Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found this which I found quite interesting, he is actually questioning the reasons and purpose and this is what is required of those who leave the traditional, doctrinal, ritualistic behind
Agnostic, atheist, is still just part of the ‘artificial’ labelling, naming, calling in relationship to ‘religion’
The names and descriptions are necessary down here for differentiation, grouping, sorting, etc but lose their relevance at the higher non-physical ‘spiritual’ type levels
He feels he can’t identify as Christian and I thinks it’s because of how Christianity itself operates and has the dominion down here and the traditional religious way is for individuals to conform to the church systems and serve the organisations and be useful to them… it is self centred
From the blog...
Their thinking, and mine, has been that if I do my best to follow the teachings of Jesus, in some respect I’m a Christian, even if I don’t believe that Jesus was the son of God….or that he was raised from the dead, or even that God exists. In fact, I don’t believe all these things. But can’t I be a Christian in a different sense, one who follows Jesus’ teachings?
Nope. Absolutely not.
At the end of the book of Judges, it says... "everyone did what was right in his own eyes." (21:25b)
This argument is Exhibit A.
According to this, I can be a Christian by following the teachings of Jesus. That's not what Jesus said.
But just note that there is a difference between following His teachings, and being baptized in to the Father, Son, and Spirit (not w/ water, but w/ the Holy Spirit and faith in the death & resurrection of Christ).
Their thinking, and mine, has been that if I do my best to follow the teachings of Jesus, in some respect I’m a Christian, even if I don’t believe that Jesus was the son of God….or that he was raised from the dead, or even that God exists. In fact, I don’t believe all these things. But can’t I be a Christian in a different sense, one who follows Jesus’ teachings?
Nope. Absolutely not.
At the end of the book of Judges, it says... "everyone did what was right in his own eyes." (21:25b)
This argument is Exhibit A.
According to this, I can be a Christian by following the teachings of Jesus. That's not what Jesus said.
But just note that there is a difference between following His teachings, and being baptized in to the Father, Son, and Spirit (not w/ water, but w/ the Holy Spirit and faith in the death & resurrection of Christ).
I’m not arguing for or against Rob, and I’m not that concerned for myself what others want to label or doubt about me either
It seems to me personally that Christianity itself is at the end stage of ‘everyone’ going his own way, under their own heads, pastors, priests, elders, etc that was foretold in Matthew 24:3-14 and what I think the reformation was about
The eyes and ears and feet and hands have become so separated from each and are like the dead/sleeping - being disconnected
People see this, they see how disconnected we now are from Jesus teachings, after the passage of time relating to the past 2000 years
If the blind lead the blind they both fall into the ditch - in the Holy Scriptures there is a lot of metaphorical and exaggerated language used - blindness has to do with the eyes and vision and seeing
I am more personally observing/witnessing the external religious environment/landscape, the systems and organisations and the written records and how they relate to each other, and I listen to what others say, that’s the ears, and hearing, in the defence of their own type of affiliations and their reactions to each other
That is just how my own individual personality and religious roots, and my own reaction to it pre-determined/pre-determines what I do and what my own purpose is
All of us are pretty limited in how much we can ‘process’ and this is ultimately what Christianity is about, the processing of information/logos/words/gnosis - 1 Corinthians 12-13
All of us are pretty limited in how much we can ‘process’ and this is ultimately what Christianity is about, the processing of information/logos/words/gnosis - 1 Corinthians 12-13
It’s through our ‘senses’
Christianity - or whatever you want to call it - is a relationship with God. Those who are His are one with Him through faith in Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus knows who His sheep are.
This is a God centered endeavor.
Whoever solely considers as a human endeavor will be in error and will never get it.
As a Christian, what is your Opinion of Biblical Scholar Bart Ehrman?
Like most Biblical Scholars Mr Ehrman came to his studies as a devout Christian (he has an evangelical background). The more he learned (and he learned a lot) the more he could see the contradictions in the Bible. He went from a position of believing in biblical inerrancy to a more realistic position understanding the flaws of common Christian belief. It was a journey, a growth experience. I respect that.
Interestingly the entire field of Biblical archaeology (Ehrman is not an archaeologist) was established by true believers who simply wanted to find the remnants to back up their understandings about Moses and Joshua and the later Davidic kingdom and the first/second temples as recounted in the texts (possibly seeking evidence to help convince a skeptical world lurching into modern times). If the biblical accounts are correct, there should be at least a bit of evidence still to discover under years of rubble.
These were sincere efforts by Bible believing Christians from Europe and America. They cared deeply about this. Both the textual scholars and the archaeologists went into it with eyes wide open.
What these scholars discovered was that some of the Old Testament/Torah historical accounts are fiction and the texts also contain plenty of contradictions. Even just one contradiction or false claim disproves inerrancy. I am not writing this to provoke an argument, it is simply a statement of fact about what they felt they learned over many decades of study.
What are we to make of this? Should we ignore the evidence and just believe what we want ... or accept the evidence?
For people who have only studied the Bible from the comfort of their own living rooms and church pews, it is easy to believe everything written in it is precisely correct with no contradictions and no flights of fancy. Serious scholars don't have that luxury.
Mr Ehrman tends to accept the evidence and the scholarship, as do many others. I am quite sure that upsets a lot of serious Christians.
As a Christian, what is your Opinion of Biblical Scholar Bart Ehrman?
Like most Biblical Scholars Mr Ehrman came to his studies as a devout Christian (he has an evangelical background). The more he learned (and he learned a lot) the more he could see the contradictions in the Bible. He went from a position of believing in biblical inerrancy to a more realistic position understanding the flaws of common Christian belief. It was a journey, a growth experience. I respect that.
Interestingly the entire field of Biblical archaeology (Ehrman is not an archaeologist) was established by true believers who simply wanted to find the remnants to back up their understandings about Moses and Joshua and the later Davidic kingdom and the first/second temples as recounted in the texts (possibly seeking evidence to help convince a skeptical world lurching into modern times). If the biblical accounts are correct, there should be at least a bit of evidence still to discover under years of rubble.
These were sincere efforts by Bible believing Christians from Europe and America. They cared deeply about this. Both the textual scholars and the archaeologists went into it with eyes wide open.
What these scholars discovered was that some of the Old Testament/Torah historical accounts are fiction and the texts also contain plenty of contradictions. Even just one contradiction or false claim disproves inerrancy. I am not writing this to provoke an argument, it is simply a statement of fact about what they felt they learned over many decades of study.
What are we to make of this? Should we ignore the evidence and just believe what we want ... or accept the evidence?
For people who have only studied the Bible from the comfort of their own living rooms and church pews, it is easy to believe everything written in it is precisely correct with no contradictions and no flights of fancy. Serious scholars don't have that luxury.
Mr Ehrman tends to accept the evidence and the scholarship, as do many others. I am quite sure that upsets a lot of serious Christians.
As a Christian, what is your Opinion of Biblical Scholar Bart Ehrman?
Like most Biblical Scholars Mr Ehrman came to his studies as a devout Christian (he has an evangelical background). The more he learned (and he learned a lot) the more he could see the contradictions in the Bible. He went from a position of believing in biblical inerrancy to a more realistic position understanding the flaws of common Christian belief. It was a journey, a growth experience. I respect that.
Interestingly the entire field of Biblical archaeology (Ehrman is not an archaeologist) was established by true believers who simply wanted to find the remnants to back up their understandings about Moses and Joshua and the later Davidic kingdom and the first/second temples as recounted in the texts (possibly seeking evidence to help convince a skeptical world lurching into modern times). If the biblical accounts are correct, there should be at least a bit of evidence still to discover under years of rubble.
These were sincere efforts by Bible believing Christians from Europe and America. They cared deeply about this. Both the textual scholars and the archaeologists went into it with eyes wide open.
What these scholars discovered was that some of the Old Testament/Torah historical accounts are fiction and the texts also contain plenty of contradictions. Even just one contradiction or false claim disproves inerrancy. I am not writing this to provoke an argument, it is simply a statement of fact about what they felt they learned over many decades of study.
What are we to make of this? Should we ignore the evidence and just believe what we want ... or accept the evidence?
For people who have only studied the Bible from the comfort of their own living rooms and church pews, it is easy to believe everything written in it is precisely correct with no contradictions and no flights of fancy. Serious scholars don't have that luxury.
Mr Ehrman tends to accept the evidence and the scholarship, as do many others. I am quite sure that upsets a lot of serious Christians.
It seems to me that when evidence backs up the stories/people in the Bible then it is talked about.
But when evidence speaks to the contrary then it's ignored, brushed off, even labeled.
To question the Bible seems to question their faith.
I, for one, want them to continue to dig and question and connect dots.
If the story changes...it has no affect on my faith. The Bible is, after all, a book written by men.
Jesus never wrote one single word.
I read this years ago and find it very appropriate for this thread.
The Gospel of Thomas was found at Nag Hammati.
It would be from one of the early Christian sects
Gospel of Thomas
(2) Jesus said, "Let him who seeks continue seeking until he finds. When he finds, he will
become troubled. When he becomes troubled, he will be astonished, and he will rule over
the All."
The Bible is riddled with them. Not seeing any reflects a lack of rational thinking, IMO. I am a Christian, NOT an atheist or agnostic.
If you are constantly criticizing Bible believers, why do you also want to use their label?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
