Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 01:51:57 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Religion & Philosophy (Moderator: Gustaf)
| | |-+  Dinner Doodle - What Do You Believe?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Dinner Doodle - What Do You Believe?  (Read 2158 times)
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18306
United States


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: May 02, 2012, 04:24:59 pm »
Ignore

You still haven't pointed out how it makes any difference in what Jesus or the twelve apostles said or meant if the beginning of Genesis is taken as literal history or as parables.

Well, if Genesis isn’t literal, then Jesus and Apostles were deceived, because they took Genesis as literal as they did any other book of the OT.  In fact, two of the Gospels trace Jesus’ genealogy directly to Adam.

Also, of all the parables Jesus gave, I can’t think of one where God is a direct actor in a parable.  God may be personified by a character in the parable, but he is not a direct actor.  But in Genesis, God is a direct actor.  So if Genesis is only a parable and God was ok with using made up stories about himself, why don’t Jesus’ parables include God as a direct character in action?

...there are 57 (fifty-seven) parables from Jesus!!! Can you show me a SINGLE example of a parable of Jesus’ where God is a direct actor?  Just one.

---

As for the story about the fifth grader, even with the added background, it is still creepy.  It also demonstrates a profound misunderstanding about love on the part of your pastor, both back when he was a fifth grader, which is understandable given his youth then, but since you say he still holds it up as an example of love, it sounds as if he is missing the point even now.  What he recounts as what he felt for Miss Carstarphen was not love, but desire, which is not the same.  Desire is but one aspect of love, but it is also an aspect of a number of sins such as lust, avarice, and pride.  Fortunately, nothing particularly bad seems to have happened as a result of that boy's great misadventure in desire.

Roll Eyes   you seem to be forgetting these doodles are written at the level of a child, to be shared with kids around the dinner table to give parents a ready-made biblical topic in order to promote parents teaching their children Christian principles.

Also, what aspect of “love” was missing from my Pastor crush on his teacher?!  The definition of love is plainly given:

1Cor 13:4 “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.”

Which one of those attributes was lacking from my pastor’s actions towards his teacher?!
 
Logged

Do not fight with one another over my banning.  I've enjoyed the time I have spent with all of you, but the time really has come for me to leave.  It is what I want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9Y_GLT4_9I

I looked over Jordan, and what did I see?
Coming for to carry me home,
A band of angels coming after me,
Coming for to carry me home.

Swing low, sweet chariot,
Coming for to carry me home.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26616
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #51 on: May 02, 2012, 05:56:34 pm »
Ignore

You still fail to show how it makes a difference to Jesus' message whether one regards the pre-Abrahamic portions of Genesis to be literal history or moral stories.


1Cor 13:4 “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.”

Which one of those attributes was lacking from my pastor’s actions towards his teacher?!

By his own admission, his desire was self-seeking.  He desired for them to someday wed.  Yet, apparently he never considered once during that whole year whether she would want to wed him or if wedding him would be in her best interests.  His failure to consider the teacher's interests was what was lacking in his desire that failed to keep it from being love.
Logged

Daily Reflections on the Revised Common Lectionary

Bible thumping kept to a minimum unless you go to sleep!
The below comic stars me!
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18306
United States


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: May 03, 2012, 02:36:02 pm »
Ignore

You still fail to show how it makes a difference to Jesus' message whether one regards the pre-Abrahamic portions of Genesis to be literal history or moral stories.

1)   I have shown that Jesus treated Gen 1 and Gen 2 as complementary parts of one account of creation.

2)   I have shown that Jesus and Apostles treated all parts of Genesis with the same historical significance as the rest of the OT.

3)   I have shown that parables NEVER include God as an actor (God is God, he doesn't need to make up stories about himself), but rather only personify God in another character or object…this is in contrast to the literal historical sections of the bible where God is cast in his own identity.

4)   You yourself have demonstrated the significance of only viewing Genesis as figurative, for you have been proven wrong at every turn and your viewpoint of scripture repeatedly differs from Jesus’ viewpoint.

---
 

1Cor 13:4 “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.”

Which one of those attributes was lacking from my pastor’s actions towards his teacher?!

By his own admission, his desire was self-seeking.  He desired for them to someday wed.  Yet, apparently he never considered once during that whole year whether she would want to wed him or if wedding him would be in her best interests.  His failure to consider the teacher's interests was what was lacking in his desire that failed to keep it from being love.

Dang, it is clear I am going to have to spell this out for you:  

Point 1)   My pastor used the story of his own first love as an analogy to teach about Love’s power to change one’s attitude and behavior.

Point 2)   The bible itself uses first love as analogy in the same way: Rev 2:4 "Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. 5 Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first.”

after you compare Point 1 to Point 2, if you still have a problem with the use of ”first love” as an analogy for the believers love of God, take it up with God himself.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2012, 02:38:48 pm by consigliere jmfcst »Logged

Do not fight with one another over my banning.  I've enjoyed the time I have spent with all of you, but the time really has come for me to leave.  It is what I want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9Y_GLT4_9I

I looked over Jordan, and what did I see?
Coming for to carry me home,
A band of angels coming after me,
Coming for to carry me home.

Swing low, sweet chariot,
Coming for to carry me home.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26616
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #53 on: May 03, 2012, 03:24:29 pm »
Ignore

We're talking past each other here, and I don't think that's going to change, but I'll give it another try.

You still fail to show how it makes a difference to Jesus' message whether one regards the pre-Abrahamic portions of Genesis to be literal history or moral stories.

1)   I have shown that Jesus treated Gen 1 and Gen 2 as complementary parts of one account of creation.

2)   I have shown that Jesus and Apostles treated all parts of Genesis with the same historical significance as the rest of the OT.

No.  You have asserted those things, but you have not shown them.  You have not demonstrated how what Jesus or the Apostles said or did would be inconsistent with treating the pre-Abrahamic portions as something other than literal history.

3)   I have shown that parables NEVER include God as an actor (God is God, he doesn't need to make up stories about himself), but rather only personify God in another character or object…this is in contrast to the literal historical sections of the bible where God is cast in his own identity.

If you're going to keep quibbling about the definition of parable, I guess I'll just have to use the word that fits the creation narratives somewhat better, but hesitated to use because it has become associated with tales that are false and fantasy, and I'm not saying that the early parts of Genesis are false or fantasy (save perhaps in the wider sense of the word fantasy which relates to anything beyond normal human experience).  They are not literal, but they were included for the purpose of demonstrating moral truths about the origin of man in a form the Ancient Israelis were capable of understanding and accepting.  That word I was trying to avoid is 'myth'.
[/quote]

---
 

1Cor 13:4 “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.”

Which one of those attributes was lacking from my pastor’s actions towards his teacher?!

By his own admission, his desire was self-seeking.  He desired for them to someday wed.  Yet, apparently he never considered once during that whole year whether she would want to wed him or if wedding him would be in her best interests.  His failure to consider the teacher's interests was what was lacking in his desire that failed to keep it from being love.

Dang, it is clear I am going to have to spell this out for you:  

Point 1)   My pastor used the story of his own first love as an analogy to teach about Love’s power to change one’s attitude and behavior.

Point 2)   The bible itself uses first love as analogy in the same way: Rev 2:4 "Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love. 5 Remember the height from which you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first.”

after you compare Point 1 to Point 2, if you still have a problem with the use of ”first love” as an analogy for the believers love of God, take it up with God himself.

My problem is with your pastor's use of the words 'first love' to describe his experience with his teacher, and not at all with its use in Rev 2:4.
Logged

Daily Reflections on the Revised Common Lectionary

Bible thumping kept to a minimum unless you go to sleep!
The below comic stars me!
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18306
United States


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: May 03, 2012, 04:14:06 pm »
Ignore

No.  You have asserted those things, but you have not shown them.

Well, all you have to do is come up with a single instance to prove me wrong.

---

3)   I have shown that parables NEVER include God as an actor (God is God, he doesn't need to make up stories about himself), but rather only personify God in another character or object…this is in contrast to the literal historical sections of the bible where God is cast in his own identity.

If you're going to keep quibbling about the definition of parable, I guess I'll just have to use the word that fits the creation narratives somewhat better, but hesitated to use because it has become associated with tales that are false and fantasy, and I'm not saying that the early parts of Genesis are false or fantasy (save perhaps in the wider sense of the word fantasy which relates to anything beyond normal human experience).  They are not literal, but they were included for the purpose of demonstrating moral truths about the origin of man in a form the Ancient Israelis were capable of understanding and accepting.  That word I was trying to avoid is 'myth'.

Again, God is NOT used as a direct actor in any non-historical analogy within the bible.  So, what you are saying is that, according to your interpretation of Genesis, Genesis is UNIQUE in using God as an actor in a story that is a non-historical analogy.

I DON”T BUY INTO INTERPRETATIONS WHICH FORCE SCRIPTURE TO BEHAVE DIFFERNTLY AT ONE POINT THEN IT DOES THROUGHOUT THE REST OF SCRIPTURE.

In fact, this is not your only belief which requires the scripture to do something that it does not do in any other case - your belief that Jewish Christians were held to the OT laws of unclean meat, and the passage which you make jump through a unique hoop is Peter’s vision of unclean animals in Acts 10:

Acts 10:11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.” 14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” 15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” 16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

Granted, God is using an analogy of unclean animals to teach Peter that the Gentiles were now to be considered clean.  But if God were not also stating that Peter could now eat unclean meat, than the whole analogy becomes a negative analogy because it is making a false statement to prove a true statement, which is a fallacy of argument

e.g. You don’t using an analogy which has you telling your kids they are to play on the freeway, in order to teach then that they should brush their teeth…for the analogy would form a complete contradiction to it’s stated purpose…

And if this vision in Acts 10 does not also mean Jewish Christians could eat unclean meat, then THIS IS THE ONLY INSTANCE IN THE WHOLE BIBLE WHICH USES A CONTRADICTORY ANALOGY.


But, being in contradiction to the bible is obviously your goal.


---
 
My problem is with your pastor's use of the words 'first love' to describe his experience with his teacher, and not at all with its use in Rev 2:4.

NEWS FLASH: the term “first love” in Rev 2:4 is an allegorical reference comparing a) the complete absorption of one’s first youthful romantic crush, to b) the exuberance the believer has when he first comes to Christ. 

In Rev 2:4, Christ is warning the members of the church that they have lost their original childlike “first love” zeal towards Christ that they had when they first came to Christ.

Similar verses are:

Mat 18:3 “I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Heb 3:14 “We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

Heb 10:32 “32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you stood your ground in a great contest in the face of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.”

Rev 2:4 is simply saying you lost your initial zeal, and used the feeling of the “first love” of youth as an analogy to that initial zeal.

---

You do realize, don’t you, that the only reason I keep you around is to use you as an example of the ignorance of those who argue against the bible?
Logged

Do not fight with one another over my banning.  I've enjoyed the time I have spent with all of you, but the time really has come for me to leave.  It is what I want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9Y_GLT4_9I

I looked over Jordan, and what did I see?
Coming for to carry me home,
A band of angels coming after me,
Coming for to carry me home.

Swing low, sweet chariot,
Coming for to carry me home.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26616
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #55 on: May 03, 2012, 04:39:41 pm »
Ignore

No.  You have asserted those things, but you have not shown them.

Well, all you have to do is come up with a single instance to prove me wrong.

You are the one asserting that what was said in the NT is inconsistent with treating portions of Genesis as myth instead of history.

I am not stating as you seem to be thinking I stated that they are inconsistent with treating them as history.  I am stating that the use of early Genesis in the NT is consistent with treating it as either myth or history. My reasons for believing that early Genesis is Jewish myth have nothing to do with the NT.

Indeed, if one were to show that there was an instance in the NT where early Genesis was clearly treated as myth and definitely not history, it would prove both of us to have been mistaken.
Logged

Daily Reflections on the Revised Common Lectionary

Bible thumping kept to a minimum unless you go to sleep!
The below comic stars me!
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18306
United States


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: May 03, 2012, 04:42:26 pm »
Ignore

if Jesus and the Apostles treated Genesis in the same manner in which they threated the rest of biblical history, no argument can be made that Jesus and the Apostles thought any part of Genesis was myth.
Logged

Do not fight with one another over my banning.  I've enjoyed the time I have spent with all of you, but the time really has come for me to leave.  It is what I want.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9Y_GLT4_9I

I looked over Jordan, and what did I see?
Coming for to carry me home,
A band of angels coming after me,
Coming for to carry me home.

Swing low, sweet chariot,
Coming for to carry me home.
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines