Do you think reading the bible is important?

[bhsmte]

Hey hey you

I disagree. Where do we go from here?

Cheers

You can go where you like.

 

[the iconoclast]

You can go where you like.

Hey hey my dear

Haha fair enough and i do - trust me.

I want to go somehwere, i do.

What i would like? I would like to question your position and see how it holds up. Does this mean we can go there because 'i can go where i like'?

Cheers

 

[bhsmte]

Hey hey my dear

Haha fair enough and i do - trust me.

I want to go somehwere, i do.

What i would like? I would like to question your position and see how it holds up. Does this mean we can go there because 'i can go where i like'?

Cheers

Read my posts.

 

[Carbon]

i'm happy that we are in a new age where humans are less likely to murder you for being different than they are. ofc Christians claim that this change in the world was largely due to the coming of Christ.

In Revelation, Christ kills all the unbelievers. How could the coming of Christ be credited with increased religious tolerance?

 

[Noxot]

In Revelation, Christ kills all the unbelievers. How could the coming of Christ be credited with increased religious tolerance?

by understanding the symbol correctly. if Christ is good and his enemies are evil then the coming of Christ and the slaying of his enemies means goodness reigns. don't read it literally and in a crude sense. understand it as a process of enlightenment.

 

[the iconoclast]

Read my posts.

Hey hey

I have had the pleasure of doing so. What happens now if i want to challenge your position?

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

Hey hey @bhsmte

I took your advise and am reading your posts.

I was a former christian, and was no longer a christian when i joined this site.

 

[the iconoclast]

One piece I find interesting, is asking believers how certain they are of their personal faith belief and or belief in God.

Hey hey you.

 

[the iconoclast]

i have been an executive in for profit healthcare for 20 plus years

i would label myself agnostic.

Whether I call myself an atheist, or agnostic towards a certain God, depends on the definition of the God being proposed.

Now, when one talks about a non-personal God, that is not well defined, I would call myself agnostic.

The same place i get evidence to understand the theory of gravity, germ theory etc. It is called science.

Scientists rely on data collected from instruments and methods that can be independently tested for accuracy.

I come to that conclusion based on devouring the work of academic nt scholars and historians, who give arguments that are credible and follow the historical method. Granted, considering we have no original copies of the nt, and none full copies until 200 years after he died, along with decades passing in anonymous authors penning them, this is certainly not a slam dunk. I am about 75-80% confident in this position.

i am 99% sure this god does not exist and i dont buy the story. Could i be wrong? Sure it is possible, but my confidence is extremely high, that i am correct.

Senses can be influenced by our personal psyche and emotion.

 

[Carbon]

by understanding the symbol correctly. if Christ is good and his enemies are evil then the coming of Christ and the slaying of his enemies means goodness reigns. don't read it literally and in a crude sense. understand it as a process of enlightenment.

Revelation should obviously be read for what it is, an apocalypse with all the symbolic trappings therein. It’s an incredibly elegant book with layers upon layers of fractal structure and poetry. Clearly the work of a person highly trained in Greek composition and apocalyptic.

The point remains that the most expansive portrayal of Christ’s coming, be it symbolic or literal, is in any case not a defense of religious tolerance as you seemed to suggest. To the contrary Christ is portrayed as a demolisher of unbelievers.

The Jesus of Q and the authentic Paul are arguably more progressive. Maybe this is what you had in mind?

 

[dlamberth]

that means I already see you as in Christ in some measure.

I'm wondering, would that be a Cosmic type of Christ? Or maybe a Universal Christ?

 

[the iconoclast]

To the contrary Christ is portrayed as a demolisher of unbelievers.

Hello

Im curious. Where is Jesus portrayed as a demoliser of unbelievers?

Cheers

 

[Noxot]

Revelation should obviously be read for what it is, an apocalypse with all the symbolic trappings therein. It’s an incredibly elegant book with layers upon layers of fractal structure and poetry. Clearly the work of a person highly trained in Greek composition and apocalyptic.

The point remains that the most expansive portrayal of Christ’s coming, be it symbolic or literal, is in any case not a defense of religious tolerance as you seemed to suggest. To the contrary Christ is portrayed as a demolisher of unbelievers.

The Jesus of Q and the authentic Paul are arguably more progressive. Maybe this is what you had in mind?

not very familiar with what Jesus Q or the authentic Paul is. I tend to think Paul wrote hebrews with help and some of his other letters by himself. some doubt peter 2 nowadays but I have no problem getting something out of it so it does not matter to me.

in my view the bible has a shadow to it and I don't accept the shadow of it as real or valid. so my method of interpretation of the bible is going to be different to someone who only depends on some kind of "historical science" to understand it, which I think can be useful but is not sufficient.

history is an interpretation of various kinds of people with certain kinds of methods. it is not what I hold as fundamentally real even though the events that occurred that people utilized to make history out of are real in some sense. but that kind of real is the osage orange fruit surface of reality and there is more depth called the spirit, which I hold to be a most fundamental and general reality.

my interpretation of Jesus and Paul are based on whatever kinds of spirits are influencing me. to some measure I ofc use some of the available history. for me it's not a problem to accept the entire NT as real and true, as I think it went through a spiritual process of sanctification by the Holy Spirit and whatever angels were assigned to the task (which are many).

osage orange fruit

I'm wondering, would that be a Cosmic type of Christ? Or maybe a Universal Christ?

well according to my tradition origen said that all men who are rational partake of the Logos who is a person of the Trinity. that certainly has a bit of a greek spirit to it. the NT says Christ is the new adam.

I don't have a problem with the Son of God being a universal but it is important that we not erase the soul of Jesus either, or anyone else for that matter. if I was to say that the image of God that man is made in is Christ, then I would not be bothered by such since I think the christology Christians were developing is closely linked to our anthropology.

but I try to keep in mind that one main aspect of being is to become and since there is such a thing as freedom it also means that man is not like Christ, if that is what they become. in fact the bible does not call sinful men men, it calls them beast.

 

[dlamberth]

I don't have a problem with the Son of God being a universal but it is important that we not erase the soul of Jesus either, or anyone else for that matter. if I was to say that the image of God that man is made in is Christ, then I would not be bothered by such since I think the christology Christians were developing is closely linked to our anthropology.

How about the thought that the Soul of Creation and all in it IS the Soul of Christ?

 

[Noxot]

How about the thought that the Soul of Creation and all in it IS the Soul of Christ?

depends on where you look at it from. I think freedom is more fundamental to reality than what is commonly considered to be being is. since other beings besides God matter it means God can't be united to them unless they will it, therefore hell exist and evil spirits exist.

I would not say that Hitler or a devil are the soul of Christ. but it seems that Alfred North Whitehead is obviously part of the soul of Christ.

Origen made a distinction between the body of Christ and the soul of Christ. things having independent existence from God is a fundamental tenet to my understanding and will. I believe in Gods development and ultimately we are all in him and united to him, which is why evil is basically non-being. this universe is only pseudo-real.

Christianity does not include evil as an attribute of God.

 

[bhsmte]

Hey hey

I have had the pleasure of doing so. What happens now if i want to challenge your position?

Cheers

Challenge until your heart is content.

 

[dlamberth]

I believe in Gods development and ultimately we are all in him and united to him, ...

So rather than being the Soul of Christ, would you say than that perhaps the Universe and all in it is the Body of Christ? I'm taking my question from your comment that :"ultimately we are all in him and united to him".

...this universe is only pseudo-real.

I'm wondering now what to you IS the real universe?

 

[ViaCrucis]

In Revelation, Christ kills all the unbelievers. How could the coming of Christ be credited with increased religious tolerance?

Not quite what it says, but I can understand why you might get that impression. It also says He has a sword coming out of His mouth and is riding a horse. Pro-tip: Try not to take the Apocalypse of St. John too literally, it is a work of apocalyptic literature, and thus needs to be read that way.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Carbon]

Not quite what it says, but I can understand why you might get that impression. It also says He has a sword coming out of His mouth and is riding a horse. Pro-tip: Try not to take the Apocalypse of St. John too literally, it is a work of apocalyptic literature, and thus needs to be read that way.

-CryptoLutheran

Hey ViaCrucis, you may not have seen I actually made the same point later in this thread that Revelation should be read in the context of its literary genre.

However I also explained why it doesn’t matter. Take the 200 mile long river of sinners’ blood — maybe this is a metaphor for an interfaith wine tasting. Or less flippantly maybe it’s just a really colorful way to say being in Christ is good and being outside is bad. But what this text is not is a call for religious ecumenism. To suggest otherwise feels a little disrespectful to the author in my opinion.

 

[the iconoclast]

Challenge until your heart is content.

Hey hey bhsmte

One piece I find interesting, is asking atheists how certain they are of their personal faith belief and or belief in God.

What u think?