[N8 v2.0]

Christian Church Denounces Holy Bible

An Ohio Episcopal Convention is choosing to take an unusual stance toward what Christians view as their most holy book. Specifically, the church is denouncing the Holy Bible as being an "anti Jewish" document.

The decision was reached by popular vote via the church's governing body. Reverend Ruth Meyers stated that certain parts of "scriptural text...has in fact stirred anti-Jewish prejudice, and resulted in significant violence toward Jewish people."

Not everyone is pleased with the resolution, however. Reverend Dr. Peter Cook was one who voted against the measure. In reference to it, he stated, "Underlying it all was a terribly flawed understanding of God's Word."

 

[Secret Squirrel]

"Underlying it all was a terribly flawed understanding of God's Word."

This makes the squirrel laugh....

 

[moff_quigley]

Perhaps the US Episcopal Church needs to just get it over with and say that they are no longer "christian."

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Since when is religion a democracy anyway?

 

[Silver]

Perhaps the US Episcopal Church needs to just get it over with and say that they are no longer "christian."

Why? The only thing necessary to be a Christian is to believe in the divinity of Christ.

Now, this would be a surprise if a Hasidic sect said the same thing...

 

[BurlyShirley]

Why? The only thing necessary to be a Christian is to believe in the divinity of Christ.

Uh...the only way to have knowledge of the divinity of christ is through the bible tho. Denouncing it is denouncing the foundation of their religion still.

 

[BuddhaRoadkill]

Since when is religion a democracy anyway?

For the religion in question, I would say it began when the first group of fella's sat around bickering over which passages were going to make it into final print.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

For the religion in question, I would say it began when the first group of fella's sat around bickering over which passages were going to make it into final print.

Good point.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Uh...the only way to have knowledge of the divinity of christ is through the bible tho. Denouncing it is denouncing the foundation of their religion still.

I think a lot of people would disagree with you on that score. Many people say that they have a personal relationship with god that is separate from the Bible.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I think a lot of people would disagree with you on that score. Many people say that they have a personal relationship with god that is separate from the Bible.

I think alot of people are idiots. They wouldnt even know his name was jesus if it werent for the bible. They wouldnt know what praying was, they wouldnt know what being saved, asking for forgiveness, etc, etc, the christian faith is bound to the bible like it or not.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Uh...the only way to have knowledge of the divinity of christ is through the bible tho. Denouncing it is denouncing the foundation of their religion still.

i have a semantic question.
does "denouncing" means "everything therein is a lie" or "not everything there is true".

 

[Secret Squirrel]

i have a semantic question.
does "denouncing" means "everything therein is a lie" or "not everything there is true".

You sir, are thinking much too hard on this here Friday......

Pretty sure it's open to interpretation...

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I think alot of people are idiots. They wouldnt even know his name was jesus if it werent for the bible. They wouldnt know what praying was, they wouldnt know what being saved, asking for forgiveness, etc, etc, the christian faith is bound to the bible like it or not.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. I'm just telling you what I've been told by Xtians.

 

[BurlyShirley]

i have a semantic question.
does "denouncing" means "everything therein is a lie" or "not everything there is true".

Normally, that'd be an important distinction, but not in the case of the bible. The "WORD OF GOD" so to speak. It's either all or none, or at least its supposed to be. Supposedly god doesnt pick and choose which rules to enforce, and he doesnt lie either, therefore it must all be true, or none.

 

[Tenchiro]

I think alot of people are idiots. They wouldnt even know his name was jesus if it werent for the bible. They wouldnt know what praying was, they wouldnt know what being saved, asking for forgiveness, etc, etc, the christian faith is bound to the bible like it or not.

or the joys of banging your twin daughters in a drunken stupor. ink:

 

[Changleen]

I love Ridemonkey.

 

[Changleen]

I think alot of people are idiots. They wouldnt even know his name was jesus if it werent for the bible. They wouldnt know what praying was, they wouldnt know what being saved, asking for forgiveness, etc, etc, the christian faith is bound to the bible like it or not.

Use your imagination... ink:

 

[Silver]

or the joys of banging your twin daughters in a drunken stupor. ink:

That's a lot to live up to...

 

[Andyman_1970]

Christian Church Denounces Holy Bible

An Ohio Episcopal Convention is choosing to take an unusual stance toward what Christians view as their most holy book. Specifically, the church is denouncing the Holy Bible as being an "anti Jewish" document.

The decision was reached by popular vote via the church's governing body. Reverend Ruth Meyers stated that certain parts of "scriptural text...has in fact stirred anti-Jewish prejudice, and resulted in significant violence toward Jewish people."

Not everyone is pleased with the resolution, however. Reverend Dr. Peter Cook was one who voted against the measure. In reference to it, he stated, "Underlying it all was a terribly flawed understanding of God's Word."

I would agree with this, there are a lot of passages in the Bible that could, if they were not put in context, be seen as being anti-Semitic. Most run of the mill Christians don’t bother to study the culture and history of the people that wrote the Scriptures and thus when they read a passages that says “and the Jews plotted against him” think “well that must mean all Jews were doing that…………..”.

As for the voting and the whole “I wasn’t aware Christianity was a democracy”, and argument could be made that Jesus gave His followers authority to do exactly this in Matthew 16.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Normally, that'd be an important distinction, but not in the case of the bible. The "WORD OF GOD" so to speak. It's either all or none, or at least its supposed to be. Supposedly god doesnt pick and choose which rules to enforce, and he doesnt lie either, therefore it must all be true, or none.

This is where I think a lot of Christians, or at least Evangelical ones don’t really take time to really understand. Technically, there are only 5 books of the Bible that were spoken in an audible voice by God to someone who was recording it, the rest is what is referred to as “inspired”. Now ask a typical Baptist and they’ll tell you inspired means that the author was merely a secretary taking Holy dictation from the Almighty Himself. However, inspired could also mean, for example when an artist is inspired to paint a flower. I believe the authors of the Scriptures were inspired by their encounters with God to write what they wrote, I don’t believe they were taking dictation.

 

[BurlyShirley]

This is where I think a lot of Christians, or at least Evangelical ones don’t really take time to really understand. Technically, there are only 5 books of the Bible that were spoken in an audible voice by God to someone who was recording it, the rest is what is referred to as “inspired”. Now ask a typical Baptist and they’ll tell you inspired means that the author was merely a secretary taking Holy dictation from the Almighty Himself. However, inspired could also mean, for example when an artist is inspired to paint a flower. I believe the authors of the Scriptures were inspired by their encounters with God to write what they wrote, I don’t believe they were taking dictation.

You see where this all gets out of hand to the point that it means absolutely nothing? I mean, if you're arguing amongst yourselves about the word "inspired" and how that applies to the bible being written, then I dont see how it's something you can have faith in. I mean, basically what you're saying is that alot of the bible may or may not be just what some dude thinks. Is that something to base your life off of?
Or do you only adhere to the chapters where god/jesus speaks directly? Becuase you know, that's just the way some guy "interpreted" what god said and wrote it down, so AGAIN, I say, it has to be either all or none. You cant pick and choose.

 

[sunny]

Christian Church Denounces Holy Bible

An Ohio Episcopal Convention is choosing to take an unusual stance toward what Christians view as their most holy book. Specifically, the church is denouncing the Holy Bible as being an "anti Jewish" document.

The decision was reached by popular vote via the church's governing body. Reverend Ruth Meyers stated that certain parts of "scriptural text...has in fact stirred anti-Jewish prejudice, and resulted in significant violence toward Jewish people."

Not everyone is pleased with the resolution, however. Reverend Dr. Peter Cook was one who voted against the measure. In reference to it, he stated, "Underlying it all was a terribly flawed understanding of God's Word."

This is really hilarious...

Christ Himself was a Jew
The most saintly woman of the Christian Church, the mother of God, Mary, was a Jew
Every one of the apostles was a Jew (yes, that means Saint Peter!! eek!)

Do people forget this?

Jerusalem and all of Judea was occupied territory - occupied by the Romans. And it wasn't the Romans who wanted Christ condemned or cared whether He "blasphemed"; it was the Jews. They could've used the term "locals" and it would've been more or less the same.

 

[BurlyShirley]

How is it that they were Jews if they believed Christ was the savior? Wouldnt that make them christians?

 

[sunny]

How is it that they were Jews if they believed Christ was the savior? Wouldnt that make them christians?

Remember how St Paul talked about "Jew or Greek" when talking about people in general? People of that time were either JEW OR GREEK, meaning, they were BORN Jewish, or born not Jewish. The term "Greek" essentially meant, "anyone not Jewish".

When Christ came, it was FOR the Jews. Remember the Canaanite woman with the dying daughter? (Matt 15:21-28). She would have easily been a "Christian" for her beilef. But she was at first turned away because she was not Jewish.

In that day, you were either a Jew, or not.

The term "Christian" didn't come into vogue until long after Christ's resurrection.

 

[BurlyShirley]

It doesnt actually matter when the term came into use, it matters what their belief was, and that, was in the teaching of christ. Not the regular jewish faith, hence, they were not jews.

 

[Andyman_1970]

You see where this all gets out of hand to the point that it means absolutely nothing? I mean, if you're arguing amongst yourselves about the word "inspired" and how that applies to the bible being written, then I dont see how it's something you can have faith in.

Since I have faith in God and not the Bible so I guess I don’t see a problem here.

I mean, basically what you're saying is that alot of the bible may or may not be just what some dude thinks.

I would argue it is a lot of “what some dude thinks” about His encounter with the Creator God of Israel.

Is that something to base your life off of?

I certainly try to, it’s not authoritative though, that would be Bibliolatry. Ideally, at least IMO, God is the only one that is authoritative.

Or do you only adhere to the chapters where god/jesus speaks directly? Becuase you know, that's just the way some guy "interpreted" what god said and wrote it down, so AGAIN, I say, it has to be either all or none.

I “adhere” what is applicable to me as a Gentile follower of Jesus. While that excludes a rather large chunk of the Scriptures for me as “must do’s” (think the first 5 books) it doesn’t’ mean that those portions are not useful in the areas of contextual research for example.

You cant pick and choose.

My previous fundy pastor used to say this all the time, so who made up that rule? The idea of “picking and choosing” gives the image of just blindly ignoring something’s and accepting others without research or study…………that couldn’t be father from the truth in my case at least.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Since I have faith in God and not the Bible so I guess I don’t see a problem here.

The idea of “picking and choosing” gives the image of just blindly ignoring something’s and accepting others without research or study.

Those two statements are not rational together. You cant have "faith" in a god that there is no proof of, and then reject certain parts of the bible for lack of factual support. Makes no sense.

 

[Andyman_1970]

It doesnt actually matter when the term came into use, it matters what their belief was, and that, was in the teaching of christ. Not the regular jewish faith, hence, they were not jews.

Some things to keep in mind when discussing the early followers of Jesus. First, up until Acts 10 (3+ years post resurrection it’s estimated) all Christians were Jews, the entire church was Jewish and thought of as another sect of Judaism. Paul even refers to himself in Acts 23 as “a Pharisee” this was years after he came to faith that Jesus was the Messiah and yet to declare that one was “a Pharisee” meant that one adhered to all the tenants of said sect of Judaism, which included strictly following the oral and written Torah. Remember also that at the time period of the close of the book of Acts (early 60’s of the 1st century) this sect of Judaism had it is estimates several hundred thousand followers, it was the largest and fastest growing sect of Judaism pre fall of Jerusalem.

So to say that those ethnic Jews who followed Jesus as their Messiah were “not Jews” is not accurate in the slightest.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Jews dont beleive christ was the messiah. End of story. They were no longer jews once they became followers of christ.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Those two statements are not rational together. You cant have "faith" in a god that there is no proof of, and then reject certain parts of the bible for lack of factual support. Makes no sense.

And your point is? I'm not really concerned if you find my faith rational, I would argue the very idea of faith itself (regardless of what it's in) is something that many times is not rational.

If there is "proof" in God then you don't need faith do you? The whole point of faith is trusting something you can't prove yourself.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I would argue the very idea of faith itself (regardless of what it's in) is something that many times is not rational.

Hallelujah.

 

[Andyman_1970]

Jews dont beleive christ was the messiah. End of story. They were no longer jews once they became followers of christ.

I know a whole group of Messianic Jews who would strongly disagree with you. Please prove your statement that those first followers of Jesus stopped being Jewish.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I know a whole group of Messianic Jews who would strongly disagree with you. Please prove your statement that those first followers of Jesus stopped being Jewish.

Obviously this is just a game of labels that doesnt really have a right answer. But seriously, they may have been ethnically jewish, but once you follow the teaching of christ, you are technically christian? Is that not what the term christian means?

 

[Andyman_1970]

Obviously this is just a game of labels that doesnt really have a right answer. But seriously, they may have been ethnically jewish, but once you follow the teaching of christ, you are technically christian? Is that not what the term christian means?

Yes that is correct, a Christian is someone who is a follower of Jesus. Jesus was a Torah observant Jewish rabbi, that had Jewish disciples, He taught them His interpretation of Torah, no where did Jesus teach for them to stop being Jewish. No where does He teach them to stop following Torah. Even after the ressurection, those followers of Jesus still went to the Temple, as required by Torah, still went to the synagogue, still the Jewish feasts and holidays.

 

[dhbuilder]

oh, those crazy episcopalians.

long ago, they were cool enough to thumb their nose at the catholic church though.

 

[SK6]

Since I have faith in God and not the Bible so I guess I don’t see a problem here.

You don't? you can't have faith in the bible, and yet, in the same breath, turn around and say you have faith in God? :nonono:

You best read the book again my friend.....oh, you can't, you have no faith in it...

Come on man, don't do Christianity any favors....

 

[Andyman_1970]

Where it is taught we as followers of Jesus are to place our faith in the Bible?

 

[SK6]

Where it is taught we as followers of Jesus are to place our faith in the Bible?

aaahhhhh....the bible?

Also refferred to as the word of God....

 

[Andyman_1970]

aaahhhhh....the bible?

Also refferred to as the word of God....

aaaaaaahhhhhhhh where in the Bible does it refer to itself in it's entirety as "the Word of God"?

 

[SK6]

aaaaaaahhhhhhhh where in the Bible does it refer to itself in it's entirety as "the Word of God"?

Pointless question, or more accurately a loaded question per se since any answer tendered leads to circular logic, or illogical as it would appear.