by tec 132 Replies latest jw friends
Dear Tammy said, "it is Christ who shows us God, not the Bible". I cannot as a rational person trust that anything in the Bible is true, much of it may in fact be true, but I have no basis for trust.
So, where do I find this non-Biblical Christ who points his finger for me ?
p.s I.m off to work now, so may not see any reply for a while, thanks.
Let's see... was the Law human or Divine? Let's start there.
So, where do I find this non-Biblical Christ who points his finger for me ?
That was exactly my point before. If the bible isn't God's word, then on what basis should I believe that Christ is, especially if he hasn't spoken to me personally, as he has certain others?
I find it extra amusing that she has stop answering or refering to questions that she clearly has no answer for, thus sinking deeper into self deception...
And I, EE, find it extra amusing that you come on this thread twice to speak about me, my feelings, my motivations, etc... but you have not addressed the OP at all. I'm not ignoring questions. I answered those asked of me. But I am trying to actually keep this thread on topic. Yet very few people are willing to actually discuss the topic. Now, if you don't believe, then the OP has to be a hypothetical for you, or you just refrain or respond as BlackSheep did. If you DO believe, how hard is it to answer the OP? Even Michelle has not done so, but has gone off about other things that I believe. So you, EE, do you think that the image of God is a book such as the bible, or do you think the image of God is the one He sent in his image? Do you have some other thoughts on the subject at hand? Or would you just like to make this personally all about me, and other things that I believe? (I do see your question Phizzy, and a few others... I am just working a lot, and have limited time. I'm just going in order, and so I will get back to you this evening.) Peace, tammy
Alright. If you want comments on topic, the Bible excellently represents the image of God. He is a jealous, vengeful guy who destroys at will. When he finally softens and sends his son, the message is not written until decades later so that the jealous vengeful destroyer can also offer the Revelation along with the "good news.
Christ looked to the law, the prophets and scriptures for authority, so Christians today can follow his example.
Any "twists" or conflicts in the scriptures are not cleared up by dropping those texts and turning to Christ. Christians claiming some sort of divine reception are just as much in conflict with each other as are the scriptures. No matter what you say, they cannot all have the Christ with them so they need the written word.
We could show you excerpts from historical records that make Charles Manson look good and merciful. If you choose to reject the rest of the story, it's the same with ignoring scriptures that show the negative side of God.
Dear Tammy said, "it is Christ who shows us God, not the Bible". I cannot as a rational person trust that anything in the Bible is true, much of it may in fact be true, but I have no basis for trust.
Okay. That's fair. You are not saying one or the other is the image of God.
My personal advice would be to test the message of what you read, to determine if there is truth or lie in it. (love is a good basis... as is the golden rule if you misunderstand love; not a perfect basis, but nothing is, since we are subject to our own limitations. Yet good) I don't mean the stories and such. I mean the teachings. You can do that in or for any religion.
Find truth and wisdom in someone's teachings, and you might have reason to think about trusting the person, themselves. At some point, you might even think about reaching out to that person in the way that He said he could be reached.
(You will note that i say some one... not some book, that is actually a collection of books with different authors, dating back what... 3000 years?)
If you wanted to know Him, you could ask God to send you His Son. Skip the bible, the religion, men, etc. Put your faith in God and ask Him to grant you ears to hear and eyes to see. But I don't know many people who want something that they don't believe in, and so they are not seeking. One must be seeking, knocking... to find, for the door to be opened.
Peace to you,
tammy
Let's see... was the Law human or Divine? Let's start there.
God's law was/is divine. The laws and rules and addendums that were added (sort of as damage control) were human. As was the misapplication of God's laws to begin with.
Peace,
tammy
There is enough cacophony from Christians whose view of Christ is centered on the Bible. The gospel accounts vary. Whose Christ is the image of God? It is a serious question. You have one image of Christ. I have another. Harry down the street has yet another. I find it arrogant that anyone would define Christ for another person. The canonical gospels are insufficient for me because I feel they were a political compromise more than truth. Elements of Gnosticsm are attractive to me. Within the canonical gospels,Jesus of Nazareth is contradictory. Sometimes he is love and meek. Other times-watch out for his rage! The Church knew the four gospels were different. The differences were supposed to make a gestalt Jesus different from that in any single gospel. Yet if Jesus was incarnate God, he should be solid. Christians have envisioned different images of Christ. Certain aspects of his life come into vogue, and then are out of date. How do we worship a God who is so variable? My gut is as valid as your gut. Without some accepted tradition, where is Jesus? When I studied Jesus in a college seminar, we were told to write four adjectives for Jesus in five seconds. As we shared our work in class, only the orthodox Jewish students wrote what is accurate in the gospels. How do you suggest we test the validity of Christ? Is our belief in Christ tied to our cultural tradition? Would we even be having this discussion if we lived in Tibet or Persia?
Alright. If you want comments on topic, the Bible excellently represents the image of God.
Represents the image of God, or IS the image of God?
The bible has conflicting views on God. Which to believe? The bible, nowhere, states that IT is the image of God... rather, that Christ is the image of God. So out of curiosity, how do you come to the conclusion that the bible is the image of God. If that is your conclusion.
He is a jealous, vengeful guy who destroys at will. When he finally softens and sends his son, the message is not written until decades later so that the jealous vengeful destroyer can also offer the Revelation along with the "good news.
But He doesn't change. So is it that he changed, or is it that the people had not understood Him? There are various sciptures throughout that bible showing how the people did not understand, both OT and NT.
So what do you have to support that God changed... rather than that the people were mistaken.
Because the God that Christ showed... can also be found in the OT. In the OT are conflicting understandings about God. How would you clear something like that up? I would, by looking at and listening to his Truth, Word, Image: Christ.
to search the scriptures thinking that by them you have life... but you refuse to come to me to have life.Christ looked to the law, the prophets and scriptures for authority, so Christians today can follow his example.
For authority? No. Else he would not have corrected anything. HE was the authority. The law was a shadow. The prophets prophecized about HIM. The scriptures spoke about HIM. Why go to those instead of going to Him. As he said... "You diligently study the scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about me; yet you refuse to come to me to have life."
Any "twists" or conflicts in the scriptures are not cleared up by dropping those texts and turning to Christ. Christians claiming some sort of divine reception are just as much in conflict with each other as are the scriptures. No matter what you say, they cannot all have the Christ with them so they need the written word.
Actually, I would suggest that the written word, and what people teach without understanding, is what trip them up. Hard to unlearn something that you have been taught to be true. Leaves you with baggage; and that is hard for some to shed.
We could show you excerpts from historical records that make Charles Manson look good and merciful. If you choose to reject the rest of the story, it's the same with ignoring scriptures that show the negative side of God.
Except you know what Charles Manon did. There is proof of it. You don't know such things about God... you need something/someone to show you who He is; and God did this through Christ. Not through a book that has conflicting views of Him.
Peace,
tammy
There is enough cacophony from Christians whose view of Christ is centered on the Bible. The gospel accounts vary. Whose Christ is the image of God? It is a serious question.Well, I would answer that THE CHRIST is the image of God. People's views of Him don't change that. We can listen and do our best to follow. In the end, He knows who listened to Him, and who did not. Sometimes we can see because of the fruit that people produce. Someone burning "witches" in the name of Christ... that person doesn't know Him. Because Christ did and taught nothing of the sort. Just the opposite.
You have one image of Christ. I have another. Harry down the street has yet another.I don't think any of us has an image of Christ. I think we have an understanding, probably not perfect, sometimes wrong. Like I said, fruits can show just how well (or not) that you understand Him. You also have to follow 'he who is not against you, is for you'. However, if someone is against you... well, they're NOT for you.
I find it arrogant that anyone would define Christ for another person.All right. Who is defining Christ for you? I am testifying to Christ being the image of God. Nothing else has authority over Him, and that includes the bible. Do you agree or disagree, and why?
The canonical gospels are insufficient for me because I feel they were a political compromise more than truth. Elements of Gnosticsm are attractive to me. Within the canonical gospels,Jesus of Nazareth is contradictory. Sometimes he is love and meek. Other times-watch out for his rage!The rage? You mean overturning the tables? I'm not sure I know of another time where he did something like that. I am not sure i see the contradictions that you are claiming to be there.
The Church knew the four gospels were different. The differences were supposed to make a gestalt Jesus different from that in any single gospel.You mean the inclusion of different gospels? Because i would suggest that there are differences based on perspective, and that can help us see him through different eyes of the people who witnessed to him.
Yet if Jesus was incarnate God, he should be solid.I don't think He is God incarnate, but I do think HE is solid. People having different views and testimonies and sharing those does not make Christ any less solid.
Christians have envisioned different images of Christ.Yes they have. I think the topic of this thread is one of the multiple reasons why this is so.
Certain aspects of his life come into vogue, and then are out of date. How do we worship a God who is so variable?I don't know. I would find it hard to do so. But that is why i look only to Christ, to see God. I trust Him, over all these other sources who show who or what Christ or God is.
My gut is as valid as your gut.Okay.
Without some accepted tradition, where is Jesus?Well, Christ had something to say about traditions, didn't he? How man can look to their own traditions, over looking to God. That man can put more validity in tradition than in truth. Christ is here, alive, and he does not depend upon tradition to show him.
When I studied Jesus in a college seminar, we were told to write four adjectives for Jesus in five seconds. As we shared our work in class, only the orthodox Jewish students wrote what is accurate in the gospels. How do you suggest we test the validity of Christ?By going to Him, as He said to do. By listening to the Spirit, asking for the Spirit, looking to Christ alone. Not just a book, or the traditional Christ... but the Christ who is real and alive and here.
Is our belief in Christ tied to our cultural tradition? Would we even be having this discussion if we lived in Tibet or Persia?Sure, and probably not. But at some point, you got to set aside tradition, the scriptures, whatever else it is that taught you about his existence... and go to Him. (I am speaking 'you' in general, and not 'you' specifically, btw) Peace, tammy
