Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Looked into beyond the theology, you are asking me, but then you point to theological questions. This makes no sense. Look beyond into what, are you asking? You just asked me theological questions.
I never asked theological questions (for example, what scripture says this...and what culture said that...). I'm hoping you're answering questions from your perspective and experience. Short scripture is fine as long as you add simple commentary related to your points.
I'm quite open to people's perspectives. The more the better. I don't think you seem to be however, with incredulous responses with triple question marks, and the like. You seem to be assuming a whole lot about me, when it is clear you don't have any real understanding of what my actual knowledge, awareness, or background is. Are you sure you are open to other's perspectives?
Sorry. I do make assumptions based on the tone of your post. It's very defensive right now. That makes it hard to understand your point, especially spiritual ones.
This is what I say about "Biblical Christianity", such as it is. Why is it about the Bible?
Scripture is fine but if you're talking about anything, make sure you add commentary in your own words. It let's me know whether the points you are making are yours or John's.
BTW, what source do you really know that I am talking from?
Scripture. If I remember correctly. I don't think you posted anything else.
You guys? What, you guys? Where? Who? I don't see anyone else next to me? Who are you hallucinating? How many do you see?
Defense (hallucinated) against defense doesn't make a nonoffense post.
Sorry. You all/christians/or christian minded, seem to think and defend yourself so similarly that it's hard to answer with something unique when it reads the same. After awhile, I feel robotic.
Because people hold different perspectives, that results in war? Not sure I'd want to be your friend, with expectations the people all believe and think alike, or there will be a violent response in a declarations of war.
Getting defense. Yes. In history, people had different believes and it caused war. If only the church, protestants, and pagans sat around and talked about their differences, we'd probably have a better non-christian oriented would.
But, yeah. It's hard to reply to this because it would sound like an insult; and, that isn't my intention.
I don't know how it can't. Don't you ever simply sit under the night sky and feel your soul connect with God? Tell me you've had that experience, right? Did you need to open the Bible for it to happen? Could it happen never even having hear of a Bible in the first place? Do you have spiritual experiences? Have you ever?
I'm trying to back track. I think I lost between replies. I think you said something against those who believe the bible is the word of god; and, I asked if it helps with your spirituality (direct question).
Extra question. In my signature, and other poetry, that's the best I can describe what some people define as "god" through art; bible christians through the bible. All of that you listed, yes, in your point of view, it would be god. Nothing wrong with that. How did that pastor say it...it's all in translation. It's the words.
So you agree everything is Christ's voice, right? Everything, including the Bible? How about everything including the Bhagavad Gita, the Upanishads, the Diamond Sutras, the Tao De Ching, etc? Does everything include those? No? Then it isn't everything then, right? Only just the books you read?
Of course. Take away god and use divinity. It's a better word to describe what's sacred instead of mixing Hindu (and other eastern) gods with abrahamic god. It does not match whatsoever.
Assumption? Honestly, I only went to a Hindu temple once. I never read the Bhagavad Gita. RF Hindu online (people rather than books), from what I understand it, most don't use the book as a "sacred scripture." As a result, it's hard to answer your question. I assume you haven't practiced any Hindu or Dharmic practices either?
I'm not sure what to say to this. The Bible doesn't help you interpret anything. The Bible is a book you read and interpret using your mind, through the programming of your culture, peers, language, personality, worldviews, etc. The Bible doesn't talk. It just sits there on the table quietly saying nothing, until you use your mind and read the words through filters of your set of eyes you're reading with.
People have different opinions. I don't know if my opinions sound like facts or tell people they are wrong or not. We usually don't see our own biases through our opinions. Human nature.
Whether it is true or right or wrong isn't my point.
Most christians use the bible to interpret and guide them to understand god's creation, interaction with people, and sense of self. It's like if you want to know god by looking at the sky, that's fine. Some people like to look at the sky, see god, as well as get to know other people around jesus' day who sees god as well. It's a communal thing.
Christ speaks from his father's Words so that people can come to his father. God calls his son, the Word, because he is special and the only one god blesses to spread his Word. The bible speaks about those who first and in person interacted with christ/God's Word/Christ. Christians see the bible sacred because it has god's laws through christ.
How do you see the apostle's interaction with christ in the skies?
But, yeah, got to look deeper than that. I understand the negative views about the bible. That's is a christian thing. Some exclusion, but, yeah, that's basically how abrahamic view things. The nature of the belief not how you express it.
Why do I get the very distinct impression that some Christians, yourself apparently, who think of the Bible as if it were some living, organic entity of its own, like it has a flesh cover or something? Do you think the Bible is an animate life force of some sort, that sends off magic energies? I certainly am familiar with the term Bibliolatry, which is the worship of the Bible as if it were God. That's a problem, in my fair estimation.
Do I think? No. I'm talking about many christians who do. Evangelists rather than liturgical believers.
Do you think they see the bible having energies?
I can't figure another way to explain the importance of god without your thinking they see it as a special force or something. The bible/god's words inspire the authors to write the correct message of christ.
Do you understand it logically?
Reading and comprehension are done with the mind. If you mean hearing with the heart, that's fine. I have no problem with that. That's what I do.
Everyone has their different ways to connect with god.
If some people connect with god through the bible (using and reading christ's words written) that's cool too.
I personally have nothing against it. (Going by your posts) Is it that you don't understand it? In your first or second comment you were more defensive. If you rephrase it, are you saying you don't understand it or it's just wrong? or both?
It seems many treat it as though it were, consider it has some goal in mind for you when you read it, claiming it helps you interpret it as if it were a friend standing over your shoulder, and the like. It may not be "god", but it sure sound's like it's viewed as some sort of living creature with a will, mind, and intention.
It does help people interpret. It's like if John's mother passed away. Her friends want to talk to his mother but since she passed away, they talk to her (get to know her history etc) through her son. Sometimes they reminisce about John's mother through her family's photo album. Nicknacks helps. Of course talking about memories is precious as well.
It depends on the person. It's not inherently right or wrong.
Yeah. Bible-thumpers do make the bible seem like an idol. I never heard them treat the bible as christ just his word's. The bible didn't die on the christ. I'm sure you know that?
Who is belittling that? I'm not. They are free to do so, but as I said from the outset, it is not necessary to read the Bible in order to know God. "Biblical Christianity" as a term, is frankly nothing more than a political slogan with no basis in historical reality. If the Bible was the only criteria, than would you call the Roman Catholic Church "Biblical Christianity"? No? Please explain why not then?
I know it is not necessary; and it is not wrong either. To me, it makes sense. I agree with you that god (however defined) is an experience.... I also believe you can learn about god through books too, not either or. You can learn about the divine in everything. I don't see how books are different. Least in my opinion.
Last edited: