Biblical inerrancy

[jmccr8]

6 hours ago, larryp said:

I agree; that's what I've been saying all along.   It will help if you read the text. 

Hi Larry

Please link the post where you said any such thing as you were arguing that hell was written in the Dead Sea scrolls

[Alchopwn]

14 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

As for using the bible as inspriation on how to live a good life, no, it is not coherent enough and there are already too many people metaphorically bashing each other over the head with what they think is written in the bible.  

I don't believe that the Bible is a guide to the "good life" either, and completely agree with you.  To properly put my comment in context, my claim based on the literature of the period is that this is what people in the 19th Century reform movements often believed.

 

[Alchopwn]

18 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Al

I would think that because the religious landscape of American is changing by both Christians and none Christians that imposing a Christian ideology on a country based on religious freedoms would create more pro Latham it solve by looking for solely based on Christian ideology. The enforcement of such precept’s would alienate a large percentage of the population 

Hi jmccr8, buddy, thanks for the comment.

I am not suggesting that we need to force people to "study the Bible", or force them to do any other damn thing.  I hate that idea intensely and would violently oppose it if necessary (health permitting).  I am saying ONLY that we can look to the Bible to find a common language for moral debate, between two increasingly polarized political parties in the USA.  The way I see things, the GOP has dominated the Christian landscape in the USA, but there is a whole other dimension to the so-called Christian message which the conservatives are pointedly ignoring.  Jesus says a lot about avoiding conflict, promoting tolerance and equality, and forgiving people.  Jesus also repeatedly suggests that the poor and the outcasts are closer to god than the rich.  Now if the USA is as determined to politicize religion as it seems to be, perhaps this is where the discussions need to happen?  In Bible study classes.  In the pulpits.  Perhaps we need Democrat Televangelists to compete for the soul of rural America?

Edited August 16, 2022 by Alchopwn

[jmccr8]

2 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Hi jmccr8, buddy, thanks for the comment.

I am not suggesting that we need to force people to "study the Bible", or force them to do any other damn thing.  I hate that idea intensely and would violently oppose it if necessary (health permitting).  I am saying ONLY that we can look to the Bible to find a common language for moral debate, between two increasingly polarized political parties in the USA.  The way I see things, the GOP has dominated the Christian landscape in the USA, but there is a whole other dimension to the so-called Christian message which the conservatives are pointedly ignoring.  Jesus says a lot about avoiding conflict, promoting tolerance and equality, and forgiving people.  Jesus also repeatedly suggests that the poor and the outcasts are closer to god than the rich.  Now if the USA is as determined to politicize religion as it seems to be, perhaps this is where the discussions need to happen?  In Bible study classes.  In the pulpits.  Perhaps we need Democrat Televangelists to compete for the soul of rural America?

Hi Al

iIn Canada there are a fair number of Muslim and Hindu people involved in politics and am not familiar enough with the American status in that sense  I think that it would be difficult to align productive dialogue based solely on a Christian moral perspective without generating hurt/bad feelings with different religious ideologies and non- Christian’s would likely be offended by the rejection or exclusion. Maybe if it was more of a Bahi type of inclusionary format it would be better received by all.

We can easily see how some people get fired up in threads here so multiply the by billions and we end up pretty much with the same religious/political conflicts that exist in the world as present status

Personally I think that there are a lot of non-practicing, half believers that don’t really believe in it but is so ingrained in culture and politics that they just go along with and in some cases for personal safety. To me morals are a part of what social inter-dependent humans do and have been a part of what we are. Because of millions of years of human development in groups principals are formed along with a hierarchy to have final word. Mostly religions developed as a means of teaching how to be with a group and work for the best interest of the whole them became bastardized to what we see today as structured profit religious institutions we have .Religion and gods are fairly recent developments in the history of or evolution and have had millions of years to study ourselves to become efficient enough to populate the world without structured religion.

Excuse me for my ramblings and will close this post with I think for the most part if people just saw others as equal and an essential part of being a group all religious and political aside we would have a better chance of success.

Thanks for the welcome and it is an interesting idea for discussion.

Edited August 16, 2022 by jmccr8

[lightly]

      ^ Great points j !  
It is an interesting discussion (thanks Alchopwn for initiating it)    I’d like to see more educational emphasis placed on teaching the societal, sociological, and personal advantages of human Cooperation .  ..in classes like sociology and philosophy, ..I seem to remember a class called Civics.    Kids should learn about morality, and ethics, etc. as being the basis for human coexistence.   To keep a separation of church and state.. maybe best to leave  spirituality out of ‘school’?   

 (for some reason I keep thinking about stuff like the meteorological destruction of the Spanish Armada while attacking England …and how it was accepted by both sides as God’s will !  ..and how ancient armies and their leaders, actually believed that the outcomes were always ,ultimately, dependent on the will of god..or the gods! )  (most now understand of course that the richest guy usually wins?;)   progress? 

Edited August 16, 2022 by lightly

[cormac mac airt]

10 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Hi jmccr8, buddy, thanks for the comment.

I am not suggesting that we need to force people to "study the Bible", or force them to do any other damn thing.  I hate that idea intensely and would violently oppose it if necessary (health permitting).  I am saying ONLY that we can look to the Bible to find a common language for moral debate, between two increasingly polarized political parties in the USA.  The way I see things, the GOP has dominated the Christian landscape in the USA, but there is a whole other dimension to the so-called Christian message which the conservatives are pointedly ignoring.  Jesus says a lot about avoiding conflict, promoting tolerance and equality, and forgiving people.  Jesus also repeatedly suggests that the poor and the outcasts are closer to god than the rich.  Now if the USA is as determined to politicize religion as it seems to be, perhaps this is where the discussions need to happen?  In Bible study classes.  In the pulpits.  Perhaps we need Democrat Televangelists to compete for the soul of rural America?

Therein lies the problem IMO, for anything meaningful one would have to look for the best amongst ALL religious texts since even the Bible has it’s share of the worst of human ideas. 
 

cormac

[+Desertrat56]

20 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Therein lies the problem IMO, for anything meaningful one would have to look for the best amongst ALL religious texts since even the Bible has it’s share of the worst of human ideas. 
 

cormac

I don't understand why we have to look in religious texts, we have societal rules and laws that dictate proper behaviour and those can be changed if they aren't working.   Religion has nothing to do with living a good life or being a good person.  

[cormac mac airt]

9 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I don't understand why we have to look in religious texts, we have societal rules and laws that dictate proper behaviour and those can be changed if they aren't working.   Religion has nothing to do with living a good life or being a good person.  

Wasn’t my idea, I’m just saying if we use the best of one we should use the best of all. Other than that I’d agree with you. 
 

cormac

[lightly]

Like it says in my wife’s copy of  “SOCIAL LIFE”  or The Manners and Customs of Polite Society.   By Maud C. Cooke (the well known and popular author).  .  Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1896, by J.R. Jones, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at .Washington, D.C.     “The essence of etiquette will be found in that Golden Rule from Holy Writ that enjoins us to do unto others as we would that they should do unto us and where on Lord Chesterfield based his maxim for the cultivation of manners “ .  ahem..   “ Observe carefully what pleases or displeases you in others, and be persuaded that, in general, the same things will please or displease them in you” 
 

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 5:09 AM, Abramelin said:

Every ancient sailor with a working brain would have known the earth was round.

Edited to add:

Round as in spherical.

YHWH

We are not talking about sailers but rather the general public. That's the point. 

[larryp]

On 8/12/2022 at 10:05 PM, Djedi said:

No it's Biblical! Texts from all the different stages of YHWH development are found in the bible!

YHWH's stages were recorded? That's as ludicrous as you trying to capture the sun, pal, back to reality.

[cormac mac airt]

1 hour ago, larryp said:

YHWH

We are not talking about sailers but rather the general public. That's the point. 

And you would be wrong: 

Quote

The earliest clear documentation of the idea of a spherical Earth comes from the ancient Greeks (5th century BC). The belief was widespread in the Greek world when Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of Earth around 240 BC. This knowledge spread with Greek influence such that during the Early Middle Ages (~600–1000 AD), most European and Middle Eastern scholars espoused Earth's sphericity. Belief in a flat Earth among educated Europeans was almost nonexistent from the Late Middle Ages onward, though fanciful depictions appear in art, such as the exterior panelsof Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_flat_Earth

Seems your flat earth claim is dead on the vine. Not unexpected! 
 

cormac

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 8:15 AM, newbloodmoon said:

". . .  but one of the reasons why I had left was because . . . "

YHWH

Was it because they tried to teach you that God supports a torture chamber (Hellfire.) I would have left too. Anyone can smell sh*** at a distance.

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 7:32 AM, Piney said:

Wow......Catholic antisemitism was quite pronounced but this wasn't Constantine. He worshipped Elagabalus i.e. Sol Invictus.

It was Constantine, can't you read? Oh, of course, you're in denials again!!

[+Hammerclaw]

On 8/15/2022 at 2:08 PM, Desertrat56 said:

He didn't do that, that pope (new Roman emperor) did that.  Paul did not change anything except for his hate of women, that was a message I got in all of his "books" I read, he wanted to perpetuate the roman version of misogyny.

Life for women in the Roman Empire was certainly a mixed bag which, never-the-less, improved over time.

Legal Status Of Women In Ancient Rome (womenintheancientworld.com)

Edited August 17, 2022 by Hammerclaw

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 7:42 AM, Desertrat56 said:

". . . I remember as a kid spending time with my aunt who taught us how to find anything in the bible quickly.  

YHWH

Well, in that case, you most surely remember this reminder YHWH gave to the Israelites before entering the promised land:

“When you have entered into the land that YHWH your God is giving you, you must not learn to imitate the detestable practices of those nations. There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire . . ."  Deuteronomy 18:9

YHWH does not support Hellfire. Period.

[newbloodmoon]

2 hours ago, larryp said:

YHWH

Was it because they tried to teach you that God supports a torture chamber (Hellfire.) I would have left too. Anyone can smell sh*** at a distance.

Nope grew up as a mormon and they don’t preach hellfire and damnation. “Sniff sniff”. Your right I can smell it and it’s real close.

[larryp]

On 8/12/2022 at 4:08 PM, cormac mac airt said:

@Piney

For Yahweh to be the sole creator He wouldn’t “have a portion” as He would HAVE IT ALL. 

cormac

I agree!!

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 3:00 AM, Piney said:

My people buried their trash and didn't even have a writing system.

YHWH

But did they do it before 1400 B.C.E.? That's the point, Piney.

[psyche101]

10 minutes ago, larryp said:

YHWH

But did they do it before 1400 B.C.E.? That's the point, Piney.

3,000 B.C. in Knossos, Crete.

People dug deep holes to hide refuse, which they would then cover with dirt. 

[larryp]

On 8/13/2022 at 7:49 AM, cormac mac airt said:

Piney apparently it’s not even Nicaean to begin with but Medieval. 

cormac

YHWH

Hey pal, it is what it is. So go ahead and deny it if it makes you feel better.

[Alchopwn]

16 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Therein lies the problem IMO, for anything meaningful one would have to look for the best amongst ALL religious texts since even the Bible has it’s share of the worst of human ideas. 
cormac

Now that is a more fair criticism imo, but how do we head off this social instability which is building?

[Piney]

5 hours ago, larryp said:

It was Constantine, can't you read? Oh, of course, you're in denials again!!

That document was written centuries after he was dead.

[Piney]

1 hour ago, larryp said:

YHWH

But did they do it before 1400 B.C.E.? That's the point, Piney.

Try 6000 BCE during the Archaic.

[Piney]

On 8/15/2022 at 2:08 PM, Desertrat56 said:

He didn't do that, that pope (new Roman emperor) did that.  Paul did not change anything except for his hate of women, that was a message I got in all of his "books" I read, he wanted to perpetuate the roman version of misogyny.

 

On 8/15/2022 at 2:11 PM, Abramelin said:

Nah.

The Romans didn't HATE women. At least not as much as Paul did.

I guess he had a small pecker, and was laughed at by the women he dated.

 

That stuff against women was a later addition to Paul's letters.

Roman chauvinism was proverbial.