RE: How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves a Christian?
October 7, 2016 at 6:19 pm
(This post was last modified: October 7, 2016 at 6:20 pm by Simon Moon.)
(October 6, 2016 at 3:12 pm)Lek Wrote:(October 6, 2016 at 3:03 pm)Rhythm Wrote: How can you question "his" reading. It's not his reading that's lacking, it's the presence of the ghost, without which a proper reading can't be had.
Perhaps you should question the ghosts absence, instead? That's the diff between a "proper reading" and a questionable one, nothing to do with human beings in the general or any particular human being in the specific.
The "ghost" is there if we are seeking him. Zillions of people have read the scriptures, but they are not seeking the truth. If "he" is really reading with a true openness and a sincere seeking of the truth then I can't say. This is my experience with myself and others and this is what the bible says. I believe I'm right. If I'm not, hopefully I'll become aware of that soon and will change my beliefs.
Every time someone makes an existential claim, my mind is open to the truth of that claim, including every theistic claim I have ever been presented with.
When I first read the Bible, I was still a believer. I was as sincere to know if it contained the truth as possible. Yet the god character described within, never made his existence apparent. Despite my pleading and openness. I then spent several years of study (at the university level, and self study) in hopes of finding said god. Again, this was a sincere search, not one to "disprove god". And still nothing.
So, how is it my fault? Why was Saul worthy of a Damascus road experience, but I'm not?
The problem we are having with this discussion, is that you are so deep in your bubble of belief, I think it is next to impossible for you to hypothetically put yourself in our position.
You want us to read the Bible with the goal of seeking the god, that you already believe exists. We don't believe that any god exists, so, without first being given a rational reasons to believe any god exists, we can't just skip from disbelief in the existence of any god, right to the Bible.
Can you possibly consider sincerely seeking the gods of the Hindus?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
