|
Post by webrunner on Aug 12, 2009 6:21:28 GMT -7
Okay, going back to your post above, Badly, I think it's clear you've had some bad experiences with some of my, how shall I say, over zealous, Protestant (I'm guessing) breathren. Sorry (sincerely) if this has been the case.
Not everyone, though, who reads the Bible thinks they have all the answers or feels empowered to shun others. In fact, if one reads it and gains any understanding at all about our own stature when compared to the greatness of God, then one can't help but be humbled by that. There's some fantastic and powerful language in scripture, Badly. Sometimes it's difficult to grasp and sometimes it's pretty plainly stated - like the scripture above about being accountable for every careless word we say. When I first read it, I though, "man, I'm gonna need to find another hobby." ;D
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 12, 2009 7:41:38 GMT -7
LOL, Web, when I wrote the above (on the other page) I had both Protestants I have encountered and Catholics I have known who fit the bill...folks like this hate to be wrong...and when they are forced into really showing how much they understand about scripture overall, they will go into judgemental mode, then hide behind scripture...
Though we are given the task of instructing our brothers and sisters in Christ, I have always felt the best example was the one set by each of us as Christians in how we live our lives. We can seriously get into deep theological debates even on the plainly stated...because I will look at it one way, while you will look at it another. This does not mean we can't see each other as brothers.
I heard a story the other day...it told of a man who had gone to heaven after his death, and was walking with Jesus, looking around the kingdom. He was shocked, because everywhere he looked, he saw someone who he just KNEW was going to go to Hell. They were all in deep concentration, and somber. The woman down the street, who was nothing but a prostitute, the teenager from work who was a little thief, and so many others who he knew would never see the brightness of heaven from afar, much less be sitting and reclining...
He tuned to Jesus and said..."Lord, I am glad to be here, but is this really heaven? I look around and see so many sinners here, and well, I can't help but wonder if God didn't make a mistake. And why are they so quiet?
Jesus, looking at him like one looks at a young child, responded, "My Father's mercy was infinite in granting forgiveness...there are many rooms in Heaven"
"And the reason they are so quiet? It's simple my son...they are in shock to see that you are here as well..."
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 13, 2009 21:19:38 GMT -7
LOL, Web, when I wrote the above (on the other page) I had both Protestants I have encountered and Catholics I have known who fit the bill...folks like this hate to be wrong...and when they are forced into really showing how much they understand about scripture overall, they will go into judgemental mode, then hide behind scripture... "Hide behind scripture..." Badly, this is actually the second time this week I've seen that. What does it mean? If I can back up my argument with scripture, is there any greater authority? Though we are given the task of instructing our brothers and sisters in Christ, I have always felt the best example was the one set by each of us as Christians in how we live our lives. We can seriously get into deep theological debates even on the plainly stated...because I will look at it one way, while you will look at it another. This does not mean we can't see each other as brothers. I agree with that but, Badly, some how you manage to make me defensive for having read (and continuing to read) the Bible. I'm not attacking at all, I just think it's an odd position find myself in. The scripture I've quoted so far...where's the room for interpretation? You know that God is love and merciful and forgiving. How do you know this? The Bible tells you so (to borrow from the song). Why do you accept and cite those truths no problem but doubt other things that are just as plainly stated? I'm genuinely curious. How do you decide what to believe?
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 14, 2009 12:29:08 GMT -7
I think the problem that scripture presents is in it's varied nature. I can make the argument that slavery is okay, and back it up with many scriptural references. I can make the argument that women should shut up and let their husbands do the talking in regards to chruch matters, and back it up with scripture...(1 Corinthians 14:34-35) Now if you presented an argument against what, to me seems plain in scripture, I would then "hide behind scripture" and tell you to take it up with the author of the "book". You can argue about my interpretation of things, but I can point out that the words are plain enough to read...now tell me...how would you go over if you told the women of your church to be silent? You can back it up with scripture...but would it be right?
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 14, 2009 19:32:39 GMT -7
You can argue about my interpretation of things, but I can point out that the words are plain enough to read...now tell me...how would you go over if you told the women of your church to be silent? Now that is a loaded question if ever there was one. ;D Actually you touch on an interesting question, Badly. Do we have to like what the Bible says before we accept it as true? Can we just pick out the feel good parts about grace and mercy and love and heaven and choose to accept those but reject the harder stuff about judgment, submission and hell? Should I substitute my sense of fairness, equality, mercy or whatever, for that of God's (assuming you believe, to any degree, the Bible contains the word of God)? It's my own answer to that last question that keeps me leaning toward fundamentalism.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 14, 2009 19:54:22 GMT -7
I think there are a lot of religious factions out there that sell only the "fuzzy feel good" faith. Many others sell the "if you beleive in Jesus, you will be rich!". I think that God provides what He beleives we need, and not what our over inflated sense of self beleives He should provide.
As to the fire and damnation, I think that there are too many that send those damnations out when they stand on Scripture and point out everyone else's splinters, while they ignore their logs. Submission means we leave our pride behind, and not use it to condemn others...as much as it sounds easy, it is a very difficult thing to do. As far as Hell, it exists, but not as fire, but as a separation from God and His creation...which means we would be suspended in nothingness for eternity. I always wondered if sending a pyromaniac to Hell and it's eternal fire would be Heaven for him...a philosophical argument, but...does it make you wonder...
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 14, 2009 20:37:20 GMT -7
Well, I think I'm about to prove your point about interpretations being different. I absolutely disagree with your characterization of hell. Nowhere do I remember (and please correct me if I'm wrong) it described as a simple separation from God (shoot, if that were the case, what would be the difference between hell and life on earth generally?), and while your characterzation is certainly more palatable, the Bible repeatedly refers to hell as a lake of fire (while I know pyros like to start fires, I don't think they'd enjoy burning in one for all eternity). Am I hiding behind scripture? I don't think so. And yes, I know that any time one even speaks of what the Bible says on hell and judgment, we are automatically assumed to be judging others without recognizing our own sin. Badly, my friend, don't think I'm comfortable with this fire and brimstone stuff. I'm not, but at the same time, can I deny what I believe is the word of God just because it's hard to hear?
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 15, 2009 8:48:11 GMT -7
The difference between life on earth and Hell is simple...when we die, if we choose to seperate ourselves from God, it is eternal. On earth, there is still a chance for repentance. On fire and brimstone, you have to look at the time that the people who are part of the writing of scripture lived in, the time Jesus lived in. Fire was the best example of something that was all consuming, and as such was something to be feared. The initial mention of Hell as fire is when Christ likens the afterlife to "Gehenna" which was, for lack of a better term, the "landfill" outside Jerusalem. Refuse was burned there, and there were all manner of poor and dispossesed who lived along the edges of it. It was always burning, and as such resembled a "lake of fire", and living anywhere near there was a desolate existence.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 15, 2009 19:16:35 GMT -7
I thought about this Web, and one of the things that I want to make clear is that I beleive in a judgement, but as it applies to me...I won't judge others, not because they are not doing wrong, but because many of them know about what scripture says and will struggle with their sins...
Now, on to following scruipture literally...
46Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48I am the bread of life. 49Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” 52The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; 55for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. 57Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. 58This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.”
John 6:46-58
Does this mean my friend, that if you are not Catholic, since we beleive in the true presence of Christ in His Body and Blood, which He established at the Last Supper to fulfill the words in John that you see above, does that mean you won't have eternal life? The words are clear enough...he never uses words like "symbol", "representation", or example in John...He uses true food and true drink, and flesh and blood...even after the Jews murmur among themselves. Now before you think I am denying you Heaven, or eternal life, I am not. The argument is whether we all have different views on scripture...
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 16, 2009 7:32:30 GMT -7
No offense, Badly, but it's not you I'm worried about denying me entry into heaven. ;D You actually kinda illustrate what I've been asking. You believe in a hyper-literal reading of those verses you just quoted but not the one's I've posted. How do you decide which to accept as literal and which you believe are nothing more than metaphors (as in the lake of fire)?
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 16, 2009 20:03:18 GMT -7
As to the existence of a "lake of fire", I don't doubt that...Remember that when the refuse was burned in Gehenna, it did resemble a lake of fire, and for Jesus to point to it as a description for Hell points to how the Jews understood it.
Now you also prove my point...that you call my understanding of John 6 and the Last Supper "hyper-literal", instead of "simple"...you want what you posit to be simple to understand, yet don't want to give the same courtesy if you will. If I were a Catholic fundamentalist, I would say that since you do not follow Jesus' very explicit instructions in John 6, and the Last Supper narratives, then you won't have eternal life. However, I know better...I know that all of us have room to interpret what God tells us in scripture. Some go about following the will of God under threat of fire and brimstone, with the emphasis on that and some go about following the will of God because of His infinite mercy and love...count me in that group. While I know that Hell exists, I also know that my loving Father won't lead me down the wrong path.
It's not that each of us don't beleive scripture...it's that each of us chooses to emphasize certain parts of it.
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 17, 2009 16:27:33 GMT -7
Sorry, Badly, I meant no disrespect when I used the term "hyper-literal." I can be hyper literal myself. Still, I have to ask, what do you mean when you say that I don't follow "Jesus' very explicit instructions in John 6, and the Last Supper narratives?" We've talked about John 6 before and, in no way did I discount a literal interpretation, I just drew a distinction between the physical and the spiritual. www.epvoxpopuli.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=religion&action=display&thread=239&page=3#1723Also, Badly, just because I recognize the truth of judgment and hell does not mean that I'm following God out of fear.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 17, 2009 18:57:05 GMT -7
See, I guess that is where I get tangled up...I forget to make the distinction between recognizing truth and dishing it out...You (and I) recognize that judgment and hell is a true part of scripture. But in the same way that you say that Christ was speaking about spiritual and not physical in John 6, can I not say that the "lake of fire" is metaphorical as well?
As to John 6..could Jesus have made that distinction himself? After all, it is here that many of His disciples leave Him out of confusion about the words He uses. He used the Greek "sarx" which is flesh. So I guess that is why I see that he was setting up the physical as well as the spiritual, and brings it to fruition in the Last Supper narratives.
We all look at perspectives of scripture as truth, but we must allow for others interpretations as well, if we are going to challengs someone else's reading of "truth ' by saying "God meant something else".
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Aug 17, 2009 21:33:23 GMT -7
See, I guess that is where I get tangled up...I forget to make the distinction between recognizing truth and dishing it out...You (and I) recognize that judgment and hell is a true part of scripture. But in the same way that you say that Christ was speaking about spiritual and not physical in John 6, can I not say that the "lake of fire" is metaphorical as well? Sure you can. Two things though, I am not claiming that John 6 is Jesus speaking metaphorically. I'm saying He's being literal but in a spiritual sense, not a phyical sense. Let me ask you, when Jesus says this; verse 58 "This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever," does He mean that folks will not physically die? Also, and I'm not saying you're doing this, but some are so uncomfortable with the notion of hell, they'll temper it's description to make it more palatable. I mean, isn't it easier, or less harsh, to believe that hell is simple separation from God as opposed to eternal torture? Yet, hard as it may be to hear, we cannot compromise on the word of God. As to John 6..could Jesus have made that distinction himself? Didn't He though, later? 60Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?" 61But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble? 62"What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63"It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
|
|
|
Post by badlygiven on Aug 18, 2009 18:47:12 GMT -7
Now, when Catholics beleive that the true presence resides in the Eucharist, do we beleive that it is the bread and wine that gives us eternal life? No, we beleive that it is Jesus that does so...that spiritual that comes into the bread and wine to make it his Body and Blood...so there is no contradiction with Scripture.
Sadly, most don't debate like this..it is all "my way or the highway" belief...There is no level of respect for different perspectives on the same scripture...and we spend too much time converting the converted, instead of taking the Good News out into the world through the conduct of our lives...
|
|