Discussion in 'Christianity' started by GlorytoGod, Mar 24, 2009.
if this is true does that mean the Bagavad Gita is inspired by God ?
My understanding is that it applies specifically to accepted Jewish scripture at the time.
yeah I can see that.
He emphasizes it was inspired by God. He was suggesting that it was beneficial for training and correction, knowing full well that people could disagree about meanings of words. He is aware that no matter what, two people never completely agree about everything. The operating principle is that scripture is a living thing. A jealous God guards his people with jealousy represented as a burning fire. The idea is that the jealousy of their God keeps them, not an obsession with bickering. As people they will err.
2 Peter 1
20-21 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
I Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying
I Corinthians 12:12-18
For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
RSV Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
In another thread you indicated one of your favorite books.
Do we truly think the bible inspired or written by G!D? Today we know it is a collection by dozens of authors and then edited and compiled by hundreds more, and then interpetted and translated by thousands after that.
I will say that main religions were inspired by God. They were based on the different cultures and the time periods of their foundation. We can see similarities between their beliefs
Whether or not we believe it is inspired by God does not change the fact that it should be considered alive, not static. The only way to approach the scriptures is with continual renewal. I suppose if you don't consider them to be inspired you still cannot treat them as static items, since people change continually as well as the languages & thought patterns. If the scriptures were not considered alive, then they could eventually become complete misrepresentations of the writer's intent, and that is what happens sometimes.
John 8:23 But he continued, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world...."
Hello again Soleil!
Oops. The first quotation above was Wil's. The second was Soleil's. It should have read:
I couldn't disagree more. Saying that there are similarities between Hinduism and Christianity is like saying there are similarities between corn and soup because you can eat both of them. The similarities between Christianity and other non-Judaic religions exist because the concept of any higher power would inspire reverence, obedience, piousness, etc. If all religions had a common source, they would be much more similar than they are; the difference would be more like the difference between Catholics and Presbyterians.
I think that God has created every human with an innate understanding of truth and beauty. When I read scriptures from other religions, I often see things that are beautiful in them, but I think the explanation for this is that, along the way, religions that are completely nasty or ugly have been discarded for ones that contain beautiful aspects. In this way, Eastern and Western religions don't share similarities because they share an origin; they share similarities because we share an origin.
And that isn't good enough?
Think back on your favorite teacher, the one that inspired you most to study and read and grow. Did S/he do that to everyone in the class, weren't there folks that disliked or didn't get out of that teacher what you did?
In my monotheistic Christian understanding I see G!d as inspiring that thought, albiet different based on differing understandings...some folks even combine the various understandings and enjoy corn in their soup.
Mmmmmm.... fresh corn, nice and watered-down, just the way you like it, Wil
Your analogy doesn't really do justice to your point. If it did, that teacher should have been able to inspire students that they never taught, or even spoke to. You're treading a very precarious line with this reasoning, because it's not that big of a jump to say, "Well, if God inspires all good understandings, then maybe he inspires all understandings, good and bad."
Naw I'll take my corn and add some more substance and spice from the rest of the world...not watered down, enhanced by the combination.
I don't believe G!d told any tribe to go and slaughter the another tribe, and then when the job wasn't done right told them to return and kill all the old, the women and the children but take the virgins for yourself... So I gain another perspective by not thinking the corn is complete sustenance as provided.
And yes that teacher did and does inspire students she never taught or saw, by those students who she did inspire....you can count the seeds in the apple but not the apple in the seeds.
Precarious line, I live on the slippery slope and embrace it!
And yes this is all G!d's creation...imo...that which our dualistic thinking perceives
as I don't believe in any little devil critter either...
In Christianity there is something called a false teacher. A false teacher tries to get followers for themselves. The baseline about teachers in Christianity is that you can't judge them by what they say, but that seem borderline contrary to what you are saying, Marsh.
Who is the teacher, really? If it isn't God then there isn't any point in trying to learn. Of first importance is 'How does the hired teacher or preacher live?' Forget about everything else when choosing who to listen to, because God has to move you directly. I've seen tons of churches say they are trying to judge the spirits, and they often hire scoundrels. Scoundrels!!!! They will be better off removing their emphasis upon doctrine and placing it upon character.
Matthew 7:20 Thus you will know them by their fruits.
II Peter 2:3 And in their greed they will exploit you with false words; from of old their condemnation
has not been idle, and their destruction has not been asleep.
IMO some people become inspired and then are motivated to make the effort to write some things down in an effort to explain that which is ineffable.
And then it gets passed on for generations and altered and distorted in the process.
People are inspired.
Books are questionable.
All of them.
It is foolish to take a book and not question what it contains.
Your analogy is falling short. The context is that every religion, developing in every location and at every time, all share a common source. Your analogy explains how one individual will influence people who come after them, sort of like how original Christianity influenced a multitude of sects. It does not explain a connection between Christianity and, say, the religion of the Mayans or Aztecs-- people who would have had no contact with Christianity until the Conquest. The obvious difference between Christianity and Mayan beliefs would have been monotheism and polytheism. You'd think that the teacher would begin by getting their facts straight: are there many gods, or just one?
Do you see the shortcoming in your analogy, Wil?
The baseline about teachers in Christianity is that you can't judge them by what they say, and that's contrary to what I'm saying? I don't get it; can you rephrase, please?
Look at the variety of Christian teachings...some are as varied from each other as Christianity is from Mayan...it isn't the teacher, it is the culture and the interpretters that modify the understanding. Like the story of the blind men and the elephant...each describing a part, each not seeing the whole.
Many Christians think Hinduism to be polytheistic because they have so many gods...
Bordering on contrary, because Jesus and John preached I think that membership in Christ no longer had the same limitations as before Jesus' ministry appeared. These limitations are based upon knowledge and formalities. These are the high and low places of Isaiah 40:4, in which John the Baptist references himself. From my personal perspective it seems like a chaotic message, yet John (and Jesus) were saying that it is faith in God (and not chaos) to recognize that God's spirit moves without our approval and (as in The Wilderness) without warning. The gospels say John faced a lot of testing, dishonor and perhaps abuse for suggesting such a thing, but I think what he said to the Pharisees was not unlike what Wil is saying now about Hindus.
When Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the life," it incorporated every message about himself, including the one where the high places were going to be made low and the low places high. This is the way, according to Jesus! We would rather make the high places higher and higher - as high as possible! We'd place Hindus down, down at the bottom of the spiritual spectrum, and we'd place someone very knowledgeable about Jesus way, way up in the spectrum. Such a device gives us a good but false feeling that we have obtained a place, built something, or found a cozy resting place for the tabernacle. That just makes sense to us, but Jesus opposed this way of thinking. This also goes against the hard earned lessons of Israel in the wilderness.
I find myself like Nicodemus in the story of Jesus trying to accept what Jesus says about the spirit moving about like the wind. "How can this be?" It seems chaotic, but it is the way Jesus taught.
Ummm, what are you basing this on, Wil? I've been a member of Presbyterian, Baptist, Charasmatic Anglican, Alliance, and non-denominational churches, and the beliefs are all basically the same: one God, Jesus as saviour, Bible as scripture, etc. Do the theological differences between denominations differ as much as, oh, I don't know, perhaps HUMAN SACRIFICE?
If you analogy doesn't hold up, just admit that it doesn't hold up; trying to defend it with vague statements just prolongs the agony.
Now I'm not going there but if I were I'd could argue that the basis of Christianity is HUMAN SACRIFICE...we all it the crucifiction....but I'm not.
But put a Jehovah's Witness, a Mormon, a Catholic, a Methodist, and a Pentacostal in the same room and have them discuss Christianity...
I dare say they'd find more than a few differences and you wouldn't require heat to keep the room warm..
If you wish to feel right it in this regard it is ok with me. I have my beliefs you have yours, I have no problem being in a room with a Mayan or member of Presbyterian, Baptist, Charasmatic Anglican, Alliance, and non-denominational churches. In my discussions with various Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Bahai, Jains, Sikhs, Sufis, and Native Americans I find enough common ground to believe that we are all connected thru the same creator...and we all believe our stories...
Now there are some of every belief, Christian or otherwise that believe their denomination, sect, religion are the only ones that have it right and everyone else is going to get their comeuppance...I don't get far in this discussion with them, as discussion is only a oneway street in their beleif system, either I conform to it or else.
Separate names with a comma.