Raven on 19/12/2007 at 21:59

---

fett - you have had a messed up experience; any Christian group that pretends to think all the answers are in the Bible alone are WAY off. I mean, that is just wrong, I don't quite know how else to counter that sort of thinking. Jesus couldn't have said that all the answers are in the bible - it wasn't even around at the time! The whole point of prayer is a personal umm... discussion?... between yourself and God (or asking for intersession on your behalf from friends/family/saints - and you also have community prayer.) Asking for forgiveness is routed in examination of your conscience and how you have affected others, and if it is done properly as a Sacrament (of reconciliation) then you have a priest present too acting as a guide... well kind off.

When the bible says to look to it for answers it is talking about It = your Knowledge/relationship with Jesus. The gospels are called the Word of Christ; Jesus Christ as the Word (as thought of as aspects of Jesus in the mass), The Word that/who was there from the beginning - not the book written by King James for crying out loud! Yes the bible is definitely a route to getting to know Jesus, but you will only find him if you are looking for him in life - not in the book!

As for no notion of self - "Love your neighbour as your self" is a fundamental message of the Gospels. I don't know the verse but, Paul saying something along those lines.. well he knows he was a bit of a dick - especially to the first Christian, so the guy would have had a low self estemm issue to begin with (remember Jesus is the role model, not Paul) , and when taken in context I imagine the passages reads something like "there is nothing good in me - except Jesus" - i.e. aspects of himself that are like Jesus - and when you think about Jesus as the definition of good (also he is God) it is a pretty obvious statement... anyway... wrong again about no notion of self - but you are still expected to act selflessly.

ULTIMATELY

I think that you are right about the difference in the understanding of religious/fundamental attitudes in Christian - and that it hits at the heart of the majority of the religious discussions on ttlg. Some folk here have a very crappy experiance of Christianity - and I think it is mainly based on some stupid (yes I said stupid) American "bible bashing" notion of what it means to be a Christian. The majority of Christians are Catholics - they should be taking their lessons from the book, and the traditions and the teachings of the church.

The bible is a brilliant starting point for faith - but without instruction on how to read it you will get problems (and some folk just will not be told!)

paloalto90 on 20/12/2007 at 00:14

---

Can you expand on that.
I agree that the stance one has toward the Bible and other religious books effects your life and spiritual life profoundly.It is almost a belief in magic that a book can contain all the answers.

st.patrick on 20/12/2007 at 00:18

---

paloalto, multiple posting isn't accepted very well here
also learn to spell belief ffs it ain't that hard

fett on 20/12/2007 at 02:46

---

Raven - since I've got a degree in theology with a minor in biblical languages, I'll keep my own council concerning what Jesus has to say about the bible, and what the bible has to say about itself. ;) I've been teaching from the bible for almost 20 years years now, and teaching advanced theology classes for about 8 of those years. That doesn't make me always right, it just gives me more ammunition. :sly:

You're obviously of Catholic background, which explains your objection to christians taking guidance from the bible alone, but that IS what the majority of Protestants do. The Catholic church places equal importance on tradition and the actual biblical text, and to some degree I think there's quite a lot of validity to that approach. What I'm getting at is that one way or the other, most every tradition and teaching of the church originates with the Bible - christians in general aren't seeking council from the bible + horoscopes, or the bible + guru, etc. The bible is the primary point of reference for faith and practice, and generally the main source of information used by other authorities within the church.

Jesus DID in fact endorse the OT in it's entirety in the form the Protestant church uses it today. He did this by way of endorsing Pharasaic teaching wholesale several times, and we know from the DSS and other references that it's the same OT used today. The NT is largely irrelevant to such a conversation because aside from the gospels, it consists mostly of commentary on the OT, and there's generally nothing 'new' in the NT except for the physical manifestation of the sacrifice(s) pre-figured in the OT.

Either way, we're picking hairs out of our butts here. The bottom line is that whether you accept the teachings of the church alone, the bible alone, or both, there are tons of inconsistencies between the theology and real life. Some people recognize these and move on, others try to find a way to excuse them. My point is that in excusing the discrepancies, the mind develops a strange world view and perspective over time that would be considered a bit mental anywhere outside of the church.

I also said before - though I have had crappy experiences in the church, I've also had many good ones. I'm not bitter because of those bad experiences, but they did allow me some objectivity that I wouldn't have gained otherwise. I started asking a lot of questions that I'd never wanted to confront before concerning long held ideas that get right to the heart of who we are as people. I concluded that myself, and most christians I've known over the years (on four different continents and in several different states, denominations, etc.) were ultimately unfulfilled. Why? Because we were living under the guilt of "original sin," thrown into a "family" with whom we realistically had nothing in common except this belief system, and were unsuccessfully trying to reconcile our life experiences with the teachings of the church and the bible. It simply makes for a form of passive psychosis at worst, or a philosophical brainwashing at best.

It doesn't bother me that other people find meaning in it. All I can say is that I went at it from every angle for 20 years and found nothing tangible at the end of it. When I let it go, I suddenly experienced all the freedom, peace, contentment, and love for life I'd been struggling to find in Christianity all those years. If the Holy Spirit really does change people and make them "new creatures" as both church tradition and the bible clearly teach, there's something terribly, horribly wrong with the contrast I (and many others like me) have experienced. It's very possibly that Emperor has no clothes.

ercles on 20/12/2007 at 06:57

---

Just with another nudge back on track if anyone is interested, there have been hints from the local Islamic community that daddy had gotten violent at home. Some women at mosque have been subtly hinting at the fact that there was a history of abusive behaviour in the family. No real surprises here, but I just thought you might like an update.

Anyway, back to Dawkins vs Jesus I guess.

On the topic, I personally subscribe to the theory that atheist extremists (such as Dawkins) are just as dangerous as religious extremists, except obviously in a much less immediate and obvious way.