Interpretation of the Bible re: Who is saved and who isn't.

[catocom]

yep, and if all could live like that, the world would be a much better place, but unfortunately the christian, and muslim religions (and sub-sects) are very evangelical, trying to convert people to save the "heathens" or "infidels" souls, a good just cause, if you are a believer, but the policy put to practice gets bad, from merely annoying

e.i. Jehovah's witnesses on Saturday mornings

to the truly despicable

e.i. the spanish inquisition

I think the main problem is not with the different religions,
it's with "extremism" with those religions.

 

[Gato_Solo]

I think the main problem is not with the different religions,
it's with "extremism" with those religions.

True, Cat, true...but it's also the fact that the people in each religion who are not fanatics stand by and let those extremists run things. Same as everything else in the world...

 

[MrBishop]

Extremists are everywhere...people who cling too closely to one ideal to the exclusion of others.

To quote my parish priest "God wants spiritual fruit, not religious nuts."

Religion is meant to be inclusive...and not a case of Us vs. Them. Unfortunatly, the tribal-identity (belonging) overrules most conscious thought and we end up saying things like "Yes..they're Christians too, but we're *insert other protestant group name here*, and we're different"

 

[Squiggy]

As soon as you argue against an 'extremist', you've simply drawn the boundary for the other extreme.

 

[RDX]

If a person cannot experience the same emotions.....then simply what exists after death is not "them". If the emotions of the soul are removed/tampered with after death......then the whole idea of an afterlife becomes preposterous, as we'll be nothing less than mindless zombies.....blissfully content with heaven as we won't have the emotions to question it. Eternity in a paradise (or wotever your idea of heaven is) might seem all hunky dory.....but I'd like to retain enough free will to say "this place is boring" if I find it to be boring.



No. It's still the same God, only peoples perceptions of Him have changed.

Ritual aside, because that is a whole seperate argument, has the way people communicate with God really changed........has the promise of heaven and his retribution in Hell changed? The answer is Yes, christianity brought forth the existance of hell, you won't find it mentioned in the Torah. Christianity paints a far more black and white religion than the old testament or Jewdaism ever did.



Removing or adding books to the bible on whose authority? The bible, both in oral and written medium, as been changed to suit the purposes of organised churches for millenia.

A helluva lot of meaning has been lost in the translation(s) ... go read your bible and look up the italicised words......you have obviously spent some time studying the bible, so I presume you know why they are written so........but how many priests/vicars/public speakers have you heard that totally do not understand why they are there? You can easily tell when they emphasise the italicised words.

I didn't say that we would not have any emotions, I said that I don't think that it is possible for us to say with any certainty that we would experience the exact same emotions, or how much greater we could experience some emortion. For instance, a few passages in the Bible say that there is no suffering in heaven. This is obviously different from earth (unless life is really treating you well).

You will not find hell listed by name in many translations, but you will find descriptions of places of suffering after death. The Hebrew word "sheol" is mentioned over 50 times in the old testament. It is quite apparant (at least to me), that this is the same term used for the greek word for hades. It depends on which translation you look at to see how this word is interpreted. In the King James version, "sheol" is translated to "hell" about half of the time. For the rest of the verses, it is translated to "grave". A few times it is also translated to "pit". In the New International version, it is translated much more often to "grave". In the Catholic Douay version, it is translated almost entirely to "hell". By contrast, when the greek word for "hades" is found in the new testament, almost every translation records it as "hell".

You are right that it is difficult to give accurate translations. The only real way to understand the full meaning of the verse, is to go back to the Hebrew or Greek text. But I think that a Person can use a translation (or better yet a variety of translations, and Bible dictionaries, etc), to form a good base to really understand Christianity.

As far as choosing which books to be included in the Bible... it sounds like you have a pretty good idea of what took place. The process took hundreds of years and was done by hundreds of people. The books were examined by their historical authenticity and their level of quality. On top of that, some books had signs of being inspired while others clearly did not.

The choice was not haphazard, but it does appear arbitrary in many aspects. Obviously, what should be included in the Bible is still not agreed upon by everyone. We can clearly see how Protestants differ from the Catholic church by what they consider scripture. When putting the New Testament together, the books were partially organized by how strongly they felt that they should be included. The Gospels are clearly the fundamental building block on which Christianity is based. The writers lived with Jesus and gave detailed accounts, those books were readilly accepted. In the same way Acts was largely a historical documentation of the early Church. Finally when you get down to say Revalation, it was not so clear whether or not it should be included in the Bible. It is not easy to interpret. People today still argue if it is prophetic, historic, or has nothing to do with either.

 

[Ms Ann Thrope]

Religion is meant to be inclusive...and not a case of Us vs. Them.

I don't understand, Bish. In my experience ALL religions are exclusionary -- if you're not one of the 'saved' or 'chosen' then you're one of the 'damned' or 'lost'. The idea of inclusion, I suppose, is that anyone could convert and become a celebrant or practitioner of said faith, provided they follow the rules set forth within that wisdom tradition. By so doing they become members of that club, though.

As for the heaven/hell question, since I see religion as a closed system, you're only 'saved' if you buy into that system. If you don't, it doesn't apply to you.

 

[MrBishop]

John 3:16-21

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.


OK...so it's kinda all over the place. 1st...you have to believe in Christ, even though Christ didn't come here to condemn us. Then it says that light "Jesus" came into the world, but people didn't like him because they were evil...BUT...those that do good, come to the light to show off their good deeds, because those deeds were done through God's name.

So..are all those who do good deeds doing so in the name of God, and thus 'walk in the light' ?

You know...I've got 6 different bibles in my office...I was trying to pick one to read..while I'm bored at work (cause I'm not supposed to be on the internet, but reading is fine)... and not one single version resembled the other...how odd. Even the description of the first 7 days (creationism) and the terms used were different.

6 And God said, Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.
7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so.
8 God called the expanse sky. And there was evening, and there was morning--the second day.

6 Then God said, "Let there be an (13) expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters."
7 God made the [3] expanse, and separated (14) the waters which were below the expanse from the waters (15) which were above the expanse; and it was so.
8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day

6God spoke: "Sky! In the middle of the waters;
separate water from water!"
7God made sky.
He separated the water under sky
from the water above sky.
And there it was:
8he named sky the Heavens;
It was evening, it was morning--
Day Two.

6 And God saith, `Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters, and let it be separating between waters and waters.'
7 And God maketh the expanse, and it separateth between the waters which [are] under the expanse, and the waters which [are] above the expanse: and it is so.
8 And God calleth to the expanse `Heavens;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day second.

6 God said, "Let there be a huge space between the waters. Let it separate water from water."
7 And that's exactly what happened. God made the huge space between the waters. He separated the water that was under the space from the water that was above it.
8 God called the huge space "sky." There was evening, and there was morning. It was day two.

So..in some cases, the expanse is Heaven, in others, it is heavens, in others still it's sky. Some older versions have the sky listed as waters, seperated by a 'dome'...and the upper waters are heaven, in some..it's a container of sorts...

no wonder peoplecan't agree on the bible...even the writers can't agree.

 

[MrBishop]

I don't understand, Bish. In my experience ALL religions are exclusionary -- if you're not one of the 'saved' or 'chosen' then you're one of the 'damned' or 'lost'. The idea of inclusion, I suppose, is that anyone could convert and become a celebrant or practitioner of said faith, provided they follow the rules set forth within that wisdom tradition. By so doing they become members of that club, though.

As for the heaven/hell question, since I see religion as a closed system, you're only 'saved' if you buy into that system. If you don't, it doesn't apply to you.

What I meant by inclusionary was that it should welcome with open arms any that would come to it, and give aid to as many as possible despite which group the belong to or do not belong to.

 

[MrBishop]

I high-hard ball coming your way.

Romans 1

1 I, Paul, am writing this letter. I serve Christ Jesus. I have been appointed to be an apostle. God set me apart to tell others his good news.
2 He promised the good news long ago. He announced it through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures.
3 The good news is about God's Son. As a human being, the Son of God belonged to King David's family line.
4 By the power of the Holy Spirit, he was appointed to be the mighty Son of God because he rose from the dead. He is Jesus Christ our Lord.
5 I received God's grace because of what Jesus did so that I could bring glory to him. He made me an apostle to all those who aren't Jews. I must invite them to have faith in God and obey him.
6 You also are among those who are appointed to belong to Jesus Christ.
7 I am sending this letter to all of you in Rome who are loved by God and appointed to be his people. May God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ give you grace and peace.

Jesus was not the 'son of God' until after he'd died and had risen from the dead. Then...God appointed him 'the mighty Son of God'.

Part two - Hmmm... those who aren't Jews....

 

[AlladinSane]

You will not find hell listed by name in many translations, but you will find descriptions of places of suffering after death. The Hebrew word "sheol" is mentioned over 50 times in the old testament. It is quite apparant (at least to me), that this is the same term used for the greek word for hades. It depends on which translation you look at to see how this word is interpreted. In the King James version, "sheol" is translated to "hell" about half of the time. For the rest of the verses, it is translated to "grave". A few times it is also translated to "pit". In the New International version, it is translated much more often to "grave". In the Catholic Douay version, it is translated almost entirely to "hell". By contrast, when the greek word for "hades" is found in the new testament, almost every translation records it as "hell".

Thus my understanding that hell as it was conceived by the church(place of eternal damnation) doesn't exist. The suffering comes from an imperfect state of soul, that can be eased as much as you are willing to change your ways.

Finally when you get down to say Revalation, it was not so clear whether or not it should be included in the Bible. It is not easy to interpret. People today still argue if it is prophetic, historic, or has nothing to do with either.

It's largely assumed today that Revelation was a "vision" that John had of what the future was bringing for them(Christians), prosecutions, etc. He then, wrote a letter to his companions alerting of what would come, but had to do it in a way that would not be undestood by his captors(he was aprisioner then). Hence, the allegoric language...

 

[catocom]

I high-hard ball coming your way.



Jesus was not the 'son of God' until after he'd died and had risen from the dead. Then...God appointed him 'the mighty Son of God'.

Part two - Hmmm... those who aren't Jews....

OK let me try again.
I had a nice response nearly completed and the page flipped
over the the MS site for some reason. I must have some hotkeys
that I'm not aware of or something.
Anyway...

The Trinity, (God the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost are all one as I understand it.
It's hard to explain Heavenly things in earthly terms.
That's why Jesus spoke in parables sometimes, that and to
throw off the Pharisees.

I also think God had chosen the Jews at the time to give
man a base to start with, as far as their ethics, at the time.