Christianity is not defined solely by the Bible

[Pegg]

What defines the Bible?

nothing defines the bible...it stands on its own merits and is an authority in its own right.

The Catholic Church does not teach that celibacy is required by God.

i should have quantified that with... required of its 'priests'. If they read the bible they'd know that several of the apostles were married men.

 

[Katzpur]

He did not lie, he was just wrong on his assumption. Or maybe he meant that people would be able to reconcile with God through his teachings. Or maybe the bible is inaccurate as to how it portrays some of Jesus speechs, so it can't it be taken to the word. Or maybe...

Or maybe you can just interpret the whole thing any way you want to or toss the whole thing out. The Bible is pretty clear with respect to Jesus indicating that it is through Him alone that men can be saved. How anyone could consider himself a Christian without accepting that simple fact is beyond me. Jesus Christ is either what He claimed to be or else He's a huge fraud. There is no middle ground on that.

Got it?

Nope.

 

[Mister Emu]

nothing defines the bible...it stands on its own merits and is an authority in its own right.

The Bible assumes its authority from those who wrote it, under the authority of God to write as they did. All authority comes back to God, and the Bible is not divine.

Secondly, many modern Bibles have less books in the Tanakh than mine or the one used by first century Jews and Christians, they got that way because someone much later decided to define the Bible in a way that removed those books from the canon. The Bible is defined by the books in it, and men(hopefully under the guidance of God) are the ones who do it.

i should have quantified that with... required of its 'priests'. If they read the bible they'd know that several of the apostles were married men.

I meant it in relation to priests as well, I understood what you meant The Catholic Church does not teach that priestly celibacy is required by God.

 

[sky dancer]

My argument is that Xy is not remotely defined by the Bible. Since God is not revealed in Xy through doctrine, but through the Person of Jesus.

How can God be revealed by the person of Jesus when he, as a person, isn't even alive, and we cannot even prove he lived?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Is that an observation or a doctrine?

It is an interpretation of Christian history.

 

[Koldo]

Or maybe you can just interpret the whole thing any way you want to or toss the whole thing out. The Bible is pretty clear with respect to Jesus indicating that it is through Him alone that men can be saved. How anyone could consider himself a Christian without accepting that simple fact is beyond me. Jesus Christ is either what He claimed to be or else He's a huge fraud. There is no middle ground on that.

Nope.

It is actually pretty simple.
Christianity in my country is mostly something passed down through generations. Many christians i know of do not use the bible to understand Christianity, rather they use the bible to justify their beliefs.

Oral tradition is what generates christians around here. And along the time important pieces of information get lost along the road.

Anyway, even if we ignore the oral traditions and stick to the text written in the bible, it is still possible to pick what you want to consider as true, and disregard whatever you want to as well.

You seem to think that it is a requirement for a christian to hold a firm belief on everything ( or most ) that is written in the bible, but this is not really the case.

 

[idea]

So obviously something else defined individuals who claimed to be Christians.

something else defines Christians, I agree.

Koldo - Many Christians i know of do not use the bible to understand Christianity, rather they use the bible to justify their beliefs.

we use a few books to defend what we already internally know... I agree.
so where do these beliefs come from? if not from a book?

I believe that God speaks to us in more than just the written word - that He also writes upon our hearts, and speaks to us through our conscience - that inner light which guides us to know right from wrong. The ability to recognize and follow this inner light is what defines Christians.

Who is of so little faith that in a moment of great
disaster or heartbreak has not called to his God?
Who has not cried out when confronted with
danger, death, or mystery beyond his normal
experience or comprehension? From where has
this deep instinct come which escapes from the
mouth of all living creatures in moments of peril?

Move your hand in haste before another's eyes
and his eyelids will blink. Tap another on his
knee and his leg will jump. Confront another
with dark horror and his mouth will say, "My
God" from the same deep impulse.

My life need not be filled with religion in order for
me to recognize this greatest mystery of nature.

- Og Mandino scroll X
http://www.optimumlifefocus.com.au/oasis/Minutes20061101Attachment.pdf


14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, (don't have the scriptures) do by nature the things contained in the law, (but act like Christians despite not having the scriptures)
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another..
(New Testament | Romans 2:14 - 15)

Christianity is about tuning in to those things which are written in our hearts by the finger of God.

 

[Katzpur]

You seem to think that it is a requirement for a christian to hold a firm belief on everything ( or most ) that is written in the bible, but this is not really the case.

What? Where did I say that? Don't bother looking. I didn't. I didn't say anything remotely close to that.

 

[Koldo]

What? Where did I say that? Don't bother looking. I didn't. I didn't say anything remotely close to that.

When you said "The Bible is pretty clear with respect to Jesus indicating that it is through Him alone that men can be saved.", you meant it as if a christian had to hold belief on a particular part of the bible, which then lead me to believe that you think that christians must believe in so and so parts of the bible at least.

Oh, well, i got a little bit carried away in my statement, but i guess it couldn't be helped.

 

[Wombat]

Originally Posted by sojourner
My argument is that Xy is not remotely defined by the Bible. Since God is not revealed in Xy through doctrine, but through the Person of Jesus

How can God be revealed by the person of Jesus when he, as a person, isn't even alive, and we cannot even prove he lived?

Ahhhhhhh....there ya go sky dancer....letting the facts get in the way of a good story!:sarcastic

Be careful though...asking pertinent questions that seek understanding of the others pov can be viewed as insidious trap setting.

Good luck.

 

[fallingblood]

the debate only comes into the picture because what we read iin the bible is different to what we hear being preached

thats why we should stop listening and start reading


If harold camping was 'reading' the bible, he'd know that 'no one knows the day or the hour'
If the catholic church were 'reading' they'd know that celibacy is not a requirement by God.

Yet even those who read the Bible disagree with what it says. You and I have gotten into a number of debates here, and we both rely on the Bible for various points. Yet, we disagree with what it says.

 

[Pegg]

Yet even those who read the Bible disagree with what it says. You and I have gotten into a number of debates here, and we both rely on the Bible for various points. Yet, we disagree with what it says.

thats true...and i believe the reason is because of preconceived ideas. As an example, some will argue that God is a trinity God...that there are 3 Gods in one - father, son and holy ghost. Therefore jesus is equal to the father in every respect, as is the holy ghost.

yet we read verses where Jesus is shown to be in submission to the father, and places where he openly says 'the father is greater then I am'

Some will assume it must mean something different because they've been told that 'God is a trinity'...so they base their reading of the verses on that preconceived notion.

 

[outhouse]

thats true...and i believe the reason is because of preconceived ideas. As an example, some will argue that God is a trinity God...that there are 3 Gods in one - father, son and holy ghost. Therefore jesus is equal to the father in every respect, as is the holy ghost.

yet we read verses where Jesus is shown to be in submission to the father, and places where he openly says 'the father is greater then I am'

Some will assume it must mean something different because they've been told that 'God is a trinity'...so they base their reading of the verses on that preconceived notion.

even in church school, even when my faith was solid as a rock.

I never could stomach the trinity. I thought someone was trying to BS me when they told me the concept and it never ever took.

because as you point out, nothing in the book states trinity or that kind of thought pattern at all.

 

[Pegg]

even in church school, even when my faith was solid as a rock.

I never could stomach the trinity. I thought someone was trying to BS me when they told me the concept and it never ever took.

because as you point out, nothing in the book states trinity or that kind of thought pattern at all.

quite right. its widely acknowledged even by catholic scholars that the trinity is not found in the NT writings...the idea is seen in later periods of time by later writers.

i love kids because they are so logical...everything is very concrete in the mind of a child and i've never met one child who grasps the idea of the trinity.

 

[sojourner]

the bible defines what is and is not a part of christianity.

Not completely. There is also Tradition to consider...

 

[sojourner]

nothing defines the bible...it stands on its own merits and is an authority in its own right.

since that kind of accountability and authority is accorded only to God, I'd say that POV comes real close to idolatry.

 

[sojourner]

How can God be revealed by the person of Jesus when he, as a person, isn't even alive, and we cannot even prove he lived?

You and I are alive.

 

[sojourner]

Ahhhhhhh....there ya go sky dancer....letting the facts get in the way of a good story!:sarcastic

Be careful though...asking pertinent questions that seek understanding of the others pov can be viewed as insidious trap setting.

Good luck.

Troll.

 

[sojourner]

quite right. its widely acknowledged even by catholic scholars that the trinity is not found in the NT writings...the idea is seen in later periods of time by later writers.

i love kids because they are so logical...everything is very concrete in the mind of a child and i've never met one child who grasps the idea of the trinity.

The Bible as the be-all-end-all of revelation has never been the case for the majority of the church. The fallacy of sola scriptura didn't come about until the Reformation.

 

[Pegg]

The Bible as the be-all-end-all of revelation has never been the case for the majority of the church. The fallacy of sola scriptura didn't come about until the Reformation.

I understand that completely. The majority of the church have put the bible aside in favor of the writings of men... i totally agree with that.