|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| fiveeagles wrote: |
| It's an amazing story. |
Oh my god, you actually said something truthful! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
But the Bible and all commentary has been washed through so many translations, nothing is left but pure gruel, no nutrients....It is a book of "the victor" and is an interpretation of history. Empty of truth unless you read it symbolically.....only in this way could the message survive.
| Quote: |
So God's definition of adultery is there somewhere.
|
So God wrote? So God spoke and there were tape recorders around? God is silence......he / she / it does not speak and those who think they hear God or know what God wants are crazy fools. Words are of the tower of Babel and we are just confused in their presence when we try to use them to reach God....But hey, if you have a hot line to God, let me know, I've a few questions.....
No tape recorders, but they did have these things called, "people." And some of them could write!!! I for one am not confused in the presence of words. In fact, I find communication without the use of words to be much more confusing.
| Quote: |
| I find religion to be very personal, and if it doesn't feel right to me (ie if it makes me feel guilty) it's probably wrong, and that's more important than "rules" written thousands of years ago. |
Hitler said something quite similiar in Mein Kampf. Those that confuse what they feel and what should be are tyrants....... .I'm sorry but this isn't a very great attitude especially when religion is suppossed to be "community".......
| Quote: |
| sorry joe, Abraham was around LONG before Moses (who brought around the Ten Commandments). And don't you think God understands about social laws and norms? Don't you think he helped form them? |
Another instance of someone speaking for God.....pure and plain idolitry, the greatest sin is to speak of knowledge of "what God knows"....wash yourself my friend.....
Huh? Where do you come with this stuff?
| Quote: |
| OK, but isn't that kind of a cop-out? The Bible is THE WORD OF GOD except for all those bits about God creating the earth out of magic and Jesus walking on water and stuff. Why even say that you're a believer? |
Word of God.....who said so.....how do we know? I think God is a legalist and has taken the 5th......
| Quote: |
Our primary responsibility is to love God, and treat others with love and respect.
|
This are the only words I found truthful and humble enough to be religious. We are not to try to find out what God wants or to find out what God said ---- we are to LOVE him, through the glory of our lives, being here and having the chance to be alive. And our love of him is always through others....not a selfish thing, a meditation on the world but an active love.........kindness, humility, helping, living in the knowledge of our own ignorance....
Anyways, my own thoughts here..
Huh? We're not to try to find out what God wants but somehow you already know it, I guess, as you go on to say, "we are to LOVE him." How do you know that?
DD |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
As for the adultery thing (although it seemed to be more about polygamy), I would guess that it was always wrong but not always taught as wrong. Jesus talks about a similar topic, divorce, in this way:
3Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"
4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'[a] 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'[b]? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
7"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"
8Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
This seems to indicate that while God's standards have always remained the same, He has not always held people to those standards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grotto
Joined: 21 Mar 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Again people...it wasnt written by a god....of any shape type or form.
It was written by man, for man with a political agenda!
Old testament: worship this god or die horribly!
New testament: I have decided that this is the morality for all people...obey it or suffer eternal damnation.
Compiled by religious fanatics to try to browbeat the world into their way of thinking.
Its a BOOK....nothing more....nothing less! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
ddeubel wrote:
Quote:
agree that the SAB is an amateurish attempt to criticize the Bible. The people who make that site do not read Greek or Hebrew
Aramaic, Hebrew I believe are the languages of the locals at the time (plus a smattering of other Semitic languages...) and the language of the scrolls.
Okay, I left off Aramaic. This doesn't change the fact that the SAB writer can't read any of the three.
Quote:
But the Bible and all commentary has been washed through so many translations, nothing is left but pure gruel, no nutrients....
And your proof of this is what? Are you, like the SAB contributors, simply an amateur making an uneducated guess? How much do you know about Hebrew record-keeping standards? How prevalent was writing at the time of the OT? What other methods were used to pass along information? Could we say the OT is somewhat unique in that it recorded the downfalls and losses alongside with victories?
These are the questions you need already have known the answer to if your opinion is to be worth anything. I don't mean to be rude at all. I'm just curious if biblical criticism is a serious interest of yours, or if you're just making passing comments without any necessary knowledge.
Quote:
It is a book of "the victor" and is an interpretation of history.
Of course, as is all history. So, do you apply the same standard to ancient Greek and Roman historians when reading their accounts? Can we believe anything at all about the Punic Wars, since the Carthaginians didn't write the history about it?
Quote:
Empty of truth unless you read it symbolically.....only in this way could the message survive.
Not really. There are portions that any honest intellectual would grant are probably historically accurate, and other portions which must be analyzed in various ways.
Keep in mind, I'm an atheist. I don't "believe in" the Bible, but I also don't believe in unwarranted, amateurish criticism of it, or of anything.
Cheers,
Q. |
Q.
sorry for my unwarranted, amateurish criticism of "the Book". But usually those that have to sweep up are amateur dregs.....
I do love the Bible and in particular Ecclessiastes. A lot of great reading/thinking/storytelling...... I am no amateur but no professional either (and thus no hidden agenda like so many thumpers and dumpers...). I have no reason to believe or disbelieve other than FACT and the historical record. I am as Voltaire and most of the enlightenment, against religion because a) it has not brought any happiness in the here and now 2) I am for truth and "ecrasez l'infame" smashing the infamy.
I have a graduate degree in Anthropology so I know about the historical record and how things get changed. I know about impartiality and participant observer. I know of the ancient traditions of storytelling which were "elaborations" and not meant to be fact....but since we discovered the printing press, we fool ourselves that so much 'recorded " history is infact, true. It ain't. Read McCluhan to get a good dose of this medicine, "Gutenberg Galaxy".
I do concede your point about SAB and languages....they are amateurish and without any science. Hocus Pocus. The world is ending tomorrow, no the day after, no, the day after that.....well maybe soon....same drivel but a different fashion.
I fall back on something I read so very early in life, Paul Tillich. Systematic Theology ;
It would he a great victory for Christian apologetics if the words "God" and "existence" were very definitely separated except in the paradox of God becoming manifest under the conditions of existence.... God does not exist. He is being-itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore, to argue that God exists is to deny him.
The method of arguing through to a conclusion also contradicts the idea of God. Every argument derives conclusions from something that is given about something that is sought. In arguments for the existence of God the world is given and God is sought.... But, if we derive God from the world, he cannot be that which transcends the world infinitely.
Meaning, that we can't know of God. He is a ground of Being, it is like knowing ourselves, we cannot but must know through others.....Hans Kung says much the same thing and is deemed a heretic. For some info. on Tillich if anyone is interested go to http://www.theology.ie/theologians/tillich.htm
I also love his small book, "Courage to be"
so to continue and address the criticism,
| Quote: |
Huh? We're not to try to find out what God wants but somehow you already know it, I guess, as you go on to say, "we are to LOVE him." How do you know that?
|
I don't "know" that......but "agape" or divine love, that gracious feeling of thanks for existing, is the only thing that can find God through others, through existence outside myself....It is a moral imperative to love, not some extra. It comes from the depths of Thou art That......
All said, what I really am crying out against are the literalists, those that think the words of the bible are the truth. they aren't and they confuse THE WORD and the word.....logos is something before and cannot be grasped directly. I think Q that you would agree, all questions of God are questions of language....
I stand by the Buddhist thought that "He who has found the Buddha, has lost the Buddha".
DD[/b] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
I stand by the Buddhist thought that "He who has found the Buddha, has lost the Buddha".
DD[/b] |
Inspired me you have. Use the Force I will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
