Truth

[awitch]

More denominations actually facilitates the effect of attracting more souls. It is because today's humans all think that they are scientifically, rationally, critically equipped. Their minds are so varied that you can't fit them all into a single denomination. So more denominations provide them with a better chance to find one suit their minds, as long as you only have one salvation message.

You're basically saying the meaning of the message is irrelevant as long as the end result is belief. Those widely varying interpretations dictate how people treat each other and are used to justify all sorts of abominable behavior, but god is OK with that as long as his numbers are up? I expect more out of a deity.

To put it another way, denominations are different views in terms of knowledge. They maintain the same salvation message or power to save, which can basically be identified by the faith statements in Apostle's Creed. If on the other hand if it's a deviation in the message of salvation, then it's a heresy.

Some say that belief alone is sufficient for salvation. Some say that it's works. Some say that it's a combination of both. But they all believe that their interpretation is the only correct one.

 

[Hawkins]

You're basically saying the meaning of the message is irrelevant as long as the end result is belief. Those widely varying interpretations dictate how people treat each other and are used to justify all sorts of abominable behavior, but god is OK with that as long as his numbers are up? I expect more out of a deity.



Some say that belief alone is sufficient for salvation. Some say that it's works. Some say that it's a combination of both. But they all believe that their interpretation is the only correct one.

No. You missed the point. God has a purpose for the multiple denominations because they can save more! That's how Protestant works.

 

[awitch]

No. You missed the point. God has a purpose for the multiple denominations because they can save more! That's how Protestant works.

No, I get it; if one set of particular beliefs are not appealing to some people, it's totally OK to come up with different particular beliefs so there are more Christians than there would have been otherwise, regardless of how they implement those beliefs. Don't like how the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America doesn't ordain women? Try the United Methodist Church down the street. It's irrelevant to God as long as you still accept him as your lord and savior.

 

[juvenissun]

Given the multitude of denominations and widely varying interpretations of the same scripture, this would seem to have been a very poor choice.

It is a very good choice. The variation is very very small. It is one of the most (or the most) precise document human has ever seen.

 

[awitch]

It is a very good choice. The variation is very very small. It is one of the most (or the most) precise document human has ever seen.

I was referring to the interpretations, not the scripture itself, which has changed over time given the large number of different Bible versions. And I wouldn't call it precise when a council of humans picked which books would be canon and which would be discarded.

 

[juvenissun]

I was referring to the interpretations, not the scripture itself, which has changed over time given the large number of different Bible versions. And I wouldn't call it precise when a council of humans picked which books would be canon and which would be discarded.

The interpretation of Bible verses should NOT be unified. Various versions of interpretation is a healthy sign.

 

[awitch]

The interpretation of Bible verses should NOT be unified. Various versions of interpretation is a healthy sign.

Some Christians insist they must be able to discriminate against gay people. Other Christians are affirming of gay people and support their civil rights. Both contradictory positions are based on interpretations of the same scripture, yet both accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior.

If God is OK with both interpretations, then that would imply God does not care about how gay people are treated as long as he is the center of attention.

 

[juvenissun]

Some Christians insist they must be able to discriminate against gay people. Other Christians are affirming of gay people and support their civil rights. Both contradictory positions are based on interpretations of the same scripture, yet both accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior.

If God is OK with both interpretations, then that would imply God does not care about how gay people are treated as long as he is the center of attention.

Of course that God is not OK with both interpretations. One of them must be wrong. However, would this case defeat the Bible or the Christianity? If allowed, I can easily raise a few more similar cases. That is exactly a healthy feature of a faith system. I like Trump, some Christians don't. So what? Are we still all Christians?

A task for you: identify the critical aspects of Christianity and see how many denominations are inconsistent on that.

 

[awitch]

Of course that God is not OK with both interpretations. One of them must be wrong. However, would this case defeat the Bible or the Christianity? If allowed, I can easily raise a few more similar cases. That is exactly a healthy feature of a faith system. I like Trump, some Christians don't. So what? Are we still all Christians?

A task for you: identify the critical aspects of Christianity and see how many denominations are inconsistent on that.

The critical part is that they all accept Jesus as their lord and savior. That defines them as being Christian but I'm not debating that at all. I'm asking about reconciling all the other details; treatment of gay people, minimum requirements for salvation, trinity vs. non-trinity, celebrating holidays, literal Flood vs metaphorical Flood etc.

 

[juvenissun]

The critical part is that they all accept Jesus as their lord and savior. That defines them as being Christian but I'm not debating that at all. I'm asking about reconciling all the other details; treatment of gay people, minimum requirements for salvation, trinity vs. non-trinity, celebrating holidays, literal Flood vs metaphorical Flood etc.

Among your list, I highlighted the critical ones. If they are violated, then the people is NOT a Christian anymore. Others are debatable. If people are wrong on those, they are still Christians.

Having different interpretation on Bible verses is a strength in Christianity. Humans are created to do that. A good example is Adam and Eve.

 

[awitch]

Among your list, I highlighted the critical ones. If they are violated, then the people is NOT a Christian anymore. Others are debatable. If people are wrong on those, they are still Christians.

Again, we're in agreement about that. It's the next part I'm asking about:

Having different interpretation on Bible verses is a strength in Christianity.

You said the differences in the non Christian-defining interpretations are a strength because it attracts more people to Christianity.

And I agree, if people are free to pick the interpretation they happen to like most, they will adopt that interpretation, resulting in a net increase in the number of the Christians. So if numbers and popular opinion are the depth of importance, then differences are a strength.

However, I pointed out that holding those different interpretations, despite all being Christians, results in people behaving very differently towards each other (discrimination, for example).

So if those non Christian-defining interpretations are truly good, then I'm left to conclude that god cares more about being acknowledged than he does in what else people believe and how that drives their behavior.

And as a caveat, if god DID care about beliefs and behavior, then he could not be OK with two contradictory interpretations held by different Christian denominations.

 

[juvenissun]

You said the differences in the non Christian-defining interpretations are a strength because it attracts more people to Christianity.

And I agree, if people are free to pick the interpretation they happen to like most, they will adopt that interpretation, resulting in a net increase in the number of the Christians. So if numbers and popular opinion are the depth of importance, then differences are a strength.

However, I pointed out that holding those different interpretations, despite all being Christians, results in people behaving very differently towards each other (discrimination, for example).

So if those non Christian-defining interpretations are truly good, then I'm left to conclude that god cares more about being acknowledged than he does in what else people believe and how that drives their behavior.

And as a caveat, if god DID care about beliefs and behavior, then he could not be OK with two contradictory interpretations held by different Christian denominations.

Theoretically, you have a point. But practically, the scenario you described did not and will not happen. Jews and Christians read the same Scripture for thousands of years. Serious conflicts in interpretation are only a few. It works like the Congress of a government, but is more harmonious and efficient because they have a King.

 

[dlamberth]

Theoretically, you have a point. But practically, the scenario you described did not and will not happen. Jews and Christians read the same Scripture for thousands of years. Serious conflicts in interpretation are only a few.

But, the difference between the Jewish reading of Scripture and the Christian reading the same is so vast that completely different images of God are worshiped, with historically the Jewish people experiencing discrimination.

 

[juvenissun]

But, the difference between the Jewish reading of Scripture and the Christian reading the same is so vast that completely different images of God are worshiped, with historically the Jewish people experiencing discrimination.

Of course. This is not a surprise. Jewish people only read half of the Scripture.

 

[MehGuy]

Truth in relation to what we can know is probably extremely limited. For example, everything we think we know about reality could turn out to be an illusion. Besides basic concepts such as "some of of reality exists" there isn't much we can know for sure.

Of course I believe truth exists outside of the human mind. Something is true because it's true regardless of whatever lack of abilities sentiment beings may have in definite knowledge.

 

[CherubRam]

What is truth?

All I can make of it is,

Truth is like a dove that comes with healing under it,s wings.

Or what do others make of it?

Truth is made known by reason of the facts.

 

[dlamberth]

Truth is made known by reason of the facts.

The Truth of Love
is hardly reason
of facts.

 

[DennisTate]

What is truth?

All I can make of it is,

Truth is like a dove that comes with healing under it,s wings.

Or what do others make of it?

I find "Truth" to be quite confusing........
The opening post in this discussion will give you a good example of me going through some serious cognitive dissonance over the teachings of scripture vs other impressive sources of information:

God's many plans for the Gay community???????

 

[DennisTate]

The Truth of Love
is hardly reason
of facts.

Exactly....................
back in 1988 when i felt that I had the facts pretty much figured out and nailed down........
I suspected that there was something terribly wrong with my reasoning...... I prayed with chutzpah
to be given wisdom and correction and wow.........
but I was soon shown error after error after error after error...... and it really does boil down to how much I love my wife and kids and grandchildren and my friends and neighbours...........

Am I at all as thankful for them as G-d is??????

No.... I am not....... and I know that this is the biggest truth that I must seek after!

 

[durangodawood]

Is truth the same thing as reality?