Everyone who hears of Jesus but does not accept Him is going to hell.

[viole]

This is sort of unclear as to meaning, ie in what context are you presenting this. I don't think that 'some' people should have to accept Jesus, while others don't. That makes no sense, imo.

And puts additional burden on the ones who know.

For, who has an advantage towards salvation? If the knower has an advantage, then God is unfair. The same if the ignorant has an advantage.

If both have the same odds, then the good news should not be called such, but should be called useless news, instead.

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

My point is simply that just because something in scripture is found to be false, doesn't mean that the entirety of that scripture is false. It's not all or nothing

True, but what epistemology do you possess to know what is false and what not?

I think that creationists like K. Ham are right when they say "if I cannot trust the bit here, how can I trust the bit over there?".

In my opinion, the very basic literal interpretation of the Bible is the one with the highest rankings in terms of intellectual consistency, even if it is obviously totally wrong.

More liberal interpretations are not even wrong, I am afraid .

Ciao

- viole

 

[leibowde84]

True, but what epistemology do you possess to know what is false and what not?

I think that creationists like K. Ham are right when they say "if I cannot trust the bit here, how can I trust the bit over there?".

In my opinion, the very basic literal interpretation of the Bible is the one with the highest rankings in terms of intellectual consistency, even if it is obviously totally wrong.

More liberal interpretations are not even wrong, I am afraid .

Ciao

- viole

Agreed.

 

[Nakosis]

True, but what epistemology do you possess to know what is false and what not?

I think that creationists like K. Ham are right when they say "if I cannot trust the bit here, how can I trust the bit over there?".

In my opinion, the very basic literal interpretation of the Bible is the one with the highest rankings in terms of intellectual consistency, even if it is obviously totally wrong.

More liberal interpretations are not even wrong, I am afraid .

Ciao

- viole

Sure, why even bother to assume the Bible has any authority. You pick out what you like according to your feelings.

People who do so actually are giving more authority to their own feelings than the Bible. Which I've no problem with, just take responsibility for those feelings and leave God out of it.

 

[leibowde84]

Sure, why even bother to assume the Bible has any authority. You pick out what you like according to your feelings.

People who do so actually are giving more authority to their own feelings than the Bible. Which I've no problem with, just take responsibility for those feelings and leave God out of it.

The Bible was written by many unknown authors thousands of years ago ... not God. They merely claimed to speak for God, just like so many other before and after them.

 

[Unification]

Everyone who does not accept Jesus is going to Hell.

What do you think? Yes, or no? If no, then what is basis for accepting Jesus?

Anyone who doesn't accept truth, life, love, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, reality, peace, calmness, equality will be in a mental state of hell chasing their mind in circles in some way or another or many ways.

 

[metis]

Maybe we've already in hell by being here at RF?

 

[Unification]

Anyone who doesn't accept truth, life, love, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, reality, peace, calmness, equality will be in a mental state of hell chasing their mind in circles in some way or another or many ways.

Labels such as being a "Christian" are outward and vain and create divide. A word used once or twice in a book and now look at the impact it has. It's internal, to be Christ-like, to have the mind of Christ. Someone walking this world in truth and love and peace and rest in mind with a fulfilled life having no knowledge of Christianity or Jesus indirectly and internally is Christ-like and having the mind of Christ with no need for a label and pride and religion.

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

Everyone who does not accept Jesus is going to Hell.

What do you think? Yes, or no? If no, then what is basis for accepting Jesus?

It's obvious from the poll there are very few evangelical Christians on this topic. Accept Jesus for what?

 

[Nakosis]

The Bible was written by many unknown authors thousands of years ago ... not God. They merely claimed to speak for God, just like so many other before and after them.

Right, and so the other option is...

 

[savagewind]

Maybe we've already in hell by being here at RF?

No doubt.

 

[leibowde84]

Right, and so the other option is...

Just pointing out that the Bible is one of many texts claiming the same thing.

 

[Nakosis]

Just pointing out that the Bible is one of many texts claiming the same thing.

The point being you might as well take responsibility for your own feelings. If you like something from the Bible or any other religious text, it is because you like, see something good in what is said. Not because it has God's authority.

People pick out passages from religious texts which support their feelings. They reject or try to explain away those that don't.

 

[leibowde84]

The point being you might as well take responsibility for your own feelings. If you like something from the Bible or any other religious text, it is because you like, see something good in what is said. Not because it has God's authority.

People pick out passages from religious texts which support their feelings. They reject or try to explain away those that don't.

That is not always the case. I,for example, understand the limits of human beings and the inevitability of fraudulent claims in any book claiming to speak for God. I try to scrutinize according to the spirit of Jesus' teachings and attempt to decipher what seems to have been added in later.

 

[Desert Snake]

My point is simply that just because something in scripture is found to be false, doesn't mean that the entirety of that scripture is false. It's not all or nothing

What do you find or think to be 'false', in Scripture?

 

[leibowde84]

What do you find or think to be 'false', in Scripture?

The story of Jesus' birth, as one example. Paul's storied "vision" for another.

 

[Nakosis]

That is not always the case. I,for example, understand the limits of human beings and the inevitability of fraudulent claims in any book claiming to speak for God. I try to scrutinize according to the spirit of Jesus' teachings and attempt to decipher what seems to have been added in later.

Yes, I tried to go down that road as well, but ended up admitting that I was really just fooling myself. Perhaps you are better at it than me. However I could always find a way to justify getting rid of something I didn't like. First it was to kick Paul by the wayside. Then everything except what was claimed to have been spoken by Jesus. Then I even had to question the authenticity of his words. I ended up being left only with what I agreed with anyway, which we can't even guarantee was spoken by Jesus.

So good luck with that. Hope it works out for you.

 

[Desert Snake]

The story of Jesus' birth, as one example. Paul's storied "vision" for another.

Couple of things, here. The 'story of Jesus's birth, if taken as false, is not a de facto declaration of a 'normal' storyline, ie. Mary is a Jewish woman, unwed, etc etc. The entire narrative could be inference as fictional, if you choose to disbelieve the virgin birth. My issue is, not your disbelief, that's fine with me, but the following expectation that people are supposed to believe the story at all. Why believe that the story isn't all made up, you already stated that the Bible has false, and true things in it. You are using a pre-set narrative, imo, fitting the Scripture into the 'story', that many secularists, and some other religious people as well, think that they are reading, when they read the Bible.


So, is the ''best guess', that Mary gave birth to a person named Jesus,, in Israel, in a barn, and that person became the quasi Rabbi fisherman carpenter whose verbal teachings were written down later by people who never knew Him, but they knew His teachings, and all the ''mystical'' stuff, (which is like, what, most of the narrative), is fictional? How does that ,make the Bible more credible? Or are you saying the Bible has no credibility?

 

[Desert Snake]

The story of Jesus' birth, as one example. Paul's storied "vision" for another.

That's most of the New testament, right there. I'm going to stop the dialogue until I get a clearer idea of what, sort of ''Christianity'', you are proposing, without the Epistles, any deific nature/?/ etc.

 

[leibowde84]

That's most of the New testament, right there. I'm going to stop the dialogue until I get a clearer idea of what, sort of ''Christianity'', you are proposing, without the Epistles, any deific nature/?/ etc.

I am concerned with only the spirit of Jesus' (supposed) teachings. I think there was truth in them.