a POLITE discussion of the 5 fundamentals

[wil]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

OK, my turn.

Now that is what I like!

Everyone take a turn at the wheel. Not discussing others views or contradicting or arguing...first post...Just get it out there..

What do you think?

Take your turn!

good stuff!

[Thomas]

Hi juantoo3

1. Biblical inerrancy
Two things on this point:

The first, contrary to what is often asserted, is that biblical scholars across most denominations (dare I say mainstream – Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Lutheran ... ) are in agreement that, despite translational differences, the fundamental content and theological import of the Bible is not altered, so it is not viewed as being as important as many see it.

Remember also we now have the translations and commentaries quoted by the Fathers, plus archeological sources – in Syriac, for example – so we can go quite a long way back to double-check our sources.

I use the RSV for my studies, as it is most accurate in terms of translation, but I use the Duai Rheims in my contemplation, because the language is much more poetic. There is, however, no conflict between the two.

The second, and more important point, is that the Constitution Dei Verbum, from Vatican II states:
"11. Those divinely revealed realities which are contained and presented in Sacred Scripture have been committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit ... they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself. In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted."

This is a nuanced reading, and basically says that God is the source of Scripture, but man is the author ... hence one can see a difference between Mark and Luke, for example, or Jeremiah and Ezekiel ... in detail this is a discussion of formal truth and material truth ... that in essence God is the inspiration, but in substance man is the author, guided by the Spirit so that those things God wants to make known are revealed in Scripture 'with no admixture of error' ... but there may be error in the 'material truth' – there might have been 4,975 people fed, not 5,000 ...

2. The divinity of Jesus
"We announce to you the eternal life which dwelt with the Father and was made visible to us. What we have seen and heard we announce to you, so that you may have fellowship with us and our common fellowship be with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:2-3). St John seems pretty convinced. So am I.

Dondi's argument from C.S. Lewis is pretty to the point as well – to emphasise "but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

Dei Verbum again
"This plan of revelation is realized by deeds and words having in inner unity: the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation manifest and confirm the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the deeds and clarify the mystery contained in them. By this revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation."

3. The virgin birth
This is a constant teaching of the Church:
• That the body of Jesus Christ was not sent down from Heaven, nor taken from earth as was that of Adam, but that its matter was supplied by Mary;
• that Mary co-operated in the formation of Christ's body as every other mother co-operates in the formation of the body of her child, since otherwise Christ could not be said to be born of Mary just as Eve cannot be said to be born of Adam;
• that the germ in whose development and growth into the Infant Jesus, Mary co-operated, was fecundated not by any human action, but by the Divine power attributed to the Holy Ghost;
• that the supernatural influence of the Holy Ghost extended to the birth of Jesus Christ, not merely preserving Mary's integrity, but also causing Christ's birth or external generation to reflect his eternal birth from the Father in this, that "the Light from Light" proceeded from his mother's womb as a light shed on the world; that the "power of the Most High" passed through the barriers of nature without injuring them; that "the body of the Word" formed by the Holy Ghost penetrated another body after the manner of spirits.

Those who taught, as they had been taught:
St. Irenaeus (III, 21; see Eusebius, H.E., V, viii),
Origen (Adv. Cels., I, 35),
Tertullian (Adv. Marcion., III, 13; Adv. Judæos, IX),
St. Justin (Dial. con. Tryph., 84),
St. John Chrysostom (Hom. v in Matth., n. 3; in Isa., VII, n. 5);
St. Epiphanius (Hær., xxviii, n. 7),
Eusebius (Demonstrat. ev., VIII, i),
Rufinus (Lib. fid., 43),
St. Basil (in Isa., vii, 14; Hom. in S. Generat. Christi, n. 4, if St. Basil be the author of these two passages),
St. Jerome and Theodoretus (in Isa., vii, 14),
St. Isidore (Adv. Judæos, I, x, n. 3),
St. Ildefonsus (De perpetua virginit. s. Mariæ, iii).

4. The belief that Jesus died to redeem man
It's always worth remembering that Jesus is the Son of God, for two reasons: 1 - No ordinary man can redeem humanity as a whole;
2 - In suffering the Cross, it was God's will to take this burden upon Himself.

5. An expectation of the Second Coming, or physical return of Jesus Christ to initiate his 1000-year rule on the earth
Who can say when, and for how long?

Thomas

[juantoo3]

Excellent posts by everybody!!!

I think the essence of wil's idea about not formally critiqing each other is a pretty good one, that was my struggle earlier, and the reason I focused, briefly, on only one point I thought clarified my earlier position.

My current comment is not a focused one, but rather brought about from the collective responses:

I have stated my reservations concerning the Diety of Jesus, and of course I have now seen others chime in on both sides of that discussion.

My question(s):

1. For the sake of discussion, how crucial is it whether Jesus is viewed as Divine? For a "Christian?" For a non-Christian?

2. Is it absolutely imperitive to salvation that Christ must be Divine, and why?

3. By extension, can a non-Christian unfamiliar or otherwise legitimately unknowing find salvation in the eyes of G-d?

I have expressed my answers elsewhere many times, as I am sure some of you have as well, but it might be illuminating to see these considerations in addition to the earlier points of discussion.

BTW, this is not meant to shut down the earlier discussion. If anyone else would care to provide their insight to the formal set 5 fundamentals, please do.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Excellent posts by everybody!!!

I think the essence of wil's idea about not formally critiqing each other is a pretty good one, that was my struggle earlier, and the reason I focused, briefly, on only one point I thought clarified my earlier position.

My current comment is not a focused one, but rather brought about from the collective responses:

I have stated my reservations concerning the Diety of Jesus, and of course I have now seen others chime in on both sides of that discussion.

My question(s):

1. For the sake of discussion, how crucial is it whether Jesus is viewed as Divine? For a "Christian?" For a non-Christian?

2. Is it absolutely imperitive to salvation that Christ must be Divine, and why?

3. By extension, can a non-Christian unfamiliar or otherwise legitimately unknowing find salvation in the eyes of G-d?

I have expressed my answers elsewhere many times, as I am sure some of you have as well, but it might be illuminating to see these considerations in addition to the earlier points of discussion.

BTW, this is not meant to shut down the earlier discussion. If anyone else would care to provide their insight to the formal set 5 fundamentals, please do.

I opine that for Christians, Christ's divinity is imperative. Or else He would be just another prophet. Also, without the mantle of divinity, Jesus could not be considered "perfect, without sin, blemishless".

In the third, I opine that all stand and face God at the end, and how they lived and loved will weigh heavily on their final judgement by the Creator. It is a 50/50 shot at best. But to Christians that part has been bypassed, and only variations of the reward will be considered (according to Christian tradition). I also opine that those who never "knew" Christ but lived "Christlike" lives, had the "laws" written on their hearts and acted accordingly during their lives. Thus, it could be pondered that somehow they did know Christ (though beyond our ken currently).

v/r

Joshua

[Prober]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

My question(s):

1. For the sake of discussion, how crucial is it whether Jesus is viewed as Divine? For a "Christian?" For a non-Christian?

IMO Critical (to all parts of this question)

2. Is it absolutely imperitive to salvation that Christ must be Divine, and why?

IMO Yes. Why? Because there's only one G-d. G-d is divine. Only G-d could offer salvation from the punishment (death) of breaking His laws. The salvation He offered was a spotless sacrifice. Only G-d is spotless. The sacrifice would have to be G-d and thus, divine. (Maybe Q said it better )

3. By extension, can a non-Christian unfamiliar or otherwise legitimately unknowing find salvation in the eyes of G-d?

I think this is the "other sheep have I...and they will hear my voice...and I will be their shepherd..." thing. Everyone gets a chance to know Jesus (and by extension, G-d). So can they be unfamiliar? I don't think so. Unknowingly find salvation? Maybe by following Jesus' voice unconsciously.

I really don't know how that (the other sheep thing) works.

[China Cat Sunflower]

It's not just biblical inerrancy, fundamentalists believe that the the Torah was literally written by Moses, not pieced together from a collection of writings by from various sources. They think Matthew wrote Matthew, John wrote John, etc. There is no allowance for scholarly study of ancient literary genres and techniques, no metaphorical or analagous bandwidth, no room for myth, and no real understanding of actual ancient history. It's a little kindergarten Bible world with felt board characters and a uni-dimensional plot.

Chris

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

It's not just biblical inerrancy, fundamentalists believe that the the Torah was literally written by Moses, not pieced together from a collection of writings by from various sources. They think Matthew wrote Matthew, John wrote John, etc. There is no allowance for scholarly study of ancient literary genres and techniques, no metaphorical or analagous bandwidth, no room for myth, and no real understanding of actual ancient history. It's a little kindergarten Bible world with felt board characters and a uni-dimensional plot.

Chris

Now Chris, isn't that a general speculation of "fundamentalists"? Or are you thinking about certain of the fundamental faiths, and grouping all together...?

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

The belief that Jesus died to redeem man
Now, this to me is a non-issue, in that, without Jesus’ sacrifice, what purpose does Christianity serve? In my mind, none. Ergo, this had to be at least a significant portion of Jesus’ purpose and ministry, if not the defining purpose. Textually and culturally I find nothing yet to refute it.

Hi my friends on the forum!
Three out of the five Christian fundamentals i.e.:
1. The divinity of Jesus
2. The redemption
3. The belief that Jesus died (on Cross)
The three in fact rest on the third, JesusYeshuaIssa’s cursed death on Cross, which never happened. So if it is proved that Jesus never died on Cross, then the whole edifice of Christianity, erected by Paul in Rome falls to the ground. He himself is a witness to it. Had he been a god he had no logical reason to relate it to Sign of Jonah? He pegged it with Jonah and Jonah was not a god. Though Jonah survived miraculously in the belly of the fish being alive there, yet he did not become a god; then how come Jesus who as per the Christians did a lower fulfillment of the sign by dieing on Cross instead of living on the Cross, could become a god? Any reason my friends, any logic! Logic and witnessing of Jesus relating the sign with Jonah is to be accepted humbly indeed.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam

[Paladin]

I think to most Christians things must be either this or that. There is no other possibility in sight. All of which hinges on some very shaky ground logically speaking. When Christ said, "come let us reason together" I think he was calling us to a higher vision beyond what we laughingly call thinking.
I fully belive that Christ is Divine, and shows us the way out of the little prison we find ouselves in. But the conventional view of what salvation is, and what it does is somewhat skewed by our human perception. Why the very act of perception includes this, but excludes that. Untill we are capable of a sight beyond our normal human consciousness we cannot even see the degree to which we are imprisoned.
Yes Jesus is Divine, and so are we though our level of development is so very low that we need to be led, shown that life has an aspect of holiness we think we are excluded from.
It is this thought and related thinking that is at the heart of our need for Salvation or atonement.

Peace
Mark

[Thomas]

Hi Juantoo3:

1. For the sake of discussion, how crucial is it whether Jesus is viewed as Divine?
Yes. If not, then the 'mad or bad' scenario applies.

For a "Christian?"
Yes. If not, then someone has redefined the term according to his or her own opinion, at which point language becomes a nonsense. Anything can be anything.

For a non-Christian?
Doesn't matter.

2. Is it absolutely imperitive to salvation that Christ must be Divine, and why?
The 'mad or bad' again.

3. By extension, can a non-Christian unfamiliar or otherwise legitimately unknowing find salvation in the eyes of G-d?
Yes.

Thomas

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by inhumility

Hi my friends on the forum!
Three out of the five Christian fundamentals i.e.:
1. The divinity of Jesus
2. The redemption
3. The belief that Jesus died (on Cross)
The three in fact rest on the third, JesusYeshuaIssa’s cursed death on Cross, which never happened. So if it is proved that Jesus never died on Cross, then the whole edifice of Christianity, erected by Paul in Rome falls to the ground. He himself is a witness to it. Had he been a god he had no logical reason to relate it to Sign of Jonah? He pegged it with Jonah and Jonah was not a god. Though Jonah survived miraculously in the belly of the fish being alive there, yet he did not become a god; then how come Jesus who as per the Christians did a lower fulfillment of the sign by dieing on Cross instead of living on the Cross, could become a god? Any reason my friends, any logic! Logic and witnessing of Jesus relating the sign with Jonah is to be accepted humbly indeed.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam

You are horribly misinformed, my friend, and are showing your ignorance about the Christian faith. Jesus didn't die to become God, He already was God in the flesh, as John 1:14 states. And the belief that Jesus died and rose from the dead and that the blood of Jesus cleanses us is not only an assertion of Paul, but of other disciples as well:

"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead," - I Peter 1:2-3

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." - I John 1:7

"And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen." - Revelation 1:5-6 (John)

The comparasion with Jonah is that it is a picture of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, that just as Jonah spent three days in the belly of the whale, Jesus would spend three days in the belly of the earth. Scriptures in the Old Testament point to types of Christ, e.g. Abraham sacrifice of Issac, Joseph cast in a pit and raised back up and sold for a certain amount of silver coins, etc. You greatly err, my friend, not knowing the scriptures of which you speak.

[wil]

This fact that fact. We must remember to discuss and examine these points from a persepective of increased awarenesses of others belief systems.

inhumility, your thoughts are from outside of Christianity, your suppositions are of your belief system as Ahmadi is an Islamic Sect not a Christian Denomination. I for one appreciate your response and can offer that you can state it as your belief system or your thoughts here...and as fact maybe over on the Islam board...

Dondi, in the same respect you offered up a request for a polite discussion and as we all interpret scripture differently your view and understanding may differ from others...

But inhumilities point causes me to beg the question...what if.

Originally Posted by inhumility

So if it is proved that Jesus never died on Cross, then the whole edifice of Christianity, erected by Paul in Rome falls to the ground.

What if these five fundamentals were at some point in time proved without a shadow of a doubt to each and every one of us not to be true.

I'm not saying or implying they are....but what if...what would that do...would it destroy the church as we know it, would it destroy our belief system...or would the church and our faith be strong enough to survive it?

From where I stand and my understanding, I see the church and much of the flock having issues.... but I don't see it collapsing...I see a new awakening of the essence of scripture and the underlying truths encased in the stories. I see many people today being able to stand up through any such event, unscathed in their faith...

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by wil

This fact that fact. We must remember to discuss and examine these points from a persepective of increased awarenesses of others belief systems.

inhumility, your thoughts are from outside of Christianity, your suppositions are of your belief system as Ahmadi is an Islamic Sect not a Christian Denomination. I for one appreciate your response and can offer that you can state it as your belief system or your thoughts here...and as fact maybe over on the Islam board...

Dondi, in the same respect you offered up a request for a polite discussion and as we all interpret scripture differently your view and understanding may differ from others...

But inhumilities point causes me to beg the question...what if. What if these five fundamentals were at some point in time proved without a shadow of a doubt to each and every one of us not to be true.

I'm not saying or implying they are....but what if...what would that do...would it destroy the church as we know it, would it destroy our belief system...or would the church and our faith be strong enough to survive it?

From where I stand and my understanding, I see the church and much of the flock having issues.... but I don't see it collapsing...I see a new awakening of the essence of scripture and the underlying truths encased in the stories. I see many people today being able to stand up through any such event, unscathed in their faith...

Absolutely brilliant Wil.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by wil

This fact that fact. We must remember to discuss and examine these points from a persepective of increased awarenesses of others belief systems.

inhumility, your thoughts are from outside of Christianity, your suppositions are of your belief system as Ahmadi is an Islamic Sect not a Christian Denomination. I for one appreciate your response and can offer that you can state it as your belief system or your thoughts here...and as fact maybe over on the Islam board...

Dondi, in the same respect you offered up a request for a polite discussion and as we all interpret scripture differently your view and understanding may differ from others...

But inhumilities point causes me to beg the question...what if. What if these five fundamentals were at some point in time proved without a shadow of a doubt to each and every one of us not to be true.

I'm not saying or implying they are....but what if...what would that do...would it destroy the church as we know it, would it destroy our belief system...or would the church and our faith be strong enough to survive it?

From where I stand and my understanding, I see the church and much of the flock having issues.... but I don't see it collapsing...I see a new awakening of the essence of scripture and the underlying truths encased in the stories. I see many people today being able to stand up through any such event, unscathed in their faith...

If there was beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christ isn't who He said He was and didn't rise from the dead, then Christianity is false and Jesus a false prophet. By that token, I certainly wouldn't convert to Islam anyway, for Jesus would be a false prophet. I'd more likely go the other way...to Judaism.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

This fact that fact. We must remember to discuss and examine these points from a persepective of increased awarenesses of others belief systems.

inhumility, your thoughts are from outside of Christianity, your suppositions are of your belief system as Ahmadi is an Islamic Sect not a Christian Denomination. I for one appreciate your response and can offer that you can state it as your belief system or your thoughts here...and as fact maybe over on the Islam board...

Dondi, in the same respect you offered up a request for a polite discussion and as we all interpret scripture differently your view and understanding may differ from others...

But inhumilities point causes me to beg the question...what if. What if these five fundamentals were at some point in time proved without a shadow of a doubt to each and every one of us not to be true.

I'm not saying or implying they are....but what if...what would that do...would it destroy the church as we know it, would it destroy our belief system...or would the church and our faith be strong enough to survive it?

From where I stand and my understanding, I see the church and much of the flock having issues.... but I don't see it collapsing...I see a new awakening of the essence of scripture and the underlying truths encased in the stories. I see many people today being able to stand up through any such event, unscathed in their faith...

Indeed, the entire stature of Christianity and "Islam" would be looked upon as false. The world as we know it would shatter. And the Jews would be both envied and hated for what they have, and the rest of the world has not. No church or Mosque would stand for long. NT Scripture, Surah and the guidance or "laws" post Old testament, would mean nothing. Most would abandon the "false teachings" they've been given. Secularism would rise as the "new religion".

Here is also what would happen: Those religious "holdouts" would be hounded down and exterminated as radicals. Entire cities would be wiped off the face of the earth, in order to elliminate the few (there would be no morality concerns, as "vermin" are the anxst of Deus ex Machina.

Finally, Israel would be targeted, simply for what it stands for. (A God in control, and a people who worship that God).

Final count down...

Gee, this all seems strangely familiar...don't you think?

v/r

Joshua