Christianity has its nutbags too

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I think you are sadly mistaken what interpretation is and what it means. If you want I'll give you examples of Jesus' parables and then you can tell me what he meant without interpreting them.

I dunno, I've only read the New Testament twice, so I can't remember all of them but Jesus' parables never seemed too difficult to interpret. And doesn't He usually end up explaining them anyway? So I'm not sure what your point is...

(by the way, I apologize if it sounds like I'm being rude to you. I'm enjoying debating this with you)

He said,"This is how it is with the kingdom of God; it is as if a man were to scatter seed on the land

and would sleep and rise night and day and the seed would sprout and grow, he knows not how.

Of its own accord the land yields fruit, first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear.

And when the grain is ripe, he wields the sickle at once, for the harvest has come." - Mark 4:27-29

My point is that interpretation happens everytime you read or hear something - always. There's no getting around it.

Let me give an example. Suppose I were to say, "Steven and incanada are like two peas in a pod." It's a figure of speech, right? Not only is it metaphorical it is also a form of sarcasm. We both understand it because of the context that exists in. Now take that statement and bury it for a thousand years. When someone finds it, they might think we are small and round like peas. Even if they conclude that it was metaphorical how can they possibly know that it was meant as sarcasm?

So when approaching the Bible, you have to use intellect, knowledge and faith to discern what is God's revelation, separated from human imperfections within the text. In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

[samir_shannon 0]

there are crazy nutbags in all races and religions.

I think you are sadly mistaken what interpretation is and what it means. If you want I'll give you examples of Jesus' parables and then you can tell me what he meant without interpreting them.

I dunno, I've only read the New Testament twice, so I can't remember all of them but Jesus' parables never seemed too difficult to interpret. And doesn't He usually end up explaining them anyway? So I'm not sure what your point is...

(by the way, I apologize if it sounds like I'm being rude to you. I'm enjoying debating this with you)

He said,"This is how it is with the kingdom of God; it is as if a man were to scatter seed on the land

and would sleep and rise night and day and the seed would sprout and grow, he knows not how.

Of its own accord the land yields fruit, first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear.

And when the grain is ripe, he wields the sickle at once, for the harvest has come." - Mark 4:27-29

My point is that interpretation happens everytime you read or hear something - always. There's no getting around it.

Let me give an example. Suppose I were to say, "Steven and incanada are like two peas in a pod." It's a figure of speech, right? Not only is it metaphorical it is also a form of sarcasm. We both understand it because of the context that exists in. Now take that statement and bury it for a thousand years. When someone finds it, they might think we are small and round like peas. Even if they conclude that it was metaphorical how can they possibly know that it was meant as sarcasm?

So when approaching the Bible, you have to use intellect, knowledge and faith to discern what is God's revelation, separated from human imperfections within the text. In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

i agree totally !!!!!!!!!!!!! anyone in their right mind knows that anything a man touches is not perfect. so to say that a book is perfect is a mistake...... you must have use good judgement and that comes from faith and a close relationship with god.

[*Robert* 2]

In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

hmmm... were they wrong? Or is modern thinking wrong? If that was wrong... how many other things were wrong?

there are crazy nutbags in all races and religions.

Yep, you can see it right here on VJ!!!

[incanada1234 0]

I think you are sadly mistaken what interpretation is and what it means. If you want I'll give you examples of Jesus' parables and then you can tell me what he meant without interpreting them.

I dunno, I've only read the New Testament twice, so I can't remember all of them but Jesus' parables never seemed too difficult to interpret. And doesn't He usually end up explaining them anyway? So I'm not sure what your point is...

(by the way, I apologize if it sounds like I'm being rude to you. I'm enjoying debating this with you)

He said,"This is how it is with the kingdom of God; it is as if a man were to scatter seed on the land

and would sleep and rise night and day and the seed would sprout and grow, he knows not how.

Of its own accord the land yields fruit, first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear.

And when the grain is ripe, he wields the sickle at once, for the harvest has come." - Mark 4:27-29

My point is that interpretation happens everytime you read or hear something - always. There's no getting around it.

Let me give an example. Suppose I were to say, "Steven and incanada are like two peas in a pod." It's a figure of speech, right? Not only is it metaphorical it is also a form of sarcasm. We both understand it because of the context that exists in. Now take that statement and bury it for a thousand years. When someone finds it, they might think we are small and round like peas. Even if they conclude that it was metaphorical how can they possibly know that it was meant as sarcasm?

So when approaching the Bible, you have to use intellect, knowledge and faith to discern what is God's revelation, separated from human imperfections within the text. In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

I understand what you're getting at. At this point, I'm just going to say let's agree to disagree. This is one of those things that you can't really prove or disprove.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

hmmm... were they wrong? Or is modern thinking wrong? If that was wrong... how many other things were wrong?

Human logic and reason may be finite, but it doesn't negate our capacity for enlightenment.

[*Robert* 2]

In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

hmmm... were they wrong? Or is modern thinking wrong? If that was wrong... how many other things were wrong?

Human logic and reason may be finite, but it doesn't negate our capacity for enlightenment.

Why weren't people enlightened back then? Why did slavery ever have to occur, if there was an all knowing and all loving god to protect ALL the people of this planet? Why was it okay back then, but not now? Hasn't the believers in god been taught the same thing since the beginning? Why did it take so long for that thinking to change?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In the OT, women were second class citizens and slavery was accepted. We now know that those ideas are wrong and weren't anything endorsed by God.

hmmm... were they wrong? Or is modern thinking wrong? If that was wrong... how many other things were wrong?

Human logic and reason may be finite, but it doesn't negate our capacity for enlightenment.

Why weren't people enlightened back then? Why did slavery ever have to occur, if there was an all knowing and all loving god to protect ALL the people of this planet? Why was it okay back then, but not now? Hasn't the believers in god been taught the same thing since the beginning? Why did it take so long for that thinking to change?

In a word. Education.

[incanada1234 0]

In two words, free will.

[Fandango 1,440]

Yep, you can see it right here on VJ!!!

Right here??????? on VJ?!?!?!?!?

B)

[incanada1234 0]

Yep, you can see it right here on VJ!!!

Right here??????? on VJ?!?!?!?!?

B)

I love how the little " B) " emoticon doesn't go with any of the other emoticons AT ALL. He's much smaller and less graphically-inclined. Or something. Poor guy.

Edited July 26, 2006 by incanada1234

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

In two words, free will.

The expansion of human knowledge and experience manifested through better and more easily accessible education systems are what has led to a broad humanist enlightenment (which is what separates the modern from the medieval and ancient worlds).

Religion, for the most part underpins that.

Its not necessarily accurate to suggest that the people living say, in ancient times were less intelligent or less inclined to exercise free will - and you certainly can't judge them by today's moral standards.

[chri'stina 190]

Up to page 9 huh?! I think I read through everything I missed, not sure...and just wanted to make a few comments.

I don't believe I am non porous...I believe when you ask God to be part of your life he does dwell in you as well. I believe nature is non porous but that people can be porous if they want to be.

If you get a cut, does God leak out?

suuuure....

Am I too naive to believe that people who do good and also believe in XYZ religion are really doing good because they feel it is the right thing to do within themself, not because someone told them too...either in a place of worship or in a book. How does that account for people who don't believe in XYZ still being able to do good?

Religion is based on the premise that man is barbaric and uncivilized and wouldn't know what the 'right thing' is, if it were not for someone with charisma claiming to be the messenger/prophet of God telling them.

You prove them wrong, more power to you.

It really matters what the indivual believes, as I don't agree with what you said about religion. I believe each man has been created with a conscience and a code of behavior, to determine good from bad, without anyone actually having to tell them that. C.S. Lewis discusses this very rationally in Mere Christianity. I happen to agree with his opinion on it. It is also based on scriptures from the Bible. People naturally want good for themselves even if they go about attaining it in an evil manner, it's always for the good of themselves even if it's not good for anyone else. Also, it seems natural that when we have something, and someone takes it away from us, it seems not right or "bad". I could go on but it can be a bit boring.

Am I too naive to believe that people who do good and also believe in XYZ religion are really doing good because they feel it is the right thing to do within themself, not because someone told them too...either in a place of worship or in a book. How does that account for people who don't believe in XYZ still being able to do good?

I know many a person who does good even though they don't follow any one religion.

same here

Am I too naive to believe that people who do good and also believe in XYZ religion are really doing good because they feel it is the right thing to do within themself, not because someone told them too...either in a place of worship or in a book. How does that account for people who don't believe in XYZ still being able to do good?

Religion is based on the premise that man is barbaric and uncivilized and wouldn't know what the 'right thing' is, if it were not for someone with charisma claiming to be the messenger/prophet of God telling them.

You prove them wrong, more power to you.

that's why I like Buddhist philosophy... *sigh*

I'm glad you called it philosophy because that is what it is. It is not a religion. Buddha himself didn't want anyone worshipping him or even doing everything exactly like he did. He didn't want to start a religion called Buddhism but was conveying a philosophy he believed to be true. (I don't agree with his philosophy but he himself didn't want people worshipping him)

And just to add, and if you don't believe in God or heaven...that is ok too... I'd much rather know and spend time around an Atheist or Agnostic who is a good person, than a religious person who is horrid.

Something else C.S. Lewis said that I like is "Of all bad men religious bad men are the worst." (in any religion)

Edited July 26, 2006 by stina&suj

[Sister Fracas 5]

that's why I like Buddhist philosophy... *sigh*

I'm glad you called it philosophy because that is what it is. It is not a religion. Buddha himself didn't want anyone worshipping him or even doing everything exactly like he did. He didn't want to start a religion called Buddhism but was conveying a philosophy he believed to be true. (I don't agree with his philosophy but he himself didn't want people worshipping him)

And just to add, and if you don't believe in God or heaven...that is ok too... I'd much rather know and spend time around an Atheist or Agnostic who is a good person, than a religious person who is horrid.

Something else C.S. Lewis said that I like is "Of all bad men religious bad men are the worst." (in any religion)

[PsychoKat 0]

If God is so powerful, why o why couldn't he give his messengers/prophets MS Word?

Actually I was thinking about that the other day. Supposedly according to the bible the 10 commandments were given to Moses written on stone tablets, meaning God himself wrote these commandments in stone so all could read and see them and know these were his words....yet man supposedly now has chosen to hide them away according to some, considered too holy to allow people access to???...as such we have no way to actually view them, which logically would be against the will of God.

Now if God could write the 10 Commandments in stone so that man would know they were his exact words and laws, why then could he not also author the rest of his messages in the same manner thus removing the human element and fallibility?

[almaty 19]

Yep, you can see it right here on VJ!!!

Right here??????? on VJ?!?!?!?!?

B)