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.
You know . . .I am beginning to think that one of the worst sins is "all-or-nothing" thinking. The idea that somethings in the Bible do NOT mean what you think it says . . . does NOT mean everything in the Bible does not mean what you think it says. That our ancestors were ignorant is indisputable . . . (it means "lacked knowledge") . . . unless you think the past 2000+ years of knowledge does not exist. That our ancestors were savage and barbaric is revealed in their "fruits" . . . such as throwing babies alive into fires to worship Molech, worshiping golden calves and treating cripples horribly because they did not want to treat them better than God did by letting them be crippled. If you are not aware of the savagery and barbarity of our ancestors . . . you need to read more. If someone who follows scriptures . . . (that are USEFUL for instruction) . . .because they think they are inerrant and infallible words directly from God . . . they are idolizing them as God . . . because ONLY God is infallible and inerrant. That would make them a Bibleian . . . NOT a Christian who follows Christ the Living Word of God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber
We are talking about authors of the Bible, so could you clarify which authors of the Bible burned babies alive to worship Molech? There are savage people alive even today, but should that mean everyone alive today are savage? It seems to be your thinking that just because there were savages alive back then, then everyone at that time was a savage, even the authors of the Bible. That is pretty ignorant way of thinking.
It is possible to believe the Bible and follow Christ at the same time. Didn't you just say that the all-or-nothing thinking is one of THE WORST SINS?
I used the examples only to indicate the general level of civility and understanding that existed back then. Let's not be coy and pretend that there is not an enormous difference in cultural evolution and knowledge from then to now. We cannot remotely relate to the mindset of those primitives anymore than we can really relate to the mindset of aborigines today. It doesn't matter how intelligent the authors were. It matters what they actually knew and what cultural milieu (zeitgeist) they lived in.
Quote:
BTW How is your way of following Christ different from what is described in the Bible? Could you point out some of the things you do to honor Christ which are not mentioned in the Bible? Thanks.
Thsi seems to be a repeated theme of yours that makes absolutely no sense. No one is saying spiritual truths are NOT in the Bible. Of course spiritual truths are in the Bible. The question is always WHICH ONES? You have repeatedly been told what the differences are. Our Father as revealed and exemplified by Christ is very different in character from the God as described in the OT . . . NOT completely different (to circumvent your usual all-or-nothing rationale) . . . but in very significant ways as you are fully aware (ET, etc.). I believe Christ . . . it seems the majority of mainstream Christians believe our ignorant savage ancestors instead. When reading with the "mind of Christ" these differences figuratively jump off the pages. Let's not pretend you do not know what I am referring to.
There seems to be two schools of thought in this matter. One which questions the credibility of the Bible and the other which considers the Bible the inerrant word of God and takes the Bible literally. Both positions have their problems. The formal is charged with having to provide criterion for deciding what parts of the Bible are true and which aren't, which are metaphor or allegoric and which aren't. The latter requires the believers to suspend scientific laws and place their belief in conflict with historic and scientific fact. Personally, neither of these quandaries are desirable, logical, or reasonable.
There seems to be two schools of thought in this matter. One which questions the credibility of the Bible and the other which considers the Bible the inerrant word of God and takes the Bible literally. Both positions have their problems. The formal is charged with having to provide criterion for deciding what parts of the Bible are true and which aren't, which are metaphor or allegoric and which aren't. The latter requires the believers to suspend scientific laws and place their belief in conflict with historic and scientific fact. Personally, neither of these quandaries are desirable, logical, or reasonable.
You completely discount the existence and "mind of Christ" as unambiguously revealed. Your disbelief is understandable . . . but it is not logical to say we do not have the means to discern what is wheat and what is chaff in the Bible according to the "mind of Christ."
You completely discount the existence and "mind of Christ" as unambiguously revealed. Your disbelief is understandable . . . but it is not logical to say we do not have the means to discern what is wheat and what is chaff in the Bible according to the "mind of Christ."
If you discredit the Bible as being written by our ignorant ancestors, how do you know that Christ even exists since these same "ignorant ancestors" are the only testaments to him and his actions?
If you discredit the Bible as being written by our ignorant ancestors, how do you know that Christ even exists since these same "ignorant ancestors" are the only testaments to him and his actions?
I could be wrong but what I think Mystic might be saying is that the originals could have been inerrant but our ignorant scribal ancestors mistranslated the love of GOD.
I used the examples only to indicate the general level of civility and understanding that existed back then. Let's not be coy and pretend that there is not an enormous difference in cultural evolution and knowledge from then to now. We cannot remotely relate to the mindset of those primitives anymore than we can really relate to the mindset of aborigines today. It doesn't matter how intelligent the authors were. It matters what they actually knew and what cultural milieu (zeitgeist) they lived in.
You have been calling the authors savage and ignorant, and now we know the claim is based on the assumption that everyone must have been a savage if some people were guilty of savage acts. The Bible condemned those acts as an abomination, so clearly there were savage people, and those who were not. Today we have savages in Afghanistan sawing off people's heads with pocket knives, but that does not mean everyone today is a savage. If it did, then you'd be a savage too.
Quote:
Thsi seems to be a repeated theme of yours that makes absolutely no sense.
You have not been able to answer it in the past, and you are not able to answer it today. No surprise there.
Quote:
. . . it seems the majority of mainstream Christians believe our ignorant savage ancestors instead......
More of the same mystic-speak, - discrediting the Bible, and those who believe it. Christians today believe in Christ, and it is not or you to claim otherwise. It is ironic you accuse others of "all or nothing attitude" when you are the who displays it more than anyone, as if one cannot believe in Christ while believing the God of the OT is also the God of the NT.
You have been calling the authors savage and ignorant, and now we know the claim is based on the assumption that everyone must have been a savage if some people were guilty of savage acts. The Bible condemned those acts as an abomination, so clearly there were savage people, and those who were not. Today we have savages in Afghanistan sawing off people's heads with pocket knives, but that does not mean everyone today is a savage. If it did, then you'd be a savage too.
You have not been able to answer it in the past, and you are not able to answer it today. No surprise there.
More of the same mystic-speak, - discrediting the Bible, and those who believe it. Christians today believe in Christ, and it is not or you to claim otherwise. It is ironic you accuse others of "all or nothing attitude" when you are the who displays it more than anyone, as if one cannot believe in Christ while believing the God of the OT is also the God of the NT.
Finn, When God's word shows one's life and beliefs to be wrong they often decided they can just call God a liar and reject any part of what He has said to justify themselves. Not having the knowledge or education and especially not having God's spirit to guild them they cannot understand God or what God has said.
If you discredit the Bible as being written by our ignorant ancestors, how do you know that Christ even exists since these same "ignorant ancestors" are the only testaments to him and his actions?
There is no proof. Unless, you have faith or hope.
God cannot be known from our perspective.
The Bible is simple more religion. And religion is man made.
You have been calling the authors savage and ignorant, and now we know the claim is based on the assumption that everyone must have been a savage if some people were guilty of savage acts. The Bible condemned those acts as an abomination, so clearly there were savage people, and those who were not. Today we have savages in Afghanistan sawing off people's heads with pocket knives, but that does not mean everyone today is a savage. If it did, then you'd be a savage too.
Zeitgeist is zeitgeist, Finn. If you do not know what the word means look it up. We are light years different from our savage ancestors and nothing can change that. What we take as normal knowledge and civility "given in the inner consciousness" . . . does not apply to them.
Quote:
You have not been able to answer it in the past, and you are not able to answer it today. No surprise there.
You have refused to accept the answer in the past and you still refuse to accept it today. Try reading without your usual bias.
Quote:
More of the same mystic-speak, - discrediting the Bible, and those who believe it.
I do not discredit the Bible . . . I properly divide it and interpret it with the "mind of Christ."
Quote:
Christians today believe in Christ, and it is not or you to claim otherwise.
I do not claim otherwise. I do not dispute anyone's claim to Christ . . . as is done by so many others here.
Quote:
It is ironic you accuse others of "all or nothing attitude" when you are the who displays it more than anyone, as if one cannot believe in Christ while believing the God of the OT is also the God of the NT.
It is double-minded to pretend that the Father Jesus revealed to us by His life, teachings and death is the same as described by our savage ancestors under the veil of ignorance over reading the OT. You have to accept rationalizations for Evil as being Good because supposedly God works in mysterious ways or His ways are not our ways, or whatever other insupportable rationale is used to accept the anti-Christ attitudes in the OT descriptions of God.
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.
