• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Inclusive Christianity?

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
As long as you take bible literally, the conflict is not going away (unless the society decides to turn back time). I think bible can be understood as a product of it's time without taking away its meaning. Quite a lot of it is outdated, but that doesn't mean that the basic idea is.

I think the religions should change. They are to give people a moral code (I know you can have moral without religion, but this doesn't happen for everyone). This is the most important function of religion. If the religion doesn't change, the people will drop it because its not working in the current society. After this you have a society based on market value.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
well, you've got 99% of the literature of the Middle Ages having been written directly into Latin, which wasn't the native language even of the authors let alone the intended audience... which includes highly influential spiritual and theological writings like Aquinas, Plutarch, etc... lots was written directly into Greek as well, like More's Utopia.

Just a thought.

nolla - I agree. It's part of the reason why I was drifting from Islam even before I was forcibly ejected lol I was concluding that it's just not practicable in Europe without so much effort having to be expended on being able to follow the letter of the law that there wasn't time or energy left to think about the spirit.

Slightly on a tangent, but connected in concept is when every now and then some European countries start talking about whether they should have a written constitution either for the individual country or the EU as a whole. My instant thought is "Why?? Just because America has? Haven't we managed fine without one so far?" Because I see the written constitution of the USA causing as much difficulty as it's supposed to prevent, due to so much of it having been written in that was specific to the time it was done, and when enforced in the current society it shows up as just not appropriate any more. But "it is written", so to change it would mean "violating" something held as precious.

I see the same struggle going on in "bible-based" or any text-based practice of religion.
And hence it receives criticism such as "not relevant, disconnected from the modern world, not practicable". And, as you say, it becomes discarded...
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Anyways, the reason why I am a bit offended about your post is this. If god is a being of superior understanding and love, how could he be so narrow-minded and egoistical to leave all the good people who don't believe in him to suffer in hell? After all, there are many people (including myself) who do not believe in bible, but attempt to live their lives loving their neighbor, that is, living their lives by the most important principles described in the bible while not believing in god.
OK, the whole thing behind this is that man's good deeds are not enough to save him, because they are imperfect and inconsistent. Israel was given the entire Law, which included loving neighbor and so much more, and even those who meticulously tried to follow it (and then became judgmental of others) could never meet its requirements. God's standard was extremely high, and this was to show man his need for God's grace.

So the whole point of Jesus coming in the first place is to bring forgiveness from the judgement man was under by the Law. While Jesus was there, and his apostles after him, "believing" (faith) was the way to appropriate or claim the forgiveness. The debate that will arise with the position I mention, is how long would that condition be mandated. Forever, or until a yet future "return of Christ" that never comes, or until the system and symbol of the Law (the Temple) was removed, a few short decades after Christ?

Faith is something you either have or you don't. You can't make yourself a believer, but you can make yourself live by benevolent principles. In your way of thinking that isn't worth anything? If the Christian God in fact exist, he surely isn't as cruel as you imply.

The religious people who think that their religion surely has to be "the right one" are as a group disgustingly prejudiced. I cannot stand them because of this. The nerve they have for saying that I go to hell for not having chosen the right book... This kind of attitude also contradicts Jesus' teaching.
I had forced myself to believe that you had to make yourself believe to be saved, and then help others rush out to make everyone else believe to be saved, and anyone who just did not have the "faith', or even those who never get reached with the Gospel, are just out of luck. And that's now most of the world. Even many professing Christians are being warned as being disqualified because of their lifestyles or lack of commitment, and so-called "liberal" Christians have long been regarded as not saved.

And "faith" (belief) ironically ends up becoming another kind of "deed" that people think only they have gotten right, and judge each other over, hence, all the doctrinal disputes with charges of "heresy" thrown around everywhere).

Then, we have debates with Augustinian theology (also known as Calvinism, and also compatible with Lutheranism) that "solves' that problem by simply saying that God gives faith to whomever He chooses, and whoever does not get it, is a "vessel of wrath" that He preordained to hell. And that debate goes on. (One thread on a Christian board ran for 1300 pages! Not 1300 posts, but pages! The server could no longer handle it, so they started the thread over, and on it goes!)

Then, others will just begin softening down, and saying, "maybe some who don't believe will still get in". Even Billy Graham is quoted as allowing this for the unevangelized. So I had a lot of problems with the apparent "cruelty" of that too, and Christ did say "to whom much is given, much is expected', so that is one evidence I point to to suggest that the strict demands of "faith" were for that generation (AD30's-70) only.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Yeah but Eric, can't you see that the MEANS by which the Bible seems to claim that this process took place (the mass genocide, slavery, suffering of millions of innocents etc) are somewhat inconsistent with the idea of a loving, forgiving, merciful God who shows his nature in the life of Jesus AND claims to not have ever changed that nature?
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
The pastor at my church is extremely fond of pointing out inaccuracies in the translation.

Heh, I looked up John 14:6 in Greek (http://scripturetext.com/john/14-6.htm):


Plugged it into Google translate, and got:

Sciski! I just reread and your post, which slipped by me the first time, made me laugh out loud. That's hillarious.

Love cockeyed translations. Thanks.

You guys seem to be getting closer to what I'm talking about now. Great thoughts, all.
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
I need to post Sciski's computed-generated translation, apparently:

"says these iisous I am the street and the truth and the life no one comes to his father if not by emou."

I believe that emou is a rap singer so saying "I am the street" is most appropriate. Hee.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
...My branch of Lutheranism was progressive but very serious about taking much of the Bible literally.

The movement to include feminism, homosexuality, Wicca, a more casual approach to sexuality and various other lifestyle issues which we now accept in society required quite a revisionism of scripture.

I'm not sure if a lot of it is revisionism of the Bible per se.

In some cases, it seems more like a revision of the popular/accepted interpretation that people had cobbled together out of the Bible because they wanted closure about an ambiguous circumstance or practice.

That's why I'm more interested in applying Biblical concepts about relationships than I am about combing scripture looking for keystone points about a specific behavior (the latter of which being a more Te-style activity).

When I was little it never occurred to me to ask, "Why did we kill Nazis and Japanese, Dad, if the Bible says, 'Thou shalt not kill?'"

That would probably seat you firmly as a Boomer. I'm about 40, so I am probably in the next generation past you (Gen X); and incidentally those questions were the ones I found myself always asking as a matter of course. If something did not follow logically, I flagged it as something that needed to be reconciled.

And those are also the sort of questions I'm not sure if there are good answers to. One can try to assemble a case from Scripture, but such cases are usually contrived and usually reflect the biases inherent in one's own position.

So are you part of the ELCA, or Wisconsin Synod, or Missouri Synod?
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
OK, the whole thing behind this is that man's good deeds are not enough to save him, because they are imperfect and inconsistent. Israel was given the entire Law, which included loving neighbor and so much more, and even those who meticulously tried to follow it (and then became judgmental of others) could never meet its requirements. God's standard was extremely high, and this was to show man his need for God's grace.

That was Paul's assumption and many people's "best guess," yes.
But it was "after the fact" thinking, wasn't it?

I'm not saying it's unreasonable; but it's definitely intuition trying to "fill in the gaps" to reconcile old and new testament concepts, based mostly on Paul's beliefs.

Approaching it from another direction: Does it make sense for God to dump an impossible law on his kids' backs, so that they at some point say, "Hey, I can't do this? I'm not good enough?"

Do parents do that nowadays? How do we view parents who would teach such a large object lesson that way? Good or bad? Loving or evil? What's the normal results when a dad drives his kids too hard? Do they change course in SPITE of the parent or BECAUSE of the parent? And so on.

(Those are serious questions, I would be interested in hearing what people have to say on this. :) )

I had forced myself to believe that you had to make yourself believe to be saved, and then help others rush out to make everyone else believe to be saved, and anyone who just did not have the "faith', or even those who never get reached with the Gospel, are just out of luck.

I know. I can identify. That is where my early faith life (from age 10-20?) was located as well.

And that's now most of the world. Even many professing Christians are being warned as being disqualified because of their lifestyles or lack of commitment, and so-called "liberal" Christians have long been regarded as not saved.

I felt uneasy about that even when young, and from age 20 -> now I've becoming increasingly dissatisfied with that sort of thinking... to the point where it not only seems wrong but evil in some ways.

And "faith" (belief) ironically ends up becoming another kind of "deed" that people think only they have gotten right, and judge each other over, hence, all the doctrinal disputes with charges of "heresy" thrown around everywhere).

Exactly. we all preach about how "faith" is about how you love others, everyone talks about compassionate conservatives recently... but it's still VERY much about what your theology is as to whether you are "going to heaven." It's not about how you live or what your fruit is; it's about what your talking points are and what doctrines you promote and what theology you've got right and wrong.

(One thread on a Christian board ran for 1300 pages! Not 1300 posts, but pages! The server could no longer handle it, so they started the thread over, and on it goes!)

That makes me want to both laugh and cry insanely, simultaneously. :(

Then, others will just begin softening down, and saying, "maybe some who don't believe will still get in". Even Billy Graham is quoted as allowing this for the unevangelized.

This might be a tangent, but I believe the focus on "heaven" as something that happens later is misguided. Jesus invited us into the Kingdom of God -- starting NOW. Physical death is an arbitrary barrier. When you live as a member of the kingdom, you're a citizen of the kingdom and you live and behave under the rules of that kingdom. That's how you recognize Christians: By how they live, by how they treat others.

The kingdom surrounds every believer and extends itself into the world based on where any believer goes. Where they are, there is the kingdom -- THERE the law of love is being followed. THERE is freedom.

This talk of heaven seems so silly to me. Like, misguided. It's just an extension of kingdom living NOW... perhaps perfected because the people will have been purified, but it's not like all of this life is a precursor to heaven. we're in the kingdom as soon as we become citizens.

Jesus didn't say, "Realize how bad the world is and what an awful sinner you are and admit it", etc he said, "Today the kingdom of heaven is in front of you, pledge loyalty to it and join and be part of it."
 

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
I had forced myself to believe that you had to make yourself believe to be saved, and then help others rush out to make everyone else believe to be saved, and anyone who just did not have the "faith', or even those who never get reached with the Gospel, are just out of luck. And that's now most of the world. Even many professing Christians are being warned as being disqualified because of their lifestyles or lack of commitment, and so-called "liberal" Christians have long been regarded as not saved.

Then, we have debates with Augustinian theology (also known as Calvinism, and also compatible with Lutheranism) that "solves' that problem by simply saying that God gives faith to whomever He chooses, and whoever does not get it, is a "vessel of wrath" that He preordained to hell.

These views are why I don't consider myself Christian anymore. I just don't want to believe that god is really that petty. This is not "God's Master Plan", this is ridiculous: "I create you so that you can try and get to heaven, but I have already chosen the ones who get in. Ha! Now worship me!" or "I create you so you can try to get in heaven, but I set the bar so high, you can't get in anyways. Ha! Now, believe in me and I will be merciful" This makes me think that god is really a six-year-old child toying with us. I rather believe that when I die, everything just ends.
 

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
This might be a tangent, but I believe the focus on "heaven" as something that happens later is misguided. Jesus invited us into the Kingdom of God -- starting NOW. Physical death is an arbitrary barrier. When you live as a member of the kingdom, you're a citizen of the kingdom and you live and behave under the rules of that kingdom. That's how you recognize Christians: By how they live, by how they treat others.

The kingdom surrounds every believer and extends itself into the world based on where any believer goes. Where they are, there is the kingdom -- THERE the law of love is being followed. THERE is freedom.

This talk of heaven seems so silly to me. Like, misguided. It's just an extension of kingdom living NOW... perhaps perfected because the people will have been purified, but it's not like all of this life is a precursor to heaven. we're in the kingdom as soon as we become citizens.

Jesus didn't say, "Realize how bad the world is and what an awful sinner you are and admit it", etc he said, "Today the kingdom of heaven is in front of you, pledge loyalty to it and join and be part of it."

I like this way of thinking. I think it actually draws Christianity closer to the eastern religions.
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
I was once ELC Lutheran, Jennifer. That is now the ELCA.

In one church I belonged to I joined an evangelistic team with encouragement from the Bible and others to go about helping people get saved. Was that an experience of helpful intrusion! I wince.

I also drew the line at going forth and multiplying. Please. Two's enough.

Okay. So help me with why Christians would want to draw Christians closer to the Eastern religions, nolla? Living in peaceful acceptance is one thing. . .
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I like this way of thinking. I think it actually draws Christianity closer to the eastern religions.

lol -- that wasn't my purpose, but... okay. (It just seems to me to make the most sense.) Could you explain that a bit?

I was once ELC Lutheran, Jennifer. That is now the ELCA.

Ah, okay. :) I was in the ELCA denom from 6-12th grade (simultaneously with participating in a local camp/program that was more Baptist/evangelical in nature). That would have been around 1980-1986 or so.

In one church I belonged to I joined an evangelistic team with encouragement from the Bible and others to go about helping people get saved. Was that an experience of helpful intrusion! I wince. I also drew the line at going forth and multiplying. Please. Two's enough.

I went through that at college (with Intervarsity). It always bothered me and I felt intrusive and unloving. Later I understood better why, but at the time I didn't know why and so felt I had to do it since I had been told to and had no solid argument to deny it.
 

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
In practice it comes closer to east because it encourages living a fulfilling life / heaven on earth. So life isn't only the preparing part, as in most Christian beliefs.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Yeah but Eric, can't you see that the MEANS by which the Bible seems to claim that this process took place (the mass genocide, slavery, suffering of millions of innocents etc) are somewhat inconsistent with the idea of a loving, forgiving, merciful God who shows his nature in the life of Jesus AND claims to not have ever changed that nature?
I can't easily answer that. The general consensus is that since man was sinful and deserved death, then that was what we all should have gotten, and now we get mercy. A lot of that in the OT was Israel's wars, and since Israel was susceptible to adopting these peoples' religions (which included child sacrifice), God then began telling them to clean them out.
So basically, we are shown two sides of God (both wrath and mercy), and He did not change, but showed us one side, then the other.
Approaching it from another direction: Does it make sense for God to dump an impossible law on his kids' backs, so that they at some point say, "Hey, I can't do this? I'm not good enough?"

Do parents do that nowadays? How do we view parents who would teach such a large object lesson that way? Good or bad? Loving or evil? What's the normal results when a dad drives his kids too hard? Do they change course in SPITE of the parent or BECAUSE of the parent? And so on.

(Those are serious questions, I would be interested in hearing what people have to say on this. :) )
These views are why I don't consider myself Christian anymore. I just don't want to believe that god is really that petty. This is not "God's Master Plan", this is ridiculous: "I create you so that you can try and get to heaven, but I have already chosen the ones who get in. Ha! Now worship me!" or "I create you so you can try to get in heaven, but I set the bar so high, you can't get in anyways. Ha! Now, believe in me and I will be merciful" This makes me think that god is really a six-year-old child toying with us. I rather believe that when I die, everything just ends.
I've felt that way too, but it's not that He "set the bar so high", but that man fell into this position from the way he was originally created. That is why man needed redemption.

I guess, if we think this way is silly, then what better way is there, short of a world that was perfect all along. But that would be quite different from anything we know of.

OK, the whole thing behind this is that man's good deeds are not enough to save him, because they are imperfect and inconsistent. Israel was given the entire Law, which included loving neighbor and so much more, and even those who meticulously tried to follow it (and then became judgmental of others) could never meet its requirements. God's standard was extremely high, and this was to show man his need for God's grace.
That was Paul's assumption and many people's "best guess," yes.
But it was "after the fact" thinking, wasn't it?

I'm not saying it's unreasonable; but it's definitely intuition trying to "fill in the gaps" to reconcile old and new testament concepts, based mostly on Paul's beliefs.
It does fit in with the entire revelation, including the other apostles' writing. Peter, in Acts 15 (before the religious leaders) also speaks of the yoke that neither they nor their fathers could bear.
This might be a tangent, but I believe the focus on "heaven" as something that happens later is misguided. Jesus invited us into the Kingdom of God -- starting NOW. Physical death is an arbitrary barrier. When you live as a member of the kingdom, you're a citizen of the kingdom and you live and behave under the rules of that kingdom. That's how you recognize Christians: By how they live, by how they treat others.

The kingdom surrounds every believer and extends itself into the world based on where any believer goes. Where they are, there is the kingdom -- THERE the law of love is being followed. THERE is freedom.

This talk of heaven seems so silly to me. Like, misguided. It's just an extension of kingdom living NOW... perhaps perfected because the people will have been purified, but it's not like all of this life is a precursor to heaven. we're in the kingdom as soon as we become citizens.

Jesus didn't say, "Realize how bad the world is and what an awful sinner you are and admit it", etc he said, "Today the kingdom of heaven is in front of you, pledge loyalty to it and join and be part of it."
And that's basically what Pantelism is all about. In fact, all of the passages used to describe Heaven ("New Heavens and New Earth, the harps of God, the pearly gates, streets of gold, etc) are symbols of this Kingdom, and current freedom from the curse of death. There is actually very little in the Bible about what Heaven is like. I was shocked when I first heard that, but when I saw its full implications for the world, it became the only answer with any hope. (Makes it so unfortunate how the Church interpreted all those passages as descriptions of heaven, to try to woo people to believe and/or do good to get there, yet everyone still winds up headed for the other place anyway by virtue of still being under the curse of death Christ promised freedom from!)
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
In practice it comes closer to east because it encourages living a fulfilling life / heaven on earth. So life isn't only the preparing part, as in most Christian beliefs.

yes, which brings me to the idea of hell as something you do to yourself here in this life, cutting yourself off from the love and grace of God - not him cutting you off as a punishment because he's like the father of the prodigal son, always ready to forgive and reinstate. It's us turning our backs on him, and hell is a state of existence wherein you're cut off totally, empty, discontent, dissatisfied and stuff... I've seen people living that kind of hell and it ain't pretty.

I just never could quite square the whole Jesus story as being about sacrifice and atonement for inherent sins, as I mentioned above. I've never had any difficulty in accepting the idea that when we die, it's possible that absolutely nothing happens. I keep an open mind but in the end nobody can know for sure. For me, it seems obvious that Jesus (ie God in flesh form) was here to show us himself. Looking at him, the more you do, the more you cannot help but love, because God is love and love begets love. And the more you allow love to permeate you, the more you become one with him. Your actions are borne out of love and when this happens things tend to go more right... usually lol

I don't 'try' to love God to get to heaven. I just DO love God, and that *is* heaven. I don't need scriptural 'proof' or explanation, or high falutin' promises of eternal bliss or fear of eternal damnation. All the explanation I need is in the Gospels and living out Gospel principles is its own motivation and reward.

God is not a snooping neighbour or a forbidding schoolmaster. He's in you, he's all the best parts of you, the parts that want you to be fulfilled and at peace; that want your spirit to be at rest no matter what goes on around you. He wants you to listen to these parts of you, that is, to him, for your own good, because he knows it will bring you contentment and peace. He knows that if you don't, you'll suffer, not from any punishment meted out by him but by inevitable consequences of your actions here in the world without any need for supernatural intervention.

The alternative is to listen to the outside world and seek instead for OUTER peace, an easy life etc, at the cost of inner turmoil. I'd rather, anyday, be at peace inside despite the world raging around me, like the Buddhist sage who "smiles like an amused infant" despite whatever fortune brings.

IMO, Jesus wasn't here to save us from eternal hellfire or the wrath of God. He showed us quite explicitly that God forgives; it's not his wrath that we should be fearing but his love that we should perceive and accept. He was here to show us an example that, if followed, saves us from ourselves. The exact parts of ourselves that the suffering he endured highlighted in our other selves, the people who persecuted him. The parts of ourselves that fear and try to gag truth out of our fear and self delusion. And through his suffering and rising he showed that the truth CANNOT be gagged or killed and will always resurface, especially within ourselves. No matter how much our egos try to bury it, there's a part of ourselves that's the breath of God within us that will keep on whispering within us. The longer we ignore it, the closer we come to hell on earth. The more we listen to it, the closer to heaven.

I might even go so far as to say that Jesus also symbolized the dual nature of our own lives, part flesh, part divinity; the Jesus that lives in us.

To say that God punished the Israelites - and all the other nations that he supposedly egged the Israelites onto massacring when he happened to be pleased with them, apparently - for disobeying a bunch of rules he laid on them for being just not good enough (despite being only what he created and allowed them to be) goes against, to me, the spirit of the God who stands at the door, knocking, never forcing himself on anyone but gently asking to be allowed in.

Death isn't something to be pointed out as a flaw in everything, something that, unless we can explain it away, renders life pointless. It's just a natural consequence of being alive. And we're given the wherewithal to make being alive a good thing. But this is the Taoist in me... haha...

"When the master died, his friend Yi came to the funeral. While everyone was weeping, Yi only stood and smiled. 'Why do you not weep?' asked a student, 'were you and the master not as brothers from one womb? do you not lament his death?' 'Of course not!' replied Yi, 'the occurrence that was the master's life was something good to me. His death was a natural consequence of that, as all that lives, dies. To be sorry he died would mean being sorry he lived. And so, I do not weep, but smile.'"

I don't really understand why all the 'good stuff' has to be seen as happening after death in order to give life meaning. And I can't help but speculate that it's more actually about people not really being willing to put in any effort unless they're promised a more specific reward. To say "your reward is that, through a path of self-denial and transformation, you will achieve oneness with God" is a bit vague for the average Joe, who's more interested in getting the harvest in... :laugh:

I don't think you need to be a Christian or even necessarily to think of God in the same theist terms as Christians and religious people commonly do. Quakers for example, often refer to God as 'the Light within', which removes a lot of the negative connotations associated with theism which hinder many people from seeking or achieving the peace available within themselves.

Sorry, bunch of slightly disjointed stuff there that just came out by itself. It's late and I'm tired so... I know how it's connected but... well, good luck LOL
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
I like this way of thinking. I think it actually draws Christianity closer to the eastern religions.

Here it is.

The politically correct position of homogenizing all human kind. What does that do to someone who follows the Bible?

Did I make too big of a leap here, nolla?

Yes. I do understand hating the sin and loving the sinner. But recognization of the differences.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
TBH Anja nobody knows what leaps you've been making because you've been very vague about everything from the start. It's like you were asking us to help you figure out both the question and the answer and you haven't really thrown any bones either way.

Reminds me of an NF friend of mine who has a habit of thinking "Hm, NT's are clever and like discussing things, so if I just lay this big vague plate of 'bleurgh' on their doorstep, I can come back in a couple of days for a complete diagnosis and prescription". ;)

So I've just been laying out whatever intuitive leaps *I've* made from what's been said, and leaving you to pick out whatever you feel fits the bill...
 

swordpath

New member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
10,547
MBTI Type
ISTx
Enneagram
5w6
You'll see view points of all variety, some of it quite wacky, mainly if you're using a Bible as reference. This variety and twist of interpretations doesn't shock me in the least, but even I as a non-Christian thinks it's safe to say that if you're following Christianity and using the Bible as a final word, that dude is just way off...
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
TBH Anja nobody knows what leaps you've been making because you've been very vague about everything from the start. It's like you were asking us to help you figure out both the question and the answer and you haven't really thrown any bones either way.

Reminds me of an NF friend of mine who has a habit of thinking "Hm, NT's are clever and like discussing things, so if I just lay this big vague plate of 'bleurgh' on their doorstep, I can come back in a couple of days for a complete diagnosis and prescription". ;)

So I've just been laying out whatever intuitive leaps *I've* made from what's been said, and leaving you to pick out whatever you feel fits the bill...

And thank you.

I'm not "going anywhere" with this, substitute. There's nothing to second guess. I find my spirituality difficult to express in words but comfortable to me. I can say that I find modern day interpretations of the Bible to be more vague to me.

Let me try.

"Thou shalt not kill" means (unless I/we think someone is bad.) But if someone is suffering and trying to die then we shouldn't kill him. That's how I see that commandment playing out in a Christian nation.

I once saw a cartoon of God which gave me pause. He was crying over a battlefield and saying, "What part of 'Thou shalt not kill don't you get?'"


In a rush to modernize ancient teachings, many of them excellent, and define does and don'ts while trying to be inclusive it is nearly impossible to define one's self as a Christian anymore. That's my perspective.

One must rely on reinterpreting the written word in order to comfort one's self that one is a Christian in good conscience. Or one must follow the letter of the law in which case he will be doing many un-Christian appearing things. Such as "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."

I just couldn't do the mental gymnastics any longer and had to do what all good Christians are doing, finding a way to live comfortably with what I believe.

I don't care to turn this thread into what Anja believes and why. If so I'd have just laid it out and then there wouldn't be much to say except words of criticism or approval. When it comes to my spirituality I need neither at this point. I don't know about down the road. . .

I'm not here to convince or to be convinced. Just here to lsten to all you folks who have so generously shared the way you handle the many inconsistencies.

My comings and goings aren't an effort to sit in evaluation of what has been said but more an effort to think carefully about each post and say something worthwhile, or not, depending on how well I understand what each one is saying.

That's it. No games. Sorry to be vague, but I think it's a vague issue. I appreciate everyone's generosity and hopefully I can repay your efforts on threads you start.

_________________________________________________________



Wow. Is this a classical example of the T/F thing? Interesting. Anyone want to dissect what they see?
 

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
yes, which brings me to the idea of hell as something you do to yourself here in this life, cutting yourself off from the love and grace of God - not him cutting you off as a punishment because he's like the father of the prodigal son, always ready to forgive and reinstate. It's us turning our backs on him, and hell is a state of existence wherein you're cut off totally, empty, discontent, dissatisfied and stuff... I've seen people living that kind of hell and it ain't pretty.

....

I don't really understand why all the 'good stuff' has to be seen as happening after death in order to give life meaning. And I can't help but speculate that it's more actually about people not really being willing to put in any effort unless they're promised a more specific reward. To say "your reward is that, through a path of self-denial and transformation, you will achieve oneness with God" is a bit vague for the average Joe, who's more interested in getting the harvest in... :laugh:

Yes! Your whole post was excellent and very close to how I see the significance of Christianity in my life. Very much symbolized, very much in this life and not the next that might never come. That kind of Christianity certainly has meaning in the current society. But.. I don't really call that Christianity, since I can see that while it might be what Jesus meant, it isn't what people have made out of his words.

Anyways, I need this kind of practical comprehensible philosophy, not a book filled with anecdotes that contradict each other.
 
Top