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.
What a foolish opinion. Just because someone is not a believer is no reason for you to dismiss what they have to say. Ehrman's opinions have the weight of scholarship behind them unlike your own. The entire purpose of the OT is to show us who WE are as we approach God. The purpose of the NT is to witness to Jesus.
Ehrman's opinions arr just that, opinions, and he NEVER offers any evidence to support this comments. What evidence does he offer for miracles are impossible? How about Jesus did not fulfill any miracles. NONE & NONE. The OT is much more than about how we approach God and the NT is more than about witnessing to Jesus
Quote:
I think Karl Barth was a terrific theologian--for the most part. But he did reach some conclusions that, imo, are opposed to the spirit of God in the NT. IF you are only willing to pat people on the back with your exact same opinion on every single biblical topic, then you have made yourself a god--
What makes you think I do that? Barth was a very controversial theologian. I am not familiar enough with his theology to comment on him .
Quote:
which is what the mythological story of Eden was all about---men making themselves gods after eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. They then elevated themselves to God's position because they felt they were smart enough to speak for God. THAT is the original sin that infects us all. It is most prevalent among fundamentalists who think only they have superior knowledge and try to use that "knowledge" to denigrate people with other views.
You are wrong on both counts. You are just parroting the theology of liberal theologians. What evidence do you have that the Garden of Eden is a myth? Where does it say they elevated themselves to God's position? You don't have to be smart to talk to God. Where did that silly idea come from? The Bible does not teach denigrating people. Not only does it teach us to LOVE our neighbor as our self, it teaches us to LOVE our enemies. A fundamentalist would never use his knowledge of the Bibe to denigrate anyone. It would help you greatly to know what fundamentalism really is all about.
Quote:
Since their are 30,000 denominations claiming christianity, it is quite easy to see how each of those denominations have used the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil to lift themselves up.
More liberal rhetoric. The number of denominations is irrelevant
Quote:
Whatever you think you know---it hasn't come from study.
Now you are speaking from pure ignorance. Why don't you tell me how much I have studied. The truth is your lack of understanding of the Bible shows you have not studied it as you should.
Quote:
As people in any field of knowledge are aware--the more one studies, the less they know, because they slowly become aware of how much they do not know. And Scripture supports this:
John 21:25
That is as silly a statement as I have ever heard. They don't give PhD's for what is not known about the subject. In fact you can't tell when there is more to learn.
What if God were to show up tomorrow and say that the Bible is full of ****.
Been there done that. And, as someone who was raised with the belief that the bible is the inerrant "Word of God", and essentially, no inerrant bible = no god, the answer to your "what if" is that I immediately stopped believing in God.
It took some time to get free of that deeply imbedded indoctrination that God is, for all intents and purposes, contained within a book.
More liberal rhetoric. The number of denominations is irrelevant
Not only that, but I've challenged people on this board many many times to provide some documentation to back it up, and they have not been able to. But they still keep going with the lie.
Ehrman's opinions arr just that, opinions, and he NEVER offers any evidence to support this comments. What evidence does he offer for miracles are impossible? How about Jesus did not fulfill any miracles. NONE & NONE. The OT is much more than about how we approach God and the NT is more than about witnessing to Jesus
I believe there were miracles--and probably a number of exaggerations of some of them.
And where is YOUR evidence that miracles took place? In that respect it is only your opinion--and an uneducated opinion at that.
Quote:
omega2xx;4605928
What makes you think I do that? Barth was a very controversial theologian. I am not familiar enough with his theology to comment on him
1.What makes you think I do that?
Every post you make follows a standard line for modern fundamentalists. Show me one anywhere that is opposition to fundamentalist religious thinking!! {Waiting-waiting---waiting} 2.I am not familiar enough with his theology to comment on him.
You aren't familiar with Barth? Or Bultmann? Or Tillich? Or Bonhoeffer? Or how about extremely conservative F. F. Bruce? I don't agree with many of the man's conclusions, but he is a scholar and has been called the Savior of Great Britain from the fundamentalist cult.
This is but another example of a failure to take advantage of the long term deep seated study of some of the great scholars of the twentieth century--regardless of whether or not you can accept some of their conclusions.
Quote:
omega2xx;4605928
You are wrong on both counts. You are just parroting the theology of liberal theologians. What evidence do you have that the Garden of Eden is a myth? Where does it say they elevated themselves to God's position? You don't have to be smart to talk to God. Where did that silly idea come from? The Bible does not teach denigrating people. Not only does it teach us to LOVE our neighbor as our self, it teaches us to LOVE our enemies. A fundamentalist would never use his knowledge of the Bibe to denigrate anyone. It would help you greatly to know what fundamentalism really is all about.
1. You don't have to be smart to talk to God.
No you don't. But you do have to be smart to read the Bible and understand it properly. Without it, God returns your talk in a simpleton way--because God reaches out to us where we are, not where we should be. 2.The Bible does not teach denigration of people.
Yet you denigrate Ehrman and pooh-pooh his years of understudy at Wheaton, and MDiv and PhD from Princeton---that horrible university that was the birthplace of modern fundamentalism in the late 19th century. And you don't tell anyone they are going to hell because they don't believe like you? Let's put it a different way--how does it make you feel if I state that your lack of a biblical education leaves you as nothing but a parrot of people like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and James Robertson? Does it make you feel good about yourself or angry and defiant? So, too does your telling those atheists and Muslims they are sinners and going to hell.
Please note the only people Jesus personally threatened with hell were the most religious "bible believers" of his time. He was actually quite kindly toward people like the rich young ruler, the woman caught in adultery (an apocryphal tale added to John after that gospel had already been written), or the Samaritan woman. He didn't threaten any of them with hell--even the rich young ruler who clung to his money.
I graduated from a Southern Baptist College (many decades ago) where I studied Bible under a liberal NT professor and a conservative OT professor. When I first heard my NT professor lecture, MY FUNDAMENTALIST upbringing kicked in and I told him I didn't believe 90% of what he was teaching, but I was going to learn it better than any student in his class. He replied, "Son, there is still hope for you then."
So I got a picture of both sides. Yet when the financial chips were down for me personally the NT professor helped me stay in school. The OT professor never even knew I had a problem. And I told neither of them about my finances. I guess the liberal must have had a revelation from God, eh?
Quote:
omega2xx;4605928
More liberal rhetoric. The number of denominations is irrelevant
Yes, fundamentalism is all about division--opposed to Christ who was all about unity. Why would you state the number of denominations is irrelevant? Some accept homosexual members and even pastors. I think it is wonderful (unity), but do you? Accepting that would make you a unifier rather than a divider, so you cannot. You judge them (as you proclaim you love them). But if you did any scholastic biblical study you would see the tenuous ground reading has without exegesis using textual, literary and grammatical and syntactical methodologies. In other words, there is frequently, FREQUENTLY, more than one way to interpret critical verses of Scripture.
I personally believe there is a Trinity, yet I confess there is much biblical evidence contrary to this idea. Exactly what education should teach a person---to not be so dogmatic as you have displayed.
Don't think that makes a difference? Read Exodus 3:6 and tell me if you understand that to mean a bodily resurrection. Then look up a fundamentalist apologist to get his opinion. But Jesus used that to tell the Sadducees they were wrong about a resurrection (in which they did not believe). No one questioned that interpretation--showing that the way Scripture was received THEN is different than it is received now.
Quote:
omega2xx;4605928
Now you are speaking from pure ignorance. Why don't you tell me how much I have studied. The truth is your lack of understanding of the Bible shows you have not studied it as you should.
Your posts readily reveal that you haven't studied Scripture scholastically. You have the same Sunday School mentality that I had before I began taking Bible courses in a very conservative college (our president was a former president of the Gideons) before that college fell to the dogmatism of fundamentalism that rejects any view but their own and they fired anyone who would not take a fundamentalist vow of inerrancy.
Incidentally, my church pastor during college was also a fellow student. He believed in inerrancy and became a missionary to Africa for 19 years for the Southern Baptists. But when they flew someone to Africa to insist he sign a document about what he believed in the Bible, he refused. The following year he came home to the U.S. on sabbatical, and then was informed that they wouldn't be returning him to Africa. When he asked what they were going to do about his furniture in storage over there (they shipped it over originally), he was told it was his problem. Fundamentalism at its dogmatic and hateful best.
Quote:
omega2xx;4605928
That is as silly a statement as I have ever heard. They don't give PhD's for what is not known about the subject. In fact you can't tell when there is more to learn.
No, and you should remain sassy and happy in your biblical ignorance. Because the more one REALLY studies the Bible, the more they become the awful "liberal" with which you divide the world into good and evil.
And the "proof" that you aren't really a Bible reader or student comes from no other than that bastion of liberalism Christianity Today:
Quote:
When I first arrived at seminary in the fall of 2008, I was more conservative than George W Bush himself.However, once I embraced the learning process and actually began to take the teachings of Jesus seriously, I found my heart begin to melt, and eventually shift, on a host of issues. When I went through my transformation, many wrongly assumed that I was being indoctrinated by some liberal political group when in reality, I was at a very conservative seminary and the only thing making me more liberal was the fact that I was actually engaging the Bible seriously for the first time in my life.
------------------------------ The results of the study were featured by Christianity Today and show that the more frequently one reads their Bible, the more they develop liberal tendencies on several important issues. What’s even cooler, is the study showed that the “liberalizing effect” was consistent across the entire sample studied:
“But unlike some other religious practices, reading the Bible more often has some liberalizing effects—or at least makes the reader more prone to agree with liberals on certain issues. This is true even when accounting for factors such as political beliefs, education level, income level, gender, race, and religious measures (like which religious tradition one affiliates with, and one’s views of biblical literalism).”
I don't care what you believe if you have truly studied scholastically. Because studying scholastically will make you more "liberal." Godly education works that way! I guess the fact tha real Bible study changes one, is absolutely true. That's why so many fundamentalists eschew it.
Last edited by Wardendresden; 11-04-2016 at 08:49 AM..
Not only that, but I've challenged people on this board many many times to provide some documentation to back it up, and they have not been able to. But they still keep going with the lie.
Evidence? How about TWO volumes of it?
Quote:
Never has there been such a thorough reference as the two large volumes, running 1,699 pages, of the World Christian Encyclopedia, published by Oxford University Press. Barrett has doggedly visited most of the lands in person, collecting raw material, including national census figures and United Nations data, and recruiting the 444 specialists who feed him material. Among them: Vatican missions librarian Willi Henkel and editor J. Gordon Melton of the Encyclopedia of American Religions. Barrett's encyclopedia sought to count each human being in each religion and religious subcategory in each country as of 1900, 1970, 1990, 1995 and 2000, with projections to 2025.
The 2001 edition, successor to his 1982 first edition, which took a decade to compile, identifies 10,000 distinct religions, of which 150 have 1 million or more followers. Within Christianity, he counts 33,820 denominations.
How Many Protestant Denominations Are There? the 20,000 30,000 numbers and David Barrett's statistics Title:World Christian Encyclopedia : a comparative survey of churches and religions in the modern world Authors: David B. Barrett, George T. Kurian, Todd M. Johnson. Edition: 2nd ed. Published: Oxford ; New York : Oxford University Press, 2001. Description: 2 v. : ill., col. maps ; 32 cm. Notes: Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Contents:
v. 1. The world by countries : religionists, churches, ministries
v. 2. The world by segments : religions, peoples, languages, cities, topics.
Been there done that. And, as someone who was raised with the belief that the bible is the inerrant "Word of God", and essentially, no inerrant bible = no god, the answer to your "what if" is that I immediately stopped believing in God.
It took some time to get free of that deeply imbedded indoctrination that God is, for all intents and purposes, contained within a book.
Once we realize God is more than any written words--IT IS SO REFRESHING to see God as God really is..
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.
I guess the fact tha real Bible study changes one, is absolutely true. That's why so many fundamentalists eschew it.