[OPEN] An honest question.

[higgs2]

I do not say that there is no Truth outside of Scripture.

This is not what this thread is about.

This thread is about the Trutfullness of Scripture. I know there is Truth outside of Scripture, but I also contend that everything that IS in the Scriptures is Truth.

Truth but not necessarily, in all cases, historical fact.

 

[ContraMundum]

Cola...you've asked a good question that everyone here is skirting around. Anyone would think it was a game of dodgeball here.

This is a matter of faith. Simple. People don't want to believe the bits of scripture that don't make sense to them or don't agree with their "reason", whatever shape that might take.

I believe, contrary to all the rationalists here, that the scriptures- every single bit of them- are absolutely and totally inspired of God, and contrary to the claims of another here, God did indeed "carry along" the authors by the power of Holy Spirit.

Our Lord Jesus affirmed the authority of God's inspired and written word so much that He said:

Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Anyone who is familiar with Hebrew writing will know that this means more than just individual words or phrases, but includes the parsing and grammar of what is written, since "jot and tittle" conform to the smallest Hebrew characters.

It's a sign of shame that some members of the modern day Church do not hold the same respect and awe for the scriptures as Our Lord did, and yet we are told to have the "mind of Christ".

What were Satan's first recorded words in scripture? "Yeah, hath God said...?" Are some members of the Church conforming to the mind of Christ or the mind of the other guy?

 

[karen freeinchristman]

OK, to help everyone remember the questions of the OP that we seem to be skirting around, I'll post them here:

If the Scriptures are imperfect to the point that Large portions of the Old Testament are made up, That paul was nothing but a sexist Pig, that we can't trust the Scriptures to come up with a competent doctrine to save itself from the fire.

Why Bother with Christianity? If all we can trust is a Religion that is based one what we think is Right, our lives are worthless.

If this is Christianity, Open Theism makes more sense.

No do not misunderstand me. I am a devout Christian and I trust the Scriptures.

I am frustrated by those who don't. It is claimed that the Bible is mere tales of men.

My question is why bother if we have nothing to base our faith on but emotion?

The first quote doesn't really make logical sense to me. There is a difference between saying that large portions of the Old Testament were made up, and saying that some portions of the Old Testament are not literal.

There is a difference between saying that Paul said the things he said about women and men for the purposes of a specific context, and saying that he was a sexist pig.

Following all of that with the question "Why bother with Christianity?" simply doesn't make sense to me.



I applaud the convicted defence of the Scriptures. But I think it goes too far to say that people who have a less literal view of some of the books in the Bible, or take things more in a certain context, that they think of the Bible as being "mere tales of men". That is a little bit offensive.

 

[Colabomb]

OK, to help everyone remember the questions of the OP that we seem to be skirting around, I'll post them here:





The first quote doesn't really make logical sense to me. There is a difference between saying that large portions of the Old Testament were made up, and saying that some portions of the Old Testament are not literal.

There is a difference between saying that Paul said the things he said about women and men for the purposes of a specific context, and saying that he was a sexist pig.

Following all of that with the question "Why bother with Christianity?" simply doesn't make sense to me.



I applaud the convicted defence of the Scriptures. But I think it goes too far to say that people who have a less literal view of some of the books in the Bible, or take things more in a certain context, that they think of the Bible as being "mere tales of men". That is a little bit offensive.

I have been told specifically by Wiffey that God did not order Animal Sacrifice for sin.

 

[Colabomb]

With it I can see that either the scriptures are imperfect, or God is someone who I wish to avoid, as he (IN the OT) likes randomly putting whole nations (including innocents) to the sword. I do not go to church each week to glorify a big genocidal jerk, so clearly my vote is that scripture represents an imperfect, very human interpretation of an all good and loving Creator.

This is a perfect example of what I mean.

 

[Colabomb]

Karen, you are a bit more moderate in your views. You as far as I can tell take your arguements from Scripture, even if I believe you are misinterpreting on a few things.

However, there is an increasing trend starting on this board of simply stating that the Bible is wrong. Many will admit that what we read is what it says, but what is says is simply wrong.

 

[Colabomb]

Untrue! I believe in God. I believe that God is inherently good. I do not believe that God likes to mess with people like a surly child incinerating insects with a magnifying glass on a sunny day. I do not think he made over 50% of the population to be glorified maids & incubators for everyone else. I do not believe that slavery, under any circumstances, is OK. I do think that we, as people, have a tendency to try to understand our transcendant God in terms we can relate to, by anthropomorphizing him and ascribing petty, silly human foibles to the Divine. I do not think God ever cared about whether we immolate bulls on the altar for a sin atonement, or if we ate a grilled cheese sandwich too soon after eating meat.

Again, the Scriptures clearly say that in OT times, Bulls were to be Killed, as well as lambs, doves etc.

The Bible apparently is just wrong.

This is what is so frustrating.

 

[Colabomb]

Could a mod please open this thread, I tried but it didn't work.

I think some non-traditional views would be okay in here as long as they are respectful, and from a general Judeo-Christian Perspective.

 

[Timothy]

Okay. I don't debate that all the Scripture contain is truth, but how about the fact that some of it is /specific/ truth? The act for the cleansing of a leper in the old testament (which incidentally there was only *4* cases where it could've been used before Christ ) is very specific, especially since what we currently know as leprosy is different from the Biblical idea of leprosy.

The epistles I treat in the same way. Matters about God as doctrine, I see as true for all time. Matters about church discipline, like who we should be ordaining as elders, or should women speak in church I consider TRUE AND VALID for their time. But I question whether acts of discipline are valid for today's time. They have no bearing on my salvation, and thus I don't see how important they can be.

Timothy

 

[karen freeinchristman]

Okay. I don't debate that all the Scripture contain is truth, but how about the fact that some of it is /specific/ truth? The act for the cleansing of a leper in the old testament (which incidentally there was only *4* cases where it could've been used before Christ ) is very specific, especially since what we currently know as leprosy is different from the Biblical idea of leprosy.

The epistles I treat in the same way. Matters about God as doctrine, I see as true for all time. Matters about church discipline, like who we should be ordaining as elders, or should women speak in church I consider TRUE AND VALID for their time. But I question whether acts of discipline are valid for today's time. They have no bearing on my salvation, and thus I don't see how important they can be.

Timothy

Yeah, I can go with that!

 

[kiwimac]

I would argue Cola that what we see in the scriptures is an evolving picture of God. Given by God to humanity as and when humanity could accept it. So the sacrifices of animals were for a specific time and inculturation.

I would, however, argue that those passages where God seems to delight at the slaughter of others is the authors projecting their own world-view onto God.

Kiwimac

 

[Wiffey]

I have been told specifically by Wiffey that God did not order Animal Sacrifice for sin.

I siad that I do not think that God really cared about whether we burnt bullocks as sin offerings, in the context of believing that God has always cared more about the state of our souls that our ability to follow all the laws of Leviticus. Whoever wrote Leviticus clearly believed that God wanted us to do many things...animal sacrifice included. Because it was the cultural norm & form of worship & offerings at the time. I'm not sure God really ever needed or wanted us to kill animals to atone for our sins...and I'll admit that I do find that concept barbaric and difficult to reconcile with a loving God.

 

[Wiffey]

I would, however, argue that those passages where God seems to delight at the slaughter of others is the authors projecting their own world-view onto God.

Kiwimac

Exactly. I do not for a moment believe that God delights in murder, destruction and human misery. That is the sort of thing that stands out as ascribing petty, horrid human failings onto God.

 

[Aymn27]

I would argue Cola that what we see in the scriptures is an evolving picture of God. Given by God to humanity as and when humanity could accept it. So the sacrifices of animals were for a specific time and inculturation.

I would, however, argue that those passages where God seems to delight at the slaughter of others is the authors projecting their own world-view onto God.

Kiwimac

Could it possibly be you projecting yours onto HIM?

Not being argumentative, but, why would we even try to rationalize or make sense of what God has ordained as His truth...

I think that the complete and fullness of his mercy was presented to us in Jesus Christ, who showed us THE WAY. His way is God's way...so why struggle with what you can't possibley understand or rationalize..God has been revealed to us in Christ - He has set forth the path for us to follow..

 

[Aymn27]

I siad that I do not think that God really cared about whether we burnt bullocks as sin offerings, in the context of believing that God has always cared more about the state of our souls that our ability to follow all the laws of Leviticus. Whoever wrote Leviticus clearly believed that God wanted us to do many things...animal sacrifice included. Because it was the cultural norm & form of worship & offerings at the time. I'm not sure God really ever needed or wanted us to kill animals to atone for our sins...and I'll admit that I do find that concept barbaric and difficult to reconcile with a loving God.

Yet you accept the atonement of His Son for your salvation? Was it not necessary for Christ to suffer and die?

 

[rosedewright]

The scripture is the best guide.

If we trust every word of the "scripture" we are trusting the men who wrote it and also there point of views as well. Henseforth we agree to live our lives by a code of man. Man wrote the bible. Not god he used interpreters therefor i dont trust it people are bound to screw up i say if god wanted us to believe in his word he should have permascrolled it across the sky so there was no room for error that way there would have been no doubt or questioning it. But, it was written by mantherefore i am sure it is full of bs one sided beliefes of every man who had a hand in on writting is.

 

[rosedewright]

OK, to help everyone remember the questions of the OP that we seem to be skirting around, I'll post them here:





The first quote doesn't really make logical sense to me. There is a difference between saying that large portions of the Old Testament were made up, and saying that some portions of the Old Testament are not literal.

There is a difference between saying that Paul said the things he said about women and men for the purposes of a specific context, and saying that he was a sexist pig.

Following all of that with the question "Why bother with Christianity?" simply doesn't make sense to me.



I applaud the convicted defence of the Scriptures. But I think it goes too far to say that people who have a less literal view of some of the books in the Bible, or take things more in a certain context, that they think of the Bible as being "mere tales of men". That is a little bit offensive.

I applaud your attemp but at the same time i offer a simple question if the old testament werent litteral doesn't that mean that it is left to the person reading it to draw there own conclusions as to what its saying. And if thats the case dont you think god would want everyone to interpret it the same. If there is only on one true path to salvation why are there so many points of view on how to get there.

 

[higgs2]

OK, to help everyone remember the questions of the OP that we seem to be skirting around, I'll post them here:





The first quote doesn't really make logical sense to me. There is a difference between saying that large portions of the Old Testament were made up, and saying that some portions of the Old Testament are not literal.

There is a difference between saying that Paul said the things he said about women and men for the purposes of a specific context, and saying that he was a sexist pig.

Following all of that with the question "Why bother with Christianity?" simply doesn't make sense to me.



I applaud the convicted defence of the Scriptures. But I think it goes too far to say that people who have a less literal view of some of the books in the Bible, or take things more in a certain context, that they think of the Bible as being "mere tales of men". That is a little bit offensive.

We need to stop jumping to conclusions and putting words in other peoples' mouths (or posts ) It might be a little scary at first, to listen to different opinions, interpretations, and points of view, but true understanding cannot come without listening. Fear blocks listening.

 

[Naomi4Christ]

I applaud your attemp but at the same time i offer a simple question if the old testament werent litteral doesn't that mean that it is left to the person reading it to draw there own conclusions as to what its saying. And if thats the case dont you think god would want everyone to interpret it the same. If there is only on one true path to salvation why are there so many points of view on how to get there.

It might be more productive on your Christian journey to focus on the parts of the Old Testament that has a clear message in our lives. It is basically the story of the relationship between God and his people, and is applicable in our lives too. It tells us about the nature of God, and tells us how God can work in our lives if we let him.

I'm not really sure what people are talking about when they say parts of the OT aren't true, or where the multiple paths to salvation are.

Edit: on rereading, I don't think this post should address you personally, Rose. Take the 'you' as meaning 'one'.

 

[rosedewright]

It might be more productive on your Christian journey to focus on the parts of the Old Testament that has a clear message in our lives. It is basically the story of the relationship between God and his people, and is applicable in our lives too. It tells us about the nature of God, and tells us how God can work in our lives if we let him.

I'm not really sure what people are talking about when they say parts of the OT aren't true, or where the multiple paths to salvation are.

Edit: on rereading, I don't think this post should address you personally, Rose. Take the 'you' as meaning 'one'.

All i'm saying is there is this theory that in order to get to heaven you must believe that every word written in the bible is true and complete to the fullest extent of belief. I just dont understand this concept when there is so much contradiction in the actuall scriptures themselves. From book to book not only does the point of view change but the rules and regulations change. Therefore i abide by only one commandment Love Thy Neighbor. Which if you look at the bible is and was the most commanded commandment aside from Love Thy Lord Thy God. I honestly believe that is the word of God becuase only God could bring anyone to selflessness. Isn't that what Christianity is all about putting others before yourself including God. Not how much you believe about the over all book.