Lunamoth, your point is well taken. I believe it is good to pray with others as well and it strengthens us. I could be wrong but the first community of believers did not have written texts to go on so we can't say that they adhered to any dogma which was my point in Bible interpretation. They probably prayed together in the spirit and shared their experience with each other.
Virtual_Cliff
Well-Known Member
I was just looking back over thae posts on this thread and was saddened by the animosity this article seems to have raised. It reminds me of when I was sixteen and the correct meaning of the apostles creed was explained to me. I had been making a few elementary mistakes because of the old-fashioned language. I remember how miffed I was.
We should bear in mind that Spong, far from attacking the Bible, is actually attacking slip-shod and archaic bible scholarship. Isn't that something we should all support, even if the results are uncomfortable? We may not necessarily agree with his conclusions, but that is no excuse to give way to gratuitous slander. Is this good Christian witness?
Also, trotting out the usual false prophet quotations gets us nowhere. The false prophets might be the ones we agree with. We should not take our prejudice as a guide.
The reason that first-century writers can be misleading has its roots in the philosophy of (I think) Kierkegaard. He writes that even if speech between humans and animals were possible, we would still not undersatnd, say, lions because the world of the lion is so very different from our own that we should have too few shared concepts to communicate. Between the first century and now, there are few shared concepts, and those we do appear to share may have changed beyond recognition. Spong is undertaking the seriously difficult task of trying to get into the mind of the writers in order to better understand their writings. Perhaps those who disagree with his conclusions might at least meet him on the same level. -VC
We should bear in mind that Spong, far from attacking the Bible, is actually attacking slip-shod and archaic bible scholarship. Isn't that something we should all support, even if the results are uncomfortable? We may not necessarily agree with his conclusions, but that is no excuse to give way to gratuitous slander. Is this good Christian witness?
Also, trotting out the usual false prophet quotations gets us nowhere. The false prophets might be the ones we agree with. We should not take our prejudice as a guide.
The reason that first-century writers can be misleading has its roots in the philosophy of (I think) Kierkegaard. He writes that even if speech between humans and animals were possible, we would still not undersatnd, say, lions because the world of the lion is so very different from our own that we should have too few shared concepts to communicate. Between the first century and now, there are few shared concepts, and those we do appear to share may have changed beyond recognition. Spong is undertaking the seriously difficult task of trying to get into the mind of the writers in order to better understand their writings. Perhaps those who disagree with his conclusions might at least meet him on the same level. -VC
S
Sacredstar
Guest
Dear Marsh
Well a Muslim once said to me that once the truth is known the world might be shocked and I say to you that this could be the case. Remember last time Jesus came he divorced himself from the Torah, it would not surprise me at all if when he comes again he does the same with the Bible.
Why else should he come if not to teach us new things?
An open mind is an open heart.
Love beyond measure
Kim xxx
Marsh said:
Well a Muslim once said to me that once the truth is known the world might be shocked and I say to you that this could be the case. Remember last time Jesus came he divorced himself from the Torah, it would not surprise me at all if when he comes again he does the same with the Bible.
Why else should he come if not to teach us new things?
An open mind is an open heart.
Love beyond measure
Kim xxx
B
Bandit
Guest
please show me where Jesus divorced himself from the bible.
once again we must rescue the bible...pull the sticky bubble gum out from the pages and try not to rip them to badly. put the gum on your nose and go sit in the corner.
and to Marsh, YES... when the anti christ is fully revealed the bibles will start to go bye-bye, just like Hitler tried and the head chopping will begin again. Thank God I wont be here for that mess.
We should be getting our souls rescued. The bible will take care of itself.
Lord have mercy on us.
Basstian
In Search
Prov 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him
Prov 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
Prov 14:14 The backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways:
In all truth, it's hard to see how this thread was started without any intention to challenge other Christians and specifically attack their views. Spong is a controversial topic after all.SacredStar said:
It *is* a good topic - but started for the wrong reasons.
Mus Zibii
QUID EST VERITAS
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
I'm such a sucker I gotta say some stuff. Its off topic, but the topic started off topic. Someone pointed out how no one ever demands that Muslims revise the Quran, or Jews the Torah, etc. There actually are liberal Muslims, Jews, etc. I've had Muslim apologists tell me that the reason Allah required four witnesses to testify to a sin was because he knew that finding that many knowledgable accusers would be near impossible. That seems utterly in opposition to what the texts says or what common sense dictates. Anyway, revisionism is everywhere. Its just another form of interpretation. Not one I care for, though.
Anyway, I don't have time to spend on the net like I use to, so I might not be able to respond if anyone actually replies to my post, but I wanted to say some stuff.
1. If the Torah is meant to be taken so literally, why are apparent literal passages interpreted by Jesus and the evangelists as figurative prophecy for the life of Christ?
2. If the Torah and Tanakh are so resistent to liberal interpretation, why does Jesus paraphrase frequently?
3. If one reads the Bible as wholly literal, or without historical context, or without the assumption that fallible men wrote it, don't errors in logic appear? From the mountain from which the entire world can be seen, to the sudden naming of God? If one attempts to reconcile these things, doesn't that lead one to mystical interpretation?
4. If the Bible is perfect, why are books cited that never became part of canon, though they are quoted as scripture? Why did the more anti-semitic Church fathers accuse Jews of changing scripture to blot out mention of Jesus? Why weren't the gospels written by the authors together, or combined by the Apostles rather than Romans, if they were to be whole and perfect?
5. Why do Papists and Prods frequently raise the spectre of 'anti-Christ' and 'devil' to condemn rival Christians when in the gospel Jesus is accused by the apparently pious as devil-possessed and blasphemous? Isn't this tempting fate?
6. If Jesus can negate circumcision and food laws with logic, isn't it logical that he negated violence and snide judgement by the words of 'forbid them not' and 'he who lives by the sword'? Why is it assumed that the Torah trumps the NC when it comes to matters of judgement and violence?
Perhaps these considerations was what was intended as a 'rescue'.
Anyway, I don't have time to spend on the net like I use to, so I might not be able to respond if anyone actually replies to my post, but I wanted to say some stuff.
1. If the Torah is meant to be taken so literally, why are apparent literal passages interpreted by Jesus and the evangelists as figurative prophecy for the life of Christ?
2. If the Torah and Tanakh are so resistent to liberal interpretation, why does Jesus paraphrase frequently?
3. If one reads the Bible as wholly literal, or without historical context, or without the assumption that fallible men wrote it, don't errors in logic appear? From the mountain from which the entire world can be seen, to the sudden naming of God? If one attempts to reconcile these things, doesn't that lead one to mystical interpretation?
4. If the Bible is perfect, why are books cited that never became part of canon, though they are quoted as scripture? Why did the more anti-semitic Church fathers accuse Jews of changing scripture to blot out mention of Jesus? Why weren't the gospels written by the authors together, or combined by the Apostles rather than Romans, if they were to be whole and perfect?
5. Why do Papists and Prods frequently raise the spectre of 'anti-Christ' and 'devil' to condemn rival Christians when in the gospel Jesus is accused by the apparently pious as devil-possessed and blasphemous? Isn't this tempting fate?
6. If Jesus can negate circumcision and food laws with logic, isn't it logical that he negated violence and snide judgement by the words of 'forbid them not' and 'he who lives by the sword'? Why is it assumed that the Torah trumps the NC when it comes to matters of judgement and violence?
Perhaps these considerations was what was intended as a 'rescue'.
S
Sacredstar
Guest
And the heart as many tongues, some hearts worship suffering, pain and death caused by man and others the joy and celebration of life that GOD created.
I will find you some quotes Bandit when I have a more time. But looks like
Mus Zibii as expressed the point.
being love
Kim xxx
Perceptions are an illusion that have no basis in reality.
I will find you some quotes Bandit when I have a more time. But looks like
Mus Zibii as expressed the point.
being love
Kim xxx
Perceptions are an illusion that have no basis in reality.
S
Sacredstar
Guest
The Contrast
between the old law OT and the new law NT
After 40 years in the desert Moses ascends the mount to give the laws to the people of Israel.....after Jesus' 40 days in the desert he ascends the mount also and gives the new law in his sermon on the mount.
The "Law of Moses" –v- the "Law of Christ" which are both said to govern the kingdom. The "Old Law" only condemned the outward actions. but the "New Law" introduced by Jesus condemned the inner conditions which lead to the outer actions.
Unlike the 10 commandments which bring curses upon the people for disobedience...Jesus gives 8 beatitudes which bring blessings to the people...Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven etc…….John 13:34 and in 15:12 he says " I now give you a NEW commandment love one another AS I HAVE LOVED YOU"
Paul also states in Galatians 5:23 that there are no laws against the fruits of the spirit. Paul even says that Charity is more important that faith in 1 Cor 13. And now abideth faith, hope charity, these three; but the greatest of these is Charity.
1. Cor 1, Exhortation to unity and dissensions reproved.
1.Cor,2:7 But we speak the wisdom of GOD in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which GOD ordained before the world unto our glory. Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory. So is this statement not a contradiction that Jesus died for our sins?
The notion that Jesus rejects the Torah presupposes that Jesus shares an understanding of the law with the Pharisees. Stephen Westerhom, ]Jesus and Scribal Authority[ (Lund: CKW Gleeerup, 1978), pp. 128-29, has laid this presupposition to rest. The Pharisees viewed the scriptural law as statutes to which they added their extra-biblical laws. A statutory view of the law requires that all laws are equally binding. The Pharisees introduce legislation or resort to legal fiction in order to resolve inevitable conflicts that arise when one believes that the letter of the law must be fulfilled. Jesus, in contrast, does not feel compelled to fulfil the letter of the law. Jesus balanced respect for previous laws but had more empathy combined with a critical social perspective in my view that were based upon the natural laws of the universe, justice for all through love, freedom and equality for all. Yes he did negate laws like circumcision did he not say that one was meant to be circumcised GOD would have created you that way!
So was Jesus more a revisionist of the law then a divorcer of the Torah?
The only prophet that Jesus likened himself to from the OT was Prophet Jonah but yet there is remarkable similarities between Moses and Jesus.
Here's a link
http://myweb.lmu.edu/fjust/Bible/Matthew_Discourses.htm
Love beyond measure
Kim xxx
between the old law OT and the new law NT
After 40 years in the desert Moses ascends the mount to give the laws to the people of Israel.....after Jesus' 40 days in the desert he ascends the mount also and gives the new law in his sermon on the mount.
The "Law of Moses" –v- the "Law of Christ" which are both said to govern the kingdom. The "Old Law" only condemned the outward actions. but the "New Law" introduced by Jesus condemned the inner conditions which lead to the outer actions.
Unlike the 10 commandments which bring curses upon the people for disobedience...Jesus gives 8 beatitudes which bring blessings to the people...Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven etc…….John 13:34 and in 15:12 he says " I now give you a NEW commandment love one another AS I HAVE LOVED YOU"
Paul also states in Galatians 5:23 that there are no laws against the fruits of the spirit. Paul even says that Charity is more important that faith in 1 Cor 13. And now abideth faith, hope charity, these three; but the greatest of these is Charity.
1. Cor 1, Exhortation to unity and dissensions reproved.
1.Cor,2:7 But we speak the wisdom of GOD in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which GOD ordained before the world unto our glory. Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory. So is this statement not a contradiction that Jesus died for our sins?
The notion that Jesus rejects the Torah presupposes that Jesus shares an understanding of the law with the Pharisees. Stephen Westerhom, ]Jesus and Scribal Authority[ (Lund: CKW Gleeerup, 1978), pp. 128-29, has laid this presupposition to rest. The Pharisees viewed the scriptural law as statutes to which they added their extra-biblical laws. A statutory view of the law requires that all laws are equally binding. The Pharisees introduce legislation or resort to legal fiction in order to resolve inevitable conflicts that arise when one believes that the letter of the law must be fulfilled. Jesus, in contrast, does not feel compelled to fulfil the letter of the law. Jesus balanced respect for previous laws but had more empathy combined with a critical social perspective in my view that were based upon the natural laws of the universe, justice for all through love, freedom and equality for all. Yes he did negate laws like circumcision did he not say that one was meant to be circumcised GOD would have created you that way!
So was Jesus more a revisionist of the law then a divorcer of the Torah?
The only prophet that Jesus likened himself to from the OT was Prophet Jonah but yet there is remarkable similarities between Moses and Jesus.
Here's a link
http://myweb.lmu.edu/fjust/Bible/Matthew_Discourses.htm
Love beyond measure
Kim xxx
B
Bandit
Guest
What is taken literally from the OT is that God is all power and can do all the things He did without questioning them with science and men of doubt. Gods logic comes in many different ways that are different from mans logic.
While Jonah was in the belly of the whale 3 days (literal) so was the son of man in the heart of the earth 3 days (literal). It is all about types and shadows for the present day spiritual man and for the perfecting of the saints. The (3) death burial and resurrection of Jesus and how we take part in that.
The parables were not for the old days but for our generation to understand what things would come to pass. There was a change in dispensation called grace, where Jesus brought man back into loving favor with God, through obedience to the cross, if we seek Him through faith and in spirit.
I am not going to answer every question here Mus Zibii , because they are all the same basic answer, but you will most likely only continue to ask more questions (which is good to a point), but they are not about our logical answers when one begins to doubt, they sink into a pit.
Certainly the bible is open for interpretation and understanding the History is a good thing, you can see scripture in many ways. In number 5, it is not tempting fate, but rather things that must come to pass, which you may or may not be aware of. Dont ask me why, ask God why and he might show you in His Word. God works just like that, pulling good out of evil, rescuing the slaves and setting them free. There has been antiChrist since Herod went to slay all the first born at the birth of Jesus- LITERAL, just as Pharao slayed the first born trying to get Moses- LITERAL.
The Word shows us how antiChrist will become more prevelant toward the end, in blaspheming God and Jesus with man exalting and worshipping himself, and that is how we will know them.
It is all first literal (earthly), then second literal (spiritualy).
Maybe you only see what you see in the bible, because you choose to only see it that way and do not realize it.
Naming it a mystery and the other mystical, is two seperate ideas. A mystery has evidence along the way, mysticism can lead into vain imaginations. They are close but not the same. Some things we are never going to fully understand.
For some reason, only certain people can see certain things. Not sure why, but maybe that is part of fate and free will. People choose to see and believe what they want, We cannot outsmart God
with our own logic. I am pretty much over this thread too. I see it going nowhere except stuck in the mud. It will make good compost. LOL
B
Bandit
Guest
no no no NO all the same 10 commandments were taught by Jesus, explaining the sabbath, and that THE WHOLE of the LAW rested on those two commandments of loving God and loving each other.
Love LOVE love aint gonna cut it if we love adultery and love murder and love idols and... .
The fruits of the spirit are not the same thing as the commandments.
Matt5:21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Luke 18:
20Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
S
Sacredstar
Guest
Dear Bandit
Yes you are correct scholars confirm that Jesus taught a couple of the original commandments.
Yes you are correct love will not cut it
without compassionate action.
Love heals the world but compassionate action changes it, and this is divine love, when they are both intertwined we become divine love in manifestation on the earth plane and an instrument of GOD's holy spirit and the will to good.
Then the blessings fall from heaven.
As Jesus said 'let those that have not sinned throw the first stone' for he did not judge anyone but showered them with love and compassion.
Blessings in abundance
Kim xx
Yes you are correct scholars confirm that Jesus taught a couple of the original commandments.
Yes you are correct love will not cut it
without compassionate action.
Love heals the world but compassionate action changes it, and this is divine love, when they are both intertwined we become divine love in manifestation on the earth plane and an instrument of GOD's holy spirit and the will to good.
Then the blessings fall from heaven.
As Jesus said 'let those that have not sinned throw the first stone' for he did not judge anyone but showered them with love and compassion.
Blessings in abundance
Kim xx
B
Bandit
Guest
aah yes, but he did make some judgements that you may not be aware of. He had that authority. I dont have it, but Jesus did.
S
Sacredstar
Guest
Only of his contemporaries Bandit who he considered to be blind masters in poverty of spirit, drunk and in darkness, he considered that they did not walk their talk or live the real meaning of their own laws, but he learnt from the error of his ways and not to waste time or energy on those unwilling to hear his word.
What does everyone think of the new international translation of the bible I have not got a copy yet but here is an example that I have on file.
Mark 4 The Sower
(New International Version)
The Parable of the Sower
1Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. 2He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3“Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times.”
9 Then Jesus said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, “ ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”
13 Then Jesus said to them, “Don't you understand this parable?
How then will you understand any parable?
14 The farmer sows the word.
15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them.
16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy.
17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop–thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown.”
What does everyone think of the new international translation of the bible I have not got a copy yet but here is an example that I have on file.
Mark 4 The Sower
(New International Version)
The Parable of the Sower
1Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. 2He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said: 3“Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times.”
9 Then Jesus said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, “ ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!’[a]”
13 Then Jesus said to them, “Don't you understand this parable?
How then will you understand any parable?
14 The farmer sows the word.
15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them.
16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy.
17But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop–thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown.”
S
Sacredstar
Guest
does the new international version (e.g. modern translations of the originals) cut it? and rescue the bible?
B
Bandit
Guest
i dont know for sure, it might be ok. I think it leaves the blood of Jesus in it for forgiveness and remission of sin and that is what we need.Sacredstar said:
I have half of the KJV memorized (well almost half), so i am not going that route of trying every version under the sun for answers.
but you do what you feel is best for you Starla in rescuing the bible. I put a parachute on my bible, in case it falls out of an airplane.
B
Bandit
Guest
Ephesians 1:7 (New International Version)
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace
In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace
S
Sacredstar
Guest
LOL Bandit I have much more important things to do and must get on.....I feel sure the bible will survive forever.
Dear Dor
The word Hate does not mean what you think it means.
I did do some work on translations last year and from memory the original translations from where these words were taken 'hate' actually means 'less good' and 'evil' love less....so you see these words have taken on different meanings to us dependent on how they were presented by the clergy and have now become part of modern language. But I am sure there are some learned friends around that might enlighten us further on this.
Sorry did not keep the links.
being love
Kim xx
Dear Dor
The word Hate does not mean what you think it means.
I did do some work on translations last year and from memory the original translations from where these words were taken 'hate' actually means 'less good' and 'evil' love less....so you see these words have taken on different meanings to us dependent on how they were presented by the clergy and have now become part of modern language. But I am sure there are some learned friends around that might enlighten us further on this.
Sorry did not keep the links.
being love
Kim xx
Interesting contemplations.