RE: "Good" & "Bad" Christians?
August 24, 2019 at 11:29 pm
(This post was last modified: August 24, 2019 at 11:33 pm by Acrobat.)
(August 24, 2019 at 11:16 pm)EgoDeath Wrote: @Belaqua
Once again, that you can cite some earlier Christians who took allegorical interpretations means little. A decrease in a vast amount behaviors shows a decline over time in literal interpretations of the Bible. This is not debatable. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself here.
@Acrobat
That you understood what a fictional story was as a child means nothing.
The Bible contains very specific instructions on how to live that are quite literal. Good Christians follow at least some of these. Bad Christians do not.
Not sure what's so hard to comprehend here guys. You guys are trying to argue that the sky isn't blue. I'm simply not falling for it. Good try though.
The Bible contains a variety of things, much of the Bible contains stories like that of the flood, exodus, Samson, Ruth, David, etc..
When we read narratives, the point isn’t to recognize that some or all elements of the story are fictional, the author intent isn’t so that you acknowledge the fictional nature of the story, but rather it’s meaning. Now there are other parts of the Bible that are not stories, that provide instructions for early Hebrew tribes etc..., but I wasn’t speaking about this.
The NT, provides accounts for the Christian life, and what it ought to look like, as embodied in the person of Christ, his early followers, and it’s early community.
This life as outlined in the NT, strips off all political ambitions, and center itself around an otherworldly kingdom, referred to as the kingdom of God. It’s not a return to some tribal form of Judaism expressed in earlier passages of the OT.
Your entire argument otherwise seems to center around one verses in the entire NT cannon, of christ indicating he’s come to fulfill the law and not to abolish it, and not long after doing so he commands turn the other cheek, over an eye for eye, as example of fulfilling the law.
Unless you’re accounting for what he means by fulfilling the law here, as indicated when taken into context, your likely to butcher the meaning of it, like creationist quote mining Darwin’s passage about the eye.