beyelzu

the problem with that veiw is thatyou have to ignore awhole lot of the bible. and if you believe in that little why are you xian?

stretch

Hi Beyelzu,

I'm not sure what is considered too much thread drift around here ... is this still 'on topic', or is it best to move to another thread and not ruin Fenton's thread with such discussions?

Anyway, IMHO, I don't think that it requires me to ignore any of the Bible. Us Catholics aren't generally 'sola scriptura' types, and don't interpret everything literally.

Yellum Notnef

Knock yourself out. What you`re talking about is on topic.

Quote:

Anyway, IMHO, I don't think that it requires me to ignore any of the Bible. Us Catholics aren't generally 'sola scriptura' types, and don't interpret everything literally.

For a long time you Catholics did take everything literally. What happened?

stretch

Hi Fenton

Glad you think this isn't too far off topic. You've started a pretty interesting thread. Thanks.

Catholics have always used a combination of scripture and sacred tradition.

And Catholics have always been humans and therefore products of their socio-cultural environments... so there were cases where prominent Catholics have taken literally things that most people living in the 21st century would not dream of taking literally.

(Of course, there's a lot in the Bible that can't be taken literally. How do you take a poem literally? )

wade-w

I couldn't answer the poll, since I have no respect for christianity in general. How can one respect a belief in the mythology of bronze age goat herders?

HelenM

This is what nontheists do, isn't it?

Helen

Yellum Notnef

Not quite. At least not for me it isn`t.

I don`t pick and choose what parts of the bible to believe and take literally based on my personal preferences about what god does and how I think he should behave.
I don`t even believe such a creature exists so this is not an issue for me unlike believers who have choosen not to believe that their god had anything to with bashing gays,killing babies and all the other cruel and unpleasant bits (as well as the utterly ridiculous stuff like miracles and the creation stories).
All this crap is in the Christian bible so why do some Christians believe it all despite contrary evidence and while others do not? Seems like personal preference to me.
I have no preference either way. If the Christian god is real and the bible is actually recorded history then that would be fine with me,but I have yet to see any evidence that this is the case. But if he did turn out to be real and as the bible portrays him,who am I to dismiss all the parts that portray him as a violent,barbaric jerk?

Recent trends is also not a factor for me although I suppose the Jesus myth theory might be seen as a recent trend even though the idea has been around since the very beginning of Christianity. But I don`t think Jesus is a divine god regardless of what any evidence says about his existence.

Maybe "recent trends" was the wrong phrase to use in my poll since I`m not saying believers are swayed that much by trends that quickly come and go like hairstyles or clothing styles. I was referring to things like how A & E once were seen as real history by Christians,but within the last couple hundred years many no longer believe it to be true. But I suppose that when compared to about 1500 years of belief,a couple hundred years of disbelief in the story could be seen as a recent trend.

And lastly,the shrinking volume of stories supported by archaelogy,history and science do indeed play a role in my disbelief. These things play a huge role as they`ve shown me that theres no reason to believe that ANY of the bible has anything to do with a supernatural god.
This is quite different from the Christian who still clings to all he can as these tools creep closer and closer to completely taking away his biblical security blanket.

Amos

Never!!!!! "Infallible" means in charge of your own destiny and this exists only in the freedom of self determination.

The problem is that you can't read Catholics with a protestant mind just as you can't play soccer on a footbal field!

Radorth

You were pretty stingy with your choices there Fenton. There are those who believe in NT doctrines such as Jesus' substitutionary sacrifice, imputed righteousness, salvation of the soul by faith and grace, who do not hold "fundy" views that all unbelievers go to hell, and do not always vote and think conservatively.

OK so there's only twelve of us.

For you Fenton, there are only two kinds apparently.

"You gotcher liberal Christians. You kin live with them because they don't get in your face"

"Butcha got your fundy Christians. You can't hardly live with them because they worry about your soul."

At both extremes are unthinking hypocrites I imagine.

Rad

HelenM

Your original description just said 'personal preferences' - it didn't say 'personal preferences about what god does and how I think he should behave'. I was referring to your original description, not this expanded one.

Although they wouldn't express it that way, that basically is the approach of those who believe the Bible is all true - if it's true they are not free to dismiss some parts just because they are bothered by them.

I doubt anyone thinks their deepest convictions are based on trend or fashion, even if they are.

I figured as much.

[quote][b]These things play a huge role as they`ve shown me that theres no reason to believe that ANY of the bible has anything to do with a supernatural god.

There are Christians out there convinced that science, archeology and history support what the Bible says and so from their point of view, they have more reason to believe it than ever, as more and more archeological discoveries are made and as scientific research continues to teach us more and more about the universe we live in.

Helen