Doesn’t sound like a cop out at all actually. I leave for days at a time and sometimes forget I am in the middle of a discussion with someone. I won’t take it personally.

LOL, I just find your response amusing. Kind of have a mental image of an absent minded professor type.

You and I can both read the same verse and get a completely different read on it. Or I can read two verses and see how they compliment each other, while you see it as an inconsistancy.

I realize this, but you must also understand that this is exactly the reason I went to seminary. I wanted to completely understand the problems as well as the solutions. This is why I await explanations from Christians scholars.

I can throw a hundred passages at you too, all about community…

Ummm… could you remind me why we are discussing community? I’m not too sure what you are trying to say with those verses.

Also, I am going on vacation, so I won’t be around for a while (i know it sounds like a cop-out, but I didn’t want you to think I’d just adbandoned this site cuz you all challanged me).

Doesn’t sound like a cop out at all actually. I leave for days at a time and sometimes forget I am in the middle of a discussion with someone. I won’t take it personally.

Plus, I’ll be the first to admit that you all are way more versed in the bible than I, but hey, it’s making me read it more.

While you are probably right on the first comment, I commend your willingness to learn and to study. Don’t stop. I must only add that the primary reason I no longer call myself a Christian is because I failed my own conscious when dealing with Biblical apologetics. I told myself that to philosophically grow in my faith, I would have to meet every objection to the Bible and my religion with integrity. I refused to be afraid of any argument. I may have been well versed, but it was never narrow-minded no matter how passionate I was for Christianity. I would not be afraid to read the arguments of those who disagreed. I would not lock myself into the group of apologetic fear-mongers who would only read what suited their current worldview: this was only dishonest to myself. If my faith was to be true, it would have to go head on with the Russells, Mackies, Dennetts, and Dawkins of the world.

Jesus actually does this a lot when the pharasees tested him, he is like “well, what does it (the old test) say about it?” They knew the old test inside and out and he was always challanging them to look deeper at it

I will consider it a compliment to be compared to a Pharisee, as they really did know their scriptures – but the fact is, Jesus’ interpretation of the scriptures was just another one, and his interpretation is rarely understood by the most devout Christians because it does not conform to the Gentile world as easily as historical Christians would like it to.

But if I try to defend them, you would see it as apologetic and “plug your ears to it”.

Please see the definition of apologetics that I posted earlier. Apologetics is giving reasons to support the Christian faith. That is what you are doing. It is not a bad thing but rather another branch of Theology.

Let me clarify…

“is that your research? Or do you mean that you study the Bible, as do I? How do you study it? What sort of method are you using? I am not saying this to be condescending, I am saying this because that is a very large assumption you just made.”

I’m not saying we do the exact same research. what I am saying is that I am looking into the verses that you gave me, granted, my research methods will be different than yours, but I am not seeing the inconsistancies that you do. But if I try to defend them, you would see it as apologetic and “plug your ears to it”. You and I can both read the same verse and get a completely different read on it. Or I can read two verses and see how they compliment each other, while you see it as an inconsistancy.

“I just threw passage after passage at anyone here to actually discuss and you retaliated with not one verse nor one argument.”

I can throw a hundred passages at you too, all about community (gen 2-It is not good for man to be alone, John 13:34,1 Peter 1:22, 1 John 3:11,Romans 12:10 , Romans 12:16,Galations 5:13, Ephesians 4:32, 1 Thessalonians 5:11, Hebrews 10:24-25, 1 peter 3:8, James 5:16, the list goes on) but after reading all my verses, I doubt it’s going to change your mind on how you view things in the bible. That is what I mean by “personal truth” although, I don’t like that word either, so I’ll just say opinion.

“I don’t recall saying it is – was that me you were quoting (I may have, I just don’t think I did)? ”

Yeah, sorry, that was writerdd, as Leo pointed out.

“Now this is just silly – did I just waste an entire comment just for you to tell me this at the end? Isn’t this why you responded to me? Of course I want to read your explanations. I de-converted because my own explanations no longer could be held in critical light -”

I’m still working on a few of them. Also, I am going on vacation, so I won’t be around for a while (i know it sounds like a cop-out, but I didn’t want you to think I’d just adbandoned this site cuz you all challanged me). It also takes me a while cuz I am not as good at articulating what I actually mean. Plus, I’ll be the first to admit that you all are way more versed in the bible than I, but hey, it’s making me read it more. I read Leo’s post on “you might be a fundy” and I can definately (sadly) relate to the fact that you all kick my butt on knowing the bible. Jesus actually does this a lot when the pharasees tested him, he is like “well, what does it (the old test) say about it?” They knew the old test inside and out and he was always challanging them to look deeper at it. What is it really saying? I’m hoping to get to that point, where I know the bible that well. (like Jesus, not like the pharasees)

Again, thank you for challanging me and keeping me on my toes. I am also sorry you had a rough few days.

Your thesis sounds interesting.

My concentration was ethics (character & moral development). I would see myself as a virtue ethicist. With that said I have often had runs in with fundamentalist because my studies were considered worthless & unnecessary. By your definition I would be a fundamentalist & I think your definition may actually be correct not what is associated with the wackos.

One of my major problems with fundamentalist is in relation to the way teens in specially are instructed on moral issues. In many cases it has evolved in to a list of do not use drugs smoke, drinking, have sex, etc. Telling them it is a sin & they will go to hell has little effect. In many cases there is no discussion about the consequences or making responsible decisions. It always hard when I see a teen seriously mess up their life by making a bad decision or be hurt by someone else’s bad decision.

The question is, looking at the gospels, the stories of Jesus, and his teachings – would that law-like attitude be so far from the truth?

Please clarify what attitude to which you are referring.

Sorry you have had a rough few days. Hope things get better.

. What seems reasonalble to me obviously is not to you. So you assume I am just explaining it away. I’m doing the same research you are, and I’m coming to a different conclusion.

What research is this? How do you know what my research is? My thesis focuses on the similarities between historical gnosticism and the contemporary Pentecostal church – is that your research? Or do you mean that you study the Bible, as do I? How do you study it? What sort of method are you using? I am not saying this to be condescending, I am saying this because that is a very large assumption you just made.

That is why I wrote about it being my truth.

That is pretty subjective, but I don’t fall into the self-proclaimed postmodernists who make their own truth depending on what is the most comfortable for them.

I don’t have to energy to write about how your “interpretation” of Paul vs Christ is completely off to me. If I did waste that time (or time on your other questions), you would say I am an apologetic, fundamentalist, whatever.

Your right, I would probably assume, partially because of what you just said above, that this would be an extremely subjective truth, from which you would not be able to show me any research. What is the most frustrating is that you completely ignored anything I said by saying it was my “interpretation” – what interpretation?! I merely gave a bunch of straight-out-the-Holy-Bible examples of why the two do not agree. I know many staunch, but labeled heretical, Christians that agree with me.

The conversion process isn’t instant.

I don’t recall saying it is – was that me you were quoting (I may have, I just don’t think I did)? I think the conversion process on so-called “missions trips” (or vacation in third-world countries with an ulterior motive) are always “instant” and somewhat shallow, but I would never say all conversions are “instant”.

ost churches don’t take the time after that initial part to help christians lead out a “christ-centered” life. They think they are done. Yes, this is important (why Paul harped on it so much)

See, when I talk about Paul, I give lots of verses – here I am suppose to take yours, and Paul’s, word for it. The fact is, Paul never talks about Jesus’ teachings. Paul doesn’t know the first thing about the “christ-centered” life, that is, unless, it requires giving up your life, in a vague way, for some sort of divine being (nothing new here, this is how most religions work).

But this is why communtiy is so important too. It doesn’t stop the minute I get saved. That is what Jesus was about. Showing how to live after that initial process. It transforms your life (or at least it should) and this takes time. oh, look at that, I did have some energy anyway.

Instead of telling me that this is what Jesus was about, how about you tell me where Jesus says anything like that. When did Jesus talk about this good ol’ community and howing to live after the conversion process (I suppose you would need to tell me where Jesus talks about this conversion process).

To me, it seems as if you are distorting facts to your benefit, and I understand that you see me as doing the same. I don’t know why they call it apologetics, I don’t remember apologizing for anything, do you?

Due to the smiley face, I am going to assume this was humour. I don’t find the first part funny, however, especially considering I just threw passage after passage at anyone here to actually discuss and you retaliated with not one verse nor one argument. You, in essence, plugged your ears and stated you simply didn’t have the energy to engage in any dialogue.

Let me know if you do want to hear my “explanations” for your other questions. I’m not done with all, I work and have a life beyond the internet, so it’s taking time.

Now this is just silly – did I just waste an entire comment just for you to tell me this at the end? Isn’t this why you responded to me? Of course I want to read your explanations. I de-converted because my own explanations no longer could be held in critical light – I would love to see whether yours are better than that I have read of Augustine, Gregori, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, Simons, Tozer, Schaeffer, Lewis, and the rest of the the theologians I have spent the majority of my young life studying.

TDZ,

You have not offended me. I respect how has been offended or has problems with something you say you are quick to apologize.

Good, I know my tone may sometimes come across as harsh, especially when I’ve had a rough couple of days at home.

As for the Trinity…

I personally think it came out of a logical matter of convenience – the other models of the godhood simply did not work for other reasons (the theologians discussing them at the time were, of course, not Jewish nor were they even in the first two Christian centuries). I believe that out of anyone coming close to solving the philosophical problems of the Trinity it was the Cappadocian Fathers.

Not all of us. Some of us do more reading and thinking.

Of course not all – which is why there are so many “heretics” out there. When it comes to the Trinity, most people don’t give a second thought. Many who do, like most theologians who I speak of, simply realize the problems of the alternatives (son lesser than father, spirit a different being, etc.) and shrink away.

Oh don’t get me started on fundamentalist. For them religion is nothing more than a list of do’s & don’ts. In some cases it is a strange perversion of any form of true Christianity.

I don’t think it is this simple. The term fundamentalism, to beat a dead horse, means many different things to many different people. I believe the majority of “fundamentalists” (not the psychotic ones) believe in God’s grace and having compassion towards people, and believe themselves to be on equal terms as the worse of sinners like any other evangelical or moderate Christian. The question is, looking at the gospels, the stories of Jesus, and his teachings – would that law-like attitude be so far from the truth?

No problem. Even TA’s comments were tame compared to others who have come here.

Did the definition of Apologetics help you? Also, what about my statement on salvation?

Hadn’t really registered this sentence before. [BTW bobbi jo, it's from dd not TA]

Again with the EOC perspective, it certainly is not instant. In joining the EOC, we had to take catechumen/inquirers classes and attend the church for one full year (to get through the whole liturgical calendar). After all that the priest still could decide you weren’t ready. I know one gal who waited a bit over 3 years. The EOC just isn’t ever in a hurry and they aren’t interested in “here today, gone next week” christians.

And the EOC firmly believes you work lifelong on your salvation. It’s a process, not a one time event, in their view.