You might consider calling all the religions you just called cults as something else so as not to offend said folks, Yorick.

Now, how literally do you read the bible? Did the sea really part? Did Jonah really get swallowed? Was Noah's Ark really afloat with all the world under it (or maybe just a large region he was in)? Did Jesus really touch blind people and make them see? Was the world created in 7 days literally (approx. 168 hours) or is it measured in "God Days" which are longer than our days?

I presume the answer is you read some of these figuratively and others more literally, on a case-by-case basis.

However, what of the God of Job? The vicious God of the Old Testament who repays his most faithful serving by making a bet and killing off his family one by one, only to physically tormet him into near nothingness -- just to make a point to Satan. How does this go with the "know love and God" philosophy?

Not picking -- just curious.

I was not suggesting that all the people and places in the Bible were fictional. I was pointing out the simple truth of not being able to reconcile many of the acts contained in the Bible. Similar to what Timber questioned above, many people will view the acts contained in the Bible to be grossly exaggerated tales that may or may not correlate to real events. In the same note, they could be depicted in metaphorical terms, thus rendering them uninterruptible to the modern age man.

It is in this sense that the Bible becomes a book of short stories and fictional writings. Proving a single, or even a couple, points of contention does not make a work verifiable. At best, most of the stories contained in the Bible could be Myths. It all comes back to us not knowing whether the works are true or not.

As for the interpretation of the Bible, you cannot state that someone would be incorrect because they come to a different conclusion than that of your own. Even in your example the passages are left to an individuals interpretation. Reading the same passages, another person may come to a completely different conclusion. Where there is room for interpretation, there will always be differing opinions. It is predetermined that everyone will reach the same conclusion, and to think so would imply that they were reading/viewing/studying/practicing their faith incorrectly. That would indeed be a very narrow minded view.

I point out the above because you have said I’m incorrect, which suggests that I’m not entitled to my opinion. It also includes an automatic assumption that any person who has not reached the same conclusion you have has done so by incorrect means.

As for the first point, I was just looking for clarification. I wasn’t suggesting you did think that way.

1. The two relgions I mentioned would be happy not to be associated with other Christians. I've had many conversations with people from either faith. The two religions fit into the generally accepted use of the English word "cult". If it offends, it is because the contents offend, not the word itself.

2. Unless it is proved otherwise I read the bible as literally as possible, despite the seemingly unbelievable nature of some of the facts. I reason, that if the writers took the time to record minute details of building measurements and genealogical lists, why would they blow some of the big details? They recorded their defeats. Very few cultures, if any of the same era recorded their defeats. The Assyrians being a prime example. All glory glory.

The Hewbrews recorded their humiliations, their victories, their evil, their good. Accuracy at every stage. So, in respect I change my own acceptance level, and keep an open mind on things that stretch my own belief, and unless otherwise shown, will believe that there was a flood, an Ark, that Jonah was in fact swallowed by a sperm whale, that the entire universe may have come into being in seven days, and that definitely Jesus caused blind people to see.

I myself have seen people with eye problems, one woman blind in one eye, totally healed in the name of Jesus. Believing in his miracles are kind of the point. I believe that had I the faith, I could walk on water. Yet I accept I do not have that faith. It sits out there though, as a challenge to my potential. To the potential I can acheive with faith.

3. Job is actually one of the most inspiring books I have read. It has shaped much of my thinking. Interesting that you brought it up.

"Do we accept good from God and not trouble" he says. Awesome. All is a blessing. this life. Job experienced the worst of the human condition, losing wife, children, possessions and health, and yet did not lose the perspective that all is a gift from God. He then received more than what he had before. greater wealth, a wife that I presume did not attack his faith as his first one did. He also broke with traditions of the day and gave an inheritence to his daughters.

It's awesome. As I said, a confirmation on my own solid belief in the positive-negative ratio in life.

I've actually put a spoken word (condensed) version of the book to music. Really cool.

[ 10-27-2003, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

I have to make sure I understand you correctly here. Are you suggesting someone made with the laying of hands in the name of Jesus, and as a result the person was once again able to see?

You keep using the word "stories", and keep ignoring the books of poetry, books of philosophical wisdom, and all the letters!! They are not in narrative form Maelakin! They are not STORIES. Please, even on an literature level.... know your subject before deriding it.

On the matter of interpretation and truth, you are choosing to ignore that there are writers behind it. The letters especially had clear intent and purpose. The "truth" in those cases, is ascertaining what the intent of the writer was. You are speaking as though there were no writers, and therefore no intent. As though only the receiver matters!

There are single truths, that are knowable within the bible. People that read and understand the entire work, generally agree about the core issues, and will disagree on marginal issues, especially given historical context.

I have to make sure I understand you correctly here. Are you suggesting someone made with the laying of hands in the name of Jesus, and as a result the person was once again able to see? </font>[/QUOTE]Yes. The girl was a student of mine at a Christian College. As a result of her sudden sight restoration (in one eye) she suffered headaches and other associated temporary problems resultant from the sudden sensory restoration.

There are others too. A male member of our church, an artist, had incurable cancer-like problems with his vocal chords. He is now healed. I knew him before his illness, during and after. I was stunned when he was talking again. Very sudden.

The girl from my church who's apartment I'm staying in is accident prone. She once walked the catwalk with a cut eyeball in unbelievable agony if she blinked. All sorts of maladies. (She sees fine now btw) Anyhow, she severed a finger once. Lost the joint in the process of reattachment. Her body GREW A NEW ONE out of scar tissue. She's listed as a medical miracle. Confounded the doctors.

[ 10-27-2003, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

True. I think someone had posted an earlier topic due to their insecurity. If you truly believe in something, then there is no need to make issue of what anyone says against it. I believe Jesus Christ was one of those men (I'm not Christian but I admire people of compassion too). He merely lived as an example. Unfortunatley, some very bad people wanted to make issues with him.

My belief is rather quasi. I take this and that and mash it all together like a sandwich; hold the sour pickles please. [img]graemlins/eating.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] :D

Interchange the word stories with "works" if you so wish. It is sad that you must resort to technical discrepancies in order to try and invalidate another’s opinion.

You validated my entire argument in this statement. When you attempt to ascertain the intent of the writer, your results will be subject to your perception. You are not the writer, and since you cannot ask the writer his intent, all conclusions you come up with are nothing more than an opinion.

Just once, I would like to see you realize that people are not attempting to sway your opinions, but they are looking for you to accept they are not fact. My opinions are just as valid as yours, and it is an extremely pompous act of you to Lord your opinion over others as if it holds more merit.

First you should take your own advice and not be so general. What core issues are you using as reference?

I would like to see proof that these truths you speak of exist, and I would like to see that proof come from a non-biased source.

fascinating. could you provide a source for this statement please?

[ 10-27-2003, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: sultan ]