in defending his faith. The problem is that he has become hardened due to all these challenges and his mind no longer allows critical, unbiased examination of his own beliefs.

Thus, he carries Christian Dogma as though it is Spiritual Truth. He has a relationship with his <thoughts>. Pride creeps in and will not allow anybody or anything to change his mind, because he's already been challenged enough times.

<diceman>, we see this with Catholics and Protestants. They go back and forth at each other to no avail. Catholics seem to have definitely invented their own religion based on some kind of Christianity, but with so much more added to it. It is impossible to defend if the bibles are open - or so you think.

They have their way of rationalizing their dogma. They think the exact same thing about Protestants. Then we have liberal Christians vs the Fundamentalists, both with bibles open, arguing about the "plain truth".

And so there are hundreds of denominations and they all do the same thing.

Wanna know what I think?

One reason is that people have a lot of pride in their intellect. This is the main reason. When you have defended your belief hundreds of times, you have pride in your intellect. There is no way that one is going to consider that, after all this time, they are majorly wrong about their beliefs. Satan is in the pride and he uses it to keep us from seeking and finding the truth.

Our intellects chatter away in our minds so that there is no room for the Spirit to reveal the truth. We replace the need for spiritual discernment with our own intellect, because we are in love with ourselves and our intellects, and we serve our pride first, as they devil would want it. If you aren't born again of God and have God's nature, then you are of your father the devil and seek to do his will, and that includes satisfying the pride.

The other reason is that Christians feel that they are in real danger of doing something really, really wrong if they even *think* about considering certain things. Take for example, is Jesus God? Many Christians wouldn't dare to even entertain this notion because they feel that it's almost the same as blasphemy! You are in danger of going to hell if you consider this.

The reason is because of Christian Dogma, and I've explained that above.

What I think should be done?

We know it's always the other guy that needs to be open minded and rid himself of those annoying beliefs that he thinks are true, but really it's us.

This is basically my experience:

1. It starts, in my opinion, with realizing that you have some dogmatic tenets in your Christian worldview. Only serious truth seekers can attain the proper mindset to entertain this idea. In order to get into this mindset, you need to realize that

2. Your intellect knows nothing about God. Everything that we think we know, we don't know. Just as Socrates showed the philosophers that they knew nothing about justice, love, virtue and so on. They thought they knew, but Socrates would ask good questions and they couldn't answer them coherently, thus revealing their ignorance where they thought they had knowledge. This mindset is key.

3. Read the New Testament again for the first time and read it slowly. Read a verse or two and put the bible down. Don't analyze it. Just be still and know that God is God, quiet the mind, and when the Spirit wants to reveal Truth, the mind will be *still* and ready for the truth.

4. Realize that the intellect lies to us. We are to "take every thought captive and make it obedient to Christ". This is because thoughts are like other things that need to be taken "captive" i.e. criminals, enemy soldiers etc...

5. Empty out all of the dogma and question everything. Doubt everything you've been taught about God, Jesus and Christianity.

I think most people would be shocked to hear that.

Ironically, this type of thinking:

<What Jesus may, or may not, be evaluating>

Brings it full circle back to your original question:

<Big Pawn: Question for the Christians: What do I have to do to please God?>

What I find interesting, as one who doesn't study this, is the irrelevant nature of most of what's actually discussed.

1)What the latest Pope/Atheist says
2)What the Church/Atheism embraces, or voids
3)Church sermons, Catholic school teachings, Atheist beliefs

4) God vs. Atheism
5) The young/old age of earth

...and so on.

Also, is the concept of the bar being so high, what creates evil?

Imagine you're a thug about to rob a liquor store for cash. Someone says to you, "No don't do that, if you are caught and go to prison, you wont be able to play Magnus Carlsen in the World Chess Championship."

Wide is the path to destruction and narrow is the way to heaven. How that turns out percentage wise I don't really know. I think heaven is an exclusive club though, not an inclusive club. But who knows? What do you think is the percentage?

<What I find interesting, as one who doesn't study this, is the irrelevant nature of most of what's actually discussed.

1)What the latest Pope/Atheist says
2)What the Church/Atheism embraces, or voids
3)Church sermons, Catholic school teachings, Atheist beliefs

4) God vs. Atheism
5) The young/old age of earth >

None of that is irrelevant to the topic of God, but then again, it depends on exactly what the topic is if you are going to determine relevance.

If the topic is <what do we have to do to please God?> then some of those things may not be relevant and some might.

By the way, it is clear though what we need to do to please God.

<God vs Atheism>

This is important because many people lose their faith in God do to believe into a false dichotomy of science vs religion. A false narrative has arise which is very destructive that educated people are too smart to believe God exists. College students get this idea and become liberal atheists because of it. Arguments from natural theology combat this narrative and expose it as false.

<age of earth>

I consider this topic to be one of fellowship. That is, when a group of believers get together and discuss different things with the purpose of edifying one another, causing each other to think.

<what creates evil?>

Evil isn't really a thing that you can find somewhere. It describes state of being separated from God. It's like shortness doesn't exist really, but it describes reality in contrast to tallness.

Acting against God is evil. God is all good, all love and omnibenevolent. That is God's nature. When we act against God's nature we act against love, which is to act out of hate. Going against God is evil, because God is <the good>.

<dice> pretty much everyone that books up on the bible and can quote scriptures at you left and right, have no real living knowledge. For instance, take someone that has gone to church for 40 years, reads the bible every day, quotes scripture at everybody, and then ask them what it takes to please God.

They have no answer.

Take three such people and ask them if you can be born again of God, a child of God, and still sin. You will have different answers from them all.

Ask a group of long time, bible reading Christians what Jesus meant when he was on the cross dying and he said, "Father, why have you forsaken me" who he meant by "you" and why he said it - you'll get no real answers. Just regurgitated dead intellectual Christian rhetoric with no real meaning.

<big pawn><I do not seek your approval <nisjesram> or anyone else's on this forum. I enjoy an inner sense of true liberty and peace that very few other people enjoy.>

1) i too want to enjoy inner sense of true liberty and peace - by understanding and practicing teachings of Jesus/ramana/nisargadatta/Krishna. And then help children of my sisters and my students and my friends in the same area.

2) you have almost always been polite/courteous/respectful and helpful to me , <big pawn>.

3)I am requesting you to please extend the same attitude to <abdel irada> if he accepts my request to participate in this discussion.

4)we may have this discussion in your forum or in the forum of <abdel irada>

5)OMV theory discussion is over - it has played out. I agree and even <johnlspouge> agrees that both premises are correct except that we have yet to examine if in the argument , uncaused cause can be replaced with god. That we will do sometime later , if you please.

6) for now , I want to say my understanding of teachings of Jesus/ramana/nisargadatta and seek your inputs.

<start>

<I am that I am>

<end>

Five words.

It's just a statement.

That doesn't tell me what the bible is about.

You do not understand what the bible is about.

I will tell you this. I can tell you what the entire bible is about in less than 5 words.

See, if you are this far off in the wrong direction then there is no use in me discussing all this stuff with you. You aren't even in the ballpark. This is why I asked the question this way.

If you want to discuss this stuff with me, then you need to answer this question correctly. "I am that I am" is just an answer to Moses about who is sending him. That does tell you what the whole bible is "about".

1)then perhaps you don't understand bible. Is it possible?

2)fu#k the niceness. I don't want niceness. I want open mindedness and honesty.

3)open mindedness - let us be open to the possibility that your interpretation could be wrong as well as my interpretation could be 'wrong'.

4) if you can not be open minded about this possibility , then our conversation is not going to be fruitful.

In that case , you are better off playing with people in rogoff forum or with some nice Christians in their forums.

5) I can explain how bible is about <I am that I am>

6)however, first I would like to hear from you what bible is about in one sentence, if you please. And once again I reiterate - I am not here to debate and win . I am here to learn.

No, I understand what the bible is about. I am not seeking your understanding here, you are seeking mine.

You want me to show you any holes in your understanding of the bible. Right now I can tell you 100% that everything you think you know about the bible is wrong and all of your knowledge about it represents a giant hole.

<3)open mindedness - let us be open to the possibility that your interpretation could be wrong as well as my interpretation could be 'wrong'.>

About this, I am not wrong. I know what I know that I know.

<4) if you can not be open minded about this possibility , then our conversation is not going to be fruitful.>

I am not seeking your knowledge, understanding or wisdom. You are seeking mine and if you're not then we have nothing to talk about.

That's okay, no need to be angry about it.

<6)however, first I would like to hear from you what bible is about in one sentence, if you please. And once again I reiterate - I am not here to debate and win . I am here to learn>

You are not here to learn. You are here to demonstrate your knowledge to someone that you think can appreciate it.

You have a choice now.

You can leave *kindergarten* <big pawn> alone and let him be the ignorant fool he is,

or,

you can come to grips with the fact that you do not know what the bible is about and that all your knowledge of it thus far is for absolutely nothing. It is utterly worthless.

<Nisjesram>, I like it when people are on a spiritual journey. Those kinds of people are always very interesting to talk to because they think about things that regular boring people don't think about.

May I remind you that there is no shortage of people on this site that know *everything* about the bible and religion in general. You may find them a lot more comfortable for you to talk to.

I admit, my approach to spiritual truth and understanding is not an easy one for anyone that is not ready for change. I'm not talking about flamboyance either. I'm talking about the direction of the discussion and things like that.

Are you familiar with <playground player> and his forum? A number of Christians gather there and they would enjoy answering your questions and talking with you about the bible in case you choose to end out discussion.