If something is in conflict with Christ, then it is not the truth. Because HE is the truth. Simple. He is the one we are told to follow and listen TO. Not the bible, not men, not religion. Just Christ.
TEC Documentary hypothesis
by mP 302 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
tec
You answered your own question. None of the BIble is inspired.
Yes, some of what was given to be written down is inspired. That which is given 'in spirit'. The prophets, Revelation, etc.
If we examine most of the message or the events recorded real or made up, we can see they are not good or moral.
You and I have had this conversation before.
They are simply the thoughts of ancient men who lived in a different harsher crueller word. Thats why we have slavery, rape, killings everywhere.
We have slavery, rape, killings everywhere... because that is what is IN some men to do. Not much has changed, except for the slavery somewhat. None of it was ever okay though. The law... that of the OT... and especially that of Christ (love) shows this. The law was there to deal with those who are 'lawless'.
THe rich men who wrote the bible made stuff up in Gods name to justify their positions and scare their subjcts.
Your proof?
Your scholars that back this for you?
The fact that God never helped them and they kept getting taken over is proof of this. The notion that God would help a nation based on some ancient ancestor is completely racist and stupid.
God DID help them, and on numerous occassions.
In any case, it is based on a promise. I don't know about you, but I would be a bit worried about a God who did not keep his promises.
It is also about love. Because when you love someone, you also love those THEY love.
God is supposedly our father and yet he wants Abrahams children to enslave and muder their brothers ?
Some have a different father. But nowhere does He want anyone to enslave or murder their brothers.
Again, look to His Living Word to know the truth of this. If you are going to look elsewhere, then you are not going to find the truth. Because the truth is only in ONE: Christ.
If you look at the laws and rants int he bible from the angle of a nasty lying ruling elite it makes sense.
Okay, often the 'rants' in the bible were against the 'elite' or against the bad/unfaithfulness of Israel... and then those giving the 'rants' (the prophets) were often killed. "You who kill the prophets"
In either case, certainly Christ (the Truth and Image of God) spoke against those who were burdening down the people. He spoke for those who were burdened down and abused and those who were being judged and 'beaten', that they might come to HIM, and be free.
Im sorry, the only way we can read any text is literally. Once you start introducing interpretation you deny the message the author was attempting to convey.
I'm sorry, but that is just untrue. Many texts are NOT literal, so to insist upon a literal reading of them is to deny the message the author was attempting to convery.
However, I do agree with you that man cannot place his own interpretation upon texts. Interpretation belongs to God, and to His Son... who KNOW what was/is meant.
If they meant to say something else they should have said it. By allowing interpretation in this manner you end up with chaos and thousands of different messages. This is why every xian religion has a different opinion. If God can create the universe then he can make sure his message is written down accurately and perfectly. I am a poor writer but im pretty sure my messages are not as confusing or twisted as often as the Bible.
Again... the assumption is that God gave his message through the bible.
God speaks through his Son. The Spirit.
I find it curious how some people think that God - Spirit - creator of the universe... would be limited to communicating to His creation and His children by means of ink and paper. That this would for some reason be his choice of communication. We don't go to our friends and write out a note and pass it to them to read. Only if they were deaf perhaps (discounting sign language)
The real problem is we have invented grand stories or answers that are simply not present or discussed in the bible.
This has happened, true. But you do the same in your interpretations.
People want to believe in jesus so they lie about the prophecies in the OT. REad them literally and the vast majority are not even close to matching Jesus, eg the virgin birth in Isaiah. People invent stories to fill in the gaps.
People want to believe in Christ based on His teachings, the love and life He offers.
One does not need the OT prophecies, if one can hear Him.
In any case, your asking for something to be read literally is in error, if it was not meant to be read literally. But rather being spirituall discerned. The eyes of the disciples had to be opened so that they could SEE all that had been written about Christ. Before their eyes were open, they could not see.
Peace,
tammy
-
tec
Jesus said nothing new. The love y9our brother is taken from Leviticus.
Christ is before Leviticus.
Jesus loved the Mosaic law, he never repealed it , thats simply made up by xians.
Christ loved God and loved us. There is nothing written about how he felt about the Mosaic law. He did state that some of those laws were given because the people were hard-hearted; not because God wanted it that way. For example, the law on divorce. He did ALSO state that God desired MERCY, over sacrifice.
Im still waiting for a simple statement from Jesus that proves me wrong but you can never give it me.
You say a lot of things. So... a statement that proves you wrong about what exactly?
You always tell me Jesus loves this and that but you can never show me from the gospels.
Please be specific. I do not know what you are objecting to.
The gospels tells us that Jesus supported slavery, racism and continued the fine ancient maltreatment of women as lesser beings. He was not revultionary.
Now here is a fine example of interpretation based on what YOU want to think, based on YOU not wanting to believe.
Using slavery in a parable speaks more to using something that the people will understand, rather than speaking to the right or wrong of it. Slavery was a soial norm that man chose. That being said, Christ came to set people FREE. The very opposite of supporting slavery.
There is no racism. The fact that the promise and invitation to life is open to all shows that. That people from every tribe, nature, culture, language, etc... are given white robes and called brothers of Christ... shows that. That Christ went FIRST to the Israelites, who had a covenant with God, shows that God upholds his promises/covenants.
Christ did not mistreat women. He treated women the same as He treated men. He spoke to them the same. He had female disciples. He showed himself first to women after having risen. He speaks to women now. And men. Whomever has the faith to hear Him.
Mat 5:17 says the law of Moses is perfect and will last forever.
It does not say that actually. Read it for yourself.
First... it says He did not come to abolish the Law (you added 'of moses'); or the Prophets.
Second... it says that He came to FULFILL these. (often if something is fullfilled it is finished)
Third... it says that 'the least stroke of a pen' will not disappear... UNTIL everything is accomplished. (Once Christ died... he said "it is done")
Paul also says that we who are in Christ are in a NEW covenant.
Not that this means there is anything wrong with the law. But the law can be summed up in 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'; and in love. If you interpret a law and it does not show love, then you are interpreting that law wrong to fit your own agenda. That is why Christ said to those who pointed at his disciples for picking and eating grain on the sabbath... "if you had known what this means "I desire mercy, not sacrifice", then you would not have condemned the innocent."
Jesus himself nearly always followed the law of Moses.
No. He always followed the Law. (stop adding 'of Moses'... because Moses made some allowances for the people, of which Christ spoke the truth of the matter instead... some of those liberties might have been taken by the scribes, to which Christ said 'woe to you scribes'. Often Christ reiterated what had been said before, and corrected it with the TRUTH)
He never said not to continue following it. We can see this in the writings of Paul where Paul has troubles with Peter and James about this very matter. They have lots of fights over circumcision and the law.
Where is Paul fighting with Peter and James over circumcision and the law?
Peace,
tammy
-
tec
What it literally says.
you can do that if you choose. not sure how many scholars out there would agree with you, even.
If you were honest, you would realize your "look at Christ" line is your version of "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"
I am being honest.
Christ is the One who reveals the 'man behind the curtain.'
Peace,
tammy
-
jgnat
I read Karen Armstrong's essay on Genesis and I was struck that different authors portray a variously personal God. J (Yahweh) E (Elohim) D (Deuteronomist) and P (Priestly source).
The Yahwist presents a God who declares his creation "good" and walks with Adam and Eve in the garden.
The Elohist introduces the concept of the "fear of God", and the aborted sacrifice of Isaac (scholars suggest that the original telling does not stop the sacrifice). God speaks through his angels and does not show his face.
The god you serve, tec, is absolutely truth and love. Could it be you have greater affinity to the Yahwist texts?
-
tec
Coincidentally perhaps, jgnat. (I have not researched those things... I just look to Christ). But I do have affinity to anything that reflects the Father who Christ showed and taught.
Peace,
tammy
-
jgnat
About that curtain, tec. You realize that you are in front of it and we have to take your word what's behind it? All your evidence is admittedly internal. Dorothy took a peek and you know what she found.
-
tec
You don't have to take my word for anything at all. I am putting it out there, giving what I am given... and what others do with that is up to them. I am not standing in front of the curtain, but rather pointing to the One who shows us who is 'behind that curtain'.
No more than that.
Peace to you,
tammy
-
PSacramento
To read something literaly is to read it within it's literary context.
It is not to read it in a "literal and concrete" manner.
I agree with the multi-source WRITINGS of Genesis.
Genesis 1 gives an account of the creation of the world, whereas Genesis 2 focuses on the events withing Eden.
Not two different accounts in regards to creation, but two different stories about creation.
-
THE GLADIATOR
The Wizard of Oz was a very telling story, because the wizard was not able to give them what they sough. The just discovered an old man behind a curtain conning people.
This led them to the discovery that what they were seeking had always been within themselves.
They just needed to believe in themselves.