Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 141

Thread: Salvation..

  1. #61
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukecash12 View Post
    We have figures like Granville Sharp (a modern monument in the field of Greek grammar) to rely upon now, unlike others who were less lucky.
    Interesting, I didn't know that, thanks.

    What I meant is that if people are using many different translations, then this creates great diversity in what is considered scriptural truth.

    Well, the system of hermeneutics that I have always preferred personally is made up of these basic rules
    If all cannot agree on this system of hermeneutics, that creates a wide variety of differing opinions.

    the secretive nature of a lot of these writings run contrary to the basic Christian understanding that God is open about who He is, and what He wants us to know, which is expressed several times in the scriptures.
    C'mon now, it isn't the texts themselves that are secretive! Their content ran against mainstream ideas at the time (just like yours and many others do now) so therefore in order to safeguard the information that they contained, they HAD to be secreted away or risk being destroyed.

    Gnostic and Apocryphal texts run right against this idea when they try to sell us their brands of mysticism, in that they violate the first numbered rule of hermeneutics that I provided and that most highly respected and well educated ministers agree with, whom have performed excessive mental gymnastics just to meet that rule.
    Why is it then that many scholars believe that the Q document exists.. ?

    Are there any internal discrepancies? Yes, but they are few, considering how much text there is.
    Even textual critics don't agree on this point.

    Is the Bible infallible in that it is God's word and the ultimate resource for personal enlightenment and salvation? Most definitely.
    In the opinion of christians, yes.

    you can't prove that the Hebrew people actually got their story from the Sumerian Enuma Elish story and altered it, simply by pointing out some similarities.
    It was written centuries beforehand and is only ONE example of what I was referring to.

    Also, the very fact that there are so many similar oral traditions is actually a vote of confidence in favor of some of the historicity of Genesis (like The Flood).
    I would agree, except that there are usually much older sources for said stories/myths.

    Well, I hope no one feels judged. Does this mean that you aren't willing to answer the question? If so, that's fine.
    My opinion regarding the logic of what someone believes is neither here nor there. It won't change the fact that people believe what they will. It is not my intent to engage others in a spirit of correction. As I said, the only time I take issue, is when presented with hubris and exclusivity of truth.

    ---------- Post added at 03:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by BigD9832 View Post
    This is an excellent question. I might add one more thing to this question...

    What are we saved from and for?

    The answer is not 'hell' as, in the Scriptures, there is no 'hell.' The Ancient Hebrew term 'sheol' does not mean 'hell' and never has. As this is a Hebrew term, it would be wise to get it's definition from a Hebrew source.
    That is exactly why I worded my Op the way that I did, because I know that many do not accept that hell is a scriptural concept.

    What are Christians saved from?

    AV 1C 15:26 The last enemy [that] shall be destroyed [is] death.

    CLV 1C 15:26 The last enemy is being abolished: death.


    Paul calling death an enemy, is no mistake. Our job will be to help abolish death in the Millennial kingdom. So we will have work to do there.
    Could you elaborate on this work that will need to be done?

    It seems we will be here, on Earth and working to make this planet like heaven.
    We are being saved from physical death then? So that we will be able to remain here on earth to create heaven?

    To many, that is exactly what we are doing now.. why did Jesus have to die for this to be attained?

    Nice to see you Bigd

  2. #62
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    64
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    That is exactly why I worded my Op the way that I did, because I know that many do not accept that hell is a scriptural concept.
    Of course. You are an amazing woman.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    Could you elaborate on this work that will need to be done?

    We are being saved from physical death then? So that we will be able to remain here on earth to create heaven?

    To many, that is exactly what we are doing now.. why did Jesus have to die for this to be attained?
    Well, you nailed it. We will work to overcome death and to make the earth like heaven. The clues are in Jesus' Prayer, aka the Lord's Prayer...

    Thy Kingdom Come... We will be spending the next 1000 years bringing heaven to earth. Well, not the NEXT 1000 years. The Millennial kingdom doesn't start until Jesus returns.

    Thy Will be Done on Earth as it is in Heaven - Sounds like He is setting things up for us to enjoy heaven here on earth. How can we work tward making this planet like heaven if we are all in heaven?

    And we will overcome death. We will make death extinct.

    And we will be able to do all this under the sovereign of Jesus Christ.

    When this 1000 year period is over, we will enter into a new dispensation.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    Nice to see you Bigd
    Thank you. It's a pleasure seeing you here.

  3. #63
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by BigD9832 View Post
    Well, you nailed it. We will work to overcome death and to make the earth like heaven. The clues are in Jesus' Prayer, aka the Lord's Prayer...

    Thy Kingdom Come... We will be spending the next 1000 years bringing heaven to earth. Well, not the NEXT 1000 years. The Millennial kingdom doesn't start until Jesus returns.
    When do you think that will be?

    And we will overcome death. We will make death extinct.
    How?

  4. #64
    Banned Indefinitely
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    64
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    When do you think that will be?
    How?
    I don't know how. But we will have Jesus Christ to work with us.

    No one knows when.

    But my advice is to keep an eye on the Middle East. When they start to rebuild the Temple, that will mark the beginning of the next Eon or Age.

  5. #65
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Manteca, CA
    Posts
    1,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Interesting, I didn't know that, thanks.

    What I meant is that if people are using many different translations, then this creates great diversity in what is considered scriptural truth.
    Not as rampantly as before. Most English translations I've used in the past had no more than say one to two hundred different words here and there in the passages concerning key issues, unless it's a paraphrased translation. But yes, I agree that translation has been problematic for scriptural interpretation amongst the masses.

    If all cannot agree on this system of hermeneutics, that creates a wide variety of differing opinions.
    And what's your point? I thought you wanted to discuss the actual merits of different hermeneutics.

    C'mon now, it isn't the texts themselves that are secretive! Their content ran against mainstream ideas at the time (just like yours and many others do now) so therefore in order to safeguard the information that they contained, they HAD to be secreted away or risk being destroyed.
    You're kidding me, right? What about the title "The secret sayings to Thomas?" Or when Jesus purportedly tells Judas secrets in the Gospel of Judas? And the Apocryphal were written in Greek, influenced heavily by Hellenistic philosophies, and riddled with historically inaccurate information.

    Why is it then that many scholars believe that the Q document exists.. ?
    What does that have to do with Gnosticism? I agree with the idea of a Q document.

    Even textual critics don't agree on this point.
    Notice the phrase "considering how much text there is." I haven't personally seen a well respected textual critic say that there the Bible has a lot of discrepancies comparable to how much text there is.

    In the opinion of christians, yes.
    Right, which is the opinion I was giving. That of a well educated Christian.
    There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
    Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib

  6. #66
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukecash12 View Post
    And what's your point? I thought you wanted to discuss the actual merits of different hermeneutics.
    You had asked my opinion on a sola scriptura approach.. and I agreed that it has merit, but imo some pretty large inconsistencies would need to be dealt with in order for it to be considered a consistent and reliable standard. I listed them and you agreed with at least one. At NO point did I state I wanted to discuss various hermeneutics. Why would I, I'm not a christian attempting to defend my point of view.

    You're kidding me, right?
    Not in the slightest.

    What about the title "The secret sayings to Thomas?" Or when Jesus purportedly tells Judas secrets in the Gospel of Judas?
    While this is true, it doesn't alter the fact that the writings had to be hidden away in order to safeguard their survival. I guess this makes us both correct.

    And the Apocryphal were written in Greek, influenced heavily by Hellenistic philosophies, and riddled with historically inaccurate information.
    The same could be asserted about the gospels. Which are just as 'pseudepigraphical' as many of the non canonical texts, but I digress...

    What does that have to do with Gnosticism? I agree with the idea of a Q document.
    But seem to disagree with the Gospel of Thomas having any validity.. interesting. Especially since many scholars relate the two.

    Notice the phrase "considering how much text there is." I haven't personally seen a well respected textual critic say that there the Bible has a lot of discrepancies comparable to how much text there is.
    Semantics, lol... my point was that the number of internal discrepancies is not agreed upon even amongst those highly educated and trained in locating them.

    Right, which is the opinion I was giving. That of a well educated Christian.
    Cool, that is all that was required.
    Last edited by Shakti; February 25th, 2011 at 01:44 PM.

  7. #67
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Manteca, CA
    Posts
    1,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    You had asked my opinion on a sola scriptura approach.. and I agreed that it has merit, but imo some pretty large inconsistencies would need to be dealt with in order for it to be considered a consistent and reliable standard. I listed them and you agreed with at least one. At NO point did I state I wanted to discuss various hermeneutics. Why would I, I'm not a christian attempting to defend my point of view.
    Because you want to discuss how it is that people can deal with supposed inconsistencies. I am telling you what I hold to be some of the basic principles of hermeneutics that Catholic and Protestant, Orthodoxy and non-Orthodoxy alike, seem to either base their interpretations entirely upon or make their interpretations with some respect to those basic principles.

    Also, I feel mislead when you tell me that there are some inconsistencies that I have to deal with as a Christian, and then you don't want to actually discuss how I deal with that, or even bring up some of those supposed inconsistencies themselves. Do you or do you not want to discuss the issue?

    While this is true, it doesn't alter the fact that the writings had to be hidden away in order to safeguard their survival. I guess this makes us both correct.
    In a way. But as you can see, I will not agree that those are Christian texts, because they aren't. They weren't written first, and they ran contrary to their predecessors, so they aren't Christian texts.

    The same could be asserted about the gospels. Which are just as 'pseudepigraphical' as many of the non canonical texts, but I digress...
    People still marvel at the historicity of the Gospel of Luke to this day, etc. You can't expect to say things like this as if they are moot points. I'm part of a long, long, academic tradition that has rigorously gone over these subjects and wouldn't consider breaching these subjects with just a foregone mention.

    But seem to disagree with the Gospel of Thomas having any validity.. interesting. Especially since many scholars relate the two.
    I'm not liking to have to be the one to dig into these subjects and then have my flow diverted as if I'm going off subject. If you want to make a point with this, you're going to have to both back it up and make it clear what your point is. As is, I don't see what you mean about the Q document.

    Semantics, lol... my point was that the number of internal discrepancies is not agreed upon even amongst those highly educated and trained in locating them.
    I am understanding you less and less here. Are you looking to make any substantial points, or are you just content to give excuses for why you feel that Christians can be shortsighted? What does it do to the validity of Christianity, that some semantics can't be agreed upon?
    There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
    Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib

  8. #68
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    184
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    lukecash

    That's in Midrash and other Jewish works of mysticism. It has nothing to do with the expressions used in Greek in the NT. Moreover, the Bible was written in Greek for Greek people, so using the words Tartarus and Hades must have been a symbolic appeal to the Greeks, so that they would understand.
    So, Taturus and Hades are symbolic in the N/T , but lake of fire is literal, in the most symbolic book of the Bible?

    The bible also contains an old testament, why exclude it? Those writing the new testament didn't. The two are bound together for a reason I would think.
    Sure is.

    Christianity was considered an extension of Judaeism by the early followers of Christ. In fact, most of the lessons from Christ, were first taught in Synogouges.

    Many of the verses used to promote exclusivity in Christiianity, actually, came from arguments by these new Christ followers in trying to show that they were still Jewish. They were accused of leavubf their Reliion of the parents and responded with " I am", still Jewish, so are refferred to as the "I am verses.

    lukecash
    Good show, my dear, good show! I'll concede to that, even if I'm not too partial to wiki. I should have remembered seeing Sheol in Job, because it's my favorite book. However, simply because the symbolism used for Sheol is different from the symbolism used in Orthodox Christianity, it is does not do anything to invalidate the Orthodox conception of hell, other than that many Christians still see hell as eternal.
    Sheol is actually used correctly in the book of Job by the KJV tranlsators. Job, sufferring as he was, could not prrayto go to a place that was even worse. Which is exactly, what the Catholic Church and their supporters in fundementalist Protestism, wants us to believe that Hell is.

    So,how could one have Job, praying to go to Hell?

    Job 13:14
    Young's Literal Translation
    O that in Sheol Thou wouldest conceal me, Hide me till the turning of Thine anger, Set for me a limit, and remember me.

    So, yea, in one of the few cases in translations, this was done right.

    But this also shows, that using Hell instead of Sheoul as they did in other areas, was not a mis tranlation, but rather a direct insertion of one word for another, to back up Church doctrine.

    shakti

    Re: Salvation..
    Originally Posted by dunrich
    did you know, God himself causes some not to be Christian? That it is his will, accordning to Scripture?

    shakti
    Why would that be do you think?
    My opinion?

    Chemistry for the spiritual realm maybe? { lol, not using the corrrect name on purpose)

    Every thing in the physical realm, has "opposites",, that attract. Yin/ Yang, masculine / feminine, postive/ negative, all of creation seems to be based on where one matter meets another.

    As you know, its my obsession with cavitation, and the infusion and separtaion of elements. Mmmm, thinking of a very noble "theory " here right now..

    I do not think God started any religion. But he knew we would be trying to replace him with it. When does one get beyond their indoctrinated religion?

    when, one meets another from a different one, and realize that they do have things in common.

    What will they be saved as then?
    Daughters and sons of God.

    I actually dislike 'saved". I prefer as Bishop Spong words it, completed rather than saved.How ever, do admit, that Salvation was required for me personally, in order that I could acsend.

    I suspect many others have also turned to Christ and Slavation when faced with the same black hole I faced. I find common, " links" to this, with others who also accepted Christ later in life.

    So the underlying idea is that, for whatever reason.. God wanted us to choose 'him'?
    Yes, God already has choosen us, but we have to decide whether to accept hm or not. Thats the only element of free will I think.

    Eventually all will I bbelieve, hey, when they meet him and get byond all the stuff we are taught in this life, who will not?

    Many deny him today, because of Religions and hate oriented doctrines taught by them. I dont believe God holds this against people or that there is an expiry date on his offer to choose him.

    So immortality is up for grabs?
    Yes, and death is defeated when we are ready I think.

    I've never understood the reconciliation thing either.. what did we do so wrong by being created and born?
    Maybe you do, but mislace where the enmitiey stems from?

    Easy to do, as Religion loves to teach us how wicked we are.

    Love is there, its involuntary I think. But, we can choose to accept or not.

    I do not for one nano second, think that God views babies as unclean and unworthy as all the Religions like to tell us. All because Eve ate an apple, or jumped the Devil, what ever.

    I was readiing this past week on how the Church brought in the Trinity from other religions. Anyway, the view those early Church theologioans had about sexuality is staggerring in how they depraved they viewed it.

    I got a glimpse into why they thought they had to make retroactivley make Mary a product on an invention called Immaculate conception, after reading that.

    This is exactly the thing Chirst died for I think. Its the ultimate gift of love. God had to show us that we are loved so much, he would die for us. Wheteher we were rich, good looking, leprosy infetced what ever.

    This is not what the fall of man , original sin, we were born damned and unworthy has us to believe. They teach, he died, to make us clean enough for him!

    Not sure if you will understand, my wording is poor today. But maybe the problem with reconcilliation, has more to do with what religion teaches rather than actually what is offered by God?

    When the world and religion, tries to tell you that you are not good enough, God offers us the conept that not only are we good enough, but he the deity makes ihim self mortal for us. Immortal, giving his life in a painfill way to die for us,,, mortals.

    Just to show us, that we are worthy of him, made perfect through his love. For it is love that makes us perrfect, yet religion tries to tell us we need to be perfect to be loved.

    To me this is only an illusion in need of healing.
    Whats an illusion though?

    I once viewed the world through the eyes of Holocousts and genocide. I became an Athiest because I could not see that a loving God would allow such stuff to occur.

    So, did all I need was "healing"? Sure, and thats what happened when I accepted Christ. I then saw not only the bad things man does man, but also the ones that tried to do something as well. What ever their beliefs and back ground.

    Maybe it was simply an illusion that I had, that I was unloveable and it didnt exist in the world. But it was an illusion that really caused me to feel that way, and manifest it in real ways.

    I am not saying that my way, by accepting Christ as my Lord is the only way. But, for me, I was healed, by Christ.

    bigD

    It seems we will be here, on Earth and working to make this planet like heaven.
    I agree broither. I might disagree though aqbout interpretating the way it will be.

    For example, I believe the 'temple " was already re built. 3 days after the execution of Christ to be exact.lol.

    I fail to see what Christ can do in physical form what he cannot in Spiritual, but thats another topic.

    Quotes I love from the Gospel of Thomas.



    "If you don't bring forth what is inside you, what you don't bring forth will destroy you.

    "The Kingdom of God is inside/within you (and all about you), not in buildings/mansions of wood and stone. (When I am gone) Split a piece of wood and I am there, lift the/a stone and you will find me.'

    I think, these quotes very much refelct Christ. They also deal with 'salvation".

    So whether or not they are "approved" or not, interests me not.

  9. #69
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Manteca, CA
    Posts
    1,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    So, Taturus and Hades are symbolic in the N/T , but lake of fire is literal, in the most symbolic book of the Bible?
    The lake of fire isn't literal. It means "second death."

    Sheol is actually used correctly in the book of Job by the KJV tranlsators. Job, sufferring as he was, could not prrayto go to a place that was even worse. Which is exactly, what the Catholic Church and their supporters in fundementalist Protestism, wants us to believe that Hell is.

    So,how could one have Job, praying to go to Hell?
    Because he was ignorant of Christ, dunrich. Solomon, in Ecclesiastes, expresses a lot of the same sentiment.
    There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
    Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib

  10. #70
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukecash12 View Post
    Because you want to discuss how it is that people can deal with supposed inconsistencies.
    I do?

    You asked my opinion of a sola scriptura approach and I complied, that doesn't mean I want to get all into the various hermeneutics of how christians deal with what I perceive as an issue.

    Perhaps your problem with this thread is that it doesn't seem to have a real point of debate? I am simply asking christians what it is they feel they are being saved from so that I can understand. I am new, so it's possible that I put it in the wrong forum. I'm sure someone would have or will let me know if that is the case.

    I feel mislead when you tell me that there are some inconsistencies that I have to deal with as a Christian
    I stated no such thing.

    and then you don't want to actually discuss how I deal with that, or even bring up some of those supposed inconsistencies themselves. Do you or do you not want to discuss the issue?
    No, I don't. As above, how you deal with what I perceive as an issue within your faith is of no consequence to me.

    But as you can see, I will not agree that those are Christian texts, because they aren't. They weren't written first, and they ran contrary to their predecessors, so they aren't Christian texts.
    When they were written seems a point of contention, and I think that they are christian texts, but I understand why you view them as you do. That is something else that fascinates me, the various christian's response to those texts and the whole process of canonization.

    I'm not liking to have to be the one to dig into these subjects and then have my flow diverted as if I'm going off subject.
    You mean like you did with the whole sola scriptura/hermeneutics thing.. ? This thread is about salvation and you have already provided your answer.

    What does it do to the validity of Christianity, that some semantics can't be agreed upon?
    A whole lot actually. As evidenced by your thread on hell......

    ---------- Post added at 02:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by dunrich View Post
    But this also shows, that using Hell instead of Sheoul as they did in other areas, was not a mis tranlation, but rather a direct insertion of one word for another, to back up Church doctrine.
    Interesting point Dun.

    Mmmm, thinking of a very noble "theory " here right now..
    It seems to permeate everything sometimes

    I do not think God started any religion. But he knew we would be trying to replace him with it. When does one get beyond their indoctrinated religion?

    when, one meets another from a different one, and realize that they do have things in common.
    Or not, as the case may be.

    Daughters and sons of God.
    I like that.

    I actually dislike 'saved". I prefer as Bishop Spong words it, completed rather than saved.How ever, do admit, that Salvation was required for me personally, in order that I could acsend.
    Interesting. Using the word completed takes on a whole different connotation and would seem to have more overlaps to other religious concepts of salvation/union with God.

    I suspect many others have also turned to Christ and Slavation when faced with the same black hole I faced. I find common, " links" to this, with others who also accepted Christ later in life.
    I know what you mean, but do you think this is because in our culture it happens to be the easiest and most prevalent choice when faced with said black hole?

    Yes, God already has choosen us, but we have to decide whether to accept hm or not. Thats the only element of free will I think.
    My views are kinda panentheistic as you know, to me we are God, or at least indivisible from 'him'.. so the whole choice thing is a bit lost on me.

    This is exactly the thing Chirst died for I think. Its the ultimate gift of love.
    His murder?

    God had to show us that we are loved so much, he would die for us. Wheteher we were rich, good looking, leprosy infetced what ever.
    It took death to realize love? Doesn't that seem pretty counter-productive?

    I don't want you to get all mad at me, but it just doesn't make sense to me.

    When the world and religion, tries to tell you that you are not good enough, God offers us the conept that not only are we good enough, but he the deity makes ihim self mortal for us.
    I guess my view is that that is the case for all of us.

    it is love that makes us perrfect
    Agreed

    Whats an illusion though?
    That we are separate from God.

    Quotes I love from the Gospel of Thomas.

    "If you don't bring forth what is inside you, what you don't bring forth will destroy you.

    "The Kingdom of God is inside/within you (and all about you), not in buildings/mansions of wood and stone. (When I am gone) Split a piece of wood and I am there, lift the/a stone and you will find me.'

    I think, these quotes very much refelct Christ. They also deal with 'salvation".

    So whether or not they are "approved" or not, interests me not.
    Excellent point.

  11. #71
    Registered User

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Manteca, CA
    Posts
    1,443
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    I do?

    You asked my opinion of a sola scriptura approach and I complied, that doesn't mean I want to get all into the various hermeneutics of how christians deal with what I perceive as an issue.

    Perhaps your problem with this thread is that it doesn't seem to have a real point of debate? I am simply asking christians what it is they feel they are being saved from so that I can understand. I am new, so it's possible that I put it in the wrong forum. I'm sure someone would have or will let me know if that is the case.
    This highlighted portion kind of gets at what I've been confused about. I thought this was a thread about issues, not opinions (no offense).

    I stated no such thing.
    How about this then? This is what you said:

    Great question. I think it is impossible to get around it, everything needs to be weighed against something consistent, and with it being held as God's word, the bible would have to be it.

    It does bring up a whole host of issues though..

    Which translation?
    A literal or symbolic interpretation?
    Some bible's contain certain pseudepigrapha/apocrypha (a fascinating distinction in and of itself) and others do not.
    Is it to be considered inerrant/infallible?
    Basically, you said that to hold your beliefs against the bible as something consistent, is to bring up a whole host of issues that you enumerated.

    No, I don't. As above, how you deal with what I perceive as an issue within your faith is of no consequence to me.
    Well, why is it that you perceive there to be issues, then?

    When they were written seems a point of contention, and I think that they are christian texts, but I understand why you view them as you do. That is something else that fascinates me, the various christian's response to those texts and the whole process of canonization.
    It's a point of unanimity at least (amongst critical scholars), that the Gnostic gospels were written after the canonized gospels. By way of textual criticism, it has been determined that the canonized gospels are raw and less philosophically upturned than the Gnostic gospels.

    You mean like you did with the whole sola scriptura/hermeneutics thing.. ? This thread is about salvation and you have already provided your answer.
    Well, why don't I just come out and say it:

    Why do you feel what you feel? If we can't at least discuss that, then there is nothing to debate about here, and thus this is not a legitimate thread for the debate forums.
    There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance.
    Nahj ul-Balāgha by Ali bin Abu-Talib

  12. #72
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Lukecash12 View Post
    This highlighted portion kind of gets at what I've been confused about. I thought this was a thread about issues, not opinions (no offense).
    What about my op gave you that impression? It's impossible to negate opinions anyway, so I'm not sure what you are getting at with that.

    How about this then? This is what you said
    I'm well aware of what I said, I shared my opinion and at NO point did I state that you have to deal with what I see as inconsistencies.

    It's honestly getting to the point where I'm wondering why we are even bothering to converse anymore? Everything has to be gone over more than once for just one simple concept to be put forth. In no way am I pointing fingers at you in saying so either, we just seem on completely different wavelengths.

    Well, why is it that you perceive there to be issues, then?
    If I didn't feel there were issues, then I would probably be a christian. But you already know I'm not, so I don't really understand the question.

    Well, why don't I just come out and say it
    I hope you weren't pu$$y-footing around on my account, lol..

    Why do you feel what you feel? If we can't at least discuss that, then there is nothing to debate about here, and thus this is not a legitimate thread for the debate forums.
    I've been saying it all throughout (albeit in response to others, not so much you).. I feel the way I do because it doesn't make an ounce of sense to me. Hence the questions, hence the thread..

    But after pondering a bit today, if Dun is unable to explain it in a way that makes sense to me, it's probably a useless cause anyway. But my intent was to try to understand.

    And it may not be fodder for debate, but the potential is there for a true dialectic, something I have always enjoyed.

  13. #73
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    184
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    You're kidding me, right? What about the title "The secret sayings to Thomas?" Or when Jesus purportedly tells Judas secrets in the Gospel of Judas? And the Apocryphal were written in Greek, influenced heavily by Hellenistic philosophies, and riddled with historically inaccurate information.
    So, what about the books that are included and so called inspired?

    We have God portrayed in completly different ways. Double creation accounts, references to the Earth being flat, faulty science in Leviticus, and the whole O/T influenced by Jewish philosphies.

    The God of the OT, is a direct contrast to the one described in the N/T,.

    So, when did mans philosophies, not enter, any scripture?

    Also, I find it incredulous, that any one claims that Scripture is the fiaqnl authority with most Christian Church doctrines.

    Quite frankly, Catholic theologians have inspired more doctrinal beliefs, even amongst those that are anti Catholic, than actual scripture has.

    We have the Catholic creations of "original sin", that man was immortal and became mortal, courtesy of them, not Scripture. We have the concept of Hell, courtesy of them rather than Scripture. We have the trinity, courtesy of them and not Scripture.

    Heck, even marriage, in that a man can make something 'holy" for God via a ceromony, is from Catholicism and not Scripture. You wont find a wedding ceromony listed in the Bible.

    One is going to conclude that man is fallen, needs salvation from an original sin, from the Penteuch?

    The same Penteuch that says woman are un clean, that supports slavery, rape and taking woman and children as prizes in war, support of all these things,,,,,, But we are to believe that all man kind was condemned by God for eating an apple?

    Really? God, inspired that writing, but Thomas is heretical?

  14. #74
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    184
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    I couldnt leave while the question from this thread was hanging over me.

    I now think, that certain individuals are inspired by God, to help put us back on track so to speak. Bhudda , Great law Giver, Christ, others, come to mind as individuals, who tried to teach a love above and beyond our Tribalistic tendencies to transfer our own values onto God.

    I think that was Christs whole purpose behind his message.

    Religion as we know it, is tribalistic. God loves this tribe and there fore hates another. Religion cant have this change, when its whole history and purpose of being, is to keep adherants based on their prremise of tribal superiority.

    Christs message was by and large anti religion. It was the religous, that executed him for blashphemy.{ like thosuasnds of others through the years)

    Was his death, a necessary element, in blood must be shed to pay for sin? I no longer believe that is true.

    Now I have to deal with my own expierience.

    Whether it was just figurative or literal, his death is instrumental for some of us lacking the ability to love naturally. Self redemption, sometimes comes from out side sources, even if it is not really required and the ability does lie with in us. It doesnt matter if it is all an illusion or not. Its still very real, that which we think separates us from God, when we think for what ever reason, faulty or not,that we are born unworthy of Gods love.

    So in a way, whether this was all needed or not for God to reconcile to us. Its had that affect on many like my self, it allows us to at least accept, that we have joined humanity.

    I now think though, that it was his message that was inspired, but was overshadowed by his execution. Which has since then, been used to teach exactly what he came here to teach against. An exclusive based belief following the great tribalistic traditions of the O/T and religion, we are saved and they are damned.

    Now, some might say, well Christs teachings failed. But have they?

    All recent polls show that more and more people are rejecting religion and embracing a spiritual relationship with God. I think, maybe the sucess of all the inspired teachers is just starting to show it self.

  15. #75
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by dunrich View Post
    I couldnt leave while the question from this thread was hanging over me.
    Do I take this to mean that you are leaving?

    Religion as we know it, is tribalistic. God loves this tribe and there fore hates another. Religion cant have this change, when its whole history and purpose of being, is to keep adherants based on their prremise of tribal superiority.
    Very similar to my view that religion as an institution requires stagnation as a means of ensuring the continuation of exclusive claims to legitimacy. I also view religion as ego operating on a grand scale, crushing the spirit of those who let it.

    So in a way, whether this was all needed or not for God to reconcile to us. Its had that affect on many like my self, it allows us to at least accept, that we have joined humanity.
    I think I get what you are saying, but when were you not a part of it?

    So do you feel you have been saved from feeling separate from humanity?

    Now, some might say, well Christs teachings failed. But have they?

    All recent polls show that more and more people are rejecting religion and embracing a spiritual relationship with God. I think, maybe the sucess of all the inspired teachers is just starting to show it self.
    Why do you think it has taken this long?

  16. #76
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    184
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    So do you feel you have been saved from feeling separate from humanity?
    That is such a hard question, at least for me. Did the Salvation "expierience", set the stage, so I could excorsise my feelings of guilt to be alive. I would have to answer yes.

    But in a way, it was also was a stumbling block, as well. It re enforced certain , wow, having a real hard time to word this right. Exclusive beliefs, that also kept me from defining my humanity?

    Its strange when I think about it.Kind of a 360 degree circle. One feels they need to be above, humanity. But fails, realizes their humanity as a failing really,,,,,,still separted from God for that,,,,, Yet, its embracing their humanity later on, that brings one closer to God.

    Looking at what I wrote, what a twisted and preverted logic it all is.God hates us and we need redemption for being born...Something isn`t adding up right.

  17. #77
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by dunrich View Post
    I now think though, that it was his message that was inspired, but was overshadowed by his execution.
    Without His execution, there could have been no resurrection. Without the resurrection His message would have been lost just like countless other Jewish Messianic figures throughout history. Without His execution Scripture would not have been fulfilled.


    Which has since then, been used to teach exactly what he came here to teach against. An exclusive based belief following the great tribalistic traditions of the O/T and religion, we are saved and they are damned.
    This is a western view I am sorry to say -- and contradicts the Eastern view held by about half of the Christians in the world -- but unfortunately comprising less than 1% of Christians in North America. In the East, it is considered wrong and indeed "un-Orthodox" to presume to know exactly how God will judge. The Eastern Orthodox view is: we don't know how God will Judge, but we have been left with an inspired Holy Tradition that includes the the New Testament, and we pin our hope on following Christ's Word as best we can. We find the fullest expression of that hope in the ancient and original Chruch started by Christ and spread by the Apostles. The Old Testament serves a purpose only when viewed through the clarifying lens of the News -- giving us a background through which to better understand the New.

    Now, some might say, well Christs teachings failed. But have they?

    All recent polls show that more and more people are rejecting religion and embracing a spiritual relationship with God. I think, maybe the sucess of all the inspired teachers is just starting to show it self.
    Having a spiritual relationship with God is again very old and very Orthodox. It is in Orthodoxy that one encounters the duality of man -- heart and mind, spirit and intellect, body and soul: Spiritual creatures living in a physical world.

    IMO: the Great Schism of the 11th century was followed by ever more schisms -- usually for worldly reasons rather than spiritual. Each schism further breaking up the Body of Christ and moving further away from the teachings of Christ and His apostles...further away from the original Church and relying ever-more increasingly on flawed human reasoning to explain spiritual truth. This modern interest in "spirituality and mysticism" within christian circles is, IMO, a natural yearning to return to how things used to be when the Church was new, mysterious, and secretive, and there was not such an emphasis on legalism and intellectual parsings of scripture without benefit of the Holy Tradition within which the scripture was inspired.

    Based on what you have written Dunn, it seems your experience with Christians and Christianity is far and away removed from what I and about half of the Christian of the world believe and practice. It saddens me when I read such things, because although Christ did come to bring division, He did not come to create a religion, but rather to give us the Good News. The Good news is not tribal or exclusionary. The Good news is this: we can choose. We can choose whether or not to be with God regardless of our tribe or race. We are all made in His image and are all equally capable of being judged worthy.

    That is why Paul was able to convince the other Apostles to allow gentiles into their group rather than keeping the Good news just for Jews. That is why Christ sought the company of the sinful and preached of and to the Samaritans (people of the 'wrong' religion). That is why Christ railed against the Pharisees and admonishes us to seek the Spirit behind God's laws rather than looking at the letter of the law as interpreted by man.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

  18. #78
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Red Deer, AB
    Posts
    240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    ^^ I'm curious what you feel you have been saved from.. especially in light of your views regarding hell.

    Quote Originally Posted by dunrich View Post
    Looking at what I wrote, what a twisted and preverted logic it all is.God hates us and we need redemption for being born...Something isn`t adding up right.
    That is exactly how I have always felt about it, and is why I started this thread. I was hoping that someone could explain it all in a way that makes some form of sense to me.

    But it's ok, I see now that that may just be asking the impossible.
    "We are the paradox to unite all duality.." ~Unknown

  19. #79
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    184
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    But it's ok, I see now that that may just be asking the impossible.
    I am finding it is for me, and cant be done with out going back to the belief of original sin. Even if I still beleieved the Bible was insptired though, I do not see it, even is scriptures. I think some stretching has to take place to make the glove fit.

    Inititally, this up set me some what. Not sure why. But, now I actually welcome that I cant. It does two things for me I find.

    One is that, it`s the final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned, of what is the exclusive claims of Christianity, and the second is, I think its a healthier way to view God with out that "guilt", and puzzlement hanging over ones head.

    (I still have some links to follow up on though, on the Eastern view of this. I am finding I know nothing at all about that, and never realized the vast differences bewteen Eastern Orthody and RC. I use RC, because it is these beliefs, in Original sin etc, that most Protestants as well follow)

    IMO

    Oh, just noticed I didnt aswner this qqquestion

    Do I take this to mean that you are leaving?

    Do I take this to mean that you are leaving?
    Since I now no longer think the Bible is inspired in any way, I find I am less mottivated to get concerned how it is interpretated, So, I find I have less and less reasons, to get involved in debates about it. How does one argue, or debate, when what they feel is more along the lines of Spiritual revevelations, rather than legalise of Biblle interpretation, kind of thing?
    Last edited by dunrich; April 3rd, 2011 at 04:23 AM. Reason: Noticed an unanswered question.

  20. #80
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Salvation..

    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    ^^ I'm curious what you feel you have been saved from.. especially in light of your views regarding hell.
    When Christ rose from the dead I was saved from...

    Every day I strive to work on my own salvation from...

    Come the final judgment I pray, God willing, I will be judged worthy to be saved from...

    Eternal darkness from being too distant from God.

    Through Christ, God created a new covenant with man and left us with the fullest of faiths. " A tooth for a tooth" has been replaced with "Turn the other cheek.. Love your neighbor as yourself... See the face of God in the least of your brethren." This new covenant is, for us humans, a much more difficult path than the old. God has challenged us to be more like Him. To move closer to Him.

    Light or darkness. The choice is ours. Christ has given us this gift through His sacrifice. In doing so the old prophecies have been fulfilled. The old temple destroyed ...



    ---------- Post added at 09:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by dunrich View Post

    One is that, it`s the final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned, of what is the exclusive claims of Christianity, and the second is, I think its a healthier way to view God with out that "guilt", and puzzlement hanging over ones head.
    Sorry to see how some modern so-called Christian beliefs have adversely affected you in regards to the Holy Bible. The ancient and Orthodox Christian view is that Christ has already saved everyone who ever lived, is living, and ever will live. He is the light of the world and through His life, execution, burial and resurrection has saved all of man from our darkness. He has given us the light by which we can all work on becoming closer to God.

    Original sin? Man's original sin and the root of all sin is human pride. We are guilty of our own sins but not those of any forefathers -- though we do experience the consequences.

    Judgment is for God and God alone. We can not be so boastful and sinful as to presume to know how God will judge any of us. We choose rather to work on our own flaws, as best we can, with all our being.
    Last edited by Spartacus; April 3rd, 2011 at 07:46 PM.
    "I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born" -- Ronald Reagan

    How can a moral wrong be a Civil Right?

 

 
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •