I think we have a desire for the book to be clear. But nothing could be further than clear. The brightest minds have argued over the basic doctrines that the various churches believe. If the greatest minds and biblical scholars cant agree, I dont know how we can begin to understand this stuff. Maybe I should just speak for myself.
We do have our unique gifts 1 Corinthians 12-14 that we can contribute into this world. I'm of the mind that that's one of the most important messages in the entire Bible and I think a lot about how I can contribute to the world.
You have a good memory of verses. I met a guy in prison that was like a Bible savaant and could recite almost every passage in every book. It was insane. I'm horrible at remember exact verses. I've read the Bible about 20-30 times and I recognize the gist of most verses, but for the life of me, I never notice the numbers when I'm reading and just the words.
But I can tell you, every time I re-read the Bible, I learn something new about myself and see new interpretations. I probably read the whole book once a year on average. They challenged us to read it when I was in CCD in second grade and I've just kept reading ever since. I just started reading and am in Genesis right now and was read the creation story 2 days ago. And I was considering the 7 days of creation and rest. And then I was thinking about how there's new organisms being created and the Earth is changing through things like Volcano eruptions or seismic shifts in earthquakes and I started wondering what day we're in. Maybe Genesis isn't only the beginning. It's the beginning and end. And we're in the middle of the 7 days right now and God hasn't gotten to resting yet.
And then I was reading the Adam and Eve story as well and thinking that it's not clear that Adam and Eve were even created as different sexes. Perhaps they turned after eating from the tree? If God created them both in his image, is he an androginous creature? Neither male or female? Was that the way it was intended for all of us to be. Perhaps the real answers about homos are in the genesis creation story if you read into it. In that story, it's where we learn about choice and sin and consequences for sin. Is it possible that we have different sex parts as a consequence of sin? One thing seems clear in this story. As long as I'm in relationship with God, it's all ok. And God know my heart.
What if a man who is mentally retarded commits a crime that he has no knowledge of? Does God hold him responsible? Perhaps sin only happens when we are able to make choices and somethings arent a choice.
I also read a lot of the Bible as just a story to teach us a lesson. I read it as symbolic in many cases. No one agrees completely on all of this book aside from the broad story. There've been wars fought over religion. It makes people crazy. It seems really important because the consequences are death which seems like a big deal. I used to worry about it but no longer am worried about when my time comes.
I'm watching American Dad right now while I have insomnia. And it's kinda funny. The topic is Stan's best friend doesn't believe in God and Stan is bothered and is trying to convince him to believe in Jesus. It's weird it's on tv while I'm typing this.
Well...this thread is/was interesting.
I think Mike Wallace is an idiot. I don't think it's because he stated a non-PC opinion publicly while being a big time athlete in the public eye. I think it's because he doesn't understand the basic concept that not all people are the same. Some people are straight. Some people are gay. What straight men feel for women is what and how gay men feel for other men (or thereabouts).
It's a basic lesson in empathy. People are different.
To continue with this idea, I'm still amazed and people who profess their religion as "right" or "the one religion" for any reason, much less "because I felt it and know it's true". I'm fine with that type of assertion as long as those people allow for other people feeling the same type of feeling with other religions or even non-religious viewpoints. For example, just because a Christian "sees the light and feels Jesus in his heart" it doesn't mean that a Muslim doesn't "see the light and feel Mohammed" or a Buddhist becoming one with the Buddha nature or even an atheist feeling the bottomless void left by the absence of objective morality is any less valid.
Point being, what's good/right for you isn't necessarily what's good/right for anyone else, and I think that taking that to heart should be a requirement for anyone attempting enlightened discourse on these types of subjects.
But hey, maybe that's just me. :)
This thread's kinda funny cause it's like we're worshiping Wally.
Russell's Teapot. I'm a fan of it.
Don't want to go too far off subject though (I think :)).Quote:
Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
It'd be so much easier if you all just understood that Chadman's opinion is right, at all times, regardless of how wrong it might be.
Oh, and Chadman prefers tea to coffee. Therefore coffee is worse than tea. You can take that to the bank.
Or to Mike Wallace, he probably has more money than some banks.