The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: hmmm

(See in situ)


I don't think it is condescending on my part to imply that God might be smarter than you, or anyone. I would put myself in the same boat (same boat as you, not God). I apologize if I came across as offending you. I don't see how your response is really turning the other cheek. I agree that God is consistent, logical, and unchangeable, but I also believe that God is not limited by our understanding. Just because we think something could have been done in a better way doesn't mean that our way is actually a better way.

Regarding Mark 16:15, there are a few problems with your view. First the authenticity of verses 9-20 are in question by most Bible scholars(including conservative ones). It's normal that churches give disclaimers if they ever preach through Mark and get to this section, some churches won't even cover that section because it is generally rejected as authentic because of manuscript evidence. Check any popular commentary or even the footnotes in almost any study bible. Second, The fact that God tells his creation to do something does not mean that God himself wants to use it to accomplish the apparent goal of the command. He may have other purposes for commanding evangelization besides the evangelization itself, (eg. sanctification of the evangelists). Third, The bible itself explicitly proves my point that God did not want the gospel to go everywhere at every time:

Acts 16:5-7 "So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and they increased in numbers daily. And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia. And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them."

Your voting scenario isn't very accurate. The canonization wasn't an arbitrary voting on what to keep and what to throw out, it was more of a recognition of what was already accepted by Christian churches. They merely made official what was already in use by faithful Christians. If you look at the contents of the books which were not declared to be scripture, it should be self evident why they were never accepted. You can also nearly reconstruct the information of the new testament from early patristic quotations prior to the councils of canonization, and can see their reverent use of the scripture which later became canonized. These were church fathers who were students and friends of the apostles picked by Jesus, and students of those students and students of those students, etc.