What do people mean by, "This is the Word of God?"

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I am not suggesting that you throw out the Bible, or the OT. I am suggesting that you read it as a whole, rather then grabbing a single verse and saying that God wants you to do this..

This doesn't mean to ignore a single verse, but just like sentences in a book, they form a greater whole (Which is what is inpsired) then when just read singly.

Verses should NOT be read alone, without context.

JM

I do not have any intention of throwing out the Bible, since my faith in God and Jesus is based on the scripture of the Bible.

I was saying that I agree with you, in what you just said; that we cannot take verses and passages out of context to suit political agendas. For example, right-wing nutjobs taking Leviticus passages out of context and distorting their meaning for homophobic reasons in order to bolster their own political power and prestige.

I appreciate the fact that you and I agree, in this aspect.

[Nikolai]

I see that this thread started with using Spong as authority. Spong, who not long ago proposed a new reformation, where most of what is Christianity was to be removed. Like God not a personal God, prayer not working, Jesus not being God's son, since God is not personal, miracles not being real, Jesus not dying for our sins, the resurrection not being real. And I could go on. Really, what is left of Christianity in that? And how he can be used as an authority on anything Christian is beyond me, but he is from time to time...

[Proteus_MST]

My personal opinion:
The bible is a mix of different books, some of them maybe inspired by the feeling that thee is a greater thing that can be called "god" others however mere books of historical value. But one thing is common to them and that is that all were written by mere humans.
Just because often the books were worth enough for people to hide them and make copies of them doesn´t make them holy just as also the fact that concils of the early christian church selected some of them to be inspired by god whereas others were discarded doesn´t make the ones holy whereas the others aren´t.

If you search for god it is more helpful to look into your own heart than to listen to priests that create artificial barriers to other people (like homosexuals or people of other faiths) instead of seeing them as what they are, i.e. humans like themselves.

Or to sum it up nicely:
I think MrFuns opening post does a good job in illusrating why it is problematic to take the bible as the literal true word of god.
But humans are herd animals and for many people it is tempting to have someone who leads them and does the difficult task of thinking for them, be it a priest or the authors of a collection of books that are thousands of years old.
(having said this I might add that I wouldn´t think that the bible cannot be inspirational for those that read it or that it cannot provide interesting insights, I only say that it is dangerous to take everything within the bible as literal truth and direct word of god)

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Nikolai
I see that this thread started with using Spong as authority. Spong, who not long ago proposed a new reformation, where most of what is Christianity was to be removed. Like God not a personal God, prayer not working, Jesus not being God's son, since God is not personal, miracles not being real, Jesus not dying for our sins, the resurrection not being real. And I could go on. Really, what is left of Christianity in that? And how he can be used as an authority on anything Christian is beyond me, but he is from time to time...

Nothing would be left that makes Christianity original/unique.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by MrFun


I do not have any intention of throwing out the Bible, since my faith in God and Jesus is based on the scripture of the Bible.

I was saying that I agree with you, in what you just said; that we cannot take verses and passages out of context to suit political agendas. For example, right-wing nutjobs taking Leviticus passages out of context and distorting their meaning for homophobic reasons in order to bolster their own political power and prestige.

I appreciate the fact that you and I agree, in this aspect.

I heavily disagree with some of what you quoted.

JM

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Nikolai
I see that this thread started with using Spong as authority. Spong, who not long ago proposed a new reformation, where most of what is Christianity was to be removed. Like God not a personal God, prayer not working, Jesus not being God's son, since God is not personal, miracles not being real, Jesus not dying for our sins, the resurrection not being real. And I could go on. Really, what is left of Christianity in that? And how he can be used as an authority on anything Christian is beyond me, but he is from time to time...

Even as I disagree with some of Spong's more radical propositions, such as not validating Jesus' crucifixion to cite one example, it does not prevent me from recognizing the valid points that he does make.

[Nikolai]

What valid points? All I've heard of him so far has been anything but valid in my eyes.

[Jon Miller]

He suggests throwing stuff out.

I don't agree with any of his points.

JM

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I heavily disagree with some of what you quoted.

JM

You do?

[Jon Miller]

I don't mean by understanding in context, that we understand it to be meaningless.

JM

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Nikolai
What valid points? All I've heard of him so far has been anything but valid in my eyes.

His point that Christians have used biblical passages for evil purposes throughout the history of Christianity is one strong point Spong has made.

[Japher]

I think MrFuns opening post does a good job in illusrating why it is problematic to take the bible as the literal true word of god.

I don't think it's problematic to take the bible literally. However, don't put the book down and act on it's instructions until you have read the whole thing!

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by MrFun



You do?

He is saying that huge parts of the Bible shouldn't be considered now because the authors were primitive, and he justifies this by taking verses out of context.

So yes, I heavily disagree with him.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Japher


I don't think it's problematic to take the bible literally. However, don't put the book down and act on it's instructions until you have read the whole thing!

Exactly.

This is what I meant by not reading verses singly.

Note that both fundamentalists and sceptics do this, and they both misrepresent God when they do.

JM

[SlowwHand]

The first several chapters of the Old Testament were written by Moses.
You can generally find the author of each chapter in the back of the Bible, as well as a summation of what each chapter is about.