jar writes:
My point is that the evidence shows the material that is called scripture varies based on the goals, era and culture of the authors and the interpretation of that so called scripture depends on the goals, era and culture of the reader.
That is pretty much meaningless as the goal could just as easily represent an actual account or maybe even a thought that does come from God. You can't assume that everyone has an agenda. Maybe they do and maybe they don't.
jar writes:
The idea of an inerrant Bible is modern. It's built around an extra Biblical cultural disconnect from both the actual texts in the so called scripture and the processes that were involved in creating the various Canons. It is a cultural concept peculiar to some chapters of Club Christian.
My understanding is that it grew out of the reformation. The Bible had been kept away from the masses for so long that some began to idolize it when they finally got their hands on it.
jar writes:
Then there is Jesus. Again, the evidence shows the character Jesus not through a single God Breathed lens but rather through the biases, culture, era and goals of many different authors. The Synoptic Gospels present one point of view, John a different point of view and the Epistles are more about developing the basic structure (including the infighting of the various visions of what the new club would be like) of Club Christian; important issues like who could be a member, what initiation rites will be used, what will be the Mission Statement and Vision Statement of the new club.
As Luke points out the Gospels are a collection of the testimonies both written and oral of the original eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life, death and resurrection. The Epistles are written by the first Christian theologians as they worked out what it all meant, and how it applied to their life and the world.
jar writes:
If you look at the passages attributed to the character Jesus in the different stories it would seem his vision was primarily two fold, to reform his religion, Judaism; and to outline a new set of moral and social guidelines that were oriented outwards as opposed to inwards, a secular view of mankind as opposed to the Jewish exclusive vision. It was a change from the concept of a People Apart and Chosen to the position of a People Among the Chosen but just one of many such Peoples.
Essentially I agree although I don’t see any of it being new. They had just gotten off track. The whole idea of loving your neighbor was there in their Scriptures and the original Abrahamic promise was that what God was doing was for the world, but through the Jews.
jar writes:
But even the above reflects my era, goals and culture. As we can see in this and so many other threads, other people with other goals and culture even from the same era interpret scripture differently.
And that is the point.
There is no True Christian, They are all True Christians.
I suppose that if someone wants to call themselves a Christian then they are a Christian. However, just as there are cultural Jews, cultural Muslims etc there are cultural Christians.
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8
™ Version 4.2
