by leavingwt 87 Replies latest jw friends
If all scientists accepted the fundamentalist view that all creation came into existence "as is" a few thousand years ago, no one would have studied such genetic information, and we'd still be dying by the millions from TB, the plague, smallpox, etc.
Not sure where you would have gotten that idea.
Some of the greatest discoveries have been by religious people like Copernicus, Galileo and even now their are religious scientists making breakthroughs like Collins and others.
not all agree with bible inerrency or even the literal interpretation of Genesis
A "scholar" who believes in biblical inerrancy or a literal Genesis would be an oxymoron.
Spong is the most honest bible scholar I have ever read and the only hope of the church surviving beyond the current evangelical fad. I recommend his book "Born of a Woman" on the virgin birth.
The Tribes whose oral history formed Genesis believed in a literal 6 Days of Creation which is reaffirmed in Exodus. Once methods were established to verify homo-sapiens existed 12,000 years ago everything related to the Biblical narrative changed.
Compared to when I was in college, there is much more access to academic materials. When I was exposed to academic concepts, I almost passed out with shock b/c I had no idea the Bible could be approached only through catchecism. Spong is a prophet. I don't agree with everything he says. I recall he prayed for AIDS patients and people were shocked. His comment was that he regularly prays for beagles at NJ riding hunts.
I, too, am very impressed with N.T. Wright. Besides the more academic writers, you have people like Dan Brown in the DaVinci code as populizers of the academic approach. I recently purchased a Gnostic Gospels for Dummies books. Such a book was unthinkable decades ago. The Catholic Church does not seem to ban books outright the way they did before Vatican II. People seem to hunger for accurate Bible knowledge.
Reading source criticism and topics such as the Christology debates, my faith has grown. My life has never been a Cecil B. DeMille production. I can see Bible events happening in a more realistic manner. Magic wands would not be necessary. My favorite book is The Last Temptation of Christ by Katzenzakis.
It is a fictional portrayl of what may have happened to Jesus as he dies. The writing is wonderful. It is not truth but the novel highlights tensions within Christianity. The author believes that Christ becomes too remote and Godlike in today's culture at the sacrifice of his humanity. Scorcese made a great film from the book. It could be problematic if no one has ever read the gospels but even as JWs we do.
If the Bible doesn't make sense then the sensible thing to do is re-write it. God can be reinvented and fiction can become fact - well until the next revision.
Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19: "But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised,your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men."
Yet Spong said that Christianity is not about "supernatural interventions, a fallen creation, guilt, original sin or divine rescue."
Honest scholarship? Please....
No one is required to like the NT message about "supernatural interventions, a fallen creation, guilt, original sin or divine rescue" or to believe it. If anyone wants to disagree with those concepts or finds them offensive, fine. But it is neither scholarship nor intellectual honesty to deny that they are a key part of the Christian message the New Testament writers intended to convey.
Spong believes that the NT writings were written centuries later than the events they purport to describe, so they don't represent true Christianity. Yet Spong writes many centuries after thatand he DOES know what genuine Christianity is? Based on what? On what he would like it to be. If it's that unreliable, why not say that there is no genuine Christianity? Why not just be honest and start one's own religion? Why call it "Christianity"?
It doesn't sound as if you have read the material you are criticising Ding or you would know it can't be dismissed so easily
Spong is aces. He's not bad for a Christian. At least he knows the difference between delusion and logic and he's ready to challenge what is taught by churches that believe in fairy tales. Harmful ones at that.
Should he step down because he doesn't think the bible is inspired and that the supernatural should be dismissed? Hell no he shouldn't!
His brand of Christianity is based on humanistic qualities,concerns. and values. He lives in the real world and I guess he feels that the best teachings of Jesus have value even in this day and age. He is marching to a different drummer and he is becoming more and more mainstream as more and more people describe themselves as Christians but unaffiliated with any denomination.
He's one of the few who can resolve many of the ugly things one can find in the bible and liberate the basic and simple teachings of the Jewish Rabbi......... Jesus.
Gladiator mention, re-write it. For example, Adam and
Eve wasn,t the first human but the first Christian. The exodus
it was 40 days. The flood was locally. I think you would have more
people returning to religion. Many of the stories in the Bible are
just to hard to believe.
i believe miraculous things can happen in normal time. My own life has been filled with events that are way beyond the predicted odds. There is a commonality of human religious experience across every major religion. As I said, Spong casts himself as a prophet and explainer. His role is as valuable to a church as a theological or parish priest. He reminds me of Lenny Bruce, throwing material up to scrutiny. I do not agree with much of what he says but I rejoice that he says it. For every person who has left church b/c of him, many more felt welcome. Spong is proof that you can question your faith and remain a Christian. He is an Episcopalian, the American branch of the Church of England. Henry VIII founded the church as a schism from the RC Church. So many people were burned at the stake or beheaded, complete with political instability, during his reign and his immediate successors. Henry was opposed to Luther and Rome yet Roman in his heart. His daughter, Elizabeth, became the stable ruler. It was decided by the English ruling class to allow a wide range of beliefs in the church. Many Catholics believed still and were hunted down. Most Protestants and Anglicans looked the other way.
Episcopalians are an umbrella religion to a large extent. He plays a role. His sermons and books create tension with the religion. I don't see the tension as a bad thing. If you can't come up with arguments to counter Spong's more extreme views, I don't think your Christianity is strong.
