How does it feel?

[Tangnefedd]

He comes over as arrogant, laying down, rules for people etc. He appeared not to get on very well with others either, even Peter he didn't seem to rate much. I don't like his attitude to women and gays. Paul was only human, certainly not divine, and as such one is at perfect liberty to disagree with him.

 

[StormeTorque]

With respect, if you distrust the authenticity of the gospels then how do you trust the resurrection of Christ? If that is in doubt then so is salvation, if Christ never rose from the dead, if there is no eternal life, then in what are we believing?

But why should Christianity just be about the reward in the end? I'm pretty certain that there is no afterlife, and to be honest I don't think I'd particularly like to live forever. However, I believe that the values of Christ regarding love and forgiveness are important for bettering humanity and allowing us to make the most of this life.

 

[ScottishJohn]

There isn't any proof that would stand up in a court of law that the Bible is anything to do with God, so that is a fact, not just imo!

lol could it be that this is why it is called 'Faith'.

By the way it is not a 'fact' - it is just 'not proven' (a good old Scottish verdict!) there is no proof that the Bible is nothing to do with God. Two very different things.

The way I see it, God created the universe, and when he did so part of that was writing the laws of Physics which govern his creation. Now some of those laws we have discovered and understood, some of them are in the process of being discovered, and people disagree about them. Nevertheless, both those that we know about as fact, and those that are just theory are not affected by whether we believe in them or not. If you try and achieve the impossible and remove one Physical law because you don't like / don't understand it - that has an effect on every other Physical law - they appear to become less true. Although in reality the only person you would be kidding would be yourself.

In the same way God created a set of abolute rules for how we are supposed to live. In the same way, picking and choosing which bits we like and believe, and which bits we find too challenging, just makes a mockery of the whole thing. What are you left with once you remove all the bits you don't like?

 

[Tangnefedd]

What are you left with once you remove all the bits you don't like?

The bits I do like!

 

[Bonhoffer]

He comes over as arrogant, laying down, rules for people etc. He appeared not to get on very well with others either, even Peter he didn't seem to rate much. I don't like his attitude to women and gays. Paul was only human, certainly not divine, and as such one is at perfect liberty to disagree with him.

But this guy talked a lot more about grace than he did about rules or law.
Yes he did establish rules and gave a lot of moral advice, but how is that arrogant? Was Moses arrogant when he taught the law? Are the politicians in parliament arrogant when they pass new laws? Are schools arrogant when they publish a list of school rules?
The rules St Paul established were not rules to condemn but advice on how to to live a more fulfilling life.

I dont see what was wrong with his attitude towards women. He clearly taught that men and womne were equal but different. A lot of his teaching on gender was very forward thinking at the time. It all depends on how you interpret him. For some he was a male chauvinist pig; for others he was an early feminist!
As for gays. There is nothing in his letters to suggest his was homophobic.
He only ever condemned homosexual practice, but he never incited violence or illtreatment of homosexuals. In fact there is Biblical evidence that he welcomed gay people as his brothers in Christ. Although these were people no longer practicing homosexuality.

 

[Bonhoffer]

There isn't any proof that would stand up in a court of law that the Bible is anything to do with God, so that is a fact, not just imo!

Actually you are wrong there. The resurrection (and possibly the Bible itself) have been put through mock court trials to see if it would stand up in a court of law. The verdict was that th resurrection is true. It was impossible for the lawyers to disprove it. They could not come up with any better explanation for the events of the Bible other than it being true.

 

[Bonhoffer]

What are you left with once you remove all the bits you don't like?

The bits I do like!

Thats a very dangerous place to be. What if I reject all the teachings about love and kindness and focus on wrath all the time.

 

[Tangnefedd]

That is your privilege!

 

[Kehaar]

But why should Christianity just be about the reward in the end?

It's about a relationship with God. And grace. Which, personally speaking, is more of a gift, not a reward - it isn't something I deserve.

And, just while we're on this topic, do you believe all religions are just about a reward? Or does Christianity differ in anyway? Just my own curiosity.

I'm pretty certain that there is no afterlife, and to be honest I don't think I'd particularly like to live forever. However, I believe that the values of Christ regarding love and forgiveness are important for bettering humanity and allowing us to make the most of this life.

That's not what I was getting at, I was responding to Christians doubting the gospel - I appreciate you're coming at this from a different perspective. I'm saying that if you doubt the gospel, then you call into question Christs victory at the cross, you call in to doubt eternal life, you call God into question, then what are you believing in? If you remove divinity from the event, Christ becomes is just another cruxifiction, there is no triumph, no 'answer' to sin, there is no way back to God, no relationship with Him, no salvation, you effectively wipe out your own faith.

Again, I'm curious, do you believe in Christ as an historical figure, that actually existed or do you see it more as myth?

 

[Kehaar]

There isn't any proof that would stand up in a court of law that the Bible is anything to do with God, so that is a fact, not just imo!

Depends on your jury.

 

[Tangnefedd]

Well of course if they are a jury of all fundies, who seem to be able to believe anything however incredible, then of course they will believe without any evidence at all!

 

[Jer]

And if it's liberals they'd never decide as they'd all have different interpretations and so not be able to because it's a person view of the bits they like.

What are you left with once you remove all the bits you don't like?

The bits I do like!

Why believe in Christianity at all? Why not just do good? From what you're saying there is no difference at all.

But why should Christianity just be about the reward in the end? I'm pretty certain that there is no afterlife, and to be honest I don't think I'd particularly like to live forever. However, I believe that the values of Christ regarding love and forgiveness are important for bettering humanity and allowing us to make the most of this life.

Why don't you want to live forever? It's probably because of all the pain and so on in this world. But if you get rid of that then it would be pretty cool to do so. Which is what it will be like in heaven.

 

[oworm]

Well of course if they are a jury of all fundies, who seem to be able to believe anything however incredible, then of course they will believe without any evidence at all!

I think its rather that Christianity isn't based on physical evidence! It's based on the self revelation of God. Gods children have all the evidence they need within themselves. I think that's probably why the bible tells us that the Holy Spirit testifies with our spirit that we are the children of God. It's something that happens within the individual believer.
All this legal talk reminds me though that there will be a court held in session at the close of the age when the Lord will return to wrap up the affairs of mankind. That will be the biggest court case ever held and no one who ever existed will be able to deny the truth of what will be revealed on that day.

 

[Tangnefedd]

Why believe in Christianity at all? Why not just do good? From what you're saying there is no difference at all.
I am quite happy doing what I am doing!


Why don't you want to live forever? It's probably because of all the pain and so on in this world. But if you get rid of that then it would be pretty cool to do so. Which is what it will be like in heaven.


The idea of heaven where everyone one is singing praises for ever and ever, all the time sounds SO boring that I would want out after the first 1000 years or so!

 

[Buttermilk]

And if it's liberals they'd never decide as they'd all have different interpretations and so not be able to because it's a person view of the bits they like.

Please explain this comment

 

[Tangnefedd]

And if it's liberals they'd never decide as they'd all have different interpretations and so not be able to because it's a person view of the bits they like.

I think it is good that we all think differently, wouldn't it be a dull world if we all thought alike?

 

[Buttermilk]

I think it is good that we all think differently, wouldn't it be a dull world if we all thought alike?

Exactly, and we all do think differently even the fundamentalists/conservatives

It struck me that in WWMC when non liberals come in and ask questions they try to divide us by questioning our differences/ trying to pin down what we believe.

These questions and differences exisit in fundamentalism/conservatism too.

 

[Kehaar]

Exactly, and we all do think differently even the fundamentalists/conservatives

It struck me that in WWMC when non liberals come in and ask questions they try to divide us by questioning our differences/ trying to pin down what we believe.

These questions and differences exisit in fundamentalism/conservatism too.

I guess it depends on the way these questions are worded, but I'd have thought they'd have been a good thing (but then I'm biased ). I ask questions about anothers beliefs, but it's not to divide or pick fault, it's to help me gain a better understanding of the person.

 

[Buttermilk]

I guess it depends on the way these questions are worded, but I'd have thought they'd have been a good thing (but then I'm biased ). I ask questions about anothers beliefs, but it's not to divide or pick fault, it's to help me gain a better understanding of the person.

Questions in themself aren't bad, or trying to find out about another person - I do it myself

but ( and this is not directed at you, it is just a general comment ), some people do ask questions to try and stir/divide/convert to their brand of Christianity

 

[Kehaar]

Questions in themself aren't bad, or trying to find out about another person - I do it myself

but ( and this is not directed at you, it is just a general comment ), some people do ask questions to try and stir/divide/convert to their brand of Christianity