Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do you view the bible?
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 14 (17976)
09-22-2002 1:58 PM


Today on CNN they had an interview with a gay couple who just moved across the street from Jerry Falwell's church (Talk about irony. ). And of course they had Jerry there as well saying that he will pray for them to see the error of their "lifestyle" choice and that they will lead "Christian Lives", and other such nonsense.
The point of this is that when they were talking, one of them is a reverend, and he was speaking about how they had a committed relationship which has lasted about 11 years now and that this isn't against god in this context. That it depends on how one wants to interpret the bible. They either take it literally, or seriously and that he and his partner take it seriously.
What do you all think? Is it important to just take it either literally or seriously?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by John, posted 09-22-2002 2:05 PM nos482 has replied
 Message 4 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-23-2002 12:19 PM nos482 has not replied
 Message 12 by Jeff, posted 10-03-2002 10:26 PM nos482 has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 14 (17977)
09-22-2002 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nos482
09-22-2002 1:58 PM


quote:
Originally posted by nos482:

What do you all think? Is it important to just take it either literally or seriously?

What is the difference between literally and seriously?
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nos482, posted 09-22-2002 1:58 PM nos482 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nos482, posted 09-22-2002 2:31 PM John has replied

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 14 (17980)
09-22-2002 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by John
09-22-2002 2:05 PM


Originally posted by John:
What is the difference between literally and seriously?
If one takes the bible literally than this leads to fundamentalism because it leaves no room for anything else. There is much nonsense in the bible which is taken literally which plainly isn't real. If one takes it seriously than one takes it as it should be as a guide to how to live one's life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by John, posted 09-22-2002 2:05 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by John, posted 09-24-2002 2:02 PM nos482 has not replied

  
acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 14 (18043)
09-23-2002 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nos482
09-22-2002 1:58 PM


I think the bible should be regarded as one of the great works of literature. Sure it has some neat things to live life by.
I believe that most people today, take what they like and leave the rest. I do not believe that there is any Christain who will take the bible literally or takes it seriously. Even, I do not take any book 100% by faith.
Ahhh, new paragraph. I believe that they have to take it on faith. Taking something on faith is much different from taking it seriously. Sure I have faith in gravity, but if I go and jump off a building, obviously I did not take it seriously. And I think, many Christains do that in their regards to the bible.
They sure are quick to defend a book that they do not live up too. Does not make sense.
In my life, I think it is important to have read it at one time. Take what you like and discard the rest. We have Christains doing this, are they not supposed to be the example? Then let us follow their example[shudders].
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nos482, posted 09-22-2002 1:58 PM nos482 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by gene90, posted 09-23-2002 10:39 PM acmhttu001_2006 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 5 of 14 (18072)
09-23-2002 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by acmhttu001_2006
09-23-2002 12:19 PM


[QUOTE][B]I think the bible should be regarded as one of the great works of literature.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Why?
[QUOTE][B]Sure it has some neat things to live life by.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Contingent upon interpretation. But lots of other works have "neat things" in them.
[QUOTE][B]I do not believe that there is any Christain who will take the bible literally or takes it seriously.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
This premise is easily proven wrong.
[QUOTE] The Answers in Genesis Statement of Faith [B]The Bible is the written Word of God. It is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. It is the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
quote:
ICR Tenets of Biblical Creationism The Bible, consisting of the thirty-nine canonical books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven canonical books of the New Testament, is the divinely-inspired revelation of the Creator to man. Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-23-2002 12:19 PM acmhttu001_2006 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-24-2002 11:15 PM gene90 has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 14 (18151)
09-24-2002 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by nos482
09-22-2002 2:31 PM


quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
If one takes the bible literally than this leads to fundamentalism because it leaves no room for anything else. There is much nonsense in the bible which is taken literally which plainly isn't real. If one takes it seriously than one takes it as it should be as a guide to how to live one's life.
Kinda declaws the Bible really.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nos482, posted 09-22-2002 2:31 PM nos482 has not replied

  
acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 14 (18181)
09-24-2002 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by gene90
09-23-2002 10:39 PM


"I think the bible should be regarded as one of the great works of literature."
What else would it be? It is not science nor anything but a work of literature. I have a few sources to back this up, but really do not want to be searching tonight when I am on limited time.
"Sure it has some neat things to live life by.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingent upon interpretation. But lots of other works have "neat things" in them. "
Sure, but that was not the point I was making based off of interpretation. Why is the bible any different?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not believe that there is any Christain who will take the bible literally or takes it seriously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This premise is easily proven wrong.
Prove it. I have never met a 100% Christain. Is there anyone out there that lives perfectly or adheres to the moral code as they should at all time? Nope. Did not think so. If it is so easily proven wrong, where it the proof?
"The Answers in Genesis Statement of Faith The Bible is the written Word of God. It is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. It is the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs."
Okay, so we have a religious organization that would state the bible is true. Big deal, what about the rest of the world. We accept things as true as the consensus of the populations defines it to be. The bible cannot be proven to be true nor can it be proven false, one must either believe in it or not. One can take any thing and believe it, if they wish to believe it. Happens all of the time.
"ICR Tenets of Biblical Creationism The Bible, consisting of the thirty-nine canonical books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven canonical books of the New Testament, is the divinely-inspired revelation of the Creator to man. Its unique, plenary, verbal inspiration guarantees that these writings, as originally and miraculously given, are infallible and completely authoritative on all matters with which they deal, free from error of any sort, scientific and historical as well as moral and theological"
Maybe the bible was infallible at one time, but over the years. Do not think so. I would not believe in a biology book older than 20 years much less older than 100 years. If the bible were written when it said it was, then I have no faith in something that old. The amoung of truth that would still exist in it, would not be much compared to the amount of truth contained in a 100 year biology book
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by gene90, posted 09-23-2002 10:39 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by gene90, posted 10-01-2002 1:01 AM acmhttu001_2006 has replied
 Message 9 by gene90, posted 10-01-2002 1:02 AM acmhttu001_2006 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 8 of 14 (18670)
10-01-2002 1:01 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by acmhttu001_2006
09-24-2002 11:15 PM


[QUOTE][B]Okay, so we have a religious organization that would state the bible is true. Big deal, what about the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
You said that nobody out there believes the Bible is inerrant. You are proven wrong. I don't care about "The rest of the world" it is immaterial to your (erroneous) statement.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-24-2002 11:15 PM acmhttu001_2006 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 10-02-2002 12:30 PM gene90 has replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 9 of 14 (18671)
10-01-2002 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by acmhttu001_2006
09-24-2002 11:15 PM


[QUOTE][B]Okay, so we have a religious organization that would state the bible is true. Big deal, what about the rest of the world.[/QUOTE]
[/B]
You said that nobody out there believes the Bible is inerrant. You are proven wrong. I don't care about "The rest of the world" it is immaterial to your (erroneous) statement.
[QUOTE][B]Maybe the bible was infallible at one time, but over the years. Do not think so. I would not believe in a biology book older than 20 years much less older than 100 years. If the bible were written when it said it was, then I have no faith in something that old. The amoung of truth that would still exist in it, would not be much compared to the amount of truth contained in a 100 year biology book[/QUOTE]
[/B]
Send them an email saying that if you like, because it is a strawman as far as I'm concerned.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 09-24-2002 11:15 PM acmhttu001_2006 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 10-02-2002 12:31 PM gene90 has not replied

  
acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 14 (18869)
10-02-2002 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by gene90
10-01-2002 1:01 AM


And how is the statement errouneous, if not intrepreted wrong.
AGAIN, ANOTHER TIME THE POINT IS DRIVEN INTO THE GROUND.
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by gene90, posted 10-01-2002 1:01 AM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by gene90, posted 10-05-2002 5:05 PM acmhttu001_2006 has not replied

  
acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 14 (18870)
10-02-2002 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by gene90
10-01-2002 1:02 AM


Ahhh,
But there is logic in that argument. You would have to be blind to not see it.
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by gene90, posted 10-01-2002 1:02 AM gene90 has not replied

  
Jeff
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 14 (19035)
10-03-2002 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nos482
09-22-2002 1:58 PM


quote:
Originally posted by nos482:
How do you view the bible?
As mildly amusing fiction.
There are some funny parts - as when yahweh throws a temper tantrum and decides he'll destroy the earth cuz man stopped calling on weekends. ( he shoulda picked a better long distance plan )
So he decides a big flood is the best method. He could have 'Soddom & Gomorrah'd the earth - ya know ? A big fireball, over very quickly...on to the next myth.
He need not even go to that extreme. As in the 10th plague of Egypt, he could have silently sent the Angel o death to take them all in their sleep and disposed of them mysteriously...
...ahhh but that hardly portrays the immature posturing of a good old fashioned 'spolied brat' tantrum.
...and this is -allegedly- a 'wise' god ? My primary school-aged nephews act with more reason than this boob.
This behavior sounds more like the bi-polar paranoia of a neglected & bitter old man who belonged to one of those nomadic sheep herder tribes.
"Pay some attention TO ME, Goddamnit !! ...or I'll piss down your back and tell you it's raining ".
If one became a Rabbi, you could hold the ignorant masses' attention until you croaked. How satisfying.
Still though, I'd have to say I prefer Arthur C. Clarke, Carl Sagan... or a good salsa recipe over the bible - but even they must take a back seat to a good episode of Monty Python. They, at least, could remain internally consistant when portraying the absurd.
I've already wasted too much bandwidth on the subject.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
but thanx for asking.
regards,
jeff
------------------
"Freedom of Religion" equates to Freedom -FROM- those religions we find unbelievable.
[This message has been edited by Jeff, 10-03-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nos482, posted 09-22-2002 1:58 PM nos482 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 10-03-2002 11:07 PM Jeff has not replied

  
acmhttu001_2006
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 14 (19043)
10-03-2002 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Jeff
10-03-2002 10:26 PM


Jeff,
Great post. I was laughing all the way through it. Keep posting these. And I love your definition of freedom from religions.
Hope to see more of your posts around here.
------------------
Anne C. McGuire
Cell and Molecular, Mathematics, Piano and Vocal Performance Majors
Chemistry and Physics minors
Thanks and have a nice day

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Jeff, posted 10-03-2002 10:26 PM Jeff has not replied

  
gene90
Member (Idle past 3822 days)
Posts: 1610
Joined: 12-25-2000


Message 14 of 14 (19127)
10-05-2002 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by acmhttu001_2006
10-02-2002 12:30 PM


It's very simple.
You said that no Christian believes the Bible is inerrant.
I demonstrated that a bunch of them do.
If they didn't this forum would not exist because there would be no YECs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by acmhttu001_2006, posted 10-02-2002 12:30 PM acmhttu001_2006 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