A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Your persistence in staying off topic is impressive.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Don't Christians Follow the Bible?
- Thread starter LongGe123
- Start date
Your persistence in staying off topic is impressive.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Ay yi yi, I must be crazy to re-enter this hornets' nest of a thread, but I agree with AE that you can't discount the thousands of years of interpretation, oral law (jewish) and tradition that shape and ameliorate the writings of the Bible. (He's probably cringing that I'm agreeing because I'm not much of a debator and much less versed in all of this than you all seem to be.) No matter how much someone insists that they are reading the Bible 'plainly' or for it's clear meaning, Christianity is not just based upon the Bible. If it were possible to find someone completely unfamiliar with all of our religions and hand them a Bible, the religion they'd come up with would have very little resemblence to the various flavors of Christianity we have today.
My understanding is that Jews don't go around stoning people or poking out eyes for eyes...their oral tradition (I think) focuses on the principles of the law and finds all the reasons God would not allow such barbaric practices...yes it's a 'law,' but it's highly improbable that anyone can meet the conditions under which it is possible to carry out the law, is one way I've heard it explained. But autodidact, I believe you are Jewish as so understand this much better than I do.
But the same is true for Christianity. The religion is based upon the Bible and what we think we know about the life and resurrection of Christ (tradition). But given even those baselines, it's all a matter of how one interprets, what one empahsizes, and what one diminishes. That's why there are so many flavors of Christianity, none of them following a 'literal' interpretation of the Bible, as if that even makes sense. You are right when you say above, "You have to actually lay out what the tradition is for us, so we can discuss and see whether it has any merit." And, you have to first agree with has merit, what could possibly qualify as correct.
I think it's perfectly appropriate to decide that Christ exemplified love, forgiveness, compassion, and inclusion and base your interpretation on those principles. And I believe AE when he says that Christian theologians, scholars, and faithful have done similar things with the NT as the rabbis have done with the OT laws, although from where I sit it seems to have been a messier process given how many different sects of Christianity have arisen.
While in theory I could agree that one could take pretty much any book, any set of words made permanent by writing, and formulate a worldview based upon them, it is ridiculous to compare the Bible to the Cat in the Hat (or Even Red Fish Blue Fish) simply because the Bible contains a much richer, vastly more complex body of writings representing the evolving wisdom and theolgoy of thousands of years, than a child's book written by one person using kindergarten words. It's like saying my kitchen prints are as inspring as a tour of Le Louvre.
Ah, I wouldn't call it a hornet's nest. No sting here, just a few senseless atheists beating the air.
We have one atheist who refuses to understand anything about Christianity who attacks it for not killing people.
Another atheist joins in who is persistent in a false analogy (a pseudo-intellectual comparison of Cat in the Hat and the Bible). I've never seen or heard of a thinking person who can't tell the difference between a modern poem for children and a religious book with profound significance.
One would think that someone who propounds to reject God on an intellectual level would be able to interact with other things on an intellectual level, such as the interpretation of a sacred work and listen with some form of respect to the spiritual journeys which the sacred traditions have allowed.
Thank God that the majority of atheists are not so artless. I know I've possibly over-used that word on this thread, but the lack of appreciation for spiritual journeys is inhuman and dispicable, and runs against the grain of the humanistic tendancies of intellectual life, which to me characterizes atheism.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Perhaps we can meditate on the meaning of this verse (which is interesting because it's full of colorful metaphors):
Matt 7
6"Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.
Matt 7
6"Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.
Hey all, i'm pretty confused now about it all - what christians believe that is. It thorght that Christians see the bible as all true words written by God. Sorry, but going back to - is the bible the word of God?
Could you answer me this - did God write:
"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death." (Exodus 31:15)
Do you think God wrote this? Thats basically what I meant to ask from the begginning.
Could you answer me this - did God write:
"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death." (Exodus 31:15)
“All his commandments are sure. They stand fast for ever and ever.” (Psalms 111:7, 8)
"The law of the Lord is perfect." (Psalm 19:7)
Do you think God wrote this? Thats basically what I meant to ask from the begginning.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
What is really interesting is that if we did kill people, people would question that, too. You can't please everyone. In fact, I am beginning to think we can't please any one.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
It's how you're *stupidly* characterizing Christianity. We *obviously* don't have to kill people in order to believe that the Bible has *some* relationship to God, because we haven't killed people for crap like this since the Dark Ages, and even then, the activity was due to the church's unity with the state and not biblical interpretation.
Your criticism of Christianity is trolling because you're criticizing Christianity for something that you yourself - and no sane person - would support as just or moral - the killing of children and unbelievers. Besides, Christians don't follow the brainless and cruel interpretation that you propound, and perhaps never have. If you don't see how killing people in the name of God is cruel and inhumane, then I won't waste any more time with you.
These two quotes from wiki are very instructive:
Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Baiting (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I've identified the question as bait from a troll, so I really don't need to humor you with anything else.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
No kidding. We can set aside the whole point that if we did, it would be a very poor testimony of God's love and benevolence.
Don't neglect your rich heritage. Millions of people have discovered profound significance in Christianity.
God inspired the Bible. That means that the men who wrote it were true followers of God and influenced what they wrote. God did not come on the earth and write things. If you notice, not even Jesus ever wrote any thing. His apostles did. This is what Christians believe and I believe it, too.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
You'll find some answers to this question in my thread
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...hristians-did-god-write-bible.html#post988009
It's a Christian DIR forum, so you won't be able to debate or express your point of view as an atheist, but you'll be able to read responses. So if it's an honest question, you'll get answers without being able to attack anyone.
Thanks. I never intended to attack anyone, i just wanted to see what christians thorght of the topic shown.
I know that Christians believe that God inspired the bible, what i meant by "Did God write this" was - Did God inspire this? Or did the men writing it go abit far with the 'stoneing' bit?
I know that Christians believe that God inspired the bible, what i meant by "Did God write this" was - Did God inspire this? Or did the men writing it go abit far with the 'stoneing' bit?
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I think that I've made myself perfectly clear on that. Critcizing a religion for not killing people (which you have done repeatedly on this thread) cannot be construed as anything other than an attack.
There's a pretty big difference in God writing something and God inspiring someone. Inspiration does not mean that the writing is perfect or that it should thoughtlessly be taken literally, because there are many different types of literary devices which are not supposed to be read literally (like metaphors, hyperbole, similie and metaphor, et cetera). In fact, the ancient views of inspiration are based on (a) the document's beauty (like the use of literary devices) and (b) the profound meaning found in it.
The process and meaning of inspiration have been up for debate for some time (since Plato).
I don't know.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I struggle with some of these issues here: The way I read the Bible as a scholar
No that does make perfect sense, the 'inspiration doesn't mean that the writing is perfect or that it should thoughtlessly be taken literally, but ....
"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death." (Exodus 31:15)
....is one of the ten commandements. Surley the ten commandements are to be taken literally, if anything?
"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day must be put to death." (Exodus 31:15)
....is one of the ten commandements. Surley the ten commandements are to be taken literally, if anything?
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I've struggled with this a bit in my Process Theology of the Cross.
No, I don't think that this should ever be taken literally today. As I've pointed out repeatedly on this thread, I don't think that this commandment was ever practiced literally by Jews (the killing part) and was probably added by people to be a motivating factor to obey. Obviously, the teachings of Christ regarding the Sabbath clearly modify this commandment.