Follow Christ but not Christian

[TheLightWithin]

If you have such a wide definition of trinity that even the Quran fits into it, of course, every Christian scholar was trinitarian.

But of course nobody is supposed to have such a wide definition of the trinity as the church declared a great many concepts heresies.
The average person though... isn't it possible that just about everybody is a heretic under strict church definitions?

 

[talib-al-kalim]

But of course nobody is supposed to have such a wide definition of the trinity as the church declared a great many concepts heresies.
The average person though... isn't it possible that just about everybody is a heretic under strict church definitions?

According to Islamic dogmatic, the Christian trinity dogma is heresy, and according to the Christians, Islam is heresy...

 

[RJM]

But of course nobody is supposed to have such a wide definition of the trinity as the church declared a great many concepts heresies.
The average person though... isn't it possible that just about everybody is a heretic under strict church definitions?

According to Islamic dogmatic, the Christian trinity dogma is heresy, and according to the Christians, Islam is heresy...

As far as I know a person has to be a Catholic to be declared a heretic. The penalty is excommunication from the Church. But it's unlikely to happen nowadays. It was the civil authorities who executed heretics, as a danger to the divinely given authority of the crown, in the days when church and state were interwoven

Heresy is defined by the Catholic Church as "the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith". The term heresy connotes both the belief in itself, and the attitude towards said belief.

Heresy has a specific meaning in the Catholic Church when it applies to someone's belief. There are four elements which constitute a person's formal heresy.

* the person in question must have had a valid Christian baptism
* the person claims to still be a Christian
* the person publicly and obstinately denies or positively doubts a truth that the Catholic Church regards as revealed by God (through the Scriptures or Sacred tradition)
* the disbelief must be morally culpable, that is, there must be a refusal to accept what is known to be a doctrinal imperative.

 

[EricPH]

According to Islamic dogmatic, the Christian trinity dogma is heresy, and according to the Christians, Islam is heresy...

We can't unite on doctrine. People don't generally care what others believe, but it is more important to know that they care.

What should unite us all is, the moral good, justice for all, love, kindness, mercy and forgiveness. The Golden rule, do unto to others, as you would have them do unto you. Love your neighbour as you love yourself.

 

[Thomas]

Naw...both...like the dictionary and meanings of words...there is the firsr...and second..and third and so on...

Oh, I don't disagree with that, we are always learning, simply that when the entire contextual frame is different, but when the over-arching paradigm is different, then the same lessons will be seen and appreciated differently.

I had an old book by a Japanese priest who went back to his old Zen master and read him the Beatitudes.
"That man is truly enlightened," was the comment. But a Catholic priest and a Zen monk would see an essentially laudable anthropomorphic message in quite different light. Even a devout humanist atheist would applaud the beatitudes, they speak of the human condition.

The only people who would sne er, I think, are consumer-capitalists, for whom the poor, the mournful, the meek, the hungry, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, the persecuted etc., are there to be used, abused, chewed up and spat out in the name of avarice.

 

[wil]

Omg Thomas I had to go back and read my post....the entire time I was writing my thought was on the beatitudes...and the various ways people interpret not only the words but the actions.

Had I written bearitudes anywhere?

But now that you mention it, it is like the unity interp of ten commandments...most think...murder? I don't murder...that one is easy.

But how often do we see that commandment violated in this forum.

We use words and attempt or succeed on murdering someone's hopes, dreams, beliefs?

We need to learn to eat, bathe, swim in scripture..not use it as a whip.

 

[Thomas]

Omg Thomas I had to go back and read my post....the entire time I was writing my thought was on the beatitudes...and the various ways people interpret not only the words but the actions.

Had I written bearitudes anywhere?

Yes, your post #37

... not use it as a whip.

Well ... Are we friends? Yes. Do we see eye to eye? No, and we both know that, but neither of us lets that stand in our way.

I read the link provided in the above post ... and as you might guess, I am far from convinced.
I quote from the beginning here:
The familiar translation, "blessed are ...," does not match the energy of these statements. Other translations have substituted "happy are ..." or "favoured are ...," with little benefit. The more recent Scholar's Version captures both the meaning and the energy with a jolting choice of words: "Congratulations to the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven!"
The Scholar's Version, a product of the Jesus Seminar, has been roundly dismissed by Scripture Scholars as bankrupt – even liberal Christian theologians regard it as a self-serving PR exercise. How the Seminar gets 'congratulations' from 'makarios' (μακάριος) can only really be understood when we acknowledge they follow in the footsteps of Thomas Jefferson, a self-declared "materialist" who sought to strip the "spiritual" out of the New Testament and arrive at an acceptable moral message.

The moral dimension of the exegesis is laudable, if a bit too accented to the material for my liking, but again there is a spiritual dimension which is largely – although understandably – ignored.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Omg Thomas I had to go back and read my post....the entire time I was writing my thought was on the beatitudes...and the various ways people interpret not only the words but the actions.

Had I written bearitudes anywhere?

But now that you mention it, it is like the unity interp of ten commandments...most think...murder? I don't murder...that one is easy.

But how often do we see that commandment violated in this forum.

We use words and attempt or succeed on murdering someone's hopes, dreams, beliefs?

We need to learn to eat, bathe, swim in scripture..not use it as a whip.

I see a difference between the 10 Commandments of the Torah and the Beatitudes of the Gospel.

"You must not murder" means "You must not kill anybody" (the Torah makes exceptions in penalty and martial laws). It does not go beyond the direct meaning, but it's a must, a minimum requirement, a strict guidance through prohibition. In Sharia science this is called "fard".

"Blessed are the merciful" sets a higher goal, an orientation, a guidance as to what we should aim at; a goal that we should try to meet although we may fail to achieve it in full. In Sharia science, this is called "mustahab".

Oh, I don't disagree with that, we are always learning, simply that when the entire contextual frame is different, but when the over-arching paradigm is different, then the same lessons will be seen and appreciated differently.

I had an old book by a Japanese priest who went back to his old Zen master and read him the Beatitudes.
"That man is truly enlightened," was the comment. But a Catholic priest and a Zen monk would see an essentially laudable anthropomorphic message in quite different light. Even a devout humanist atheist would applaud the beatitudes, they speak of the human condition.

I see the context of the Beatitudes and most teachings in the context of the Kingdom of God. Following this guidance makes the Kingdom of God grow in this world and prepares us to Jannah, with God's help through faith.

The Zen teacher sees this as a way to Enlightenment and Nirvana. The frame is different, but it doesn't really change the attitude Even if he has not the direct, concient relationship to God, he understands it from faith, as a far goal to target.

An atheist humanist sees in it a wise guidance towards a good society and mental health. He sees it without the background of faith as a continuous challenge and as a far goal to target. The attitude "I must do it myself" may make it more difficult and more exhausting to try and fail and try again, but the sense and the level of this Word is still the same.

 

[wil]

Lol, sometimes I miss having access to my whole brain and other times it does eliminate a hinderance!

"You must not murder" means "You must not kill anybody"

Nah, killing is permitted, encouraged even. Murder is not. And the unity version of the commandments moves it closer to beattitudes... short example...when your kid brings his artwork home you praise and put it on the fridge....it would be a sin to murder creativity, artistic expression, joy.

And yes, I do appreciate the red, pink, gray and black version of the Jesus Seminar vs a red letter bible....of course I am that liberal ilk that our orthodox and evangelical like to look down upon. I also understand TJs attempt at taking the marketing material (miracles) out of the gospels...and think he would have enjoyed the one that coincidentally bears his name as much as the seminar did.

I would also love to see a selection of modern scholars from a variety of denominations repeat the seminars expirement. It would fit both scientific method and the tradition of Rabbi arguing nuance of scripture.

 

[Thomas]

I would also love to see a selection of modern scholars from a variety of denominations repeat the seminars expirement. It would fit both scientific method and the tradition of Rabbi arguing nuance of scripture.

The problem is, it's a flawed premise from the get-go, that's why they don't.

 

[Thomas]

I also understand TJs attempt at taking the marketing material (miracles) out of the gospels...

I wonder if it ever strikes you how offensive this comes across?

 

[RJM]

If Jesus had been just some 'positive affirmations for a better life' coach, it's unlikely he would have attracted such attention as a healer at the time, or lasted 2000 years still going strong and still attracting discussion in the 21st Century on all sorts of internet forums, not just religious ones, imo

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Were Moses and Muhammad of virgin birth?

No.

The Qur'an says Jesus is of virgin birth. Who is the Father of Jesus?

The Quran states that God created Jesus in the womb of Mary.
The Catholic creed contains the contrary, saying, "genitus, non factus". As the creed is mostly containing disputed issues of belief, it opposes to a teaching that was already proposed by Christian scholars, which is confirmed in the Quran: "factus, non genitus".
Of course, it is a mystery. There is no scientific possibility for a woman to give birth to a male without a sperm containing the Y-chromosome [...] There's no natural explanation for virgin birth.

(Post edited by moderator)

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Nah, killing is permitted, encouraged even. Murder is not.

As I said, killing is permitted in penalty and martial law both in the Torah and the Quran and Hadith. Both are restrictive in this; Quran and Hadith are more restrictive in penalty law; the Torah has little restrictions in martial law; whereas Quran and Hadith, again, formulate clear restrictions (that have not been and are still not observed by many Muslim rulers, even less by terrorist groups claiming to be Muslim).

Jesus, revealing the ideals, blesses the peacemakers and rejects violence. Isaiah , as well, in his vision, saw complete peace. Jesus proposed to postpone penalty (John 8) and hesitate to kill according to penalty law. As a whole of the Word we received, killing is not encouraged.

And the unity version of the commandments moves it closer to beatitudes... short example...when your kid brings his artwork home you praise and put it on the fridge....it would be a sin to murder creativity, artistic expression, joy.

If you discourage your child, you don't murder, but you do wrong.

And yes, I do appreciate the red, pink, gray and black version of the Jesus Seminar vs a red letter bible....of course I am that liberal ilk that our orthodox and evangelical like to look down upon. I also understand TJs attempt at taking the marketing material (miracles) out of the gospels...and think he would have enjoyed the one that coincidentally bears his name as much as the seminar did.

I haven't attended that seminar, but TJ seems to me not very serious, rather attempting either to break down the Bible for disbelievers to make it seem more accessible to you, or adapting the sense to his own convictions. We all do the latter to some extent, but at least, we should try not to exaggerate in this.

I would also love to see a selection of modern scholars from a variety of denominations repeat the seminars expirement. It would fit both scientific method and the tradition of Rabbi arguing nuance of scripture.

Which experiment? Have you described it? I couldn't find it in the thread so far..

 

[wil]

@talib-al-kalim our views differ.... I did not say you were murdering them, but murdering their enthusiasm, creativity, spunk. Which I feel is a sin as I have met so many who took the words spoke from their parents to heart and stopped trying.

But we differ...in our ways.

And I was referring to the Jesus Seminar...which I and my scholars like and Thomas and his do not.

Again we differ.

I am a heathen who wears the heretic moniker with pride sometimes...cause...we differ.

 

[Faithfulservant]

God is not human and He/She/It could not (excuse) fuck Mary. There's no natural explanation for virgin birth.

Whoa. Was that necessary?

 

[RabbiO]

Whoa. Was that necessary?

I don’t think so.

 

[RJM]

There's no natural explanation for virgin birth.

Nor for other miracles? That's the nature of a miracle?

 

[Faithfulservant]

Adam and Eve were not procreated.. nor were all the animals at creation.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Adam and Eve were not procreated.. nor were all the animals at creation.

What do you mean?