The new Bible

Originally posted by josephw
...
What makes you a Christian?

My belief in the truth of the teachings and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth is what makes me Christian.

That does mean that I am, nor will I ever be, an orthodox or fundamentalist Christian. I do not believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, nor that every word is the divine "word of God". I do not believe in the accounts in the Bible that cannot be.

Instead, I trust in the teachings of Jesus that I can use; about the folly of violence, the equality of beings, and the way to simply get along with others that we share this planet with. The rest is not important.

Originally posted by Badwater
My belief in the truth of the teachings and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth is what makes me Christian.

That does mean that I am, nor will I ever be, an orthodox or fundamentalist Christian. I do not believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, nor that every word is the divine "word of God". I do not believe in the accounts in the Bible that cannot be.

Inste ...[text shortened]... way to simply get along with others that we share this planet with. The rest is not important.

I've got news for you. The devils believe in the truth of the teachings and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, but that doesn't make them Christians.

I'm not going to argue with you about this.

Let's save the discussion about what makes one a Christian for another day. I'm out of time and I gotta go for now.

Originally posted by josephw
I've got news for you. The devils believe in the truth of the teachings and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, but that doesn't make them Christians.

....

Also, I've never found any evidence, personally or otherwise, that Satan exists so I treat him symbolically and not as a literal entity. The devil doesn't affect me when he doesn't exist. 😉

Originally posted by josephw
I believe God.

You believe yourself.

This is pretty much the difference in what your theology represents and the theology that some of us have. It is not inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus if there is some "believing in ourselves." That is not a bad thing.

Originally posted by Badwater
I'm a Christian, but I'm not about to ignore the laws of nature, mathematics, logic, etc. in my exercise of my own spirituality. I'm not going to ignore the hands of men in the politics of religion. I'm not going to believe in things that cannot be. I'm not going to nod my head at every ridiculous thing people are going to throw out in the name of religion, simply to maintain my/a belief. To do so is incomprehensible to me.

I always find that sort of statement interesting. Surely you realize that a large part of Christianity does go against the laws of nature, and that the hands of men in the politics of religion is widespread. If you truly do not believe things that cannot be, then how can you claim to be Christian? Can I take it that you:
1. Don't believe in the resurrection.
2. Accept that the gospel accounts are largely fictional.
3. Don't believe in an afterlife.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I always find that sort of statement interesting. Surely you realize that a large part of Christianity does go against the laws of nature, and that the hands of men in the politics of religion is widespread. If you truly do not believe things that cannot be, then how can you claim to be Christian? Can I take it that you:
1. Don't believe in the resurrect ...[text shortened]...
2. Accept that the gospel accounts are largely fictional.
3. Don't believe in an afterlife.

In response to your numbered statements:

1. I do not believe that Jesus of Nazareth physically rose from the dead, and that he would somehow be the only person that would do this. It is not necessary to my Christian beliefs to have this literally occur.

The disciples attest to his resurrection. That's fine by me - did they think he resurrected? Is it a stretch of my imagination to think that people of 2,000 years ago would think that a resurrection happened or believe in one? No, of course not. It's like ghosts: I don't believe that ghosts exist. I've never seen one and never witnessed anything that I could not explain. Do I believe other people have seen ghosts? Sure, I think that other people think they have seen a ghost. I have no problem with that; their belief is not harmful or threatening to me. Might the same thing happen in terms of the resurrection? Sure, why not, in the context that I analogized?

2. I don't think the gospel accounts are largely fictional, but I do think that each writer has a Christological perspective that they are trying to put forward. There are parts of each gospel that I think are not factual, and where it is not factual the questions I pose to myself are: What is the passage trying to say about God? What is it trying to say about Jesus? What is the story saying about a spiritual relationship with God? What is the author trying to teach about how to act as a Christian? What is the spiritual imperative?

I can, and do, get things that I use in how I act toward and think about others that I have not done on my own. I use the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth to try to be a better person and behave as a better person with others. I see the underlying truth of the teachings and I care not that others understand or not. I'm not in a position to tell anyone the truth of those teaching and have it mean jack. I am in the position of behaving that way and perhaps being an example in my tiny part of this existence.

3. I do believe in an afterlife. That might be a loaded word - rather, I believe in an existence after this one. I don't think there is a heaven and a hell, and I will not be surprised if any existence I might have beyond death would be beyond my comprehension in this lifetime.

The converse of believing in an existence after this is to believe that this is it, that our self-awareness is an illusion and all the things we think are important or not are just contrivances. I have never been able to shake how pointless that would be in that I don't see why this existence should count for nothing.

But there is the chance - 50/50 - that death means the end of existence and the illusion. If that's the case then so be it. I don't fear that at all. I don't fear the inevitable that no one escapes. If this existence was it and I thought I existed but really didn't then it's not a big deal, because there's an awful lot in my mind to not like in this existence.

If there's an existence after this, it better make sense, because this one gets stupid a lot of the time. If that can't happen then I don't want to exist after this.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I always find that sort of statement interesting. Surely you realize that a large part of Christianity does go against the laws of nature, and that the hands of men in the politics of religion is widespread. If you truly do not believe things that cannot be, then how can you claim to be Christian? Can I take it that you:
1. Don't believe in the resurrect ...[text shortened]...
2. Accept that the gospel accounts are largely fictional.
3. Don't believe in an afterlife.

1. Don't believe in the resurrection.
they resurrected dogs. for a brief time. god might have better technology. the point is, if we could have done it, why can't god and do it better?

2. Accept that the gospel accounts are largely fictional.
why fictional? why largely? the miracles you don't believe in can be attributed to some ability we don't have. doesn't have to breake universal laws if there are laws we haven't discovered. do you not believe in sub-atomic particles just because sometimes they tell newton to go fuk himself?

3. Don't believe in an afterlife.
scientists search for life all over the universe. they admit they can encounter it in all forms. maybe it is a sentient star. or a sentient planet. a civilization of germs that could fit in a jar. sentient energy lifeforms. so if the latter is thought to be possible, why can't an afterlife be possible?


there is a difference of believing in the flood and a 6000 year old earth when so many evidences prove to the countrary. but jesus dying and resurrecting? why not?

Originally posted by Badwater
I can, and do, get things that I use in how I act toward and think about others that I have not done on my own. I use the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth to try to be a better person and behave as a better person with others. I see the underlying truth of the teachings and I care not that others understand or not. I'm not in a position to tell anyone the tru ...[text shortened]... e position of behaving that way and perhaps being an example in my tiny part of this existence.

Have you read the works of other great philosophical thinkers / writers? Do you see the Gospels and their message as unique and special? If so, why?
I too can see the 'underlying truth' in the teachings of Jesus, but I don't think they are unique (nor do I think Jesus came up with them).
So why do you call yourself Christian? What is it about Christ that causes you to label yourself his follower?
If you came across a book by a man named Jack which had just as many good teachings, would you become a Jackian?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
there is a difference of believing in the flood and a 6000 year old earth when so many evidences prove to the countrary. but jesus dying and resurrecting? why not?

You simply have a different blind spot from those who believe in the flood. From my position, your whole post was little more than ridiculous excuses for believing in things that are clearly unscientific.
Surely the "god might have better technology" excuse would work just as well for the flood?

Originally posted by twhitehead
You simply have a different blind spot from those who believe in the flood. From my position, your whole post was little more than ridiculous excuses for believing in things that are clearly unscientific.
Surely the "god might have better technology" excuse would work just as well for the flood?

the "excuse" as you call it wouldn't work on the flood. there are evidences to support the absence of a flood. good evidences. it would be highly illogical to assume god would do a flood then cover it up. sure, an omnipotent god would make that happen but then that scenario would render all of our science and future discoveries pointless.

why go through the trouble of translating the egyptian language when all the archaelogical finds were placed there by god and the egyptians didn't really begin their civilisation until after the flood? why go to a geology school if god made the rocks to only "appear" like they are having 2-3 billion years.


about believing in things that are unscientifical. we do it all the time. you hope your wife loves you even though you cannot read her mind. you believe you have friends. you believe that maybe with enough research you will prove that string theory. some believe the lhc will show the higgs boson.
we believe in unproven things even if they are unproven. and we seek to prove them but until we do we do not abandon them. just as i will not know for sure god is real until i die, so too you may not know if string theory is a valid theory.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Have you read the works of other great philosophical thinkers / writers? Do you see the Gospels and their message as unique and special? If so, why?
I too can see the 'underlying truth' in the teachings of Jesus, but I don't think they are unique (nor do I think Jesus came up with them).
So why do you call yourself Christian? What is it about Christ tha ...[text shortened]... a book by a man named Jack which had just as many good teachings, would you become a Jackian?

I've read other thinkers as well, and I practice my spirituality with Buddhist leanings; however, I'm not aware of similar teachings, in quite the same way, earlier.

It's like having a Stradivari violin - sure, there are lots of other violins, before and since, but Stradivari raised the bar in his own time and created not only violins, but works of art.

Antonio Stradivari did not invent the violin, but that's not what made him the bar that everyone tries to reach. The violin is a Baroque expression that reflects its time and you'll find that reflection in literature, art, and music of that time. Today's violins are copies, and you'll find many fine modern violins, but they remain copies so the luthier must still understand the originals and why they are what they are and the connection from the past to today.

As for why I call myself a Christian, I believe I already answered that question.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Have you read the works of other great philosophical thinkers / writers? Do you see the Gospels and their message as unique and special? If so, why?
I too can see the 'underlying truth' in the teachings of Jesus, but I don't think they are unique (nor do I think Jesus came up with them).
So why do you call yourself Christian? What is it about Christ tha ...[text shortened]... a book by a man named Jack which had just as many good teachings, would you become a Jackian?

I dont think you have to follow Christ to be a christian. Only the example he set.

(And that example was : DONT FOLLOW ANYONE EXCEPT YOUR OWN HEART,or something like that...)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I dont think you have to follow Christ to be a christian. Only the example he set.

(And that example was : DONT FOLLOW ANYONE EXCEPT YOUR OWN HEART,or something like that...)

well not so much. in fact not at all. it actually tells you what your heart should tell you to do.

you have to follow christ to be a christian. if you only do what he said then you are merely a nice person.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
...

you have to follow christ to be a christian. if you only do what he said then you are merely a nice person.

This is semantical hair splitting; for all practical purposes it's the same thing.

"In the Book of Joel it says that so you will know I am God, a stranger shall never enter Jerusalem again. I know of one person on the site who is an absolute incorrigable sinner who has been in Jerusalem. How can this be?"

no man is a stranger to god so all men may enter jerusalem.