Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Problem With the Literal Interpretation of Scripture
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 97 of 304 (645457)
12-27-2011 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Dawn Bertot
12-26-2011 2:07 AM


Dawn Bertot writes:
The comparison between you and them is unmistakeable, neither of you have a logical approach that says truth is possible to begin with
By your definition the treating of the Bible as if it is dictated by God, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, is logical and rational. I think I'm starting to understand your redefinition of logical and rational.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Dont you see GDR, your making the same initial, illogical mistake our secular fandamentalist atheist friends are making, when they characterize God as evil. When you ask them how they decided or came upon what is good and moral, they flounder to give you an answer, because thier survival of the fittest position is subjective at best, which means there is no real evil to begin with Which involves them in immediate contradiction, like your approach to the scriptures.
But it is you that claims that God is capable of directing His people to commit genocide. It is me that says God doesn't do that but tells us to love our enemy and turn the other cheek. The discussion of the atheistic position has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Dawn Bertot writes:
In the same way, your approach makes no logical sense, its not rational, even before examining what the scriptures has to say. Your starting with a premise that says there is no rational way to know what is or is not truth
I have given you my view on how to discern the truth of the Bible but you just dismiss it. Just because you subjectively decide that the Bible is dictated by God does not give you objective truth about anything.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Your approach makes the resurrection subjective, because even within your own approach you have no standard to imply that it is even possibly true. Yet you insist that it has to be ture for Christianity to be valid or believable, yet your approach offers no method t assit in this belief
There is no one living today who can know that the resurrection happened. Yes, I think that a very strong historical case can be made for it but in the end it boils down to faith. I frankly have very little doubt but I don’t know in the sense that I know I have 10 fingers.
Dawn Bertot writes:
You have consitently ignored anything I have quoted concerning Jesus' veiws on hell
Well I didn't intend to ignore hell; it is just that you throw up this barrage of words and it becomes difficult to manage to respond to everything you say.
There is a hell for those who ultimately choose self love over unselfish love. C S Lewis had this to say about those in hell.
quote:
There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.’ All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell.
Yes Jesus talked about hell. Yes there will be perfect justice in the end but it isn't up to us to know, let alone judge, who will ultimately wind up separated from God. There will be those who are ultimately so self focused that they fail to find their joy in the joy of others, and will choose to reject an eternal existence that is characterized by self sacrificial love.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Remember my original point above. Its pointless for you to contrast scriptures, when you havent established an initial mehtod for deteming which is true or belivable to begin with. First things first. What is your objective method for deciding which we should accept and what we should be discarded, as non truth and not actually factual?
If you dont have a method, then just say I have no method, Im just winging it
You keep asking the same question. I view Jesus as the human embodiment of God and I understand the OT in reference to what Jesus teaches in the NT. The teaching of Jesus makes sense of what I observe in the world, but in the end I take it on faith and I've felt the results of that faith in my life.
I keep answering the same questions and just trying to word it differently. I'm not sure what else I can do.
Dawn Bertot writes:
It would make no sense for him to contradict what he knew to be true. He was not comparing his words to Moses and implying Moses was in error, when he had already agreed to the validity and content of the Law
Do you think that he agreed with statements such as this from Numbers 15?
quote:
32 Now while the sons of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering wood on the sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation ; 34 and they put him in custody because it had not been declared what should be done to him. 35 Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man shall surely be put to death ; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp." 36 So all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, just as the LORD had commanded Moses.
Let's forget the NT for now. Let's go back earlier in the Torah in Exodus 23.
quote:
1 "You shall not bear a false report ; do not join your hand with a wicked man to be a malicious witness. 2 "You shall not follow the masses in doing evil, nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after a multitude in order to pervert justice; 3nor shall you be partial to a poor man in his dispute. 4 "If you meet your enemy's ox or his donkey wandering away, you shall surely return it to him. 5 "If you see the donkey of one who hates you lying helpless under its load, you shall refrain from leaving it to him, you shall surely release it with him. 6 "You shall not pervert the justice due to your needy brother in his dispute. 7 "Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent or the righteous, for I will not acquit the guilty. 8 "You shall not take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of the just. 9 "You shall not oppress a stranger, since you yourselves know the feelings of a stranger, for you also were strangers in the land of Egypt.
The Sabbath and Land
10 "You shall sow your land for six years and gather in its yield, 11 but on the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, so that the needy of your people may eat ; and whatever they leave the beast of the field may eat. You are to do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove. 12 "Six days you are to do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labour so that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female slave, as well as your stranger, may refresh themselves.
I quoted the first part of the Exodus quote to show that yes, the concept of a loving God, and the concept of loving your enemy is all there and revealed in the Torah. The last part of the Exodus quote tells why the Sabbath laws existed for a reason which is completely consistent with the quote you used about the Sabbath being made for man not the other way around. This being the case it makes no sense to believe that some poor smuck who was picking up wood on the Sabbath should be stoned to death by the members of the congregation who are supposed to love him.
You keep asking how I decide which is of God and which isn't. One of those quotes is consistent with the teachings of Jesus and one isn't. You just decide based on your understanding of how to read the Scriptures that they are both true. I'm sure you'll enlighten us on how you square that.
Edited by GDR, : typos

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-26-2011 2:07 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-28-2011 12:56 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 99 of 304 (645575)
12-28-2011 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Dawn Bertot
12-28-2011 12:56 AM


Dawn Bertot writes:
GDR, there is no "actual evidence to the contrary", for your argument or position,if you dont know what is real or not and if you have to pick and choose by your own judgements
It is not just my own judgement. I read the Bible. The vast majority of what I read is written by Christian scholars. I have other Christian friends and pastors. I pray. I have the Holy Spirit.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Let me demonstrate. In the beginning of post 42 you stated "The thing is I have faith in God". I would very much contend that you have no faith in God at all. Here is why.
You have been presented with two passages that involve God taking action upon human beings. Acts 5 and Numbers 15. Youve also been presented with many NT passages that imply God will take extreme judgement on people in Hell
In each of these instances you have used your own rescources (your mind) to decide what is or is not Gods actions, what is factual and what is real You pick and choose, essentially making your own mind and decisions God himself
In fact there is no not one single point or statement in the Bible that you could point to and say you have complete faith on God, on that alone. You have chosen every single point from your own mind, on what is Gods and what is not.
I can just repeat the same thing back to you. You have no faith in God. Your faith is completely wrapped up in a book about God. You believe in a God that is inconsistent, vindictive, and cruel but at the same time loving, merciful and forgiving. You frankly have no real concept of God at all.
I repeat the Jesus is the Word of God - the Logos.
I don't just pick and choose. Jesus is God incarnate. I use His words to interpret scripture. I accept on faith what is written in the Gospels as accurately reflecting what He actually said.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Isnt it possible that God knew the reason in Numbers 15 why that person should be stoned, just like he knew why Ananias and Saphira should die
Sure it's possible, but He would be breaking His own rules in order to do it.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Tell me what it is actually you actually have faith in. You say God, but then I cant see anything you havent decided for yourself and by yourself alone
Repeating this over and over and over does not make it true.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Your standard of faithis your own mind. Tell me one thing where you have let God be the soul judge in the matter, without your approval or disaproval, without involving your own standard of morality, without involving yourself at all.
I trust God to judge all of creation at the end of time. I have complete confidence that perfect justice will be done. It is you that has the formula to judge who is going to be "saved" and who isn't.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Here is a perfect example of what I am saying. I dont claim anything for God, except what you and I have already agreed upon, is that it is his Word. I take the Word at its word and his judgements as valid concerning his characteristics as they are described
I said that the Bible contains the word of God. That does not mean that human influences, misconceptions, inventions and rationalizations are not in there as well.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Isnt it possible that the person described in Numbers 15 was openly defiant and that part was not revealed to us.
Isnt that a much better approach to faith in God, instead of deciding for God what his judgements should be in each situation
If the Bible is dictated by God then why on Earth would He leave us with the idea that somebody should be stoned to death for picking up wood on the Sabbath when it was actually for some other reason? Please Dawn, just go over what you write and think about it. God is so much bigger than your limiting view of Him that you get by such a myopic view of the Scriptures.
GDR writes:
You keep asking how I decide which is of God and which isn't. One of those quotes is consistent with the teachings of Jesus and one isn't. You just decide based on your understanding of how to read the Scriptures that they are both true. I'm sure you'll enlighten us on how you square that.
Dawn Bertot writes:
this statement closes the door of doubt about who is in charge, in Gods decision making process, its not God, its GDR
If you believe the scriptures are the Word of God, then you read them as the Word of God, without letting your or mine own decision making process, interfere with Gods judgements
You have it backwards, all you do is interfere with Gods judgements, edicts, commands and decisions
Then you tell us God is moral for sending some to Hell for an eternity, in eternal torment
Again why and what do you need God for, if all we need to do is decide for ourselves. Surely if we can decide for ourselves what is moral and immoral on Gods part, we dont need Jesus to save us from anything, nuchless God. because according to you he doesnt even know what he doing most of the time
This is what is so frustrating about this discussion. I give you two scriptural quotes that present a contradictory nature of God. I ask you to tell me how you rationalize this dilemma.
Your answer is as always to tell me that I am saying He doesn't know what He is doing. You say that because I say that something in the Bible shouldn’t be understood literally that I’m not trusting God. You don’t put forward any kind of sensible argument to support your position, but you just keep repeating it and thinking that provides some kind of justification for what you believe. Instead of actually telling anyone how it is that you have decided that the Bible is to be read as dictated by God you just keep accusing anyone who disagrees with you of not trusting God.
Again, the Bible is not God. The Bible is not an additional member of the Trinity.
Edited by GDR, : typos

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-28-2011 12:56 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-29-2011 1:25 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 101 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2011 12:14 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 102 of 304 (645791)
12-30-2011 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Dawn Bertot
12-30-2011 12:14 AM


Dawn Bertot writes:
GDR, the only way you know any of these things about even Christ, is from the Bible. Youve put your faith in Jesus, but refuse to believe God is infinte in wisdom and knowledge as the Bible describes him
God being infinite in wisdom and knowledge has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with how the Bible is to be understood. I suppose God could have dictated a book for us. I’m just saying that He as usually chose to work through people, even with all of their human failings.
Dawn Bertot writes:
You cant even make your faith consistant within the same book claiming to be from God
Here are a few questions. How many of Jesus words are actaully his in the Gospels? How many of the miracles attributed to him and the apostles actually happened and how do you distinguish these from the legends you described in the OT
If we cant trust the writers in the Gospels concerning what seems to us outlandish claims, there is no valid reason believe that if I do or dont believe in Jesus, i will or will not be saved
claiming you have faith in one and not the other is the worst of all approches
I can't see where you actually read anything I write. I've answered all of these questions already.
Dawn Bertot writes:
You have know way of knowing, muchless having faith in any of these things, because they only way you know of them iis by the Bible, a book you say we cannot trust, can trust, cant trust, can trust, cant trust, etc, etc, etc
I'll try again but I don't have a lot of hope. The Bible is a meta-narrative, of the people of God, written by many authors that were inspired to write down their stories in their words. It contains revelation, poetry, allegory, mythology, drama, history, philosophy etc.
Within that meta-narrative are many shorter narratives. As Christians we see the first part of the meta-narrative being brought to fulfillment or climax in Jesus. In fulfilling the law and the prophets we have a record of much of what He taught. By understanding what He taught we have been given the wisdom to understand what was of God and what was of man in the OT.
Yes I learn about Jesus from the Bible. How do I know that I can trust what He said in the Bible? I don't know. As I've said it is by faith. I have faith in, and base my understanding of God in the resurrected Jesus, whereas your faith is in an inerrant Bible even with all of its inconsistencies, contradictions etc.
I went through Ecclesiastes today which contains a great deal of Godly wisdom as written by Solomon. It is pretty clear that it was written by one man who was pondering some of the mysteries of life and understanding the futility of finding meaning in material things. His personality stands out clearly in that book. When you read through 1st & 2nd Kings for example it is clearly written by scribes that are obviously producing an historical record in their words and with their understanding. The personality we see in the writers of 1st & 2nd Kings is very different than that of Solomon. If the Bible was dictated by God the personalities of the authors wouldn’t be so evident. Even in the NT we can see the differences that Peter and Paul had in their understandings, and in the manner in which they write.
You might consider, although I’m not optimistic, that if God had dictated a book so that we could fully understand what He has to tell us, there would not be all the divisions that we see within the church as to what various passages mean. It would be clear to all of us.
Dawn Bertot writes:
If you cant trust the Bible, how do you know the Spirit is leading,you, since you only know that from reading the scriptures? Wouldnt it make logical sense to trust both, to be even remotely consistennt
I do trust the Bible but I understand it differently than you do.
Dawn so much of what you write is repetitive and so there is no point in me repeating myself beyond what I already have.
One other suggestion would be that you run your posts through spell check before posting.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2011 12:14 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2011 8:38 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 104 of 304 (645819)
12-30-2011 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Dawn Bertot
12-30-2011 8:38 AM


It isn’t helpful that you close off the first quote at "I don't know" and leaving off the part where I said it is by faith.
You have never been able to tell me why it is that we should understand the Bible as if it was dictated by God. Your only explanation is by using quotes from the Bible that don’t actually confirm the point you are trying to make anyway. Your reason is circular but even then it doesn’t support your position. You simply keep repeating that it is the only way we can know anything in the Bible with certainty. I keep telling you that there is no certainty which is why they call it a faith. We come to God by faith. It is our faith in God, incarnate in Jesus and His love and understanding, and then taking that on board in our lives that make us Christians.
You keep telling me how necessary it is to understand the Bible as if it were dictated by God. I'm wondering how you think the early Gentile Christians ever came to faith, and to an understanding of who God was and who Jesus was. They only had Paul and others telling them about this Jewish Messiah who was resurrected and was King and that Caesar wasn't. They didn't have either the Hebrew Scriptures or the NT. It was over 300 years before the canon was essentially what it is today. During that period there was considerable controversy about what would be included in both Christian and Jewish canons.
This is going in circles. I'll continue to believe in God incarnate in Jesus that tells us to love our neighbour and our enemy. You can continue to believe in a book that tells us to love our enemy or maybe slaughter him.
You want specific answers as to how I decide what is from God in the Bible and what isn't, and my answer is that I use the words that we have recorded by Jesus, which I accept by faith. I realize that answer doesn't satisfy you but so be it.
How about you tell me how you decide whether it is right to drop bombs on Islamic nations or to reach out to them in love. Both messages are in the Bible.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2011 8:38 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by vimesey, posted 12-31-2011 3:37 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 111 of 304 (645899)
12-31-2011 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Chuck77
12-31-2011 6:31 AM


Re: A thought
Chuck77 writes:
For me personally I serve the God of both the OT and the New, which is the same God. God Almighty. I also believe it's not up to me to decide how God does things or chooses to carry out His Mercy/Justice. How could I question God if He really exists? (and I believe He does). I come to a better understanding from Reading the Bible more so than what people say. The Bible is the filter and it's what connects us (in part) to God. So when other Christians weigh in on their beliefs their (beliefs) are measured against the Bible. That's how we come to an better understanding of Who God is.
So I would ask you which God do you serve, the one who tells us to slaughter our enemies or the one that tells us to love our enemies. By this post I have to assume that you would say both because it is in the Bible and it is not up to us to question God.
This is wrong on many counts but let's just look at a couple.
Firstly if we have been given, as I believe, the ability to choose between good and evil then it is absolutely imperative that we question God in order to know what is good in order that we can choose that option. In other words our questioning God is the way we discern what is good and what is evil. If God does exist then that is what all people do, whether or not they think of it in those terms.
Secondly, if you believe in a God that both advocates loving your enemy and slaughtering him then you have accepted an extremely ambiguous view of what is good and what is evil. Good and evil are then all situational, and there is no basic underlying morality.
This is from Paul's letter to the Romans Chap 2.
quote:
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
Everyone has the law written on their hearts. We instinctively know that loving our enemy/neighbour is good, whereas hating/slaughtering your neighbour/enemy is not good. By understanding the God is capable of either you are skewing the understanding of good and evil that God wrote on your heart so that you can decide that it is ok to hate your neighbour if you decide the situation warrants it. If we are to follow God perfectly, which obviously none of us do, hating our neighbour wouldn’t be an option. Jesus didn’t give us that option. It all hangs on loving God and neighbour.
Sure Jesus was critical of the Pharisees but that is not the same as not loving them. He condemned their legalism as sin but He Himself said that He had come for sinners and not the righteous. As He said it is the sick that need a hospital, not the healthy.
Ultimately we can understand through this passage and others that what God wants is for people to have hearts that love the message of love or the standard of morality that we see in God embodied in the man Jesus. I agree that that standard is in the OT but along with that is mixed in the many failings of the human condition and by trying to understand it as dictated by God leaves us with a god that is ambiguous allowing us to create a god in whatever image we like.
Happy 2012
Edited by GDR, : typo

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Chuck77, posted 12-31-2011 6:31 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 113 of 304 (646005)
01-01-2012 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Dawn Bertot
12-31-2011 6:10 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
If the Bible is the Word of God, then you take him at his word for the reasons the Bible indicates. If its not, then who cares.
That is my point. Essentially you are saying that if someone could convince you that any part of the Bible is not factually correct then you would toss the whole thing. You’re Christianity is more Bibleianity than it is Christianity. If what Jesus says in the NT contradicts the OT then you just say that God didn’t give us enough information to explain the discrepancy. As you believe in a Bible as dictated by God I would have to ask you why it is that God left out that information that would explain away all ambiguities.
I repeat that there are only three members of the Trinity — The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. The Bible is not part of the God-head. Yes God’s revelation to man is found in the Bible and yes all of the Bible is, profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness ; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.. And yes, God breathes life into the scripture so that in reading the Bible we gain understanding and Godly wisdom. But the Bible is not a science text, it is not a newspaper, it is not an historical account written objectively.
The whole Bible is personally and culturally conditioned by the writers. That is not something to be afraid of but something to celebrate. God has entrusted us to care for His creation and He has given us reason and wisdom to do just that. He has also given us His Holy Spirit and one of the things we have the Spirit for is to discern truth including the truth of what is written in the Bible.
By deifying the Bible you have subverted God’s will by denying His gifts of wisdom and reason. It is the same mistake the Pharisees made. You are going back to the laws of commission and omission as opposed to what undergirds everything, which the law of the heart. What God wants of us is that we have hearts that love unselfishly.
It's in the Bible.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-31-2011 6:10 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-01-2012 10:04 PM GDR has replied
 Message 116 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 7:30 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 115 of 304 (646015)
01-01-2012 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Dawn Bertot
01-01-2012 10:04 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
GDR, if the above reality of the trinity is to be accepted as factual, then the Trinity is a part of lies, misconceptions, immorality, inconsistencies, axe griding, scribal errors and embellishments and irrational and illogical approaches.
How do you figure that Dawn? I just told you in the last post that the Bible is consistent with what is written in 2nd Timothy 3. It doesn't have to be written as 100% factual to contain the truth about God and what He wants of us. We don't have to cut off all reason in order to be Christian, and frankly that is what it takes to read the Bible as dictated by God.
As I said earlier, which either you didn't read or ignored, that we had centuries of Christians that worshipped a ressurected Jesus before the Bible came into existence as we know it today. Sure they we would have some of the writings that became part of the canon but they also had a number of gnostic writings as well. They had to use Godly reason and wisdom to sort out what was of God and what wasn't.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Because the only way you know of the Trinity is from that unreliable Bible. You cant actually believe the Trinity is real or actual if you believe the Bible is not
The Bible is real and it is reliable but not in the way that you understand it. Once again it is to be understood as a meta-narrative involving God and those that He has revealed Himself through.
You say that I can't believe that the concept of the Trinity is true without understanding the Bible the way you do. Well we know that is false because I do believe in the Trinity.
Yes, I can't KNOW that the doctrine of the Trinity is real but I believe that it is. You can't KNOW that The Bible is to be intended to be read literally but you believe that it should be.
Once again, in the end it is faith, and I put my faith in God as expressed through Jesus, whereas you put your faith in an inerrant Bible.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-01-2012 10:04 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 117 of 304 (646078)
01-02-2012 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 7:30 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
The Word is already deifyed. John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God, the same was in the beginning with God"
This is exactly what I mean. When you try to understand the Bible literally you can make God in any image that you like, by making the Scriptures mean what you want them to mean. To you the Bible is the literal Word of God so it’s simple. You take your quote to mean that the Bible existed from before time. The current canon wasn’t in general acceptance for over 300 years from the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Also, why don’t you at the very least read what the Bible says in context? Here is your quote with some additional verses.
quote:
The Deity of Jesus Christ
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
The Witness John
6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. 8He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light. 9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
The Word Made Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15John testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.' " 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses ; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18No one has seen God at any time ; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
Just read what it says. Read verse 14. The Word became flesh. Your quote is saying that Jesus is the Word of God, which is what I have been saying all along. Jesus is the Word of God, and the Bible contains the word of God
Also note in 17 it says that the law was given to Moses but that grace and truth were realized through Jesus. In other words, if we want to know the truth of the laws we have to look to Jesus. We are to interpret the OT through our understanding of the NT.
Dawn Bertot writes:
These are nice sentiments GDR, but as I have demonstrated to many times to mention now, you have no visible way of distinguishing one truth from another as being from God
For the hundredth time I find truth in the OT by understanding the NT. Just look at your quote concerning the Word and you can see just how well your method is working.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 7:30 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:02 PM GDR has replied
 Message 119 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:24 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 120 of 304 (646087)
01-02-2012 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 9:02 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
For the hundreth time that makes no sense, except to say you like the New Test better than the Old. Iam Joseph, likes the Old better than the New, he believes the Old To be the Word of God and I think he blieves the NT, to not be the Word of God, who is correct?
So I'll answer for the hundredth time. You keep saying that I can't know and I agree. It is faith.
I'm just saying that there is a lot less knowing and a lot more faith if you try and read the Bible as dictated by God, with all of the irregularities, contradictions etc that you have to rationalize in order to read it that way. You are the one that says we can't understand it because we don't have all the information and yet you don't ask the question of why God would dictate a book for us that repeats information and yet leaves out other information.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Anyone would have the right to decide what they wanted to accept or reject and you would have no way to determine if they were correct or incorrect.
The god of the OT supposedly ordered His people to commit genocide which is completely contradictory to the message of God as revealed by Jesus. I have a way of resolving that as I believe that one of the reasons God gave us Jesus in the first place was to bring understanding to the Scriptures. IMHO God abhors genocide.
You have to come up with an answer that justifies genocide then but not now. How do you determine which is correct?
How do you determine whether God approved of the slaughter as carried out by Jehu or not? In one place it said He was and in another it says He wasn't. My understanding of scripture tells me He wasn't. What does your method tell you?
We shall do justice as an eye for an eye. In the OT it says yes - Jesus says no. I would agree that it's no. What does your method of "knowing" tell you?
As you know I could go on.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:02 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 11:23 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 121 of 304 (646088)
01-02-2012 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 9:24 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
Paul made it clear that the Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.
If the law is truly of God then it exists as something that is not dependant on our 4d universe. Jesus came to fulfill the law, (which is timeless) and He told us how we can know the law which is truly of God and it is all about having hearts that love unselfishly. Jesus fulfilled, clarified and lived the law as we are called to do as well.
Is it part of God's law that we are to stone to death, prostitutes, adulterers, difficult children, anybody doing any manner of work on the Sabbath, (which happens to be Saturday by the way), etc.
You keep asking how I know. I look at Jesus and can give a flat no as an answer. Once again what answer does your literal reading provide? You are the one that can't answer the difficult questions. It is easy to say that the world was created in 6 days or argue for a flood that destroyed all living creatures except for those marched on to a boat in spite of all evidence to the contrary, but moral issues are a different kettle of fish. You have to pick which specific Biblical book or verse that you choose to believe.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 9:24 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 123 of 304 (646241)
01-03-2012 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Dawn Bertot
01-02-2012 11:23 PM


Re: A thought
Dawn Bertot writes:
No, I dont have to come up with a answer, that has already been provided before I read any passages from the Old Test or the New, about what God may or may not have done. You just keep ignoring, that precedence of scripture exists.
You are the one that keeps insisting that I have no way of knowing what is true. I have been able to give you examples in the Bible that are contradictory and have been able to pick the one I believe to be true based on the teaching of Jesus.
It is you who have no method of determining what it is that you believe. You just go on parroting the idea that it is all true even though there is an obvious contradiction, and then accuse me of lack of faith.
Your faith, as has been substantiated, is in the Bible which you even agreed that you deified. Jesus seems to get left out of the equation, and God the Father is marginalized.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-02-2012 11:23 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 125 of 304 (646291)
01-04-2012 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by foreveryoung
01-03-2012 7:59 PM


Re: A thought
foreveryoung writes:
My faith is in a God who did order that. God is perfectly righteous in all of his dealings. That doesn't mean it is right for a man to do it or order it to be done. What makes something immoral is the why of it, and God ultimately determines what is moral and immoral in any particular circumstance.
In other words you believe in a god of situational ethics. I believe in a God who is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
I cannot fathom how anyone can believe in both God as incarnate in Jesus and also believe in a god who would have the people he chose to bring a message of love of others to the world, to get together and stone to death difficult kids or somebody that picked up some firewood on the Sabbath.
Is there any fundamentalist/literalist on this forum who has given all they have to the poor? Read Matthew 19.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by foreveryoung, posted 01-03-2012 7:59 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by foreveryoung, posted 01-04-2012 8:14 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 128 of 304 (646525)
01-05-2012 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by foreveryoung
01-04-2012 8:14 PM


Re: A thought
foreveryoung writes:
No, I don't believe in a God of situational ethics. It is moral to kill someone who is going to kill your family. It is immoral to kill someone because he ticked you off. Get it? I doubt it.
That is hardly the situation we are talking about now is it? We are talking about slaughtering a whole community - men, women and children. Not only that but you are using the people who are supposed to be bringing your message of peace and love to the world as the instruments of this slaughter and just consider what that does to them. We are talking about getting a group together to stone to death someone picking up firewood on the Sabbath.
foreveryoung writes:
That is because you are assuming the situation in ancient palestine is identical to the situation in calm, peaceful, modern western society. Have you ever heard of a kingdom run by God's chosen people being established here on earth? If God had intended for that to happen relatively soon when he had the Torah written, it would make perfect sense for both apparently objectionable acts. You cannot have a perfect society with a bunch of God and parent hating rebellious kids running around eventually turning into grownups. The sabbath was serious business. If you were God's special people, it was a serious affront to God to ignore the day especially carved out for him and him alone. You may not like a God who wants that kind of worship, but that is what you got.
How about the world that Jesus lived in? Jesus came to establish His Kingdom. But HIs Kingdom is led by serving, by mercy, by justice for all, by forgiveness etc and as His followers that is what we are called to.
Jesus lived in a land occupied and controlled by Romans and with a puppet government of quislings. There was a rebellion when Jesus was 10 years old that would have resulted in Him seeing hundreds of crucified freedom fighters along the roadsides. In spite of that, he told his fellow Jews that they were to love the Romans, go the extra mile for the Romans and to even turn the other cheek. Now, just how do you square that with the image of the Yahweh in the passages mentioned?
As I’ve said, I believe in a God who is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. I worship a God that we see revealed in Jesus. Jesus was the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. He shed a bright light on all of the Hebrew Scriptures so that we could properly understand what was of God and what wasn’t.
The version of Yahweh from the OT that you worship, the one who’s answer to just about everything is to have them stoned to death, and the who sometimes advocates genocide is not what we see embodied in Jesus. IMHO, misunderstanding how we are to understand the Scriptures gives you a warped view of God and in some minds a dangerous view of God.
If you are really serious about understanding the Bible literally then why don’t you get a group of like thinking friends next Sunday, and stone to death the guy running the local corner store? As I’m sure you are serious about following the Bible literally I’m sure you have given all that you have to the poor. It goes on and on.
The Bible is not intended to be read literally and frankly it would make no sense to do so even if it was possible. God is so much bigger than that. Jesus is so much bigger than that.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by foreveryoung, posted 01-04-2012 8:14 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by foreveryoung, posted 01-05-2012 2:48 PM GDR has replied
 Message 130 by foreveryoung, posted 01-05-2012 3:01 PM GDR has replied
 Message 131 by foreveryoung, posted 01-05-2012 3:11 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 136 of 304 (646648)
01-05-2012 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by foreveryoung
01-05-2012 2:48 PM


Re: A thought
foreveryoung writes:
There was a very good reason for slaughtering the whole community.
Hmmmm. Now I agree that if God wants to slaughter a whole community then He has it in his power to do it. The question is whether or not that is actually what He wanted them to do. When the whole of scripture is considered it is clear that Micah 6:8:
quote:
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
accurately sums up God's calling for mankind.
So you would have us believe that God would ask those that He has chosen to take that message to the world, to go down and slaughter a whole community - men, women and children. Can you think of a better way of hardening the hearts of those that He has chosen to do love kindness and to reflect His love into the world?
If God genuinely wanted them all dead why would He not do it Himself and not involve His own people?
foreveryoung writes:
Why do you question God's motivations?
First off I'm not questioning God's motivation. What I am questioning is your misuse of the Scriptures.
Also, God has given us the capacity to gain wisdom and the ability to reason. Why shouldn't we question Him? Read through the Gospels and you can see that people including the disciples were always questioning Jesus.
Jesus is the Word of God and the Bible contains the word of God. There is a difference.
foreveryoung writes:
The purpose of israel was not supposed to be bringing a message of peace and love. That is you putting your own goals as God's goals. The purpose of israel was to let the world know who the true god was. It was to put a glaring contrast between Jehovah and baal or ra or whoever they had as god's back then.
If you have a God that commands the wholesale slaughter of other communities I have to wonder how anyone back then would be able to tell the difference between Yahweh and the pagan gods. I don't see the contrast you're talking about.
foreveryoung writes:
That is exactly what should have been done. The sabbath was for man and not for God. It was essential that the sabbath be strictly followed for man's own good.
OK, so your god wants someone stoned to death by His followers for picking up firewood on the Sabbath for his own good. Your god is a proponent of genocide. Your god advocates the stoning to death of difficult children, again by those that worship him, and obviously I could go on.
So I ask - why would you worship a god like that?

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by foreveryoung, posted 01-05-2012 2:48 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 137 of 304 (646650)
01-05-2012 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by foreveryoung
01-05-2012 3:01 PM


Re: A thought
foreveryoung writes:
I don't see any contradiction here because you do not know what the purpose of his kingdom was. There were no caananites or jebusites or baal worshipers at the time of Jesus. There was no need to annihilate a whole community of people. Israel had already lost her kingdom. It had now been taken over by the romans.
So once again your god is not the God we see incarnate in Jesus.
foreveryoung writes:
I see no contradiction at all. Why do you? Slaughtering whole communites was not about inflicting revenge. Your problem is that you ascribe evil motives to the works of God in the OT where there are none.
See the above answer.
GDR writes:
As I’ve said, I believe in a God who is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. I worship a God that we see revealed in Jesus.
foreveryoung writes:
I believe the same. The only problem is that you don't have a clue what was really revealed in Jesus.
Well you don't believe the same because you worship a god who both tells us to both slaughter our enemies and to love our enemies and you've already told us that your god doesn't engage in situational ethics.
I certainly don't have a clue about the god that you see revealed in Jesus, but I think I have a reasonably good idea about what is revealed to us in the Gospels about Jesus.
foreveryoung writes:
I agree , but you still have failed to grasp just what Jesus was teaching.
I'm sure you'll enlighten me.
foreveryoung writes:
The Yahweh from the OT is the exact same person as the Jesus of the NT. Modern scholarship inspired by the devil makes you think otherwise. What God did in the OT was not genocide like that of pol pot. It was the removal of evil from a land that was promised to a chosen people. Any people who had remained unkilled, would still hold on to their ancient religion and culture and lead the people of Israel astray, and that is exactly what they did. See how you missed the wisdom of God in your self righteous declarations of what he should and shouldn't do?
I agree that the Yahweh in the OT is the same as we see incarnate in Jesus when the scriptures are properly understood.
You are going down the same path as the Pharisees and the other revolutionaries as Jesus' time. Those would be the ones that He was always speaking against. They also said that it was all about the possession of the land and their dominance over their neighbours. It is the same old thing of making god in our image in order to gain wealth and power.
Frankly, fundamentalists/literalists are modern day Pharisees by another name. It is all about following a legalistic approach to get God on their side.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by foreveryoung, posted 01-05-2012 3:01 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024