The Fall From Grace
- _Boanerges_
- _Boanerges_
- pink101
- _Boanerges_
- _Boanerges_
- pink101
- hawknut
- _Boanerges_
- pink101
- pink101
This archived discussion is "read only".
« Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Next »
» _Boanerges_ - is [anyone] held accountable?
In response to is [anyone] held accountable? posted by pink101:It's not a matter of accountability.
Actually.. It is.. And that is what the texts claim. You may not believe that (your explanation follows) but that is not a critical look at what Christianity teaches.
It is all about the concepts that lead up to the christian doctrines of salvation. According to the "core christianity" doctrines, every person is accountable for what Adam did--none are excused.
No... The texts do not make the claim that the child is held accountable to the fathers sin. The Bible makes this clear from the beginning, to the ending. So again, if you are going to quote a "core" belief of Christianity, then you must use the texts to make the claim. Otherwise, all we have is 'your core belief'
Some religionists even believe aborted embryos go to hell, I suppose.
People make all sorts of wild claims. We are not interested in what people think or believe. What we are interested in is precisely what the texts tell us. This is called a critical look at the texts. What one believes is irrelevent where texual criticism is concerned. If in science this belief was followed, then science would be biased. So hopefully you grasp the understanding of Textual criticism. If not, here is a helpful link
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r...
Now... back to the actual question. Who decides morality?
-- posted by _Boanerges_
» _Boanerges_ - Applications of textual criticism
The Hebrew BibleTextual criticism of the Hebrew Bible centers on the comparison of the manuscript versions of the Masoretic text as compared to early witnesses such as the LXX, Samaritan Pentateuch and the Biblical texts of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The New Testament
The New Testament has been preserved in more manuscripts than any other ancient work, having over 5,300 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages including Syriac, Slavic, Ethiopic and Armenian. This compares to less than 700 manuscripts for Homer's Iliad, the next most well-documented work from antiquity. The sheer number of witnesses presents unique difficulties, mainly in making stemmatics impractical. Consequently, New Testament textual critics have adopted eclecticism after sorting the witnesses into three major groups, called text-types. The most common division today is as follows:
* The Alexandrian text-type constitutes a group of early and well-regarded texts, including Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.
* The Western text-type is also very early, but its witnesses are seen to be more prone to paraphrase and other corruptions.
* The Byzantine text-type is a group of around 95% of all manuscripts, the majority of which are comparatively very late in the tradition.
The New Testament portion of the English translation known as the King James or Authorized Version was based on the Textus Receptus, an eclectic text prepared by Erasmus based primarily on Byzantine text manuscripts. However, following Westcott and Hort, most modern New Testament textual critics have concluded that the Byzantine text-type is late, based on the Alexandrian and Western text-types. Among the other types, the Alexandrian is viewed as more pure than the Western, and so one of the central tenets of current New Testament textual criticism is that one should follow the readings of the Alexandrian texts unless those of the other types are clearly superior.
However, a minority position represented by The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text edition by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad suggests that the Byzantine text-type represents an earlier text-type than the surviving Alexandrian texts, possibly the result of an early attempt at textual criticism. This position is also held by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont in their Byzantine Majority Text: The Greek New Testament: Byzantine Textform. Proponents of the Byzantine-text type assert that Egypt, almost alone, offers optimal climatic conditions favoring preservation of ancient manuscripts. Thus, the papyri used in the east (Asia Minor and Greece) would not have survived due to the unfavorable climatic conditions. The argument is that the much greater number of Byzantine manuscripts indicate a superior claim to being an accurate copy from the autograph. Furthermore, proponent J.P. Green, in Volume II of Unholy, questions over 3,000 differences between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the New Testament Gospels.
Other scholars have criticized the current categorization of manuscripts into text-types and prefer either to subdivide the manuscripts in other ways or to discard the text-type taxonomy.
Textual criticism is also present among scholars who believe the New Testament was written in Aramaic, including James Trimm and Raphael Lataster. Often, textual criticism is used by such scholars as evidence for an Aramaic original (see link below).
-- posted by _Boanerges_
» pink101 - Been Very Clear
In response to is [anyone] held accountable? posted by hawknut:.
"I guess I can't contribute much to that, as I don't believe it ever happened."
.
Maybe I haven't been very clear. Neither do I believe it ever happened. But, the discussion is about what hi-jacked christianity claims as truth. I'm sure you've noticed the resident religionist's posts even if you haven't read them. I generally don't read them either; but, I have a pretty good idea he's trying to claim that what was written is the absolute truth AND HE INTERPRETS IT FOR US--pretty much as it goes over our heads. Or so he claims. Whoopee! Anyone have a whirly-gig?
.
What hi-jacked christianity is saying relates to the statement you quoted, "The point here is how man's fallen condition can be remedied."
.
Accordingly, man's condition is diagnosed as "SIN SICKNESS" and there has to be a remedy or else all is lost. So, we can talk about how what Jesus taught gets twisted to be a support mechanism for O.T. Judaism and in keeping up with the times where priests were held in contempt for the way they sacrificed live animals to their god who wanted blood. God still needs the BLOOD of innocent and perfect living beings as a payment of the "SIN DEBT"according to hi-jacked christianity. Key the words in caps into your search engine. What do you get? I got 16,400 hits using "Blood" and "Sin Debt"..
-- posted by pink101
» _Boanerges_ - Blame shifting
In response to is [anyone] held accountable? posted by _Boanerges_:Blame shifting, of course, was part of the original response of Adam and Eve. God expected Adam and Eve to trust His warning (and to grow thereby). But when they failed, the man immediately blamed the woman, and then God ("The woman YOU gave me, gave me the fruit to eat and I ate") and the woman blamed the Serpent ("The serpent tricked me, and I ate"). The Serpent gave no excuse, since his act was apparently one of deliberate destruction. (Remember, Jesus called him a "murderer" from the beginning, in John 8.44.)
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/gutri...
-- posted by _Boanerges_
» _Boanerges_ - Morality
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
Morality refers to the concept of human ethics which pertains to matters of good and evil —also referred to as "right or wrong", used within three contexts: individual conscience, systems of principles and judgments — sometimes called moral values —shared within a cultural, religious, secular, Humanist, or philosophical community; and codes of behavior or conduct.
Personal morality defines and distinguishes among right and wrong intentions, motivations or actions, as these have been learned, engendered, or otherwise developed within each individual.
Contents
* 1 Conscience, belief, and code
* 2 Development of morality
* 3 Morality in judicial systems
* 4 Comparative morality among cultures
* 5 Moral codes
* 6 Moral core
-- posted by _Boanerges_
» pink101 - Blame shifting
In response to Blame shifting posted by _Boanerges_:.
We know all that, Wendell. It's all about what YOU believe.
.
By the way, morality? Isn't that another name for the fruit of which Adam and Eve partook?
.
-- posted by pink101
» hawknut - Been Very Clear
In response to Been Very Clear posted by pink101:
.
You know, Pink, folks can 'claim' anything is truth. Maybe for them, it is. Whatever gets em through those tricky day, I'm for it.
.
Have they really 'hi-jacked' the truth in their faith, or could it be that you're seeing an evolutionary process - another sect developing within your lifetime? Do you think Christianity is the same as in Paul's day? Is Lutheranism the same as in Luther's day? Know what I mean?
.
Blood guilt and atonement, and blood sacrifices to appease the gods, are hardly new ideas. Those developed WAY before Judaism and Christianity. I'm sure you know that already, given your web search results.
-- posted by hawknut
» _Boanerges_ - Blame shifting
In response to Blame shifting posted by pink101:We know all that, Wendell. It's all about what YOU believe
I thought you wanted to discuss "the fall"...?? But what you are really presenting (a derailment of your on discussion) has now manifested into the presupposed "hi-jacking" of Christianity....
Uhmm... hmmm....
Let's get on with the discussion
If, as you claim, its about what YOU believe, then how be it that you use the Bible to justify the rejection of the Bible? In logic, this is called a fallacious arument (premise) and cannot be used as a way to determine "truth"....
What YOU must do is present your evidence that Adam and Eve did not exist. As you can see, a universal negative cannot be proven. So, that brings you back to the beginning. Either you will use the texts, as given, or present other cultural texts, or sacred texts, to give a complete viewpoint of "the fall"...
Otherwise, all you have done is hi-jacked Christianity's core beliefs and only present YOUR core beliefs. In the end, all this is called is a biased essay on what Phil believes. And ultimately, has no bearing in reality other than in your mind.
So.... as you said "Let's get on with the discussion".
The question of "the fall" centers of the core belief of good and evil, or, to the humanists, right and wrong. That is the core belief that Christianity presents. And, ironically, if we are to remove "God" or "religion" from the equation, we still remain at the "ethical and moral" questions.
Which causes me again to repeat: "Who decides what is right and wrong"? Care to answer this simple human question, or will you continue to ignore it?
-- posted by _Boanerges_
» pink101 - Been Very Clear
In response to Been Very Clear posted by hawknut:.
"Have they really 'hi-jacked' the truth in their faith, or could it be that you're seeing an evolutionary process - another sect developing within your lifetime?"
.
Sure that's possible.
.
But, what Jesus taught is so clear that it seems obvious to me that these religionists are trying to obfuscate it to be something else. I remember when the arguments were on top in churches whether the Old Testament should be considered or if the writings of the apostle Paul could be given much credit. These were the questions being considered as Fundamentalism began its marching into the main Protestant churches in America. There was a process involved in the take over--you have to know that.
.
Fundamentalism was a gigantic movement within the realms of protestantism in North America. It presented an overwhelming force as it defended the very bulkheads of belief. THAT was very significant to what we have today.
.
-- posted by pink101
» pink101 - Blame shifting
In response to Blame shifting posted by _Boanerges_:.
"Care to answer this simple human question, or will you continue to ignore it?"
.
The discussion has progressed way beyond where you want it to be. We already discussed that aspect. Apparently you want a chance to say that God is the one who decides what is right and wrong. Okay, say it. We all can read what you write.
.
Now what?
.
.
-- posted by pink101
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.