Just finished it and recomend it. It may change your mind

Vicki

But my stance that Scripture is infallible and self-affirming is not just because I am influenced by what others tell me to believe. I see it reinforced by every reading of Scripture.

I cannot count the number of times I have read some passage in which God tells us the importance of handling His word correctly, or the fact that it will stand forever and never fade away. One cannot read the vast number of such statements without coming to the conclusion that it must be really important to God to keep His written word intact. And if it’s important to Him, then He’s not likely to slack off and let some mere human keep us from having an intact canon of Scripture to live by. It would be completely inconsistent with who He is and what He has repeatedly stated.

As for Peter/Paul, I reiterate: Scripture is the foundation of all that I believe. If Scripture (a)shows no conflict between what the Gospel Writers and Disciples describe about salvation, and (b)shows that Peter and Paul disagreed about something, but came to agreement to the point that Peter actually refers to Paul’s writing as Scripture, then I am convinced.

Reboot: All of this subthread started with a statement about how the Gospel writers had a different take on salvation than Paul did, and I still haven’t seen anyone show me an example of this.

” Is your god really God? is my god really God? I think our god isn’t God if He fits inside our heads”.

These lines have really helped and humbled me when I become prejudice about who God truly loves. I have to remind myself that I am human just like everyone else. Sometimes I have to remind myself that everyone else is human as well.

The Westboro Hate Group (they stand far from what the baptist church believes) announce that they were going to picket at my school during The Laramie Project, a play about the death of matthew shepard who was murdered for being gay. When It came to the time of the show, NO ONE came to picket. None of the area churches would support it. Hatred is not the monster lurking within us, its the sinfulness that we have been emdracing for all our lives.

You’re writing your arguments based on a conclusion you reached 40 years ago. As such, it’s hard for you to “come down” off the mountain of your eldership to engage real questions deeply rooted in a study of religious history, and their implications. You can argue as always that the scriptures are perfect because you believe they are (and have been affirmed in your beliefs by leadership and peers) and you can insulate your ideas with details you accumulate as time passes (throwing out contradictory or inflammatory notions as you go along), but this frustrates any attempts to engage you in a sophisticated, intelligent analysis of the rift between the Jerusalem church and the ever-controversial Apostle Paul in the arena of historical reality.

Ironically, in pointing out that Paul rebuked Peter, you failed to acknowledge that Paul later amended his accusations and adopted a principle similar to that of Peter’s own. This was pointed out by Pope Benedict XVI in a dissertation last year. His theory is sound, and well-cited. Feel free to explore the text of the analysis itself here, with links to scriptural references and their own individual dissections: http://www.kandle.ie/2008/10/02/paul-peter-conflict-dialogue/

There is no disagreement here that Paul’s writing and that of the Gospels is different in tone, because, as Morf points out, they are coming from two different points in time. However, that doesn’t mean they are in conflict with one another, especially regarding salvation.

All of Scripture was written by one Author, and it flows together with no conflicts. How could it differ from itself?

BTW, Peter refers to Paul’s letters as Scripture. Thinking of this in context, and of who Peter was and his background, this is a huge thing for him to say. It seems to me that regardless of their earlier difference of opinion, they were clearly on the same page eventually.

I have been a listener and supporter of Focus on the Family for many years, and it pains me to see their newsletters getting more shrill and alarmist. Their tone – and content – is getting more like Phelps (and less like the Jesus of the New Testament) with each issue.

Phelps (and others like him) should be rebuked – not embraced or copied – by those who would follow Jesus.