Biblical Faiths: Which is more dangerous?

[Katzpur]

What faith is supposed to be debating here?

Hmmm. I guess any faith that accepts the Bible. I was sort of thinking in terms of a Christian debate, but you are welcome to join if you'd like, Maize.

 

[Katzpur]

The Pharisees took a literal translation of the OT and look where it got them! What started out in excellence ended in hypocrisy!

The Spirit enables us to "make a right judgement", and so on it, and it alone, I will rely to make known the mysteries of God's Scriptures. So far it has been an incredible ride.

NetDoc,

I don't think it was the Pharisees' literal translation of the OT that was their problem. I think it had more to do with their failure to understand that the spirit of the law is at least as important as the letter of the law.

I don't want to come across as a Bible literalist, because I'm really not. All I'm trying to point out is that when one person says, "The Bible says such and such but what it really means..." and another person says, "The Bible says such and such but what it really means..." we end up with beliefs that often completely contradict each other. I'm having a hard time explaining what I am trying to say without giving an example, and I don't want to give an example, because everybody would just start debating that example instead of the more general topic I tried to introduce. Yes, we need to rely on the Spirit. But what if the Spirit tells you one thing and the Spirit tells me something different?

 

[Scuba Pete]

The Spirit is our Counselor. However, the Spirit was not sent to "tell us" anything. The Spirit was sent so that we can understand what was already said. None of us will understand the truth in the same way... but that is not the Spirit's fault OR a problem.

That being said, I think you said the same thing... with a minor twist to it.

 

[joeboonda]

I don't blame you for saying such a thing. After all, you have to say such a thing to justify your own erroneous doctrines. Otherwise you would left to answer WHY most of history disagrees with you. Very typical.

~Victor

Hi, Victor, I don't think I have discussed doctrine with you, to what are you referring when you talk of my erroneous doctrines? I believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, died for our sins, rose again, is coming again, and that he is God. Do you believe something other than this? I didn't think as a catholic, that you would. Look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks,

Joeboonda

 

[Quiddity]

Hi, Victor, I don't think I have discussed doctrine with you, to what are you referring when you talk of my erroneous doctrines? I believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, died for our sins, rose again, is coming again, and that he is God. Do you believe something other than this? I didn't think as a catholic, that you would. Look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks,

Joeboonda

We are in agreement.
But do understand that other post you have in RF have shown me that we are not in agreement on other details that essential to Catholics. But there is always the possibilty that I may have misunderstood you.

~Victor

 

[joeboonda]

Thanks, Victor. I am glad we agree on those fundamental points. It is true that I am not catholic, although my parents were when I was very young. Honestly, there are some things we would not agree on as I am not catholic, maybe we can iron some of those ideas out in the future. Probably on a different thread or something.

Joeboonda

 

[Quiddity]

Thanks, Victor. I am glad we agree on those fundamental points. It is true that I am not catholic, although my parents were when I was very young. Honestly, there are some things we would not agree on as I am not catholic, maybe we can iron some of those ideas out in the future. Probably on a different thread or something.

Joeboonda

Certainly. That is why we are here.

~Victor

 

[Green Gaia]

Hmmm. I guess any faith that accepts the Bible. I was sort of thinking in terms of a Christian debate, but you are welcome to join if you'd like, Maize.

No, thanks.

There were people from several different faiths responding, so I wanted it to be clarified which faith should be debating, otherwise the thread should just be moved to religious debates. But I see you've fixed the title now.

 

[blueman]

The Pharisees took a literal translation of the OT and look where it got them! What started out in excellence ended in hypocrisy!

The Spirit enables us to "make a right judgement", and so on it, and it alone, I will rely to make known the mysteries of God's Scriptures. So far it has been an incredible ride.

It wasn't the fact that the Pharisees did not know the law, they certainly did, but it was their heart and disbelief that did them in, not upholding the law. Their heart was the source of the hypocrisy. Satan knows scripture better than most christians.

 

[Dentonz]

I don't blame you for saying such a thing. After all, you have to say such a thing to justify your own erroneous doctrines. Otherwise you would left to answer WHY most of history disagrees with you. Very typical.

~Victor

There is a reason that "most history" disagrees with him. Because satan is the 'prince of the power of the air' and broad is the way to death and destruction and many will go in. But narrow is the way to eternal life and few will find it. So most of the world and history will disagree with the truth.

 

[Scuba Pete]

It wasn't the fact that the Pharisees did not know the law, they certainly did, but it was their heart and disbelief that did them in, not upholding the law. Their heart was the source of the hypocrisy. Satan knows scripture better than most christians.

I assure you that the Pharisees started out with the best of intentions and their hearts in tune with God. They exchanged understanding God with their hearts for a "literal interpretation" that appealed to their intellect. It didn't happen overnight either; it took decades.

So those who put words in God's mouth in the name of literalism are missing the entire point. God does not want your intellect: he wants your HEART!

 

[jamaesi]

Hmmm. I guess any faith that accepts the Bible. I was sort of thinking in terms of a Christian debate, but you are welcome to join if you'd like, Maize.

Would Jews and Muslims be welcome?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I assure you that the Pharisees started out with the best of intentions and their hearts in tune with God.

You uncritically read and feed the banal propaganda of late 1st century Christianity and then, based soley on this thinnest of gruel, make assurances concerning a movement about which you know nothing. I suggest that you constrain your anti-Judaic rhetoric until you've read something about 2nd Temple Period Judaism - if not Macoby then at least Josephus. Until then, your assurances are worthless.

 

[Katzpur]

Would Jews and Muslims be welcome?

Sure. Be my guest. We'll extend it to Same Faith Debates: Abrahamic.

 

[fromthe heart]

Sure. Be my guest. We'll extend it to Same Faith Debates: Abrahamic.

The key word still being same faith debate!!! Those who are not here to debate as one of the faith please hold you responses or start a new thread. Thank you!

 

[Katzpur]

So those who put words in God's mouth in the name of literalism are missing the entire point. God does not want your intellect: he wants your HEART!

It's interesting that you would say that, NetDoc. It seems to me to be quite the opposite. It's when we start saying, "Well, God said [such and such], but of course He didn't really mean that. He meant [such and such]," that we're putting words into His mouth. Personally, I feel much safer simply assuming that He isn't trying to play games with us by making things any more complicated than they need to be. (Once again, I am not a Bible literalist, but I probably do accept it more literally than many Christians.)

 

[Scuba Pete]

I agree Kat that those things happen, but they are rare when put next to extrapolation and inference. I don't claim to understand God's words all of the time. But I DO see a ton of "doctrines" that have arisen out of the extrapolation/inference mode. To whit:
Praying Jesus into your heart.
God helps those who help themselves.
God hates Gays.
WWJB (Who Would Jesus Bomb).
No alcohol.
No dancing.
No Instrumental music.
No kitchens.
Evolution.
A seperate preisthood.

The list could go on, and I challenge ANYONE to find references in the Scripture that DIRECTLY support your position without relying on inference or extrapolation.

 

[Katzpur]

I agree Kat that those things happen, but they are rare when put next to extrapolation and inference. I don't claim to understand God's words all of the time. But I DO see a ton of "doctrines" that have arisen out of the extrapolation/inference mode. To whit:
Praying Jesus into your heart.
God helps those who help themselves.
God hates Gays.
WWJB (Who Would Jesus Bomb).
No alcohol.
No dancing.
No Instrumental music.
No kitchens.
Evolution.
A seperate preisthood.

The list could go on, and I challenge ANYONE to find references in the Scripture that DIRECTLY support your position without relying on inference or extrapolation.

Well, you've made a good point, Doc. I think we can go too far either direction.

 

[nutshell]

The list could go on, and I challenge ANYONE to find references in the Scripture that DIRECTLY support your position without relying on inference or extrapolation.

But isn't that what all of us do??? Everyone sees the obvious truth of their own beliefs in the scriptures because it is their own. The Bible on its own has managed to create numerous church's and beliefs because it is a natural thing to make inferences and extrapolate. No one's belief is exempt from this.

 

[Scuba Pete]

But isn't that what all of us do???

No, not everyone ascribes to this: especially me!

Everyone sees the obvious truth of their own beliefs in the scriptures because it is their own.

I have changed quite a few of my beliefs because I saw that they contradicted scripture. Why fight the truth?

The Bible on its own has managed to create numerous church's and beliefs because it is a natural thing to make inferences and extrapolate. No one's belief is exempt from this.

On this we FULLY disagree. The Bible created NOTHING. It describes the First Century churches of Christ in raw detail. We can choose to follow this proscription or invent our own. Of course, like it does all of it's heroes, the Scriptures report the bad with the good. The Spirit can guide us into which is which, IF we are open to it!