Meaning of the word "Christian"

Theology, Religious Studies, religion, god, faith and other topics of a spiritual nature.

Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on July 13th, 2018, 9:04 pm 

For me, the word "Christian," like the words "Buddhist" and "Muslim" are only about what the person believes, which tells us absolutely nothing about whether they are a good or Godly person. In fact, it seems to me that nothing is less Christian than thinking this means one is a good person. A Christian should understand that he is a sinner and totally unworthy. For this reason, it is strange how so many of the cults calling themselves Christian have turned being Christian into one of their meritorious accomplishments in life, sounding a lot more like the religion known as Gnosticism than the one presented in the Bible by Jesus and Paul.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on July 23rd, 2018, 11:11 pm 

So how do we define the beliefs of Christianity to distinguish it from other religions? One thing that will not work is the most popular definition by non-believers where "Christian" means a believer in or follower of Jesus, because other religions do that too: Islam, Bahai, Hari Krishna, to name a few more obvious ones. Clearly defining Christianity is a matter of significant dispute, but acknowledging this I would like to list a few logical approaches.

1. I believe the definition most widely held by believers goes back to the ecumenical agreement of Nicea 325 AD which pretty much equates Christianity to Trinitarianism and the divinity of Christ. This does the job in distinguishing Christianity from these other religions like Islam.

2. Another approach for those not liking number 1, is to define it by the Bible as the primary if not sole authority for Christian belief. After all, the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be found in the Bible (not unless it has been altered to add this in, like the King James Bible was). And the arguments by Christians for the divinity of Christ from the Bible alone are far from ironclad. By the way, this is coming from someone who believes in both the doctrine of the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. I also think the job of distinguishing Christianity from other religions is accomplished by this definition because Islam, for example, not only holds another book, the Quran, in higher esteem, but contradicts the Bible at least in claiming that Jesus did not die on the cross.

3. Or perhaps there is a way to resurrect the popular definition as a follower of Jesus by zooming in on what Jesus taught. Can we objectively evaluate what Jesus taught? Probably not... but here is my best attempt. First lets take a look at topic frequencies: God (incl the Father and Holy Spirit) 259 times, Heaven (kingdom, paradise) 169 times, love 57 times, prayer 33 times, prophets 33 times, sin 32 times, faith 30 times, forgiveness 30 times, hell (incl eternal punishment and eternal fire) 26 times, devil 25 times.
a. I saw a claim that the one teaching found in all four gospels is: He who seeks/saves/loves his life will lose it and he who loses his life (for my sake) will save/keep/find it. The context is important though. In three places this is where He says "what profit a man if he gain the whole world and loses his life/soul." In another place the context is Jesus saying worry not for God takes care of sparrows. In another place He is talking about how a seed dies before it can bear fruit. And in one place the context is talk about the last days and reminding us of what happened to Lot's wife. Thus this doesn't mean that we should hate or throw away our lives, but only that we should not make our physical life so all important that we sacrifice our spirit for its sake.
b. The power of faith was one of Jesus' most consistent repeated messages.
c. Speaking against hypocrisy and the legalism of the Pharisees was frequent topic of Jesus.
d. Taking care of those in need was another of Jesus' often repeated messages.
e. According to one of my teachers, a Jewish Rabbi, nearly all of Jesus' teachings are found in the teaching of the Pharisees or rabbinical Judaism. The only exception was his disregard for purity, associating with tax collectors and sinners.
But where in all this do we have something which distinguishes Christianity from other religions like Islam? If there is something which does this, I am not seeing it.


So, how about me? Where do I find my definition of "Christianity?" I am with number 1. Number 2 works ok until we come to one of the teachings attributed to Paul in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Not only is this rife with disgusting misogyny but it contradicts the gospel teachings of Jesus and Paul of salvation by grace. Thus if the definition of "Christianity" requires giving authority for truth to this passage then I am not Christian by that definition to be sure.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on July 26th, 2018, 8:01 pm 

I should add that the problem with number 1, however, is that this council of Nicea in 325 AD was only the first of many ecumenical councils to decide on the creed of Christianity, each one adding more beliefs to the list and defining Christianity more narrowly to exclude more and more sectors of Christianity in the process. But if one is looking for the most general definition of Christianity then it is only logical to look to the first agreement in Nicea 325 AD.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on July 27th, 2018, 2:42 am 

One of the things I stumbled across came from trying to understand what Islam valued in the teachings of Jesus. At first, I mostly found that Islam speaks about Jesus: who he is, what happened to him, what he will do in the future, and his relationship to God. But finding out what important things they thought Jesus taught was more difficult.

I found that Islamic tradition has Jesus saying some very different things than what is found in the Bible.
1. "Blessed is he who sees with his heart but whose heart is not in what he sees.
2. "The world is a bridge; cross this bridge but do not build upon it
3. Jesus met a man and asked him, What are you doing? 'I am devoting myself to God,' the man replied. Jesus asked, 'Who is caring for you?' 'My brother,' said the man. Jesus said, 'Your brother is more devoted to God than you are'.
Tarif Khaladi wrote a book "The Muslim Jesus: Sayings and Stories in Islamic Literature" which gives 300 more such sayings and stories of Jesus in Islamic writings.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby Don Juan on August 23rd, 2018, 11:40 am 

mitchellmckain » July 24th, 2018, 5:11 am wrote:
So, how about me? Where do I find my definition of "Christianity?" I am with number 1. Number 2 works ok until we come to one of the teachings attributed to Paul in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Not only is this rife with disgusting misogyny but it contradicts the gospel teachings of Jesus and Paul of salvation by grace. Thus if the definition of "Christianity" requires giving authority for truth to this passage then I am not Christian by that definition to be sure.


So these mean the following verses are full of disgusting misogyny? I am wondering if you know what you are saying?

1 Corinthians 14:34 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.


Colossians 3:18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

18 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.


Ephesians 5:22-23 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.


Isaiah 3:12 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12
O My people! Their oppressors [a]are children,
And women rule over them.
O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray
And confuse the direction of your paths.


Genesis 3:16 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16
To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain [a]in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you.”
Don Juan
Active Member
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: 17 Jun 2010


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on August 23rd, 2018, 2:32 pm 

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:So these mean the following verses are full of disgusting misogyny? I am wondering if you know what you are saying?

My general answer is that when I singled out that passage, I really meant to single out THAT single passage as one I cannot support for the reasons I gave. Others might be explained away, but not that one. It really quite thoroughly disgusts me, and I cannot overlook this just because it is in the Bible.

Furthermore the whole issue of equality between men and women is a complicated one, and although I side with equality for the most part there are perhaps details on which I would call for caution.

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:
1 Corinthians 14:34 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.


Misogyny may be an excessive label in this case. I do not support the inequity, but frankly, there are a lot of legalisms in the Bible that 99% of Christians do not support, because Jesus and Paul were not so supportive of them either. I think they have more to do with the culture at the time than God. Also the reasons for such restrictions often had to do with particular situations which people at the time were confronting. In this case, it may have only been singling out women because they were particularly noisy and disruptive at that time and place.

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:
Colossians 3:18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

18 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.


Ephesians 5:22-23 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.



In addition to what I said above, I would also say that the Bible puts obligations not only on wives but also on husbands. Though again, I don't think a legalistic treatment of such things is very Christian, and forcing couples into rigid patterns is not helpful. They really need to find out what works for them, and other people ought to butt out.

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:
Isaiah 3:12 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12
O My people! Their oppressors [a]are children,
And women rule over them.
O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray
And confuse the direction of your paths.


What? Women (and children) cannot do any wrong or be a source of considerable evil? Of course they can. It was a particular problem in Israel that taking wives from other cultures was corrupting the way of life which God directed the Israelites to lead.

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:
Genesis 3:16 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

16
To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain [a]in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you.”


I have already objected to the idea in another thread (Eve and Pandora) that this story was biased against women.

Adam, Eve and the snake were ALL handed out punishments and I believe they were all logical consequences of what happened.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby Don Juan on August 23rd, 2018, 6:31 pm 

mitchellmckain » August 23rd, 2018, 8:32 pm wrote:
Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 10:40 am wrote:So these mean the following verses are full of disgusting misogyny? I am wondering if you know what you are saying?

My general answer is that when I singled out that passage, I really meant to single out THAT single passage as one I cannot support for the reasons I gave. Others might be explained away, but not that one. It really quite thoroughly disgusts me, and I cannot overlook this just because it is in the Bible.

Furthermore the whole issue of equality between men and women is a complicated one, and although I side with equality for the most part there are perhaps details on which I would call for caution.



You are disgusted about what specifically with the passage? Have you considered thoroughly its meaning to give justice to what the author wants to communicate, because remember, Paul was writing in context - there was reference to the Genesis, the condition of Timothy and those listening to him. Woman is not equal with man about what specifically in that passage?

My apologies if you are a woman, but Paul's writing was related to the context at least of that passage, and Paul in the first part of the epistle was clear about the goal of what they are doing:

1 Timothy 1: 3-11

3 As I urged you [a]upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4 nor to [c]pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to [b]mere speculation rather than furthering [d]the administration of God which is by faith. 5 But the goal of our [e]instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.

8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 [f]and [g]immoral men [h]and homosexuals [i]and kidnappers [j]and liars [k]and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.
Don Juan
Active Member
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: 17 Jun 2010


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on August 23rd, 2018, 11:53 pm 

Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 5:31 pm wrote:You are disgusted about what specifically with the passage?

I have already answered that question. However, I will make a list for you. But first....

Let us be clear what this passage really consists of. However doubtful it may be, this is purported to be a letter from Paul and the passage is telling us only about Paul's supposed attitudes and practices. HE doesn't allow women to have authority over men. This only tells us that the author of this epistle is as insecure in his relationship with women as he is contemptuous and arrogant. Like so many people for so many centuries, he can only be a man if half the population are deprived of all their potential and abilities except to serve as breeding animals or reproduction machines. It is pathetic AND disgusting.

It tells us that the attitude which spawned the half-baked theology which follows (inconsistent with all teachings which went before) is derived from a deeply sexist view of the world.

Women can be great doctors, lawyers, writers, musicians, artists and thus since World War I when the men slaughtered each other pointlessly in trenches lined with machine guns, the world has seen the creative potential of this half of the human population liberated from this pathetic male inferiority complex. It is another reason why I will do whatever it takes to stop people like you from dragging the world back into the filthy squalor of the middle ages.

Yes they can also be great mothers, and this is a very very important thing which is too often insufficiently valued. However, we are long long past the time, in this overpopulated world, when this needs to be a full time occupation for every woman. It only makes sense to leave this to those who are inspired to do so instead of forcing them with legalistic religious dogma or by taking away the opportunity to develop any other skills.


Don Juan » August 23rd, 2018, 5:31 pm wrote:Woman is not equal with man about what specifically in that passage?

Which brings us back to that list I promised.

1. Unlike the Genesis story, this passage IS biased against women much more like the Pandora story where women are given to men as a curse and they are the origin of all evil.
2. All through the previous writings of Paul and the teachings of Jesus we are saved by the grace of God and what God asks of us is faith. But this passage contradicts this to make an exception in the case of women who are to be saved by works instead ... the work of a uterus for breeding a man's offspring. The implication being that a woman who cannot have children is damned.
3. Furthermore, according to this pig, a woman is not to use her God given capability for speech and even leadership but is to suppress these in order to crawl like worms before men -- a teaching clearly derived from contempt for women and the insecurity and pompous self-indulgence of men.
4. If it is true that Adam was not deceived then he has even less excuse for what he did. And I see far more blame in Adam because his response to God's query was to take no responsibility but to blame God and Eve instead, showing no love for either God or his female companion.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby Don Juan on August 24th, 2018, 5:33 am 

Your answers are not specific enough because first there is a lack of an analysis regarding context, at least the context of the passage in question in the Bible, in the way your arguments are delivered. There was no delineation of what the passage is biased about in what aspect specifically. It is easy and shallow to attack without a good analysis of Biblical content. Your answers did not address HOW specifically, based on an understanding of the Bible, all these regarding the passage contradicts its immediate context or even the greater context beyond the book. The answers given wonder a lot - beating around the bush.

For example:

1. Unlike the Genesis story, this passage IS biased against women much more like the Pandora story where women are given to men as a curse and they are the origin of all evil.


...the passage IS biased against women IN WHAT ASPECT specifically?
...women are given to men as a curse TO WHAT CONTEXT specifically?
..they are the origin of ALL evil? HOW specifically is that related to the passage?
2. All through the previous writings of Paul and the teachings of Jesus we are saved by the grace of God and what God asks of us is faith. But this passage contradicts this to make an exception in the case of women who are to be saved by works instead ... the work of a uterus for breeding a man's offspring. The implication being that a woman who cannot have children is damned.


....HOW specifically THE PASSAGE CONTRADICTS salvation? WHAT specifically IS MEANT BY PAUL when he mentioned about [i]CHILDBEARING in the passage? WHAT specifically is meant by "Let a [/i]woman learn in silence with all submission" in that particular passage in ITS IMMEDIATE CONTEXT?
3. Furthermore, according to this pig, a woman is not to use her God given capability for speech and even leadership but is to suppress these in order to crawl like worms before men -- a teaching clearly derived from contempt for women and the insecurity and pompous self-indulgence of men.


Is not your arguments a self-indulgence? An argument without a good analysis of Biblical text? WHAT specifically IS MEANT by "And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence" IN ITS IMMEDIATE CONTEXT - that is the WHOLE letter of PAUL to Timothy? The argument you provided is lousy, full of topings coming from an external viewpoint from the Bible. You did not demonstrated an understanding of the passage based on its context Biblically.

4. If it is true that Adam was not deceived then he has even less excuse for what he did. And I see far more blame in Adam because his response to God's query was to take no responsibility but to blame God and Eve instead, showing no love for either God or his female companion.


What do you mean by EXCUSE specifically, and HOW specifically Adam took no responsibility or BLAME God and Eve? What specifically did the woman say when God also asked her? Were they not telling the truth? Did not Adam answered "...and I ATE" to God's question?
Don Juan
Active Member
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: 17 Jun 2010


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on August 24th, 2018, 6:49 pm 

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:Your answers are not specific enough because first there is a lack of an analysis regarding context, at least the context of the passage in question in the Bible, in the way your arguments are delivered. There was no delineation of what the passage is biased about in what aspect specifically. It is easy and shallow to attack without a good analysis of Biblical content. Your answers did not address HOW specifically, based on an understanding of the Bible, all these regarding the passage contradicts its immediate context or even the greater context beyond the book. The answers given wonder a lot - beating around the bush.

I conclude that communication with you is impossible. You interpret anything which does not give you the answer you want as not addressing your question and beating about the bush. This is nonsense. I will not give your answer EVER. I disagree with your answer because your answer is WRONG. And I will ALWAYS think your answer is wrong. This is a bet of course, for you have not given your answer. Probably because you know it will not stand any scrutiny and I will tear it to shreds. Thus all this babble about "beating around the bush" is nothing but word games on your part and completely meaningless.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:
1. Unlike the Genesis story, this passage IS biased against women much more like the Pandora story where women are given to men as a curse and they are the origin of all evil.


...the passage IS biased against women IN WHAT ASPECT specifically?
...women are given to men as a curse TO WHAT CONTEXT specifically?
..they are the origin of ALL evil? HOW specifically is that related to the passage?

The passage is biased against women in the specific aspect of putting the blame for what happened in the Garden of Eden on Eve, and the specific aspect of saying that women should not use their gifts of speech and leadership, and in the specific aspect of making them an exception to the gospel of salvation by grace. I explained all this before, but you simply refuse to hear because it is not what you choose believe. But I am not going to play your stupid games... EVER.

The background of the story of Pandora is that the gods gave us women as punishment and retaliation for Prometheus giving us fire. Then the story is that Pandora disobeys and opens this box and lets out all the evils into the world. Thus the story of Pandora blames all the evil in the world upon women. This is pure misogyny and nothing more. As I explained in the other thread this is NOT the case with the story in Genesis of Adam and Eve. Instead we see all three characters in the story held responsible by God for what happened. And thus any idea that Eve/women are to blame is inserted by the reader and this is the case with writer of 1 Timothy, who claims that women should be subservient to men because they are responsible for evil in the world -- which proves nothing but the misogynistic attitudes of the writer. If you really want to know more about the Pandora story then I suggest you do some research of your own.

The whole idea that all the evil in the world derives form the disobedience of women is idiotic. This nonsense is clearly concocted by insecure men with a need for dominance over women.


Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:
2. All through the previous writings of Paul and the teachings of Jesus we are saved by the grace of God and what God asks of us is faith. But this passage contradicts this to make an exception in the case of women who are to be saved by works instead ... the work of a uterus for breeding a man's offspring. The implication being that a woman who cannot have children is damned.


....HOW specifically THE PASSAGE CONTRADICTS salvation? WHAT specifically IS MEANT BY PAUL when he mentioned about [i]CHILDBEARING in the passage? ?

Jesus and Paul teaches that we are saved by the grace of God and not by works and yet this says that women are saved by the work of bearing children. This is the explanation I gave before and it directly answers the question no matter how much you refuse to hear it because it is not the answer you want to hear. But it will always be my answer because it is the correct answer and any nonsense you want to change this to is wrong.

What is specifically mentioned by the writer of 1 Timothy is that Eve was deceived and Adam was not and this is given as a reason why men should be in charge over women and that women should not speak or have authority over men. AND I addressed this in the previous post despite your refusal to hear what you do not want to hear, explaining that if Adam was truly not deceived then he is more to blame for what happened rather than less. I greatly doubt that women are deceived more than men unless it because men are more the authors of deception than women, but I hardly see that as a recommendation for authority being given to them. And the fact is that I see far more examples of men abusing the authority given to them than women. So argument given by the author is invalid no matter how you look at the details of what he said.

But no doubt you will refuse to hear anything I said because it is not what you want to hear and believe, but spout more nonsense about me not answering the question because this is the game of deception which you like play.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:WHAT specifically is meant by "Let a [/i]woman learn in silence with all submission" in that particular passage in ITS IMMEDIATE CONTEXT?

Already answered this, although you refuse to hear it. What is specifically SAID is that this person who wrote this does not permit women to teach or have authority over men. I also was very clear about the meaning of this which is that the author has serious insecurity problems with women. But again you do not want to hear this because it is not how you choose to rewrite this passage in a way that suits yourself.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:
3. Furthermore, according to this pig, a woman is not to use her God given capability for speech and even leadership but is to suppress these in order to crawl like worms before men -- a teaching clearly derived from contempt for women and the insecurity and pompous self-indulgence of men.


Is not your arguments a self-indulgence?

Hardly! I am not a woman. Therefore it has nothing to do with self-indulgence. It does however have to do with the respect I have for women and the talents which many women have for speech, teaching, and leadership as well as for science, medicine, art, etc.. which I apparently value more than those whose mentality is more suited to the filth and ignorance of the middle ages. It has to do with the realization that the squalor and poverty of the past has a great deal to do with the fact that instead of unlocking the creative potential of the majority of humanity by rewarding their efforts they were instead treated with contempt by the brigands, murders, and rapists who pretended to authority over them.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote: An argument without a good analysis of Biblical text? WHAT specifically IS MEANT by "And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence" IN ITS IMMEDIATE CONTEXT - that is the WHOLE letter of PAUL to Timothy?

I GREATLY approve of looking at the texual context for the meaning of what is said in the Bible. But your pretense that the context can change the meaning of this passage is rejected. The context will never make this mean anything so different that it will invalidate my objections. Up to verse 11, I have no objection. But from verse 12 we can see the misogynistic attitude of the writer which not in any way altered by the context. And the theology which follows is atrocious completely contradicting the teachings Jesus and Paul elsewhere.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote: The argument you provided is lousy, full of topings coming from an external viewpoint from the Bible. You did not demonstrated an understanding of the passage based on its context Biblically.

Your objections to my answers to your questions are lousy, full of outright lies. You do not demonstrate that you can comprehend anything other than what you choose to believe.

Don Juan » August 24th, 2018, 4:33 am wrote:
4. If it is true that Adam was not deceived then he has even less excuse for what he did. And I see far more blame in Adam because his response to God's query was to take no responsibility but to blame God and Eve instead, showing no love for either God or his female companion.


What do you mean by EXCUSE specifically, and HOW specifically Adam took no responsibility or BLAME God and Eve? What specifically did the woman say when God also asked her? Were they not telling the truth? Did not Adam answered "...and I ATE" to God's question?

When God asked whether Adam had eaten the fruit he was commanded not to eat, he said , "The woman you gave to be with me gave me the fruit and I ate." Perhaps it is subtle but it does not seems so to me. Adam is clearly blaming Even for giving him the fruit and God for giving him the woman. What a dunderhead! If I was told that there was a fruit that would kill me you can bet I would learn to recognize that fruit and I would not eat it just because someone gave it to me. Nor would I see any need to point out that God had given me this woman if I had any love for God, or any need to point out that the woman gave me the fruit if I had any love for the woman. The excuse is pathetic and the assumption of responsibility here is beyond pathetic.

Now that Adam had set the tone, it is hardly surprising that Eve would follow his example in putting the blame on the snake. But be serious for a second. If God told you that you would die if you ate a particular kind of fruit would you really listen to a snake telling you to eat it anyway? Really? And what was God's response? Was it to say, ok, this is all the fault of that snake? No He did not. Well then, was God's response to say that all the fault of Eve and the snake? No He did not. God quite clearly held ALL OF THEM RESPONSIBLE!
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Meaning of the word "Christian"

Postby mitchellmckain on August 26th, 2018, 4:57 pm 

But you know the real problem is making the Genesis story all about obedience. That is great for a religious organization which is all about power and control. But it really makes for an absurd story if this is about the origin of a separation between man and God. If God wanted obedience then he should have created robots not living children who learn by making mistakes and finding out the consequences. Thus it makes considerably more sense if the real problem is a refusal on the part of Adam and Eve to learn from their mistakes by looking for someone else to blame things on. Putting the blame on God is bad enough to twist the relationship with God into something harmful -- that is a reasonable cause for a separation between man and God. But making this about obedience quite clearly tells me this is about a church organization looking for a rational for lording it over their congregation.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1302
Joined: 27 Oct 2016



Return to Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests