Christianity vs Mormonism

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Locked
_GoodK

Post by _GoodK »

Jersey Girl wrote:
I'm not implying that you're quoting the Bible correctly. I do think you aren't thinking about what you're reading.


That's a bit of leap, don't you think?

Jersey Girl wrote: Had I made the claim, I would have gladly posted it myself. I don't think that engaging in thought is silly.


Asking me to post text that ANYBODY can read for themselves either online or in their Bible, especially after I gave you a reference to look up is silly.
Jersey Girl wrote: When you make claims on a board such as this, it's not unusual for someone to challenge your claims.


What exactly were you challenging by asking me to post the full text of a Bible verse that I referenced?

Jersey Girl wrote:I'm looking for global references, I don't see them. Are you saying that the Caananites knew the world was round and that other countries existed?


I am not saying anything about the Caananites nor the flat-earth theory.

As I suspected, you had nothing substantive to offer in regards to those scriptures.

*feeling like I just wasted ten minutes of my life*
_GoodK

Post by _GoodK »

Ray A wrote:
GoodK wrote:You are grasping at straws my friend. There is nothing muddy about the Church's England's role in the curriculum of schools there. And the lesson plan I gave you doesn't even hint at the concept of the Noah story being allegory.


If it was taught as an allegory, by moderates like Spong, for example, would you consider that a bad thing?


No, I wouldn't object to the story being taught as an allegory, as long as it was taught in the same context as the Gods of Mt. Olympus or any other myth.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

GoodK wrote:No, I wouldn't object to the story being taught as an allegory, as long as it was taught in the same context as the Gods of Mt. Olympus or any other myth.


That's pretty much what Spong does, and he's a moderate Christian. That's what John Dominic Crossan does; he doesn't even believe there's an afterlife, but he adamantly says he's Christian. You said you feel moderates are, more or less, "in bed" (my paraphrase) with the fundamentalists. Is this a justifiable connection?
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

In response to your "knock yourself out" comment. Yes, I intend to. You know, heck, one of us might just learn something of interest or of use to us.

The Bible on homosexuality:

Leviticus 20:13

13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.


The above is not quoted in context, GoodK. There are additional references to what appear to be condemnation of homosexuality found in other parts of the Old Testament. The one above makes no mention at all of lesbianism. Does that cause you to think that there might be cultural context missing from our modern interpretation? Do you think there were no lesbians during this time period?

Romans 1: 24-32

[24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
[25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
[26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
[28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
[29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
[30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
[31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
[32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.


The above portion of scripture is a blanket condemnation of something alright, but not a blanket condemnation of homosexuality. You missed the intro to this series of verses, GoodK. If I am not mistaken, it gives a direct reference to Paganism. When you got back into the the text, look for references to Pagan gods. There were a couple of things going on during that time period. For example, Pagan fertility rites, temple prostitutes, orgiastic ritual worship..apparently Pagans were fond of hot monkey sex in the temple.

There was also the Greco-Roman accepted cultural practice of social conditioning that involved pederasty. Are you familiar with that? This was present in Paul's culture. When you see references to "effeminate" in the New Testament, those are largely references to the "beloved" in the pederastic relationship.

There. Knock yourself out.


Thanks, I probably will eventually but it's a little too late in the evening right now.

;-)
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

GoodK wrote:You are grasping at straws my friend. There is nothing muddy about the Church's England's role in the curriculum of schools there. And the lesson plan I gave you doesn't even hint at the concept of the Noah story being allegory.


Balderdash. The way these stories are being presented they might as well be Grimm's Fairy Tales. I read your link, and acquainted myself fairly well with several pages of it. The Bible is being taught and presented in historical context as a work of literature that is important to certain people (Christians) as a holy book. The stories are being used to teach various concepts, or raise discussions on them (in this case, the story of Noah is being used to introduce the children to the Old Testament, and to discuss the concept of obedience).

There's no explicit statement that it's allegory there, to be sure, but there's also nothing there to prevent that interpretation.

Even if what you're asserting is that because this curriculum site sponsored by C of E influenced education seems to you to teach a universal flood (although I really see that nowhere on the site), that means by default that the Church of England believes in a universal flood, you can't stretch that to mean that all Christians believe in a universal flood.

It's already been demonstrated that's a false premise.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

GoodK wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:
I'm not implying that you're quoting the Bible correctly. I do think you aren't thinking about what you're reading.


That's a bit of leap, don't you think?

Jersey Girl wrote: Had I made the claim, I would have gladly posted it myself. I don't think that engaging in thought is silly.


Asking me to post text that ANYBODY can read for themselves either online or in their Bible, especially after I gave you a reference to look up is silly.
Jersey Girl wrote: When you make claims on a board such as this, it's not unusual for someone to challenge your claims.


What exactly were you challenging by asking me to post the full text of a Bible verse that I referenced?

Jersey Girl wrote:I'm looking for global references, I don't see them. Are you saying that the Caananites knew the world was round and that other countries existed?


I am not saying anything about the Caananites nor the flat-earth theory.

As I suspected, you had nothing substantive to offer in regards to those scriptures.

*feeling like I just wasted ten minutes of my life*


If you're not saying that the Caananites knew the earth was round and that other countries existed, what are you saying when you refer to a global flood?

My understanding is that the Flood Story is ancient Caananite in origin. If the Caananites didn't know that the earth was round or that other countries existed, if they had no concept of "global" then how is it that you hold the ancient story to a "global flood" perspective?
Last edited by Google Feedfetcher on Fri Jan 25, 2008 4:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
_GoodK

Re: Mis Analysis on Religion

Post by _GoodK »

the road to hana wrote:
GoodK wrote:
the road to hana wrote:
No it isn't. Christianity arose as a sect of Judaism, a cult around an individual, in the first century A.D. The "Bible" as we know it wasn't compiled and canonized until somewhat later. Sure, the early Christians were familiar with the Jewish scriptures, which comprise most of what we currently know as the Old Testament. Certain documents that ended up canonized in the New Testament were familiar in the early generations of Christianity. But Christianity itself absolutely predates the compilation and canonization of the Bible.



This is your queue to give some kind of source or reference so I don't have to take your word for it... and then I'll gladly admit to being wrong on this specific point. And sorry if I confused with Jersey Girl.


Although the Jewish Scriptures were copied by hand, they were extremely accurate copy to copy. The Jews had a phenomenal system of scribes, who developed intricate and ritualistic methods for counting letters, words and paragraphs to insure that no copying errors were made. These scribes dedicated their entire lives to preserving the accuracy of the holy books. A single copy error would require the immediate destruction of the entire scroll. In fact, Jewish scribal tradition was maintained until the invention of the printing press in the mid-1400's AD. As far as manuscript accuracy, the recent discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has confirmed the remarkable reliability of this scribal system over thousands of years 3 (I'll get back to the Dead Sea Scrolls later).

After approximately 400 years of scriptural silence, Jesus arrived on the scene in about 4 BC. Throughout his teaching, Jesus often quotes the Old Testament, declaring that he did not come to destroy the Jewish Scriptures, but to fulfill them. In the Book of Luke, Jesus proclaims to his disciples, "all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." 4

Starting in about 40 AD, and continuing to about 90 AD, the eye-witnesses to the life of Jesus, including Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Peter and Jude, wrote the Gospels, letters and books that became the Bible's New Testament. These authors quote from 31 books of the Old Testament, and widely circulate their material so that by about 150 AD, early Christians were referring to the entire set of writings as the "New Covenant." During the 200s AD, the original writings were translated from Greek into Latin, Coptic (Egypt) and Syriac (Syria), and widely disseminated as "inspired scripture" throughout the Roman Empire (and beyond). 5 In 397 AD, in an effort to protect the scriptures from various heresies and offshoot religious movements, the current 27 books of the New Testament were formally and finally confirmed and "canonized" in the Synod of Carthage.


http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/histo ... -bible.htm


I never thought or implied that the Bible as we know it today existed at Jesus' time.

Thanks for that reference, but does it demonstrate that there was a Christian religion before the Bible was canonized?
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Hana,

When you say that Christianity pre-dated the Bible, do you mean that from an LDS perspective or Ev perspective? I think it could be both. What about you?


Editing: Hold on, are you saying that Christianity pre-dated the Canon?

Jersey Girl

(I haven't read all of the exchanges here, just looking at GoodK's response to you.)
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Re: Mis Analysis on Religion

Post by _the road to hana »

GoodK wrote:I never thought or implied that the Bible as we know it today existed at Jesus' time.

Thanks for that reference, but does it demonstrate that there was a Christian religion before the Bible was canonized?


I'd like to hope you're joking in asking the question.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_GoodK

Post by _GoodK »

Jersey Girl wrote:If you're not saying that the Caananites knew the earth was round and that other countries existed, what are you saying when you refer to a global flood?


Dear God, Jersey Girl, Give me a Break! Wouldn't you rather abandon this argument and move on to one in which you have more footing?

What am I saying when I refer to a global flood?

Gen. 6:13
...the end of all flesh is com before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them: and behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
6:17 And behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.


Ok. Another weak argument demolished.

By the way, I gave up after just those two verses. The two chapters are full of references to flooding the entire Earth.

I'd love for you to finally quantify the point you are trying to make.
Locked