The Frood Dude

LOL! Here's an ex-Christian who reads the text like a fundy!!

Regarding John 14, Jesus was telling his disciples that if they have seen him, they have seen the father. They said "show us the way to the father." That's when he said he was the way, the truth and the life. Not one of them could get to God except through him. That's not a claim of exclusivity for all people, just a claim for those thick headed people he was talking to.

Revelation is apocalyptic literature. NOT to be taken literally. It is a book about giving up on redemption, destroying everything and starting over. It was produced by people under severe persecution and is typical of other literature in the genre.

Athiest or Christian, the Bible is still ancient literature and must be understood in linguistic, cultural, historical, and literary context.

You won't go to hell, btw, there is no such place of eternal torment and destruction.

Now, my answer to why I am a Christian is worse than that of Seebs. I am a Christian because I choose to be. Nobody else has to. I make no claims to exclusivity. But I like Christianity (though not most Christians, sad to say) and I choose it.

The Frood Dude

I have heard, and believe, that this is part of a rabbinical form of argumentation.

"You destroy the law" -- means you oppose it and think it is wrong.

"You fulfill the law" -- means you honor it.

This makes a lot of sense to me. We use all kinds of phrases in stylized arguing. I have watched C-Span and note that there is a format and structure. In the same way, this "I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it" is a statement of intention and shows what side of the argument one is starting from. Jesus did this too. He started with the law as foundation, but took understanding of the law beyond the letter to its underlying purpose and spirit.

Opera Nut

Which Jesus is he?
Is he the bad-assed one that comes with a sword and splits up families and causes discord among relatives, or is he the meek and mild guy?

Which one is he??

fatherphil

maybe because some of us are here for the wrong reasons.

i stop responding to posts because:

1) i get bored of the circle
2) i forget about them
3) there seems to be no point to continuing
4) it was mean
5) i've already covered the subject and don't feel like doing it again
6) way more intense than i want to get

can you think of any others? i'm sure my reasons for not responding are pretty much the same as yours.

The Frood Dude

The Christ I find in the text of the NT, read with the understanding of culture, context, history, and language, is the one I choose. He is not a bad ass or a meek, in the sense of weak, guy. He is a guy who understood the will of God and sought to empower those who were marginalized. He attempted to call the Jews, his own race and religion, to faithfulness to God.

The Frood Dude

One of my reasons for failing to respond is I lose the cotton picking thread if I am away for too long. Can't remember where it was and can't sort through them all. And if a new thread is open that is more interesting, I spend a lot of time there and have less time for the other.

But thread topics have a way of recycling themselves, so I don't worry about it.

ex-xian

When did Jesus refer to a sliding scale of truth?

So you only accept the gospels as being accurate? Did you form you opinion of what xianity should be and then decide to accept only the parts of the bible that line up with that belief? Incidentally, when the church fathers were putting together the new testament, they accepted only those gospel accounts that happens to line up with the image of Jesus that they wanted to portray. See "The Case for Faith" and the critique of said book on II.

There are also stories of alien abduction that are remarkably similar to each other; the stories used to be about demons or fairies visiting people. That's the problem with subjective experience as a standard of truth. One can justify virtually anything.

ex-xian

Then why didn't jesus say, "You guys only can come to father thru me"? Why did he say "No one comes to the father except by me."?

So, apparantly you are another person who takes only those portions of the bible that line up with what you already decided to believe? Even if one applies proper hermeneutics (sp?) while interpreting the bible, it is impossible to be consistent and ignore all the references to punishment and hell. We'll toss out revelation and we're left with the teachings of paul and jesus aboutg hell.

So you choose to be a xian. Ok, fair enough, you assume that all religions (or even none) are all ways to god?

So if the type of christ you believe is the one you choose, what happens if you make the wrong choice? If there is no objective standard to measure your christ against other christs, what value is there in choosing one at all?

seebs

He didn't. He referred to a sliding scale of *judgement*. "From he to whom much is given, much is asked."

"Accurate" isn't the word I'd use. I think the entire thing, front to back, is essentially the history of some people and their search for God. In the process, I think they introduced the occasional misunderstanding or error, but the underlying message is there.

I am aware that there are many things that didn't make it, and I'll read those too, and be just as skeptical of naive interpretations them.

True. So, you do your best with the filters, but in the end, you pick the answers you like best. People always have.

seebs

The same value there is in choosing any moral system, at least, and possibly more.

No one has yet offered an objective standard for judging moral systems that doesn't presuppose at least some of the axioms of a specific moral system. And yet, everyone chooses one sooner or later. Why?

Underneath it all, these drives are deep in us.