How can a Christian reject part of the Bible and still call themselves a Christian?

[The Grand Nudger]

How are we supposed to "read it right" if the ghost doesn't come along with it's crib notes, as you claim it did and does for you?

[vorlon13]

How are we supposed to "read it right" if the ghost doesn't come along with it's crib notes, as you claim it did and does for you?

and the ghost must have 70,000+ versions of those crib notes so that all the schismatics keep working out of different play books.

God said He wasn't the author of confusion, so it looks like we have to blame this cluster fuck on the Holy Ghost.

[The Grand Nudger]

True, but not an issue for the particular version of christianity we have presented here before us.  So long as whatever the ghost says leads people to jesus, it's cool, because that's it's purpose. Lie cheat or steal, spin pious fiction or speak entirely in contradictory professions of faith and particulars...none of that is relevant...so long as it leads....to jesus.

[vorlon13]

but Jesus with 70,000 plot twists seems a bit much, even for an omniscient deity . . . .


Even if some major denoms got together and exterminated 90% of the heretical competition, there'd still be 7000 schisms, and the streets would be awash in blood and gore


What are the One True Faithfulls to do ???

[vorlon13]

How much 'street cred' do we give a self proclaimed Christian who turns a blind eye towards the divorced and remarrieds in his own congregation, for example ??

If this individual can not bring himself to witness the Word to his own flock, what variety or flavor of Christ is he actually acknowledging ? Certainly not the real one of the gospels, rather a self inspired/negotiated ersatz Jesus. The one he worships doesn't rock the boat, doesn't cast out demons, doesn't proclaim His Holy Truth.

[The Grand Nudger]

but Jesus with 70,000 plot twists seems a bit much, even for an omniscient deity . . . .


Even if some major denoms got together and exterminated 90% of the heretical competition, there'd still be 7000 schisms, and the streets would be awash in blood and gore


What are the One True Faithfulls to do ???

Mostly?  They forget that the rest of them exist, and when reminded..hilariously claim that their disagreement is minor.  You know, how many instruments in the choir and whatnot.  

I don't know if that's another tall tale jesus whispers in their ears, or if they come up with that one on their own...but so long as it leads to jesus...... 

[Angrboda]

It's purpose is to convict the reader of God's existence, his relationship to mankind and his kingdom under Jesus Christ. [..] I believe that the bible does a good job of leading people who have the desire to know God. For those with no desire, it won't happen, even if God himself comes and has a conversation with them.

The bible is a book possessed of multiple genres. It contains literal passages and metaphorical passages. But the two are not clearly delineated. This invites the reader to be their own divining rod, literalizing the metaphorical and metaphorizing the literal as they see fit. This is an implicit quandary in a book containing an admixture of styles with no clear demarcation as to which is which. It is inherent in the book itself that the reader is given the task of rejecting and accepting as they please. Saying that the bible serves the purpose of leading someone to Jesus, besides being an intent not clearly spelled out anywhere, ignores this dualistic nature of the text. For all your good intentions, Lek, at the end of the day that is merely how you personally choose to read the bible. Nowhere is it spelled out unambiguously that this is the intention behind the bible. You have your own personal hermeneutic of the bible that is backed by nothing at all. For every one who has the witness of the spirit and agrees with your reading, there are four more who don't. What you have is an opinion on how the bible is to be read and nothing more.

[Lek]

How are we supposed to "read it right" if the ghost doesn't come along with it's crib notes, as you claim it did and does for you?

You can't.

[Lek]

The bible is a book possessed of multiple genres.  It contains literal passages and metaphorical passages.  But the two are not clearly delineated.  This invites the reader to be their own divining rod, literalizing the metaphorical and metaphorizing the literal as they see fit.  This is an implicit quandary in a book containing an admixture of styles with no clear demarcation as to which is which.  It is inherent in the book itself that the reader is given the task of rejecting and accepting as they please.  Saying that the bible serves the purpose of leading someone to Jesus, besides being an intent not clearly spelled out anywhere, ignores this dualistic nature of the text.  For all your good intentions, Lek, at the end of the day that is merely how you personally choose to read the bible.  Nowhere is it spelled out unambiguously that this is the intention behind the bible.  You have your own personal hermeneutic of the bible that is backed by nothing at all.  For every one who has the witness of the spirit and agrees with your reading, there are four more who don't.  What you have is an opinion on how the bible is to be read and nothing more.

Okay, but if you read the old testament and not see that what everything is leading to is Jesus, then I question your reading.

[The Grand Nudger]

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.