Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe that the Bible is God inspired and literal except for parables and allegories.
In other words you don't know that the doctrine was formulated at the beginning of the Reformation to combat the Doctrine of the Roman Rite Catholic Church that the church was the final authority on matters of faith? Interesting.
What do you know about "the advocate" Jesus promised us? John 14:17
I don't know anything about The Way International, except for what I just read in your link which I just skimmed through.
In the early church, before followers of Jesus were called Christians, they were referred to as followers of the Way.
Acts 9:1 Now Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest, 2] and asked for letters from him to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.
But yes, some of the people who post on this forum and identify themselves as Christians reject much of what the Bible says.
I should point out also, that while it is a legitimate term, moderators don't allow the use of the word 'cult.'
I would clarify that, because I see that stated way too often. It is not surprising because of the either/or black/white thinking inherent in literalists/fundamentalists, but it really isn't quite accurate.
Non-fundamentalist Christians simply reject that what much of the Bible says is literally true. For example, while a true fundamentalist believes, simply by virtue of the fact that it is contained in The Bible, that a guy named Job actually got played by a bet between God and Satan and that all those things listed that supposedly happened to him really happened, a NF Christian understands that the story is meant to teach us something even though those things did not really happen. It doesn't matter to us that it didn't really happen. What matters is what we get from studying and discerning what we might learn from it.
Do you see the difference? That is not rejecting what the Bible says. It is only rejecting that the Bible=God.
We see elevating an assortment of writings by men to claiming that God dictated those words as dangerous. Declaring mankind's words as equal to God to abuse power has caused great harm to people over the centuries.
I would clarify that, because I see that stated way too often. It is not surprising because of the either/or black/white thinking inherent in literalists/fundamentalists, but it really isn't quite accurate.
Non-fundamentalist Christians simply reject that what much of the Bible says is literally true. For example, while a true fundamentalist believes, simply by virtue of the fact that it is contained in The Bible, that a guy named Job actually got played by a bet between God and Satan and that all those things listed that supposedly happened to him really happened, a NF Christian understands that the story is meant to teach us something even though those things did not really happen. It doesn't matter to us that it didn't really happen. What matters is what we get from studying and discerning what we might learn from it.
Do you see the difference? That is not rejecting what the Bible says. It is only rejecting that the Bible=God.
We see elevating an assortment of writings by men to claiming that God dictated those words as dangerous. Declaring mankind's words as equal to God to abuse power has caused great harm to people over the centuries.
This is extremely arrogant; like extremely. Christianity isn't a spiritual buffet where you accept the parts that you like and ignore those that you don't. It's not about you, or me. It's about HIM.
No self loathing here; I am the child of the most high God. I am eternally joyful and regretful for his love, forgiveness and grace.
Making yourself a special snowflake does nothing for your attitude to those who are not, the ones who seem to be contemptible. How is that going to work in carrying out Matthew 5:49?
This is extremely arrogant; like extremely. Christianity isn't a spiritual buffet where you accept the parts that you like and ignore those that you don't. It's not about you, or me. It's about HIM.
A realistic assessment of the nature of the Bible is not arrogant, what IS arrogant is believing that YOUR assessment is the only right one in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. What did you find out about the advocate Jesus promised and how does it compare to your doctrine of Sola Scriptura?
I would clarify that, because I see that stated way too often. It is not surprising because of the either/or black/white thinking inherent in literalists/fundamentalists, but it really isn't quite accurate.
Non-fundamentalist Christians simply reject that what much of the Bible says is literally true. For example, while a true fundamentalist believes, simply by virtue of the fact that it is contained in The Bible, that a guy named Job actually got played by a bet between God and Satan and that all those things listed that supposedly happened to him really happened, a NF Christian understands that the story is meant to teach us something even though those things did not really happen. It doesn't matter to us that it didn't really happen. What matters is what we get from studying and discerning what we might learn from it.
Do you see the difference? That is not rejecting what the Bible says. It is only rejecting that the Bible=God.
We see elevating an assortment of writings by men to claiming that God dictated those words as dangerous. Declaring mankind's words as equal to God to abuse power has caused great harm to people over the centuries.
I would clarify that, because I see that stated way too often. It is not surprising because of the either/or black/white thinking inherent in literalists/fundamentalists, but it really isn't quite accurate.
Non-fundamentalist Christians simply reject that what much of the Bible says is literally true. For example, while a true fundamentalist believes, simply by virtue of the fact that it is contained in The Bible, that a guy named Job actually got played by a bet between God and Satan and that all those things listed that supposedly happened to him really happened, a NF Christian understands that the story is meant to teach us something even though those things did not really happen. It doesn't matter to us that it didn't really happen. What matters is what we get from studying and discerning what we might learn from it.
Do you see the difference? That is not rejecting what the Bible says. It is only rejecting that the Bible=God.
We see elevating an assortment of writings by men to claiming that God dictated those words as dangerous. Declaring mankind's words as equal to God to abuse power has caused great harm to people over the centuries.
The only people I've seen say that the Bible=God, or that the Bible is God are the people who claim that that is what fundamentalists are saying. It's a straw man argument. Believing that the Bible is the word of God is not saying that the Bible is God.
The Bible says that Jesus is God. Many who identify as Christian reject that. Many deny that Satan is a real being despite the fact that the Bible presents him as such. Some deny that Jesus went to the cross to pay the penalty for our sins even though the Bible is quite clear that he did. Some deny the virgin birth of Jesus. Some deny that angels exist. Pcamps just denied that the Bible teaches separation. I showed that it does. Yes, many who identify as Christian deny and reject certain plain statements in the Bible.
Nor does the belief that the Bible is the word of God necessitate believing that God dictated what is written in the Bible although in some cases He did, such as in Revelation chapters 2-3 where Jesus tells John exactly what to write. Nor does it mean that God used automatic writing in which the Biblical writers unconsciously wrote what God directed them to write. But God was able to use human writers to communicate what He wanted to communicate to man.
The Bible is both the word of God and the writing of men who wrote within the framework of their own culture. It contains many genres such as literal prose, poetry, wisdom sayings, allegory, apocalyptic literature, etc. It contains some things we know not to be scientifically true, such as the Genesis creation story for instance. But the creation story was not intended to be taken literally. It was a polemic against the creation stories of the Canaanite and Egyptian creation stories. The creation story contains a theological truth - it was Yahweh who created the Universe, not the gods of the other religions. But He didn't do it in the way that Genesis says He did it.
The only people I've seen say that the Bible=God, or that the Bible is God are the people who claim that that is what fundamentalists are saying. It's a straw man argument. Believing that the Bible is the word of God is not saying that the Bible is God.
The Bible says that Jesus is God. Many who identify as Christian reject that. Many deny that Satan is a real being despite the fact that the Bible presents him as such. Some deny that Jesus went to the cross to pay the penalty for our sins even though the Bible is quite clear that he did. Some deny the virgin birth of Jesus. Some deny that angels exist. Pcamps just denied that the Bible teaches separation. I showed that it does. Yes, many who identify as Christian deny and reject certain plain statements in the Bible.
Nor does the belief that the Bible is the word of God necessitate believing that God dictated what is written in the Bible although in some cases He did, such as in Revelation chapters 2-3 where Jesus tells John exactly what to write. Nor does it mean that God used automatic writing in which the Biblical writers unconsciously wrote what God directed them to write. But God was able to use human writers to communicate what He wanted to communicate to man.
The Bible is both the word of God and the writing of men who wrote within the framework of their own culture. It contains many genres such as literal prose, poetry, wisdom sayings, allegory, apocalyptic literature, etc. It contains some things we know not to be scientifically true, such as the Genesis creation story for instance. But the creation story was not intended to be taken literally. It was a polemic against the creation stories of the Canaanite and Egyptian creation stories. The creation story contains a theological truth - it was Yahweh who created the Universe, not the gods of the other religions. But He didn't do it in the way that Genesis says He did it.
Uh............who said?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
