| | | | | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
stonefro2000
Sergeant
465 Posts
    
 | | 04/07/2006 9:57 PM |
| The Bible say a lot of thing, and not very clearly. But that dose not make it an less of a book! I think that the most important thing you can take away form this disscussion, is that "People fear what they don't understand".
D&D is a game we play, an activity that we use as a way to escape our boring little live for a couple of hour each week. I mean just let that imaganatin run free and have fun, Man thats what's it's all about.
But on the other hand there will always be those people who take it a little too far. Thats were all the negitive stereo types come form.
So cast off the shackles of Ignorince! Go to that local game store! Meet the people! Get to know them! And You Wlll Discover That You Have Many Things In Commen!
and one last thing, Jesus saves... and takes half damage
| |
"Well maybe Mr. T hacked the game and created a Mohawk class! Maybe Mr. T is handy with computers! Had that ever occurred to you Mr. condescending Director!" | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/07/2006 11:25 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Idzy
What have I as a non religious person taken from it?
Anyone that reads the Bible/Quaran/etc. will have their own understanding of it, and because it is God's truth their interpretation of it is correct.
If that is what you have taken from my comments, I am afraid you have misunderstood my point.
What you said is kind of like saying that 2+2 can equal 37, just because thats what someone wants it to equal. Obviously, 2+2 does not equal 37, it equals 4. Only the people who know that 2+2=4 are correct, because that is the truth. Some people are going to conclude that 2+2=1, some people will conclude that 2+2=5, but only the people who conclude that 2+2=4 are the ones who concluded correctly.
God doesn't miraculously make everyone who reads the Bible understand it, but He can help if you ask Him to.
People come to different conclusion when they read the Bible because people are different, not because more than one of these different conclusions are the truth. People think in different ways, and they have different experiences to apply things to. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
Idzy
Commander
3082 Posts
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| | 04/08/2006 9:07 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
quote:
Originally posted by Idzy
What have I as a non religious person taken from it?
Anyone that reads the Bible/Quaran/etc. will have their own understanding of it, and because it is God's truth their interpretation of it is correct.
If that is what you have taken from my comments, I am afraid you have misunderstood my point.
What you said is kind of like saying that 2+2 can equal 37, just because thats what someone wants it to equal. Obviously, 2+2 does not equal 37, it equals 4. Only the people who know that 2+2=4 are correct, because that is the truth. Some people are going to conclude that 2+2=1, some people will conclude that 2+2=5, but only the people who conclude that 2+2=4 are the ones who concluded correctly.
God doesn't miraculously make everyone who reads the Bible understand it, but He can help if you ask Him to.
People come to different conclusion when they read the Bible because people are different, not because more than one of these different conclusions are the truth. People think in different ways, and they have different experiences to apply things to.
How do you know that only 1 of the many interpretations is true? Or infact that any of them are? So I choose to believe that all of them are or all of them are not it really doesn't matter. IF everyone thought this way there would be a lot less problems in the world.
That was my point basically, since there is no way to prove that any of them are true or that there is a god or that religion isn't just a way for the people in power to stay in power, it is all just pointless debate, and every one should just agree to disagree. | |
Champion of Champions (for all races! even Gnomes  )
Reference Thread
Winnipeg Gryphon Cavalry Forums
| |
|
Username
Warlord
5692 Posts
| | 04/08/2006 11:30 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Felagund
quote:
Originally posted by Username
No, that statement was in reference to why some people have different views about D&D, a summation of what this thread as been about, being educated before you make a call on something.
Okay, so you've told me three things so far.
1. The Bible is not complicated.
2. Anybody is capable of reading and understanding the Bible.
3. Differing views on the Bible are caused by lack of education.
So how are people to know if they have a true understanding of the Bible, or a "lack of education" understanding?
Sorry for not being clear; I did not say #3. I mean, in general (not with just reading the Bible) people should educate themselves before they make a judgement call, whether it's D&D, tattoos, food, or hairstyles.
Also, four very different people wrote the four Gospels. I am sure you can agree that a physician, a tax collector, and a fisherman would have very different points of view about the same scene. For example, if you ask four different people about a wreck they just witnessed, they will give four different stories with varying degrees and details about it the wreck.
And that's it for me. I feel I have answered y'alls' questions to the best of my ability, but I do not want anyone here to feel like I am trying to shove this down y'alls' throats. Thanks for the civil discussion. I really love this little community we have.
[:)] | |
Originally posted by Schooly_D
Username - he deals in minis
Champion of Lhesh Haruuc Shaarat'kor | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/08/2006 11:58 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Idzy
How do you know that only 1 of the many interpretations is true? Or infact that any of them are?
Because if God is who He says He is, then God's Word is the final word. God is the ultimate and only judge of right and wrong.
If one person believes the Bible says not to murder, and another person believes that the Bible says only to murder if someone makes you really mad, how can both of those beliefs be true? Only one can, because there is only one truth, and I believe that God establishes all truth.
quote:
That was my point basically, since there is no way to prove that any of them are true or that there is a god...
Different people would require different types of proof to believe that God exists. Its usually according to personal experience. Proof to one person may or may not qualify proof according to the opinion of the next.
Personally, I have no doubt in my mind that God exists. I have a personal relationship with Him through Jesus. I have seen His work in my own life and in the lives of others. I have understood the reasons for His laws when I myself have failed to obey them and seen the consequences. I look at the universe and can only conclude that the way things are held together so delicately, there's no way it happened by chance. The list goes on and on.
quote:
...or that religion isn't just a way for the people in power to stay in power, it is all just pointless debate, and every one should just agree to disagree.
Like I have said several times in this discussion, people can take something that is true and then twist it to serve their own perpose. Indeed, people who are in power very often try to manipulate ignorant people through religion. I think this is one of the most dispicable things a human being can do.
It is a result of the self serving nature of humans (read sin), not the "untruth" of God and His Word. This is why the Bible urges us to compare the teachings of leaders (religious or otherwise) to scripture. People who claim to do something in the name of God (or a god) that does not agree with God's Word are either decieved themselves, or trying to decieve everyone else.
I don't want to get into an in-depth discussion on the difference between religion and spirituality, because there is a lot involved in it, and it tends to be a very touchy subject. It often comes down to using specific denominations/sects as examples, and that can easly be viewed directly offensive. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/09/2006 12:21 AM |
| Bert -
The examples you gave regarding the four gospels aren't really what I call contradictions. They aren't even really what I'd call inconsistencies.
I'm sure you know what contradict means, but lets use this definition.
con·tra·dict - 1 : to assert the contrary of : take issue with
2 : to imply the opposite or a denial of
For example: In two books, two angels were present in to tomb. In the other two, only one is mentioned. Only one of the angels spoke, though. The author of one book may have felt it unnessesary to include the presence of the other angel, given that only one spoke. It does not say that there was not another angel there.
Another example: One of the authors mentions Jesus appearing to two desciples in Emmaus before appearing to the 11 at Galilee, and another does not. Just because the author of the latter does not included this, it does not mean it didn't happen. It means he did not include it in his writing, because he may not have felt it was important.
None of these examples assert that the contrary happened from one gospel to the next. They all convey the same message.
I'll get back to your example from the book of James after I look it up. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/09/2006 12:59 AM |
| -Bert
In response to your comment on James, I will first give the rest of the relevant text, to put it in context.
James 2:14-26
"14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
The excerpt is not saying that you are not saved by faith, or that we are saved by our works. It is saying that if you truely have faith, that fact will be evidenced by your works. In other words, we are saved by grace through faith, but that faith is not truely faith without works.
It is impossible for a human to to do what works God would have them do 100% of their life without a single flaw. This is where Jesus's sacrifice on the cross and forgiveness come into the picture. When we admit our imperfection and ask God to forgive our sins, all that is left in God's eyes is purity, including the works we do for His glory. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
bigbadjon
Sergeant
546 Posts
| | 04/09/2006 12:36 PM |
| | I'll stop playing when God carves "Thou shalt not play Dungeons $ Dragons" in stone. | |
Evil triumphs when good men fail their morale saves. | |
| 
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 04/09/2006 8:48 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by bigbadjon
I'll stop playing when God carves "Thou shalt not play Dungeons $ Dragons" in stone.
Ummm Amen to that :)
The biblical augurement I have heard against D&D is basically based on 'he who sins in thier thoughts sins in deed' combined with the sorcery/witchcraft and murder that you pretend to do is as bad as the real thing. | |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 04/09/2006 9:16 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
Well, I have to submit that I think a person can read the Bible and apply it to what they have experienced, and come to the realization of its truth without assuming so beforehand.
In fact there are people who have begun scientifically analyzing events that took place in the Bible in attempt to disprove them, and ended up becoming Christians. There may very well be cases in which the opposite occured. The point is that coming to believe the Bible isn't always an instant leap of faith without question.
Far more set out to disprove the bible and kept their skepticism.
But numbers does not equal right!
I would bet though, that if you read the examples of what you are talking about, all will have a phrase like 'while reading I was given the realisation' etc with them. IE god moved them, not the text itself.
quote:
It seems like going on like this will just be beating a dead horse. I understand where you are coming from, and you are certainly free to believe what you will. You seem to have a pretty good grasp of what I have been trying to get across as well.
I think it will be beating dead horse too. I don't think contradictions being exposed/reconciled in the bible have ever converted or 'deconverted' anyone.
I do hope I understand your position correctly.
quote:
If you can find some specific examples of the contradictions you are referring to, please present them and I would be glad to further this discussion.
We could start with genesis and the different stories of creation [:p]
Compare the order of creation. Animals first? Genesis 1:25-27. Humans first? Genesis 2:18-19.
Man and woman at once? Genesis 1:27. Woman after man? Genesis 18-22.
By the way I tend to use the King James text (http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/kjv/browse.html) when referring to the bible
quote:
Thanks for keeping this so civil, and I appreciate your patience and honesty.
Likewise. I never mind hearing different viewpoints, or understanding why people think what they do.
I am glad you are taking my comments with the respect I intend.
quote:
~Edit~ Nevermind, you are apparently a faster typer than I am. I'll get back to this discussion later also, for now I'm tired.
I don't think, I post [:)]
But don't feel pressured to answer fast for my sake. Some thoughts take time to percolate.
quote:
The examples you gave regarding the four gospels aren't really what I call contradictions. They aren't even really what I'd call inconsistencies.
My point is that you have to add or subtract or give other than a strict textual interpretation to the scripture to make them anything other than inconsistent. Once you start adding text that isn't there, you are discussing more than the bible. Which goes back to the semi-comatose horse of why imo there are so many different sects with such different ideas on what is "true Christainity".
The definition I had in mind when I said the bible was full of contradictions was from wikipedia: "Broadly speaking, a contradiction is when two or more statements, ideas, or actions are seen as incompatible. One must, it seems, reject at least one of the ideas outright. "
I see the stories of easter in the gospels as incompatible. At the very least they show that the bible is not infallible.
I might as well add, that I find the biblical history to be errorenous as well. Things like Noah's flood to me are tales, not a description of events.
People should be able to believe what they want, but not at the expense of distorting facts.
I do think there are some very good lessons in the bible, but I can not see it as inerrant or infallible.
| |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 04/09/2006 10:23 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
-Bert
In response to your comment on James, I will first give the rest of the relevant text, to put it in context.
James 2:14-26
"14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
The excerpt is not saying that you are not saved by faith, or that we are saved by our works. It is saying that if you truely have faith, that fact will be evidenced by your works. In other words, we are saved by grace through faith, but that faith is not truely faith without works.
It is impossible for a human to to do what works God would have them do 100% of their life without a single flaw. This is where Jesus's sacrifice on the cross and forgiveness come into the picture. When we admit our imperfection and ask God to forgive our sins, all that is left in God's eyes is purity, including the works we do for His glory.
To me, without adding to the text it says belief is not enough (even satan beleives in god). Faith without works is dead.
It seems to be that there are three major 'christain' beliefs about works/faith. I know I`m repeating myself, but very learned people who know the bible far better than me find scriptural support for all three depending on their viewpoint.
There is the belief that what is required to get to heaven is faith that Jesus died for your sins, and to choose to accept him. Summed up by Titus 3:5 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost"
The second main belief I have observed is that faith alone is not enough. Works are required. As per James above. I suspect this is your personal belief?
The last major belief I see is the calvinism, where all mankind are sinners and god chooses a few/many to go to heaven - calls them. In essence, the choice is gods not thiers.
God has elected, based solely upon the counsel of his own will, some for glory and others for damnation (Romans 9:15,21). He has done this act before the foundations of the world (Ephesians 1:4-8).
My point if any, is that reading the bible and having a single message from it isnt as clear cut as it may appear. | |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
Felagund
Sergeant
922 Posts
| | 04/10/2006 12:31 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Username
Sorry for not being clear; I did not say #3. I mean, in general (not with just reading the Bible) people should educate themselves before they make a judgement call, whether it's D&D, tattoos, food, or hairstyles.
Ok, Username, what is your explanation for how people have come to different interpretations of the Bible?
You've retracted the "lack of education" explanation, and rejected both of my understandings of why there are different interpretations (the Bible is complicated, and not everyone is capable of understanding it). | |
Champion of Gnomes | |
|
ccolinh
Sneak
144 Posts
| | 04/10/2006 5:38 PM |
| | Wow - a religious thread that hasn't even mentioned evilution... OOPS![:D] | |
Champion of the ???
Completed Trades (19): Raland, Frostrune, Ghendar (x2), Siddartha of Suburbia (x2), ckissee, doubtofbuddha, dagonet, jgsugden, Bugsy, smetzger, sttmxn, Drakkengi, Vrecknidj, Caustic_Mouse, lyus_sleyden, shoesan, Username, | |
|
Monsoon28
Underboss
2313 Posts
Toronto
| | 04/10/2006 6:47 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Felagund
Ok, Username, what is your explanation for how people have come to different interpretations of the Bible?
You've retracted the "lack of education" explanation, and rejected both of my understandings of why there are different interpretations (the Bible is complicated, and not everyone is capable of understanding it).
How about the fact that the bible is a collection of writings from MANY different sources. If this book were written by a single source or if all of it was inspired by a god then maybe a singular interpretation would be possible. (Probably not IE. even when Karl Marx was alive his works were being Interpreted in ways he disagreed with. Hence his comment, 'I for one am not a Marxist'.)
OR maybe Interpretations are like Opinions and you know the old adage about opinions.
Me, I am more interested in the historical proofs of the bible/god/christ.
Such as from Wikipedia:
quote:
Date of Gospel
Main article: Authorship and Date of the Canonical Gospels
There is little in the gospel itself to indicate the date of its composition. Some conservative scholars argue that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (Matt 24), probably between the years 60 and 65, while liberal scholars would date it between the years 80 and 100. Most scholars agree that the writings of Ignatius reference, but do not quote, the Gospel of Matthew, suggesting the gospel was completed at the very latest by the turn of the 2nd century.
A minority of conservative Christians argue for an even earlier date, as seen in the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia: "Catholic critics, in general, favor the years 40-45..." Α] In recent times, John Wenham, one of the biggest supporters of the Augustinian hypothesis, is considered to be among the more notable defenders of an early date for the Gospel of Matthew. He cites almost unanimous agreement by the Chuch Fathers in placing Matthew before Mark, in addition to internal evidence within the gospels. Furthermore, Carsten Peter Thiede in Eyewitness to Jesus argues for redating the Magdalen papyrus and the Gospel of Matthew to before 70. His writings have been hotly contested. Scholars who defend a later date for the gospel cite multiple reasons for their view, such as the time required for the theological views to develop between Mark and Matthew (assuming Markan priority), references to historic figures and events circa 70, and a later social context.
So generally anywhere from CE 60-100 the gospel of Matthew (and that's if you believe that Matthew actually was the first writer though Mark is the more likely original and his writing came after the year 70) was written ~30 (at it's most conservative estimate) years after the death of Jesus, hmmm strange how this important and significant figure in their lives didn't merit writing about for so long.
Also from Wikipedia S(P)aul of Tarsus lived around CE(AD) 3–67, remember Paul never met any person named Jesus, in fact he didn't even believe Jesus lived on earth http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=8&version=31 Hebrews 8:4 'If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law.'
_______________________________________________
Someone asked about contridictions? How about something really basic about Jesus like his Genealogy?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%201:1-17;&version=9;
http:/www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%203:23-38;&version=9;
Up until David everything is ok (probably because they took this from the same Judaic source) but after that wow do they ever differ.
OR
How about the belief of Heaven and Hell?
Old Testament has no mention of them in fact 'The Old Testament teaches life after death, and that all people went to a place of conscious existence called Sheol. The wicked were there (Psalm 9:17; 31:17; 49:14; Isaiah 5:14), and so were the righteous (Genesis 37:35; Job 14:13; Psalm 6:5; 16:10; 88:3; Isaiah 38:10).'
So while the concepts never come up until the new testament in greece they were old concepts, including the popular novel written by Homer 'Odyssey' in the 8th century BCE (BC).
So the Old and New Testaments have different after-lifes.
OR
The time line of Jesus? Born from ~8-2 BC/BCE – 29-36 AD/CE and it is known that he was baptized by his 'cousin' John in his adult years.
As well all know Herod had Johns head brought to his daughter.
According to the Gospel of Peter, Herod had Jesus put to death.
Problem is King Herod the Great's life span is 73-4 BCE/BC.
So Herod died during the infancy years of Jesus and the childhood years of John but had them killed as adults?!?
The Bible has plenty of inconsistancies but should the bible be the principle of faith? Now there is a question!
Interesting books to read on christianity include:
The mythmaker: Paul and the invention of Christianity by Hyam Maccoby
The Jesus Mysteries: Was the "Original Jesus" a Pagan God? by Timothy Freke, Peter Gandy
An interesting Documentary would be: The God who wasn't there by Brian Flemming.
Faith is a powerful thing, and I won't try to change a persons faith (God or gods could exsist, only one way to find out...apparently).
OTOH when it comes to reality the bible is a books of allegorical stories, philosophical writings and some genealogies.
just my 2gp's worth. | |
"I was sittin' here eatin' my muffin, drinkin' my coffee, replayin' the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity." - Jules Winnfield
Sales/Trades Bad (1): Ironfist Boulderbender
Trades/Sales completed (8.): Danthl, Dafrca, Garyaxe, qillan_dvra, realmaster, Vandal_Savage, cavedweller, unearthed arcana.
Champion of Gem Dragons, VINDICATED Squire of Duergar Commander, Knight of the Astral Stalker.
| |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/10/2006 10:14 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Bert the Troll
The second main belief I have observed is that faith alone is not enough. Works are required. As per James above. I suspect this is your personal belief?
I can see why you might have summarized that from my last post, but that is not exactly what I believe.
I believe that faith that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and accepting Him as your savior is what gets you into heaven. It is God's grace that saves us through our faith.
(Yes, demons and Satan believe in God and know full well who He is. They do not accept Jesus as their savior, or serve Him.)
Works are a result of faith. If you acknowledge who God really is, and the sacrifice Jesus made in your place, you will want to serve Him. Yes we are saved by faith, but if the faith one has is true faith, it will be evident by that person's works. If a person's faith is not accompanied by works, that person does not have true faith to begin with.
To say that we are saved by works is to say that we (humans) save ourselves. Jesus, by His sacrifice, saves us, forgiving us of our failure to be perfect in our works.
I tried to state plainly that I do not believe that works are what save people. That is what makes Christianity different from every religion in the world.
To Monsoon28 -
As much as I would love to research up and respond to every person's opinions, it takes a lot of time.
I'll say this now, regarding your statement about the difference between what the Bible says about the afterlife in the Old and New Testament, because its not very complicated.
If you've been following this thread, you may recall that I said in one of my posts that a lot of things changed because of the crucifixion. One of those changes was directly related to this.
Jesus's sacrifice made it possible for people to enter the Heaven. Through His forgiveness and payment of our debt in our place, we are made pure. Before Jesus died on the cross, however, the result of Jesus's sacrifice was not yet in effect. Folks who died before the crucifixion were held temporarily in Sheol and then released after the crucifixion to their final destination.
| |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 04/10/2006 11:21 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
quote:
Originally posted by Bert the Troll
The second main belief I have observed is that faith alone is not enough. Works are required. As per James above. I suspect this is your personal belief?
I can see why you might have summarized that from my last post, but that is not exactly what I believe.
I believe that faith that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and accepting Him as your savior is what gets you into heaven. It is God's grace that saves us through our faith.
(Yes, demons and Satan believe in God and know full well who He is. They do not accept Jesus as their savior, or serve Him.)
Works are a result of faith. If you acknowledge who God really is, and the sacrifice Jesus made in your place, you will want to serve Him. Yes we are saved by faith, but if the faith one has is true faith, it will be evident by that person's works. If a person's faith is not accompanied by works, that person does not have true faith to begin with.
To say that we are saved by works is to say that we (humans) save ourselves. Jesus, by His sacrifice, saves us, forgiving us of our failure to be perfect in our works.
I tried to state plainly that I do not believe that works are what save people. That is what makes Christianity different from every religion in the world.
Okay. I think I know where you are coming from.
And I`m pretty sure you know my opinion .
& probably 'nuff said for now [:)]
Thanks ! | |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
Bert the Troll
Commander
3964 Posts
Adelaide
| | 04/10/2006 11:27 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Monsoon28
<>
How about the fact that the bible is a collection of writings from MANY different sources. If this book were written by a single source or if all of it was inspired by a god then maybe a singular interpretation would be possible. (Probably not IE. even when Karl Marx was alive his works were being Interpreted in ways he disagreed with. Hence his comment, 'I for one am not a Marxist'.)
<>
One thing that always amuses me is how Moses is meant to of written the first five books of the bible (OT), including his death and events afterwards :) | |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: "In the age of the internet attaching a famous name to your personal opinion to give more weight to it is a very valid strategy." - Benjamin Franklin
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
|
dagonet
Sergeant
442 Posts
| | 04/11/2006 1:21 AM |
| | Still waiting patiently for some kind and enlightened soul to clear up the Biblical contradictions I mentioned a page or so back. . . | |
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
Champion of Kyuss and his Servants of Squishy Doom | |
|
zdrake
Warrior
279 Posts
Albany, CA (near Berkeley)
| | 04/11/2006 2:07 AM |
| This thread has been absolutely fascinating to me.
Regarding the whole D&D=Satanism meme that flourished in the early 80's:
I'm surprised and saddened by many of the stories related here. I didn’t know the fear and hatred of our hobby was so strong in certain subcultures. I'm hopeful, however, that we'll be hearing fewer of these kinds of stories in the future. Back in the late 70's and early 80's, fantasy culture and geek culture in general were not as mainstream as they are now. I don't think there was "geek chic" in 1981, and now there is. I think Bill Gates (whatever you think of his business practices) showed that a geek can be a spectacular success. Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings movies brought huge exposure to the whole “sword and sorcery” genre. And the video and computer game industries have grown enormous and ubiquitous. So I hope that geeky, fantasy-related stuff won’t be so scary to the people who found it so alien and frightening before
Heck, Dungeons & Dragons can seem downright QUANT compared to Diablo (talk about Satanic imagery!), Grand Theft Auto III, hip-hop lyrics, and Internet Porn. So I would hope that negative religious reaction to Dungeons & Dragons would be on the wane. But I have never really encountered such reactions face to face, so I don’t know for sure which direction they are heading.
My worry about D&D is not that it will be condemned by puritanical zealots, but that people's attention spans will shorten to the point where they won't be willing to invest the time and creativity into it.
Regarding the question as to whether Christians, Muslims, and Jews worship the same God: My understanding is that most scholars within the three traditions believe that all three faiths worship the same "God of Abraham". Indeed, to an atheistic Unitarian Universalist like me, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity appear remarkably similar: all three proclaim the existence of an almighty God, all claim that this God should be worshipped, all claim that this God has revealed important things through prophets and that these revelations have been collected in sacred texts, etc.
I am frightened by the poster who stated that Ghandi is in Hell while Dalhmer is in Heaven. I understand that within a certain interpretation of Christianity this is a logical consequence of how the universe works. It’s like gravity: you may not like it, but that's the way it is.
But my sense of fairness and morality balks at the injustice of such an arrangement. But then I calm down, because I remember that (in my worldview) there is no God, no Heaven, no Hell, and no immortal soul. But just as one can get inspired or exasperated with a character in a fictional story, I can get inspired or exasperated by moral cosmologies and Bible stories, even ones I don’t think are accurate depictions of reality.
And I find the moral cosmology in which Ghandi is in Hell and Dahlmer in Heaven pretty horrendous from a moral standpoint. Why would God set up the universe in such a perverse way? If a human were to reward a person who did awful things and punish a person who did virtuous things, we would condemn that person as unjust. Should we not condemn God for acting in such a way, or at least, like Job, vent our outrage? This difficulty (called by philosophers the problem of Theodicy-justifying God’s ways to humanity) has never been solved to my satisfaction.
Of course, this isn’t a huge problem for an atheist like me.
Congrats to everyone on keeping things civil. Geeks of all religious stripes should support each other! | |
Champion of Acererak the Demi-Lich (w/ Epic Card)
D&D minis gathering in Berkeley, CA at Games of Berkeley (every other Tuesday, and sometimes every Tuesday.) | |
|
dagonet
Sergeant
442 Posts
| | 04/11/2006 2:39 AM |
| zdrake,
Believe it or not, there's a fairly reasonable, non-dogmatic explanation of how Dahmer could be in heaven and how Ghandi, well, couldn't. And while it will likely not solve the issue of Theodicy for you (heck, if Milton couldn't in Paradise Lost, what chance do I have?), it runs something like this.
First, assume that hell isn't some punishment leveled at sinners by God, but rather the state of being you end up in when you choose something, cling to something, over God. The idea is that any of us can enter heaven, but we can't carry everything with us--our pride, grudges we've treasured, addiction to physical pleasures, etc. If we're unwilling to leave these things behind (at the door, so to speak), we end up in the place where God *isn't*, which is hell. If we assume all this, then it is possible that a Jeffrey Dahmer, ackowledging all of the terrible things he'd done, repudiating them, and sincerely desiring to become someone more than what he'd been, could get into heaven. And that a Ghandi, upon learning the truth (seeing the face of God, so to speak), could utterly refuse to accept that truth, and thereby renounce heaven in favor of its opposite. Not that either of those cases would be at all likely to happen, but they could. . .
This is, by the way, more or less a summary of ideas on C. S. Lewis' 'The Great Divorce.' It's a quick but very deep read, and I recommend it to anyone thinking about the afterlife.
"Why this is hell, nor am I out of it.
Thinkst thou that I who saw the face of God,
And tasted the eternal joys of heaven,
Am not tormented with ten thousand hells,
In being deprived of everlasting bliss?"
--Mephistopheles, to Faust
| |
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
Champion of Kyuss and his Servants of Squishy Doom | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/11/2006 4:51 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by dagonet Still waiting patiently for some kind and enlightened soul to clear up the Biblical contradictions I mentioned a page or so back. . .
I'm not sure who you're directing that to, but I'm sorry if you got the impression that your input was disregarded by me or anybody else.
Please understand that it's difficult to reply to so many different varieties of posts. I am double checking to make sure I don't post any inaccurate info as facts, and trying my best to choose the right wording not to be offensive or pushy to anyone, while still trying get my point across. This is a time consuming process, and its easiest to take each topic one at a time.
quote:
Originally posted by dagonet
Wow, big thread, lots to talk about. Here's a start. . .
Going back a ways. . . So far as I know, the gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are equivalent. Certainly the Old Testament (Jewish) Yahweh and the New Testament (Christian) Jehovah are the same being. And I believe that that Quran makes a special point of acknowledging all the Old/New Testament prophets (starting with Moses and going all the way to Christ (who is not, however, considered the Son of God)) as true speakers of the word of Allah. I believe also that the Quran specifically describes both Christians and Jews as "People of the Book," people who follow the same deity (as Muslims) and who are decidedly *not* infidels.
I believe that the God of Judaism and Christianity are one in the same. Christians believe God exists in three Persons (not three gods, but three parts of the whole) - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The main difference is that Judaism does not recognize Jesus as the Son of God, and they wait for the messiah's first coming.
In fact, one of the many names by which God is called in the Hebrew text is the word "Elohim," which is plural.
Muslims, however, believe Allah to be god. Islam stresses the singularity of Allah.
From there, the only other thing I feel comfortable saying is that the fundamentals are very very different, despite how superficially similar they may appear because of certain values/qualities that are emphasized by both Christianity and Islam.
I really don't want to say too much on this subject, because it may be viewed as directly offensive if I go into too much depth. I researched Islam with a Christian mindset, so its hard to explain in it in any way other than the way I understand it.
quote:
Also of interest is Satan's behavior in the Book of Job; apparently the Adversary enjoys a free run of the created universe (up to and including heaven), and is on rather chummy terms with the creator Himself. That seems like rather a stretch from more traditional conceptions of the Devil.
Satan did have to ask God's permission to test Job, but that doesn't mean he casually waltzed up to heaven, knocked on the pearly gates and made himself at home. God is a spirit, and exists any and everywhere He will. (Genesis 1:2 - "...And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters")
God doesn't only dwell in Heaven, and therefore Satan would not have to be there to speak with Him. Prayer would be rather difficult if one had to be in heaven to speak to God.
quote:
I've always had trouble understanding how finite crimes can possibly result in the infinite/eternal punishment which is Hell. That seems neither merciful nor just. Personally, I'm with C.S. Lewis on this one: "There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, 'They will be done,' and those to whom God says, in the end, '*Thy* will be done.' All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell."
All of God's laws have a perpose beyond "something for us not to do." God is the only one with the authority and wisdom to judge what is truely just and right.
All crimes are infinite unless they are forgiven. Do you think doing time in prison corrects the effect of a crime? As long as the people who were affected by the crime remember it, it has not been corrected. If they choose to forgive the criminal, however, the effect of the criminals's actions no longer matter. All that is left is for the criminal to do his time.
This is sort of like our relationship with God. We're all like inevitable criminals. We have to do the time for our crimes. God, in His mercy, sent His Son in our place to do the time for our crimes. If we ask Him to, He'll forgive us, and there is nothing left of our crimes. If that's not mercy, I don't know what is.
I'm not sure what your reference to CS Lewis is supposed to mean. Could you explain that in depth? | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/11/2006 4:54 AM |
| | Oops, I accidentally hit reply with quote instead of edit reply. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
scruffydude7
Underboss
1196 Posts
Rock Hill, SC
| | 04/11/2006 5:25 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by Felagund
Ok, Username, what is your explanation for how people have come to different interpretations of the Bible?
I know you directed this question to Username, and I cannot speak for him, but I would like to respond.
The explanation for why people have come to different interpretations of the Bible is quite simple, and yet incredibly complex: People are different.
People are modivated by different things, people approach things differently, have different priorities, and people have free a will.
The opinions of various people are irrelevant to the actual truth in the Bible, though. People are quite capable of discerning the meaning of the Bible, but that's not to say that everyone can automatically understand every detail.
I'll go back to the math illustration. If someone does a complex algebraic equation, and does not find the correct answer, it does not take away the validity of the correct answer. | |
Champion of the Revenant
Knight of the Elf Duskblade
Complete Trades: Oni, Kidkach, Melrune, callidusx3 | |
|
Monsoon28
Underboss
2313 Posts
Toronto
| | 04/11/2006 7:57 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
To Monsoon28 -
As much as I would love to research up and respond to every person's opinions, it takes a lot of time.
I'll say this now, regarding your statement about the difference between what the Bible says about the afterlife in the Old and New Testament, because its not very complicated.
If you've been following this thread, you may recall that I said in one of my posts that a lot of things changed because of the crucifixion. One of those changes was directly related to this.
Jesus's sacrifice made it possible for people to enter the Heaven. Through His forgiveness and payment of our debt in our place, we are made pure. Before Jesus died on the cross, however, the result of Jesus's sacrifice was not yet in effect. Folks who died before the crucifixion were held temporarily in Sheol and then released after the crucifixion to their final destination.
I am very aware of the concept of Sheol, but Sheol was as place everyone went to, so Hell didn't exsist and Heaven didn't until christianity took the concept (among dozens of others) from other sources mainly Egyptian/Greek/Rome beliefs. Their first mentioning don't occur until these new testament writers and the names give are taken from exsisting sources. IE Hades, Gehenna. | |
"I was sittin' here eatin' my muffin, drinkin' my coffee, replayin' the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity." - Jules Winnfield
Sales/Trades Bad (1): Ironfist Boulderbender
Trades/Sales completed (8.): Danthl, Dafrca, Garyaxe, qillan_dvra, realmaster, Vandal_Savage, cavedweller, unearthed arcana.
Champion of Gem Dragons, VINDICATED Squire of Duergar Commander, Knight of the Astral Stalker.
| |
|
ccolinh
Sneak
144 Posts
| | 04/11/2006 8:49 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
The opinions of various people are irrelevant to the actual truth in the Bible, though. People are quite capable of discerning the meaning of the Bible, but that's not to say that everyone can automatically understand every detail.
I'll go back to the math illustration. If someone does a complex algebraic equation, and does not find the correct answer, it does not take away the validity of the correct answer.
While I agree that truth doesn't change regardless of interpretations, it causes me to wonder why a perfect God did't do a better job of communicating to us the things that he feels are important. If everyone comes away with something different from the Bible then of what use is it for determining truth? I mean if were talking about living forever or burning in hell then isn't the exact right message really really important??
It seems to me that a perfect God could have and should have made the truth evident to everyone, only then would your "gift" of free will be truly useful. IMO [:)] | |
Champion of the ???
Completed Trades (19): Raland, Frostrune, Ghendar (x2), Siddartha of Suburbia (x2), ckissee, doubtofbuddha, dagonet, jgsugden, Bugsy, smetzger, sttmxn, Drakkengi, Vrecknidj, Caustic_Mouse, lyus_sleyden, shoesan, Username, | |
|
Monsoon28
Underboss
2313 Posts
Toronto
| | 04/11/2006 9:13 AM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
Satan did have to ask God's permission to test Job, but that doesn't mean he casually waltzed up to heaven, knocked on the pearly gates and made himself at home. God is a spirit, and exists any and everywhere He will. (Genesis 1:2 - "...And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters")
God doesn't only dwell in Heaven, and therefore Satan would not have to be there to speak with Him. Prayer would be rather difficult if one had to be in heaven to speak to God.
Don't get me started on the story of Job!
Job 1:5-12 (King James Version)
quote:
5 And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually.
6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?
10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.
12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.
First Satan and the 'Sons of God' Present themselves.
Second this all-knowing being needs to ask Satan where he came from. A silly question to make when Satan use to be your head angel and knows that your omniscient.
Thirdly satan plays god (He doesn't ask for permission) and just to prove a point, god ruins Job's entire life. Job may have taken it all in stride, but thats a pretty petty thing to do to man just to prove a point to your fallen angel.
Then, In verse 12 you'll notice 'only upon himself put not forth thine hand' so in Job 2 we have satan saying 'yaya but if you were to lay hands on Job he would curse you' And yet again god is played and says ok you can lay hands on him, just don't kill him. Not someone I want playing a part of my life.
____________________________________________________
Then there is the question of Sin
Envy/Jealously - Is a sin, but:
Exodus 34:14 (King James Version)
14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:
Exodus 20:5 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
____________________________________________
Wrath is a sin but:
Numbers 16:46 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
46 And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a censer, and put fire therein from off the altar, and put on incense, and go quickly | |
"I was sittin' here eatin' my muffin, drinkin' my coffee, replayin' the incident in my head, when I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity." - Jules Winnfield
Sales/Trades Bad (1): Ironfist Boulderbender
Trades/Sales completed (8.): Danthl, Dafrca, Garyaxe, qillan_dvra, realmaster, Vandal_Savage, cavedweller, unearthed arcana.
Champion of Gem Dragons, VINDICATED Squire of Duergar Commander, Knight of the Astral Stalker.
| |
|
zdrake
Warrior
279 Posts
Albany, CA (near Berkeley)
| | 04/11/2006 2:37 PM |
| Dagonet, I have read C.S. Lewis' The Great Divorce, and I think his conception of Hell is very interesting: that it is a place of smallness and selfishness that we cling to. In The Great Divorce, souls in Hell (which IIRC is like block after block of seedy bookstores) get a chance to see the outskirts of Heaven. If they can let go of their "baggage", they can run off into the Mountains of Heaven. I think this is a very useful metaphor for the spiritual life vs. the pursuit of selfish desire.
But, I don't think that this is a very "orthodox" Christian cosmology. In most version that I've heard of, hell is Eternal Punishment, with no chance of redemption or spiritual progress. C.S. Lewis' vision is certainly more appealing from a moral standpoint. But does he just get to "make up" how the universe is, like Dante and Milton seem to be able to do? One thing that frustrates me about the whole theological enterprise is I don't know what the rules are, they way I know what they are for the scientific enterprise. I can make up lots of fascinating moral cosmologies (any good DM should be able to generate a cosmology, or at least pick a cool one), but that doesn't mean they're true. How do I know C.S. Lewis' is any more accurate than a "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" cosmology? What test can I perform to see which model is correct?
Regarding Job: This is absolutely my favorite book of the the Bible, precisely BEACAUSE God is so distant, uncaring, and unconcerned about human morality. The God of Job is a God an atheist like me could almost believe in. He's a God that looks like the Universe, with all its majesty, beauty, power, and haughty indifference. I admire the book of Job so much because it attempts to deal with the problem of Theodicy without the cop-out of an afterlife where all the wrongs of this world are redressed. (Although I hasten to point out that many Christians on this thread have insisted that the afterlife is NOT a place where virtue is rewarded and vice punished, rather it is a place where believers are rewarded and unbelievers suffer.)
I admire Job because in his raving, he refuses to give up his thirst for justice (as his wife tells him to do), but he also insists on seeing the world as it is, with all its suffering and injustice. His friends tell him that his suffering is punishment for sin. But Job knows this isn't true (and we the reader know it isn't true, because we saw the "bet" between God and the Accusing Angel). He won't let God off the hook. He curses they day he was born; he rails at God's unfairness. He even seems to want to sue God in a court!
And when God shows up in the whirlwind, what does he say? Does he explain to Job the reason for his suffering? Does he congratulate Job for proving the accusing angel wrong? No. He belittles him! He uses some of the most wonderful sarcastic language in all the Bible. Then he goes on and on about all the cool monsters he made (I think Leviathan and Behemoth would make great huge figures, but I don't think we need a dire ostrich.) And then, after Job cringes/repents, God says the scariest thing of all:
quote:
7 And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.
8 Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like my servant Job.
(emphasis added)
So after giving Job the biggest dressing down in all of scripture, possibly in the whole Western Canon, God essentially says: You were right about me, and your friends were wrong! He says it TWICE, just to make sure the conventionally pious friends (and conventially pious readers) get the message. So what is this saying? It seems to me to be the most frightening, perplexing, exasperating, and believeable thing a God could say. How anyone can say that the Old Testament God is "good" in any conventional sense is completely beyond me. Aside from God's actions, we have God's own words saying that Job's view of him is right and the friends' view is wrong.
Virginia Wolf said, "I read the book of Job last night, I don't think God comes out well in it." One scholar I read sees the entire New Testament as God being forced to become a more moral being by the events that take place in Job.
It still think Leviathan and Behemoth would make cool minis. Definitely huges with epic stats, or even iconics. In fact, I think we should have a whole Bible series! Solomon would be a LG Commander 7. David would have a wicked ranged attack that did extra damage against large sized figures. Jesus could treat water squares as clear terrain, and should probably have and Epic card, too. Old Testament prohpets could cast Flame Strike. Esther would be good at assassinating enemy commanders. Jonah would be immune to the Swallow Whole ability. Paul could convert himself from LE to LG, then start converting others. There could be a Temple of Jerusalem map. The possibilities are endless. If only WotC had the guts... | |
Champion of Acererak the Demi-Lich (w/ Epic Card)
D&D minis gathering in Berkeley, CA at Games of Berkeley (every other Tuesday, and sometimes every Tuesday.) | |
|
zdrake
Warrior
279 Posts
Albany, CA (near Berkeley)
| | 04/11/2006 2:55 PM |
| More biblical D&D minis stuff: [WARNING: irreverent humor]
Noah would have a Warband Building: 2 of any animal are legal in your warband.
Joshua would have the special ability to extend the 60 minute limit on a game.
When Moses is on top of Mount Sinai, his commander effect covers the whole board. But he and all his followers gain the "wandering monster" ability.
Other maps:
The Parting of the Red Sea: Sort of like Drow outpost, with a narrow channel going through water. But only good clerics can open the channel.
Garden of Eden: Eating from the tree gives you the ability to differentiate between good and evil warbands, but then a sword archon appears and routs you off the map.
Calvary: If a figure containing the name Christ is eliminated in the center victory area, everyone wins. | |
Champion of Acererak the Demi-Lich (w/ Epic Card)
D&D minis gathering in Berkeley, CA at Games of Berkeley (every other Tuesday, and sometimes every Tuesday.) | |
|
Felagund
Sergeant
922 Posts
| | 04/11/2006 6:41 PM |
| quote:
Originally posted by scruffydude7
quote:
Originally posted by Felagund
Ok, Username, what is your explanation for how people have come to different interpretations of the Bible?
I know you directed this question to Username, and I cannot speak for him, but I would like to respond.
The explanation for why people have come to different interpretations of the Bible is quite simple, and yet incredibly complex: People are different.
People are modivated by different things, people approach things differently, have different priorities, and people have free a will.
The opinions of various people are irrelevant to the actual truth in the Bible, though. People are quite capable of discerning the meaning of the Bible, but that's not to say that everyone can automatically understand every detail.
I'll go back to the math illustration. If someone does a complex algebraic equation, and does not find the correct answer, it does not take away the validity of the correct answer.
Hey scruffy,
The reason I posted that question directly for Username is that he stated that a)the Bible is not complicated b)anybody is capable of understanding the Bible.
Right now, I can't reconcile the truth of those statements with the fact that people interpret the Bible differently. My explanation is that the Bible is a complicated book, and most/many are |
|
|
|
|
|