A loving God that instills fear of punishment as His "love"?

I plan on reading the King James Version for literary purposes, regardless of its purpose.

I'm not sure whether it will match the power of Milton or Alighieri, but I've heard it has great literary merit.

I hope to glean enough of the philosophy while I'm at it. That way, I'll be better prepared to engage in these discussions.

It's a long book, though. I'm not sure when I'm going to get around to it. I'm currently two thirds of the way through the Divine Comedy, so it may be a while. I read these sorts of things over a long period, digesting them bit by bit.

This is still a discussion forum. That much remains the same. My point still stands.

 

I'm not looking for any knowledge per se. Much of the core tenets and their meanings I will likely already be familiar with in other contexts. Consider, for example, the parallels between Christianity and Buddhism on a fundamental level. I've already read so much Buddhism, and even a fair bit of Hinduism, that I'm expecting to see a lot of overlap on that level. (I'm also quite familiar with the basics of Christianity through other means.)

What I'm looking for mainly is the poetic value of the text---metaphor, diction, meter, rhythm, turns of phrase---in addition to the storytelling value. Any "eternal benefits" I could derive from the Bible I'm already probably experiencing to a large degree. However, I will be open to learning new things if that should happen.

 

Nothing fundamentally. No one does. I'm assuming you are referring to things that exist which are unchanging. One example is that it is in our nature to suffer. Nothing will change that. I have the "eternal benefit" of having acknowledged that suffering is inherent in us.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "eternal benefit."

Eternity itself is something else. Since everything is in flux, the only thing truly eternal is change.

Could you clarify what you mean?

 

Okay, I get that. But what is an "eternal benefit"? Can you give me some examples?

I'm a bit confused by this.

Does this mean you believe in Christ but don't ascribe to his teachings? Or are you some kind of Christian/post-Christian secularist?

 

Okay, I thought so. I wasn't sure. You're basically saying the eternal benefit is access to an afterlife, in heaven in this case. Right?

I believe that this life is the only life we have. I'm not concerned about the idea of an afterlife. It won't be something I'll consider while reading the Bible. I've already told you what I'm concerned about.

So you are a Christian in that you believe in and ascribe to the teachings of Christ, but you don't call yourself a Christian because of the religious/social problems associated with such a label? I think I understand.

I could be labelled a secular humanist, but I tend to avoid that because there is a movement towards formalizing that as a label, as a kind of belief system. I see problems with that too, as there are things I will tend to be indifferent about or disagree with on one point or another.

 

That's what I assumed by having access to an afterlife. Maybe I'm misusing the term. Anyway, as I said, I'm unconcerned with that in my approach to the Bible. I tend to view issues of fellowship, learning, protection, and knowledge to be my own responsibility (this is both a humanist and Buddhist ideal).

The concept of eternity is addressed in Buddhism with regard to an enlightened state that essentially means one becomes untouched by the cycle of birth and death (i.e. no clinging to life, no fear of death). But I view much of that as metaphorical. As I said earlier, the only eternity I know of is the eternity of flux (hence the futility of clinging to life and fearing death). Much of Buddhism addresses these concerns of impermanence.

 

That's why I said I think I'm misusing the term. But won't your physical body die away?

 

It's something I can depend on based on observation. For all I know the universe may dissipate eventually. For all intents and purposes, however, I will call flux eternal because that is something to contemplate when considering daily life. It helps avoid clinging to things, because it's futile. Life is change.

So from a scientific perspective, no, I don't know whether flux is eternal. Philosophically, I assume it to be so. Scientifically, we cannot know if anything is eternal. It's assumed by many that nothing is.

But I think we're wandering away from the OP a bit far. How about getting back to God and fear and love?

I tend to define life biologically.