Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-25-2015, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,284,769 times
Reputation: 14072

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert M Prince View Post
An excellent post. We need to take all passages of scripture for what they are. As said in 2Tim. 3:[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Poor, sad man. You have my pity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2015, 08:11 PM
 
Location: USA
18,529 posts, read 9,218,447 times
Reputation: 8556
Wardendresden,

You make a very good case against Christianity.

If you are aware of the many problems with the bible, then why do you want to have anything to do with Christiany?

It's nothing personal. If a Muslim gave me a detailed explanation for why the Quran is an unreliable guide for Islamic doctrine, I'd ask him why he was still a Muslim.

See what I'm getting at?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,284,769 times
Reputation: 14072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Wardendresden,

You make a very good case against Christianity.

If you are aware of the many problems with the bible, then why do you want to have anything to do with Christiany?

It's nothing personal. If a Muslim gave me a detailed explanation for why the Quran is an unreliable guide for Islamic doctrine, I'd ask him why he was still a Muslim.

See what I'm getting at?
I'm certain Warden can, and will, speak eloquently on his own behalf but he's one of the most admirable people I've "met" online and a fine ambassador of his faith.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 10:07 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
10,688 posts, read 7,747,711 times
Reputation: 4674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Wardendresden,

You make a very good case against Christianity.

If you are aware of the many problems with the bible, then why do you want to have anything to do with Christiany?

It's nothing personal. If a Muslim gave me a detailed explanation for why the Quran is an unreliable guide for Islamic doctrine, I'd ask him why he was still a Muslim.

See what I'm getting at?
I had a road to Damascus type of experience many, many years ago. Actually, I've had two. Despite all the problems of the Bible it is still the attempt of some of our ancestors to explain their faith and their understanding of God.

The problem with fundamentalism which has only developed in the last 100 years (not defending all the non-fundamentalist screw-ups prior to the past century) is that it will not allow morality to grow.

Through the ages man's morality has grown, not perfectly and not everywhere at the same time. But consider that women were once no more than chattel--and that men (mostly wealthy)--even in the Bible collected them as wives or concubines sometimes by the score. We generally have dim views of that ancient morality imposed on the 21st century. Was the Bible "wrong" then, or was morality not at a growth point to produce a higher understanding?

Slavery was certainly condoned in the Bible and we are less than two hundred years in moral growth to understand the problems with slavery. Was the Bible wrong or had our moral growth not reached a point to provide a higher understanding?

Have their been setbacks? Of course. The rise of Fascism was certainly a stunting and even reversal of moral growth for one group of people. Hitler used religion in the early days to foment opposition against abortion, homosexuals, and eventually those of Jewish ethnicity. But there were those in the world who had advanced to the point that they didn't want to see the ugliness and atrocities of yesteryear ---and they fought to overthrow it.

And guess what? Religion has always been a rallying cry for those who wish to demean and disenfranchise others. Yet at the same time religion has been a rallying cry for those opposed to such things. In our history---for two thousand years--it has been a step backward before two steps forward on the moral compass.

In this nation today, we are seeing the very tactics Fascists used in Germany being used here. Picking a group of people (abortion doctors and homosexuals) who are the "reason" for anything bad that happens (9/11 was blamed on "homosexuals" and other sinners in America) in order to instill terror, find someone to blame--and raise money for those who wish to be powerbrokers. And it's done in the very name of God!!

On the other hand, there are people of faith standing opposed to this kind of ugliness. People whose moral compass has moved two points beyond the others, who have sustained some further kind of moral growth yet to take hold of this nation as a whole. Both sides claim to be serving God, but only one side has moral high ground.

There is much bitterness against those of us who are more virulent in our defense not of just "everyone is loved by God," but of "we are the servants of everyone else."

Hermann Hagedorn, a historian and poet, in his classic poem, The Bomb That Fell on America, was asking why the world is short on martyrs.

I stood in the desert and a there was a Cross in the desert and a Man on the Cross
"Look at Him," said the Voice, "and look at yourself, Look at Him, and be still,
Look at yourself and be honest. How do you appear to yourself beside Him?"

I looked and it seemed as though the earth dropped from under my feet,
and I was hanging in space between currents that pressed me down and currents that pushed me up.
"What do you see"? said the Voice. "I have never been crucified," I replied.
"No," said the Voice, "you have never been crucified. Do you know why?"

I felt suddenly ashamed. "I have never made people angry enough."
The Voice was still for a very long time and when it spoke again it seemed to come from the mountains, afar off.
"The world is sick," said the Voice, "for dearth of crucifixions."

Right now there aren't enough of us who seek moral growth to make angry the powerbrokers, the ones who stunt and hold back moral growth. When we make them angry enough--they crucify us--as they did in one fashion or another in the past century to Dietrich Bonhoeffer who stood in opposition to cruelty imposed by Nazis and the churches which quietly supported them. As they did to Gandhi who stood against oppression of all people and actually supported the separation of India from Pakistan--killed by Hindu fundamentalists who believed Gandhi was appeasing Pakistani Muslims at the expense of Indian Hindus. As they did to Martin Luther King who pointed out again and again that "We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love." His death, too, was most likely because of the public opposition of many churches in the deep South.

So I have no problem making fundamentalists angry with my words---the world is sick, for dearth of crucifixions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 10:10 PM
 
Location: Arizona
28,956 posts, read 16,454,545 times
Reputation: 2296
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
I'm certain Warden can, and will, speak eloquently on his own behalf but he's one of the most admirable people I've "met" online and a fine ambassador of his faith.
I would agree, there is a difference between professing.
And actually being that something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 10:51 PM
 
Location: USA
18,529 posts, read 9,218,447 times
Reputation: 8556
Warden,

I found your post above to be insightful. Thank you for sharing your point of view.

I guess my next question would be this: why do we need religion for morality to "grow"? Aren't non-religious people just as capable of working for justice and fairness in the world?

Sorry if it sounds like I am interrogating you. I'm just trying to understand "non-fundamentalist" Christianity a little better. As you can probably tell, I'm totally unfamiliar with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 11:04 PM
 
64,026 posts, read 40,336,559 times
Reputation: 7898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
Warden,
I found your post above to be insightful. Thank you for sharing your point of view.
I guess my next question would be this: why do we need religion for morality to "grow"? Aren't non-religious people just as capable of working for justice and fairness in the world?
Sorry if it sounds like I am interrogating you. I'm just trying to understand "non-fundamentalist" Christianity a little better. As you can probably tell, I'm totally unfamiliar with it.
Warden is my preferred Preacher for Christ . . . but I disagree that religion has been a force for the advancement of morality. It has been worse than a stumbling block . . . it has been an immovable wall. The ridiculous policy of retaining as a sign of faith in God . . . the ancient ignorance from 21 centuries ago or more is a travesty. Imposing 1st century and earlier cultural mores on 21st century society is ludicrous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 11:38 PM
 
335 posts, read 221,025 times
Reputation: 29
llghghhbbb
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 11:40 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,284,769 times
Reputation: 14072
Quote:
Originally Posted by john233 View Post
llghghhbbb
More sensible than your previous few posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2015, 11:45 PM
 
335 posts, read 221,025 times
Reputation: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
That's why we have two different nativity stories.
The key point to reconciling the nativity accounts is that Luke is writing to a Roman official and Matthew is writing to Christians who were formerly Jews. In other words, Luke is writing to the oppressor and Matthew is writing to the oppressed. Luke has carefully left out those things that would upset the Roman official, Theophilus, or any other Roman official that Theophilus might show Luke's gospel. Matthew has similarly left out those things that would upset Jewish Christians.

I know by faith that there was no dishonesty, just good prudent editing. This kind of prudence is not sinful, in fact it is at least recommended if not commanded by the Bible. Paul when instructing Christians on how to speak to those outside the faith said, "...try to fit your answers to the needs of each one." Colossians 4:6. Jesus told us to be, "... be cunning as serpents and yet as harmless as doves." Matthew 10:16. So Christians should not be shocked, or scandalized if the writers of the Gospels exercised an honest, godly, prudence in their editing.

Matthew does not mention Nazareth at first. He briefly deals with the virginal conception and birth of Jesus and then rushes on to the wise men, Herod, the slaughter of the innocents, and the flight to Egypt.

In Luke the wise men, Herod, the slaughter of the innocents and the flight to Egypt are all skipped. Jesus is born in Bethlehem, is visited by the shepherds, is circumcised, goes to Jerusalem for the Presentation at the Temple, and then the Holy Family goes back to Nazareth.

What really happened? Jesus was miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit in Nazareth. Matthew leaves this out because it would weaken the Christian claims that Jesus was the Messiah who had to be from Bethlehem, the city of David.

Luke emphasizes the same point Matthew leaves out because Jews claiming to be the Messiah were always leading revolts against Rome. So writing to a Roman official Luke plays the Messiah aspect of the Christian faith down without denying it.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem, fulfilling the prophesy that he would come from Bethlehem. Both Matthew and Luke mention this. Luke might have wanted to leave it out, but it was simply to central to the story.

Luke mentions the shepherds visit to the family of Christ, Matthew does not. As shepherds were poor marginal members of society this would make Jesus, and therefore the Christians seem less threatening to the Romans.

Luke says that Jesus was circumcised on the eight day, and about a month later was presented at the temple, and returns to Nazareth. Matthew leaves out both the circumcision, the Presentation, and the return to Nazareth.

At the "presentation" the family of Christ provides two turtledoves or two young pigeons for the sacrifice. This was the sacrifice of the poor. If they had just received gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh then they would have provided a lamb. This is one of the clues that provides evidence that the wise men showed up later.
As devout Jews the family of Christ made at least yearly pilgrimages to Jerusalem, which is a few miles from Bethlehem. Joseph had relatives in Bethlehem and there might be carpentry that he could do there. So it would be only natural that the family would visit Joseph's relatives in Bethlehem, and perhaps Joseph would pick up some work, which might make the stay longer. It was during such a visit that the Wise Men showed up.

As Herod was an official appointed by Rome, Luke naturally left out the slaughter of the innocents. Starting your story of the life of Jesus by mentioning what was at least indirectly a Roman atrocity would have be very imprudent. Luke's decision to spare the feelings of the Roman official on the slaughter of the innocents is probably the key reason that the stories are so different.

Matthew on the other hand was writing to Christians who had formerly been Jews. They would have been favorably impressed by story of the Wise Men. The Romans on the other hand might suspect that the Christians were making alliances with powerful people beyond the boarders of the empire. They might have reacted negatively to the story of the Wise Men.

The family of Christ fled to Egypt and eventually returned to Nazareth.

A consistent story can be constructed from the two gospels if we recognize that both writers were writing to two very different audiences. The were not testifying before a modern court, they were writing the truth, but they had not promised to tell the whole truth. They picked the parts of the true story that would help them win over their very different audiences.

Quote:
That's why Paul would teach to pray for your enemies in order "to heap burning coals" on their head, and Jesus taught that we do good for our enemies in the same manner that we do good for our own families--in their best interests.
Praying is doing good for your enemies. He makes it clear all throughout his writings that we are to embody Christ and the love of Christ. "Heap burning coals" on them does not mean to literally put burning coals on them. It means to repay evil with good, as they will not be able to understand why (unlike godless people) they do not live and act according to the ways of the flesh. The passage about coals is about the emotional discomfort an enemy will feel when you waken his conscience about his conduct toward you. It is taken directly from Proverbs 25:22.
Such an awakening will be a testimony to the greatness and love of Christ. With the desired result that even the enemy may come to believe upon Him.

Quote:
That's why Paul can teach about faith only and John can write about "I will show my faith WITH my works.
Faith is not simply accepting Christ in your mind, but being obedient to Him. When faith is spoken of in the Bible, it is understood that works necessarily result as a product of that faith. If works do not follow, then that faith is dead and worthless.(James 2:17) This correlates with what Jesus says(Matthew 12:33), "You shall know a tree by it's fruits." Faith makes you a good tree(saved/in Christ), a good tree naturally produces good fruits(works). A good tree, without good fruit, is either a dead tree or a worthless tree.

John 14:12-16
“Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.
15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,


Galatians 5:6
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.


Romans 1:5
"through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations"


Romans 16:26
but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith


Quote:
Why would Paul write in Corinthians 11 that women may prophesy as long as their heads are covered. Who are those women speaking to?
Then in 14:34 Paul REVERSES himself and says "Let your women keep silence in the churches for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience---."
In three short chapters Paul REVERSED what he already said was acceptable if a head covering was used (a culturally acceptable dress of the time) and then told them to shut up????
Paul affirms women’s role in prayer and prophecy (1 Cor 11:5), so he cannot be prohibiting all kinds of speech here. (In fact, no church that allows women to sing actually takes this verse to mean complete silence anyway.) Since Paul only addressed a specific kind of speech, we should note that the only kind of speech he directly addressed in 14:34—36 was wives asking questions. In ancient Greek and Jewish lecture settings, advanced students or educated people frequently interrupted public speakers with reasonable questions. Yet the culture had deprived most women of education. Jewish women could listen in synagogues, but unlike boys, were not taught to recite the Law while growing up. Ancient culture also considered it rude for uneducated persons to slow down lectures with questions that betrayed their lack of training. So Paul provided a long-range solution: The husbands should take a personal interest in their wives’ learning and catch them up privately. Most ancient husbands doubted their wives’ intellectual potential, but Paul was among the most progressive of ancient writers on the subject. Far from repressing these women, by ancient standards Paul was liberating them.(underlined in case RonkonkomaNative reads this)

This text cannot prohibit women’s announcing the word of the Lord (1 Cor 11:4,5), and nothing in the context here suggests that Paul specifically prohibited women from Bible teaching.


And then there is 1 Timothy 2:11
“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence”

Which brings up the same question dealt with at Corinth. Women were not to call out to their husbands or the current speaker for Scriptural explanations during the service. If one looks closely at Paul’s statement respecting the right of the woman to teach, it plainly says, “Nor to usurp authority over the man.”The idea is, that the woman does not have power over the man. To do so, is to violate the Creation model. Women should not dictate to men, but they do have the right to exercise their privilege to Teach, Preach, Prophesy, Pray, and do other things under the authority of men. As should be obvious, the key is in not exercising authority over men.(again, underlined for RonkonkomaNative) The Greek word for “usurp” is “authenteo,” and means “to have power over it.” So, women are not to have power over men, at least as it regards the Work of God. But under the authority of men, they can do anything they feel the Lord has called them to do.

Last edited by john233; 02-26-2015 at 12:05 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:51 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top