Revelation, and religious indentity

[R_C]

There are multiple layers of meaning I agree. I’m implying through evidence that every statement you cite from the bible as a source of ‘whatever’ - I can find another statement that casts doubt on it. You really want to talk about the old testament? If you don’t agree with the statement I used - believe - I’ll find a better one.

While I am personally not knowledgeable enough to be able to explain the correlation of the Old Testament with the New Testament, there are many learned Catholic theologians who have wrote quite a lot on this. Let’s talk of the NEW Testament, which is the key for understanding the widely symbolical and metaphorical Old Testament.

Like I said - read the bible. There is nothing in the bible that condemns slavery in the whole. As a matter of fact it seemed quite ok.

**That is not fully correct.

First of all, Exodus 21:16 forbids slavery against will:

He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death

 

[doormouse73]

How do you reconcile your religious identity or revelation with your geographical location, and the environment you came of age in?

What are the chances you would be christian if your parents were Muslim, and you were living in Indonesia? What about the environment? What if no one you knew was christian, and you had no available christian material? What are your chances that you’d be christian if your were born into some remote tribe in Africa outside of Missionary work, or some other thing introduced you to it?

How do you reconcile your religious identity or revelation with your geographical location, and the environment you came of age in?
What are the chances you would be christian if your parents were Muslim, and you were living in Indonesia?

it does make me wonder why you have not said atheist,being born in a muslim lands?

they get them in Christian lands,but what are the chances really ?

on the other hand this did happen 2012 years ago.some were in Israel,cant place it at the moment.maybe you know were it was?

 

[triumphguy]

There are multiple layers of meaning I agree. I’m implying through evidence that every statement you cite from the bible as a source of ‘whatever’ - I can find another statement that casts doubt on it. You really want to talk about the old testament? If you don’t agree with the statement I used - believe - I’ll find a better one.

Like I said - read the bible. There is nothing in the bible that condemns slavery in the whole. As a matter of fact it seemed quite ok. Destroying a people may be condemned by christianity - but god killed thousands upon thousands of people - even babies.

You can’t have your cake and eat it. You can’t use the bible in a literalist fundamentalist way when it suits you to back up your own arguments, and then on the other hand tell people that there are many layers to scripture when that suits you.

Yes death and slaughter is part of the bible because it was part of the lived reality of the people: not because God is a God of death and slaughter.

 

[ManRay]

R_C:
Read

Dum Diversas, and the Romanus Pontifex.

This is exactly what I’m saying - anything that you conjure up - I can defeat with your own writings and scripture. Kidnapping is wholly different and they were most likely talking about a person within a society that was already a free person. White people in America didn’t consider themselves kidnappers - nor would they have defined it as much. The other parts you’re talking about have to do with a caste, and class system that existed in those times. People who were born into slavery probably did feel that it was their lifelong pursuit and their owners probably did think it was just wonderful that they have these employees. In a way it’s almost as if you are defending it as something that was correct. None of that makes anything you said right.

 

[ManRay]

You can’t have your cake and eat it. You can’t use the bible in a literalist fundamentalist way when it suits you to back up your own arguments, and then on the other hand tell people that there are many layers to scripture when that suits you.

Fair enough - I’m just playing the game. Religious people do it nonstop. If it creates logical problems - it’s allegory or metaphor. If it doesn’t it’s the literal and divinely inspired word of god. You’re enjoying your cake - I may as well have some too.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

it does make me wonder why you have not said atheist,being born in a muslim lands?

they get them in Christian lands,but what are the chances really ?

To word it kindly, in some lands dominated by Islam there can be a certain social if not survival disadvantages if one were to make known that she were an atheist. Like many atheist with other religious backgrounds the ones I know of from lands with higher Muslim populations tended to start off believing what their parents had tough them but then walked the path of apostasy. In general the response from family and community hasn’t been very welcoming, and in some cases it has been almost lethal. (Ayaan Magan aka Ayaan Hirsi Ali is probably one of the better known cases. I’ve not yet figured out if she still finds the need to still travel with body guards ).

 

[Luvtosew]

He claimed to be God, and many people martyred themselves because they believed Him. If he lied, He is not a good man, but no one would agree with this. People want to claim that He was a great spiritual teacher, but if He was not what He claimed to be, the ONLY way to the Father, He is the Devil. Or maybe He was just insane. But if He is not these, then He is what He claimed to be: God. He certainly was no Hindu Guru, teaching that we are all gods.

Logic tells us that truth is one, so I find the Hindu way of dealing with contradictions illogical. Truth is just as important as goodness, and I cannot accept excusing a lie because it makes people behave good. If Jesus IS God, every other religion is false. Everyone else who claimed to be God cannot be traced in human history (Where the heck is Krishna in history?) and those who form religions call themselves prophets or teachers. Only Jesus is arrogant enough to claim to be the Most High.

Well I’m a Chrsitan (RC majority of my life not that it matters) but I never remember Jesus actually saying he was God. Sayinlg he is the only way to the Father is true but in and of itself is not saying that he is God. Also even saying the FAther and I are one, is the same as us saying Jesus is in us, we are one , as we believe Jesus is God, but I guess I don’t see how he could be considered a madman even if he wasn’t God. just because the top Jews had an issue with him, his techings were much above and more enlightened than theirs.

 

[doormouse73]

i dont think Jesus ever said he was a prophet either.

but he did say I AM.now, what does that say to you?

 

[Luvtosew]

i dont think Jesus ever said he was a prophet either.

but he did say I AM.now, what does that say to you?

I say I Am all the time,don’t you?

What I’m saying is Jesus either said who he said he was? or he was a madman to me is not like a defense for Jesus, he may not of been God but he was not a madman, as if he wasn’t God he was very englightened.(ahead of his time and certaintly moreso than the head Jews),

 

[shoe]

How do you reconcile your religious identity or revelation with your geographical location, and the environment you came of age in?

What are the chances you would be christian if your parents were Muslim, and you were living in Indonesia? What about the environment? What if no one you knew was christian, and you had no available christian material? What are your chances that you’d be christian if your were born into some remote tribe in Africa outside of Missionary work, or some other thing introduced you to it?

I believe that I would choose the Christian way no matter what the worldview of either my parents might be or the culture in which I happened live. And I think that people going against the grain of accepted cultural beliefs and practices may be a more common occurrence than we think. China is a good example of many people turning to the Christian faith despite the physical and emotional pressures of their government not to do so.

Furthermore, since easy access to information is the rule and not the exception nowadays, a person doesn’t have to be in the world too long before he or she either hears someone discussing the good news of Jesus or finds good reading material about the Christian way of life: CAF, for example.

And even if a culture does not recognize the truth of Christianity, the truth still remains true. A culture may shackle its citizens to a particular belief system, but the Truth of Christ is able to unshackle anyone who seeks Him in earnest. Jeremiah 29:13 says, “You shall seek me, and shall find me: when you shall seek me with all your heart.”

And in Romans 2:14-15 the Bible indicates that even those people who have not had the pleasure of hearing the good news can be saved as God has written the awareness of His presence on the face of His creation and upon the hearts of every human being: “For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another.” God has “left not himself without testimony” (Acts 14:17).

 

[triumphguy]

Fair enough - I’m just playing the game. Religious people do it nonstop. If it creates logical problems - it’s allegory or metaphor. If it doesn’t it’s the literal and divinely inspired word of god. You’re enjoying your cake - I may as well have some too.

So you are saying we shouldn’t take you seriously then?

 

[InJesusItrust]

Well I’m a Chrsitan (RC majority of my life not that it matters) but I never remember Jesus actually saying he was God. Sayinlg he is the only way to the Father is true but in and of itself is not saying that he is God. Also even saying the FAther and I are one, is the same as us saying Jesus is in us, we are one , as we believe Jesus is God, but I guess I don’t see how he could be considered a madman even if he wasn’t God. just because the top Jews had an issue with him, his techings were much above and more enlightened than theirs.

Jesus was not Hindu, Buddhist or Gnostic, and neither was His teaching or His actions. Give me an enlightened “guru” who can raise the dead, multiply food, heal the blind and turn water into wine and maybe it is possible that He was “enlightened” rather than Lord.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Jesus was not Hindu, Buddhist or Gnostic, and neither was His teaching or His actions. Give me an enlightened “guru” who can raise the dead, multiply food, heal the blind and turn water into wine and maybe it is possible that He was “enlightened” rather than Lord.

That seems like a rather circular test for verifying god-hood. One could just as easily select a combination of other attributes that care thought to be unique to some other god concept and ask the same thing.

 

[InJesusItrust]

“Enlightened” people are not all powerful and they don’t preach a personal God. How many enlightened people do you know who can give life to the dead? To give life to unlife needs a God who is transcendent. A pantheist god does not care and a gnostic god would not have a bodily Resurrection. If these things happened then those gods do not exist.