DCJ Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 It has, however, had 2000 years and countless translations by people with less than Godly intentions and motives. Actually, the thousands of early manuscripts we have, when you correct for spelling errors and transposition, etc, compare remarkably well with the Bibles we have today. While we don't have the actual autographs, we can be sure that our Bible is almost exactly what the authors wrote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 I, like other Progressives here, take the Bible to be Truth while believing that there are stories and mythologies in the Bible. I don't believe it to be either literal or inerrant. I think this was dealt with in some depth elsewhere. But saying that there are myths doesn't mean they aren't perhpas more true. I don't doubt there are inconsistencies and so on, as I think while it was inspired by God, it wasn't written by God. I'm curious as to why fundies are reading the board? Is it to try and convert us? (I have lurked on fundie boards, more curious than anything I think. Also maybe wanted to figure out where my sister was coming from.) --des Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 Hey Des, I love your posts and it seems you believe that an open mind is a good thing. Let's not discourage people from seeking ideas that may be new and threatening to them... God knows we need more seekers and less acceptance of what we already think! :> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darby Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 I'll answer as a "fundie," although I don't usually like labels. I always want to learn more, understand more, just like the rest of you. I also don't want to believe certain things just because I was taught that way one time. I enjoy being around those that might believe slightly different from me, so I can learn where other people are coming from. I'm around like minded people enough. I want my views to be challenged, put to the test, etc. I like hearing the different views on the board as we challenge each other's beliefs. So in a way, perhaps that makes me "progressive," though not in the sense of this site, I guess. All that to say, I always want to make sure my beliefs, what I hear and read, match up with scripture. If there is a difference, I'll choose scripture over my feelings every time. That is my foundation, my starting point. I understand that many of you don't feel like that, but I am curious, what is YOUR foundation? What I mean is, when you are challenged with something you do not agree with or believe, what standard do you measure it against? Not speaking for all "fundies"......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted January 22, 2005 Share Posted January 22, 2005 Darby - I believe that the bible is true, but not literally true. True in a bigger sense - that is timeless. Literal truth is a current cultural ideal, this was not the case in the first century. The way I understand it, true then did not mean reporting the facts, it meant taking a truth and making it understood. Honestly, and, again gently, I don't understand how it is possible to see the bible as literally true when you read the inconsistencies just in the synoptic gospels of literal fact. For example, what time was Jesus crucified? How many wise men were there? As for the base of my actions and beliefs, I go with Jesus. The sum of the law and the prophets is love thy neighbor as thyself (which I read as the golden rule) and Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength. I don't think you can go wrong if you follow those. How about this as a compromise (smiling): The first person to get those two commandments/rules/concepts and apply them without fail to their own life gets to make up the rest of the rules. It won't be me. :> Cynthia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Cynthia, thanks for your compliment. I think that fundies have a right to post here if they are polite and do not wish to convert, coerce or attack (as the webpage says). I just want to know why. If I hadn't asked I would not have read Darby's excellent response. In fact, I think it is good for me (and maybe others here) to have our sterotypes shaken up a bit. Esp, since some of the others here, myself included, have been hurt by fundamentalists. I liked Darby's comments that are not really like my sister's might have been. And I understand your wariness of labels, Darby. > I understand that many of you don't feel like that, but I am curious, what is YOUR foundation? What I mean is, when you are challenged with something you do not agree with or believe, what standard do you measure it against? I'm not a member of the Foundation, so the only thing I can do is refer you to the 8 points. Look up at the top of this board and see where it says tcpc homepage. I think the homepage will have references to the 8 points. I think they are an attempt to define what Progressive Christianity is. I agree with all the points but I think they are general statements, not meant to be all inclusive. >What I mean is, when you are challenged with something you do not agree with or believe, what standard do you measure it against? Yikes, that is a hard one. I think if 12 people answered that you might get 13 answers (in fact all 13 from me! :-)). I feel I am a seeker, and have not arrived at Truth. I have come to believe that the "greatest commandment" that Jesus gave is the key point: "loving God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself." (Hey Cynthia and I agree at least. :-)) So if you look at all scripture next to that, you can decide which go along with it, and which might not. And if you look at various actions of others and yourself you can decide. And you can look at church organizations and structures-- how well they do these things as an institution. Not that we all won't fall short! Why that one verse? Well it seems to be the most distilled statement of what was required. I view the Bible as a no. of books written by PEOPLE, which must be viewed from historical and cultural perspectives. Even though I don't take many of the stories literally, I feel that they have broader Truths. So just because I don't take them as literal fact, that doesn't make them untrue. (I have heard the statement, the phone book contains all fact, but is not Truth. The Bible may have limited facts but is mostly Truth.) You ask great questions. Welcome to the forum, Darby! :-) --des Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynthia Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 Agreement, how lovely!!! Usually when I try to explain my religious/spiritual views in any depth I get "the look". y'know the one... this is way more fun. :> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJ Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 BTW, a non-religious statement on the nature of ancient biblical manuscripts isn't necessarily indicative of a religious viewpoint (e.g. being a "fundie"). It would be just as valid if a progressive had said it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des Posted January 23, 2005 Share Posted January 23, 2005 BTW, a non-religious statement on the nature of ancient biblical manuscripts isn't necessarily indicative of a religious viewpoint (e.g. being a "fundie"). It would be just as valid if a progressive had said it. For me, it was by way of explanation. I don't think everything I write here is "religious". --des Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.