Crime Salman rushdie attacked on stage

[Deleted member 577981]

That's a great excuse to ignore the bullshit and choose your favourite parts of the bible

In actuality it is the ONLY approach that has ever existed in Christianity up until Luther when a false notion of sola scripture and literalism was introduced but only by a minority.

The scriptures have never stood on their own they have always been interpreted through the lived experience of the community and also through the commentary of the early church fathers and continually through history by Christian scholars.

Any notion of a literal translation of the Bible read plainly from the text alone is false and heretical and has never been the approach of Christianity.

When you insist on such a perspective you just prove you're absolute and total ignorance of the entire endeavor.

The notion you are promoting in fact is also never stated even once in the Bible itself..... hilariously.

 

[Post 2 Decision]

In actuality is the ONLY approach that has ever existed in Christianity up until Luther when a false notion of sola scripture and literalism was introduced but only by a minority.

The scriptures have never stood on their own they have always been interpreted through the lived experience of the community and also through the commentary of the early church fathers and continually through history by Christian scholars.

Any notion of a literal translation of the Bible read plainly from the text alone is false and heretical and has never been the approach of Christianity.

When you insist on such a perspective you just prove you're absolute and total ignorance of the entire endeavor.

The notion you are promoting in fact is also never stated even once in the Bible itself..... hilariously.

You know the majority of people who claim to be Christian, do in fact interpret the Bible literally, and do believe it to be 'the word of god'?

Which notion?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

You know the majority of people who claim to be Christian, do in fact interpret the Bible literally, and do believe it to be 'the word of god'?

Which notion?

Believing it is the word of God does not equate or require a literal interpretation friend. If you hear someone say it's the word of God don't assume that means literal.

Don't form your understanding from online fundamentalists.

What I said in the post you replied to is true. If you ONLY want to engage with fundamentalist that's fine but I just want you to know that's the minority position.

 

[Post 2 Decision]

Believing it is the word of God does not equate or require a literal interpretation friend. If you hear someone say it's the word of God don't assume that means literal.

Don't form your understanding from online fundamentalists.

What I said in the post you replied to is true. If you ONLY want to engage with fundamentalist that's fine but I just want you to know that's the minority position.

Never said it does, but most Christians across the world do believe both.

Try and experience the world outside of your incense scented bubble.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Never said it does, but most Christians across the world do believe both.

Try and experience the world outside of your incense scented bubble.

No. Most are Catholic or Orthodox and all of them have been taught about biblical criticism, historical criticism, literary criticism genre etc.

 

[Post 2 Decision]

No. Most are Catholic or Orthodox and all of them ave been taught about biblical criticism, historical criticism, genre etc.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

This is a non response.

 

[Post 2 Decision]

This is a non response.

It'll be a wasted effort to convince you that you're wrong. It's not worth the time just to end up getting nowhere.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

It'll be a wasted effort to convince you that you're wrong. It's not worth the time just to end up getting nowhere.

 

[Islam Imamate]

In actuality it is the ONLY approach that has ever existed in Christianity up until Luther when a false notion of sola scripture and literalism was introduced but only by a minority.

The scriptures have never stood on their own they have always been interpreted through the lived experience of the community and also through the commentary of the early church fathers and continually through history by Christian scholars.

Any notion of a literal translation of the Bible read plainly from the text alone is false and heretical and has never been the approach of Christianity.

When you insist on such a perspective you just prove you're absolute and total ignorance of the entire endeavor.

The notion you are promoting in fact is also never stated even once in the Bible itself..... hilariously.

This has been the case for all three Abrahamic faiths and I'm sure for most traditional religions. The Jews have the Talmud and the Muslims have the hadith and the Sirah. Its sort of hard for modern people to understand but in these traditional societies these central texts have always been mediated by supplementary material and the community of scholars. Knowledge isn't just on the page, its embedded in the community itself. When a student goes to learn under a scholar, he's not just there for some standardized academic exercises administered to him but rather there to learn from the person of the scholar himself by way of his moral example.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

This has been the case for all three Abrahamic faiths and I'm sure for most traditional religions. The Jews have the Talmud and the Muslims have the hadith and the Sirah. Its sort of hard for modern people to understand but in these traditional societies these central texts have always been mediated by supplementary material and the community of scholars. Knowledge isn't just on the page, its embedded in the community itself. When a student goes to learn under a scholar, he's not just there for some standardized academic exercises administered to him but rather there to learn from the person of the scholar himself by way of his moral example.

this is such an important point and one that many atheists and detractors willfully ignore so that they can strawman religion and mock it. i really cannot understand the motivation to dishonestly dismantle religion and lead people into believing false things about it.


my spiritual journey has been lifelong and i started in the new age movement and that lead me to through many different paths before i landed on christianity. i briefly studied with a traveling sufi and was wondering what your thoughts are on the mystical branch of islam? it seems quite closely related to what i am involved with.

 

[TheMaster]

this is such an important point and one that many atheists and detractors willfully ignore so that they can strawman religion and mock it. i really cannot understand the motivation to dishonestly dismantle religion and lead people into believing false things about it.


my spiritual journey has been lifelong and i started in the new age movement and that lead me to through many different paths before i landed on christianity. i briefly studied with a traveling sufi and was wondering what your thoughts are on the mystical branch of islam? it seems quite closely related to what i am involved with.

You would do far better to stick to the Perrenial view. Sufis were unsurprisingly persecuted by mainstream Muslims throughout history, it is the least mystical and enlightened of the religions.

That's a great excuse to ignore the bullshit and choose your favourite parts of the bible

Where the Bible has an advantage is that large parts of the old Testament can be discounted as historic context and the new Testament taken as the Christian teaching proper.

In Muhammadism the entire koran is taken as gods word which is laughable.

Notice how not a single Muhamadeen here attempted to deny they would reinstate human slavery if they had a choice, so as to be consistent with Koran.

If he is real it is surely Gods will that Muhammadeens are now the global subordinate (Dhimmi) of the non-muslim world, and being rightly put in their place everywhere.

 

[SandisLL]

No one will discount even Norse Gods...
And other Gods....

Christianity is so much insulted by anti christians because they feel modern times weakness in modern society.
Old Testament is fundamental thing and part of backbone in christianity.
New Testament basically is promise fo forgive you if you will improve and follow God's will.

Sadly in modern times chatolics doesn't issue fatvas like muslims.
And sadly doesn't have Pope blessing crusades.

Only one thing Satan might respect is his followers death and famine + understanding that people does know where Satan is hidden from us and how Satan does work now....

 

[Deleted member 577981]

No one will discount even Norse Gods...
And other Gods....

Christianity is so much insulted by anti christians because they feel modern times weakness in modern society.
Old Testament is fundamental thing and part of backbone in christianity.
New Testament basically is promise fo forgive you if you will improve and follow God's will.

Sadly in modern times chatolics doesn't issue fatvas like muslims.
And sadly doesn't have Pope blessing crusades.

Only one thing Satan might respect is his followers death and famine + understanding that people does know where Satan is hidden from us and how Satan does work now....

edit-- accidentally quoted this post but did not mean to.

@SandisLL

 

[moosaev]

Notice how not a single Muhamadeen here attempted to deny they would reinstate human slavery if they had a choice, so as to be consistent with Koran.

Firstly, slavery is not encouraged in Islam, freeing slaves is considered one of the highest deeds anyone can do. Secondly, slavery in Islam is not the same as slavery in the Americas, there is no concept of chattel slavery in Islam where the slave is your property, it's more like indentured servitude. But you're not allowed to torture and beat your slaves or otherwise treat them like property, and slaves should have an option to buy out of their slavery. Slavery in Islam is more like debtors jail than it is chattel slavery in America. So it's a false comparison to begin with.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Firstly, slavery is not encouraged in Islam, freeing slaves is considered one of the highest deeds anyone can do. Secondly, slavery in Islam is not the same as slavery in the Americas, there is no concept of chattel slavery in Islam where the slave is your property, it's more like indentured servitude. But you're not allowed to torture and beat your slaves or otherwise treat them like property, and slaves should have an option to buy out of their slavery. Slavery in Islam is more like debtors jail than it is chattel slavery in America. So it's a false comparison to begin with.

this form of slavery that you seem to be promoting as good is absolutely terrible and reprehensible though. are you actually saying its ok?

 

[moosaev]

this form of slavery that you seem to be promoting as good is absolutely terrible and reprehensible though. are you actually saying its ok?

No i;m not, thats why i said slavery is discouraged in Islam. I don't know how you figured i was promoting it.

 

[TheMaster]

No i;m not, thats why i said slavery is discouraged in Islam. I don't know how you figured i was promoting it.

But you acknowledge that it's endorsed in the Koran and therefore tacitly endorsed by a significant proportion of the Muhamadeen world.

 

[moosaev]

But you acknowledge that it's endorsed in the Koran and therefore tacitly endorsed by a significant proportion of the Muhamadeen world.

It's not endorsed in the Koran. Slavery is not a good thing in Islam, it's discouraged.

 

[TheMaster]

It's not endorsed in the Koran. Slavery is not a good thing in Islam, it's discouraged.

But Muhammad and many of his closest followers kept slaves, and his example is seen as the 'ideal' for muslims;
ergo, it's tacitly endorsed and ok.