Ahhh yes...

[Yuoofox]

For example, the "golden rule" appears to differ to me.

That might be a mistake on my part. I think Firemane was correct in saying that "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," is the Golden Rule. I think what I quoted is better called the Greatest Commandment. But, they are similar, aren't they?

Hmm. Curious. two people, of apparently the same faith, yet two separate views of such?

It's okay with me if I and Firemane don't agree on everything. The Bible is a difficult thing to understand as a whole sometimes, and each of us have to do the best we can. If Firemane says something that goes against what I think, then I might say to him, "I disagree with that, and here's why," but I wouldn't say, "Thou art evil, Firemane." As long as someone is studying the Bible the best they can, and they're trying to please God with their life, then that's fine with me.

Further, to me, it seems there is much contradictory to the bible itself

I don't blame you for that because I know the sort of Bible verses that you're talking about: where God says one thing in one place, and He says something seemingly contrary in another place. In my opinion, some things seem contradictory in the Bible because they're dealing with a topic that's difficult to explain, a topic that involves grey areas. Here's an example:

**Yuoo breaks out his hippie guitar and begins to sing "Turn, Turn, Turn" by The Doors.**

There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:
a time to be born and a time to die,
time to plant and a time to uproot,
a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.
-- Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

I know this seems kind of odd for a faith that claims Absolute Truth, but there's more to the Bible than that. Don't get me wrong; there are plenty of Thou-Shalt-Not's and Thus-Saith-The-Lord's in the Bible, and those are important, but equally imporant are the quiet parts, I think.

But again, yes, I understand what you're saying, and I do think you have a good point. Thanks for listening.

[The JAM]

[...unWARP!!!]

Good evening.


Ultimately, we must realise that the Bible, as a whole, is not for "personal" interpretations:

[quote=I Peter 1:20-21 ]Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.[/quote]

God gave the Bible to humanity as a whole. It's when people take bits of the Bible and try to build distorted doctrines on it that others start to suffer. Paul calls the Word of God "The Sword of the Spirit", not "The Sword of Man". There is even an incident where Satan himself used the Bible (Psalm 91) in an attempt to deceive Yeshua, but Yeshua replied with another portion of the Bible (Exodus, I believe) that set Psalm 91 in its correct place and not the distorted interpretation Satan tried to use.

It is God who directs us and brings to life what was written, for our edification, our correction, and to put away what doesn't please Him ("The letter kills, but the Spirit brings-to-life"). It's interesting to know that we have the Book available, as well as the Author, Whom we can consult concerning His work.

[Mwalimu]

**Yuoo breaks out his hippie guitar and begins to sing "Turn, Turn, Turn" by The Doors.**

There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:
a time to be born and a time to die,
time to plant and a time to uproot,
a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,
a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.
-- Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

Turn, Turn, Turn was by The Byrds (not The Doors).

[Yuoofox]

Oops. My mistake. I guess I got the songs on the Forrest Gump soundtrack kind of mixed up.

Oh, and I agree with you, Sir Jam. I wasn't trying to say that the Bible means whatever you want it to mean. I was just saying that when two Bible-believing Christians disagree on the meaning of some point of scripture, they can still be in harmony in their quest to understand what God is telling them in that passage.

[Firemane]

Hmm. Curious. two people, of apparently the same faith, yet two separate views of such? o.O

*That* bothers you?

Seriously, why would you expect Christians to be monolithic and homogenous? Especially those of us who don't have the resources or inclination to devote all of our time to theology? Scientists disagree on scientific principles, without having to question the logical basis of discovery. Philosophers disagree, often radically, on the very basic nature of things, each supported by rational thought and reason, yet we do not have to question the validity of philisophical Truth. So why would there be no room for different viewpoints in religion?

Indeed, a good book is one that you can read more than once, and come away with a different understanding each time you read it. There are many books that only deserve a single, casual reading. But the best books should speak to you in a new voice each time you read them. The Bible is a very good book, and if you read it over and don't come away with a new understanding, then perhaps you aren't really reading it. As Chaucer put it "As old fields yield new crops, so do old books yield new ideas"

For example, the "golden rule" appears to differ to me. However, more to the point i suppose, how is it that, as ive seen, people of the faith say "while it is written such and so, what is meant is different"? i find it odd that such would be said, to me, if you say something, MEAN it, otherwise dont bother saying it -- unless your deliberately aiming for misconceptions. Further, to me, it seems there is much contradictory to the bible itself, and more so, when you compare, say, the christian bibles to the US Declaration of Independance, or the US Constitution.

This is where I suggest you dig a little deeper. The Bible makes a *lot* more sense when you know where the different parts come from. Find out who compiled the Old Testament. Consider the historical context of the different books: Much of the law of Moses makes sense from a public health standpoint, especially when you consider that Moses was working on moving 40,000 disgruntled Hebrews through the wilderness while keeping enough of them alive to sustain a new nation in the promised land.

In the New Testament, contradiction is to be expected. There's a good reason that there are four gospels instead of one; the story was too important to be told from a single perspective. Whenever you introduce two observers into a situation, you will have contradiction (with the possibility that neither side may be completely correct or completely incorrect). After the gospels themselves, you have a collection of letters and statements made by followers of Jesus: the beginnings of interpretive Christianity. Primarily, you have the generally ignored doctrine of James (brother of Jesus) and the doctrine of Paul (basis of the original Church and pervasive through almost all subsequent churches).

Please note that by making the above statement I've more or less doused myself in gasoline and handed out matches. But, I believe it is the truth.

For the latter point... why do you expect the Bible to compare with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? The former is a religious document, the latter two are secular documents. That there is some overlap between the two is to be expected... but why would you assume that they would mirror each other?

Firemane
"As old fields yield new crops, so old books yield new wisdom" - Chaucer

[Yuoofox]

Please note that by making the above statement I've more or less doused myself in gasoline and handed out matches. But, I believe it is the truth.

**Yuoo gets some roasting-sticks, some hotdogs, and some marshmallows and distributes them to Firemane, RKCoon, and himself.**

As long as there's a fire, we'd might as well get some weanies and s'mores out of it.

[LoneWolf23k]

I'm surprised that RKCoon is surprised that two christians are in disagreement. Especially since, throughout history, arguments about the fine points of the faith have kept christians arguing at each other since pretty much the day after Christ left his apostles.

Heck, if it wasn't for the puritans being in disagreement with the catholics, we'd probably never have had the early american settlers.

Let's face it, christianity is anything but monolithic.

[Firemane]

I'm surprised that RKCoon is surprised that two christians are in disagreement.

I'm surprised that you're surprised that he's... ah, nevermind.

Especially since, throughout history, arguments about the fine points of the faith have kept christians arguing at each other since pretty much the day after Christ left his apostles.

The misunderstanding of Christ started long before his death. Keep in mind, the death of Christ took many of his followers by surprise, because they believed he was intended to be an *earthly* king, despite his statements to the contrary. So, right from the start, people were hearing what they *wanted* to hear.

Heck, if it wasn't for the puritans being in disagreement with the catholics, we'd probably never have had the early american settlers.

Let's face it, christianity is anything but monolithic.

Christianity as a whole is fragmented, but in a given region it can seem *very* monolithic. There are parts of alabama, for instance, where Southern Baptist is the only game in town (though there will still be three churches, at the minimum). If you grew up in that area, it would be very easy to believe that the view of Christianity you grew up with was the only possible view.

I think this is one of the reasons many of the alternate religions become popular (I know it's one of the things that led me to search outside Christianity in the first place). If you're told all your life that there is only room for one interpretation, and you cannot reconcile yourself to that interpretation, then your option is to either pretend to be faithful (which I think is lazy and possibly sinful) or to reject Christianity entirely. A lot of people never realize until much later that there are other interpretations of Christianity.

I think this is sortof what leads people to become Satanists, from what I've seen. They accept the Christian cosmology *implicitly* because they've been immersed in it all their lives. It is so pervasive that they simply don't understand that they can reject it. However, they feel compelled (for whatever reason) to reject Christianity. All too often they're told that if they aren't on the side of God, then they are on the side of Satan, or that any religion other than Christianity is Satanism (I read this in a sunday-school lesson guide, btw, I think it was a publication called Guideposts. It even labeled "meditation" as Satanic.) Well, if you've only got two options, and you can't stand the one, you might as well embrace the other. That's the understanding I get from the people who seem serious about it, rather than the ones who are doing it to be "cool" or to spite their parents.

I think someone had mentioned *being* a Satanist in the forum earlier in the grand debate. Feel free to correct me (by private email if need be: cwilliams5319@charter.net) if I've grossly misinterpreted this.

Firemane

[Starfury]

Some quickie notes, most of what I have has already been said...

The Golden Rule is "Do to you neighbor as you would like them to do to you."
The Greatest Commandment is to "Love God with all your Heart, Mind, Soul, Strength."

Those who wrote the two political documents (Declaration of Independance and the US Constitution) where of mixed theological background. Theists, Deists, I want to say even an Anthiest or Agnostic or two. Franklin didn't buy into the Diety of Christ. Plus, they are *political* documents. Not scripture.

how is it that, as ive seen, people of the faith say "while it is written such and so, what is meant is different"?

Sometimes it's Irony. "Go to Bethel and sin; go to Gilgal and sin yet more. " Amos 4:4a. Sweet! I get a free pass for anything I want to do so long as I am At Gilgal or Bethel! Or... Not. Maybe God was being just a wee bit sarcastic.

When a bunch of guys stopped following Jesus because he said they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood... I don't think he meant "Hey guys, come pick my bones! Come on! It'll be a great time!" I think he was refering to something that was up and coming... the Last Supper.

Sometimes if you take literature literally, you get messed up (Voltaires 'Candide' as point in case.) The Bible, however inspired, is still literature, why not treat it like that?

Oh... and one last thougt, then I have to scoot.
Under the Covenent of Christ, the Mosaic Covenent is (as Prof Wheeler is fond of saying) "Abrogated." God pretty much said "Ok, lets do this. I'll finish all the requirements of the covenent with Moses, tie that lose end up, and then revert back to the one with Abraham and David." Granted, there is a lot of in depth study that could be done just on that one concept of Christian Doctrine, but the basic are there... ANd now I must be off. Food and school await. And to think... I pay to be punished like this... *sigh*

[Sharuuk]

I think someone had mentioned *being* a Satanist in the forum earlier in the grand debate. Feel free to correct me (by private email if need be: cwilliams5319@charter.net) if I've grossly misinterpreted this.
Firemane

I think you may be referring to me on this. I didn't say that I *was* a Satanist....I was telling some people that if a particularly obnoxious member of their group, one who had literally chased me out into an office parking lot screaming, really screaming that I was going to Hell, was representative of a "born again Christian" then he was the poster-boy for embracing Satanism.

I think you may find that particular post in the locked thread "Beltane,The Boss, or Both" at the top of page 7.

And no offence taken.

Shaaruuk

[LoneWolf23k]

I think this is one of the reasons many of the alternate religions become popular (I know it's one of the things that led me to search outside Christianity in the first place). If you're told all your life that there is only room for one interpretation, and you cannot reconcile yourself to that interpretation, then your option is to either pretend to be faithful (which I think is lazy and possibly sinful) or to reject Christianity entirely. A lot of people never realize until much later that there are other interpretations of Christianity.

Except that if history has proven anything, it's that christians who disagree with religious orthodoxy are most likely to do is just start off their own seperate branch of christianity based on their own interpretation of the holy book.

It's really only since the whole 60s "Dawn of the Age of Aquarius" deal that "alternative" religions really got started, and that was mostly sparked by kids who wanted to really do something to be different from their parents.

...Of course, most of the people who started those alternative religions were also drugheads, but it's not related.

...really!

I think this is sortof what leads people to become Satanists, from what I've seen. They accept the Christian cosmology *implicitly* because they've been immersed in it all their lives. It is so pervasive that they simply don't understand that they can reject it. However, they feel compelled (for whatever reason) to reject Christianity. All too often they're told that if they aren't on the side of God, then they are on the side of Satan, or that any religion other than Christianity is Satanism (I read this in a sunday-school lesson guide, btw, I think it was a publication called Guideposts. It even labeled "meditation" as Satanic.) Well, if you've only got two options, and you can't stand the one, you might as well embrace the other. That's the understanding I get from the people who seem serious about it, rather than the ones who are doing it to be "cool" or to spite their parents.

Modern Satanism, as imagined by Anton Szandor LaVey (1930

[The JAM]

[...unWARP!!!]

Good evening.


It's basically when a church stops actively praying and asking God for guidance that it falls into rituallism: everything becomes a set of do's and dont's, and the "my way or else" form of thinking develops. The youngsters, being so active, naturally rebel at the constricting lines that constrict, yes, but do nothing about the spiritual side of things.

Keep in mind this: going to church doesn't automatically make you a Christian! Christianity, as it is explained in the entire Bible, is a relationship with God, and doing what He asks you to do. Some women in some churches would claim that they're very "holy", with their long dresses and no make-up or jewelry, but by the way they gossip and slander, you know that they're everything BUT holy.

Jesus said, "You'll know them by their fruits", i.e., by the "output" their lives give, which, according to the Apostle Paul, are summarised with love, joy, peace, patience, self-control, endurance, goodness, and kindness (modern terms).

In summary:
You don't go to church to be a Christian, you go to church BECAUSE you're a Christian.
You don't do good deeds to be a Christian, you do good deeds BECAUSE you're a Christian.

[LoneWolf23k]

In summary:
You don't go to church to be a Christian, you go to church BECAUSE you're a Christian.
You don't do good deeds to be a Christian, you do good deeds BECAUSE you're a Christian.

*Stops, then applauds*

BRAVO!

I could not have put it better myself... You've just summed up what, I may say, is exactly THE POINT of Christianity. It's about building a personal relationship with God, which inspires him to be faithful and do good..

[Tbolt]

Outstanding summary, Jam. I couldn't have put it better myself.

I keep thinking of when I was in AIT for the army and how my relationship with two of my drill instructors really clarified my relationship with God.

The Senior drill represented God the father. He was the man everyone lived in "terror" of. His verbal lashings and corrective PT were beyond comparison. I respected the man because he knew his job, was up front about everything and really did care about the people he was in charge of. I toed the line when he came by partially out of that respect and partially out of the desire not to incur his wrath.

Our platoon's DI was more of a christlike figure to me. I would have taken a bullet for this man. Our platoon got smoked several times for doing stupid stuff, but it really brought us together as a team. He was a kind hearted man that knew his job and how to do it well. I toed the line for him because I wanted to. I wanted the other platoons to know that we had the best DI in the batallion and my actions were a reflection of his expertise.

In that way as a christian we must realize that the eyes of the world are upon us watching what we do, looking for evidence of hypocricy. When a christian stumbles and falls it reflects negatively not only on himself, but also on the name of Christ. A prime example is the pedophilia scandal within the Roman Catholic church. How can a church that claims moral authority have permitted such crimes to go on for such a long time? Some white supremacist groups claimed the bible backs up their position. I have read the bible in five different translations from King James to the NASB, both from a protestant as well as the Roman Catholic viewpoint. I God shows favor to any race at all it would have to be the Jewish race more than anything else. It pains me enormously to see Christ's name dragged through the mud by people like these. All this serves is to show the world that Christians are just as evil as anyone else and there is nothing worthwhile to their doctrine.

Finally, another thought as to the "golden rule" and the ten commandments: The first three, or four (Depending on whether you follow the Catholic, or protestant traditions) establish the authority of God, the author of the commandments. If you have ever had to tell a child to do something, or lay down a rule, eventually you are going to get a "Says who?" response. Without the establishment of theistic authority the rest of the commandments can be called into question as mere human constructions.

Similarly, the "golden rule" summarizes all good moral behavior into two quick easy to understand sentences. The first part, "love God" establishes authority for the second, "love your neighbor as yourself"
If I love God I want to do things that will make Him look good, not embarrass Him. How can I accomplish this? By treating others as I would wish them to treat me.

This is a LOT easier to remember than the myriads of rules and regulations laid out between Exodous, Leviticus and Durter,.... Duerto,.... (Thumbs through bible "Ahhh!, there it is.... ") Deuteronomy.

Sorry for rehashing some old points but i felt the need to chip in my two cents

[Firemane]

It's really only since the whole 60s "Dawn of the Age of Aquarius" deal that "alternative" religions really got started, and that was mostly sparked by kids who wanted to really do something to be different from their parents.

...Of course, most of the people who started those alternative religions were also drugheads, but it's not related.

The Buddha was on drugs? I guess it would explain the weight gain (though I think the all rice diet had something to do with that as well).

Not all "alternative" religions (in the sense of "alternative to Christianity") are new (though as has been pointed out, several aren't near as old as they claim to be). And even among those that are new, not all of them are schemes to make money (*cough* Dianetics *cough*) or justifications of rampant hedonism (Like the spiritualist movement of John Crowley & Co. Have you ever noticed how many people in religion are named John?). Some are poorly thought out, but I think suggesting a link between that and drug use is a tad unfair.

Though whether it's unfair to the alternative religions or to drug users I can't really say.

Modern Satanism, as imagined by Anton Szandor LaVey (1930

[Mad Mike]

My father joined the Unitarians a few years ago (oddly enough, about the same time my step-sister joined the Primitive Baptists).

Whew - bet your family get-togethers are interesting...

[Firemane]

My father joined the Unitarians a few years ago (oddly enough, about the same time my step-sister joined the Primitive Baptists).

Whew - bet your family get-togethers are interesting...

You have *no* idea. People popping in and out of the closet, religious conflicts, several recent divorces (including, sadly, my own), it's many things but rarely boring. Fortunately even those of us who don't practice tolerance do practice civility, so everybody more or less gets along. I'll admit that some of my family members being smart enough to decide "I don't want to know" helps that along.

Firemane

[Mad Mike]

I can commiserate - My grandmother is a fundamentalist Baptist and my mother is a Methodist minister. She is 100% sure that her daughter, my mother, is going straight to hell, because God doesn't allow women to be ministers.

Of course, she's also mentally unbalanced and refuses treatment. My father has informed me that if he EVER makes any noises like he's going to invite her for another visit, I am to kick him square in the... uh... posterior.

(RH - I am most definitely NOT implying that being a fundamentalist Baptist and being mentally imbalanced have anything at all to do with each other.)