Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

toxic515 · 09-08-2004, 06:23 PM

I'll spend a good bit of time later on further adressing the issues you've raised, but I'd like to point out that at no time did I assert that anything was purely political. I simply wish to raise the point that MANY MANY factors, INCLUDING politics greatly affected mores and dogma. I also do not attempt to assert validity or lack thereof on the writings included in the Bible. The point is that it is important to be aware and take into consideration all of the factors that shape the ideas we are presented with today. I despise dogmatic "faith" without reason. I find it impossible to reconcile that a creator would give his people (us) only ONE real tool for survival (our minds) and then require us to NOT use it in order to reap some eternal reward.. Therefore, to my way of thinking, everything MUST be reasonable. In some cases that means that I have to acknowledge that I may not have all of the information.

You are correct in the statement that the moral teaching is not necessarily invalid, and that the churches choice of books to include are not NECESSARILY incorrect. My admonishment is to refuse to simply accept that it IS correct without searching.

I thought that I was very clear that christianity STARTED as a Jewish sect. (and while it's expansion wasn't quite as rapid as some think it was, they certainly DID spend a lot more time attempting to convert than the Jews did) Celibacy is another issue entirely, much of that brought up because Jesus more or less told the people to ignore everyday responsibilities and activities and focus on the kingdom of God... It was a rather short hop, instead of a leap to fit sexual absinance into that as well. The establishment of the Roman church's canon was not PURELY political. There is little question that they were scholarly, and were attempting to do right by what they understood and believed, just as we all try to do today. Priestly celibacy always seemed more of an economical decision rather than anything else as far as the church was concerned..

and the Gnostics... well, that's certainly another thread, but the short version of the story is here is that they had some radically different ideas about the metaphysics of the universe than the Romans (Catholics) did, and their interpretation of Genesis alone was a radical departure from that belief system. The writings of James (Jesus brother) frightened them to no end. (and you'll notice that they're not in the bible nor are they openly discussed...) More later, I'm tired and I wanna go to bed. ;-) Thanks for the opportunity to continue to discuss.. :-)

09-08-2004, 06:23 PM	#20 (permalink)
toxic515 Addict Location: Texas	I'll spend a good bit of time later on further adressing the issues you've raised, but I'd like to point out that at no time did I assert that anything was purely political. I simply wish to raise the point that MANY MANY factors, INCLUDING politics greatly affected mores and dogma. I also do not attempt to assert validity or lack thereof on the writings included in the Bible. The point is that it is important to be aware and take into consideration all of the factors that shape the ideas we are presented with today. I despise dogmatic "faith" without reason. I find it impossible to reconcile that a creator would give his people (us) only ONE real tool for survival (our minds) and then require us to NOT use it in order to reap some eternal reward.. Therefore, to my way of thinking, everything MUST be reasonable. In some cases that means that I have to acknowledge that I may not have all of the information. You are correct in the statement that the moral teaching is not necessarily invalid, and that the churches choice of books to include are not NECESSARILY incorrect. My admonishment is to refuse to simply accept that it IS correct without searching. I thought that I was very clear that christianity STARTED as a Jewish sect. (and while it's expansion wasn't quite as rapid as some think it was, they certainly DID spend a lot more time attempting to convert than the Jews did) Celibacy is another issue entirely, much of that brought up because Jesus more or less told the people to ignore everyday responsibilities and activities and focus on the kingdom of God... It was a rather short hop, instead of a leap to fit sexual absinance into that as well. The establishment of the Roman church's canon was not PURELY political. There is little question that they were scholarly, and were attempting to do right by what they understood and believed, just as we all try to do today. Priestly celibacy always seemed more of an economical decision rather than anything else as far as the church was concerned.. and the Gnostics... well, that's certainly another thread, but the short version of the story is here is that they had some radically different ideas about the metaphysics of the universe than the Romans (Catholics) did, and their interpretation of Genesis alone was a radical departure from that belief system. The writings of James (Jesus brother) frightened them to no end. (and you'll notice that they're not in the bible nor are they openly discussed...) More later, I'm tired and I wanna go to bed. ;-) Thanks for the opportunity to continue to discuss.. :-) __________________ Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.