different perspective of "recognize we all ignore Jesus".

[DoubtfulOne]

I don't mean to sound trollish but I think your explanation on this site has slightly misconstrued the meaning of such verses as Mark 10:21 about selling everything you own.  I believe you have taken this too literally.  Christians believe this doesn't mean to become a bum in a cardboard box, but to not confide in your possessions, but seek the Lord.  You say using a computer is in violation of this.  What if the entire purpose of owning the computer is give your testimony and preach gospel?  What is the predominating factor of your life?  Material possessions and science?  Or are they simply a prop to be used for Gods will and of no value to you otherwise?  This is what it means I believe.

[Dante]

One of the tough questions that Christains can't seem to come to agree on is; what's to be taken literally, figuratively, or allegorically.

How does one know?

[cheezisgoooood]

Here we go again with the magic decoder rings.

[One Above All]

So tell us, what is the correct interpretation of the bible? Which of the +30000 denominations is the right one?
Or do you have your own denomination thanks to your magic decoder ring?

Non-sarcastic version: This is BS. Christians whine here all the time about "context" and "what god really meant" but provide no evidence for their claims. The website creator/owner takes all verses literally because they say NOTHING about being "metaphorical"

[OnePerson]

The Magic Bible Decoder Ring.

I hardly know any Christians who bought a computer for the sole purpose of preaching.  And the ones who do tend to be insane.

[velkyn]

DO,

It's no suprise that you think we have have "interpreted" Mark 10:21 in error.  Many Christians do when we mention it because they don't want to follow it as it reads literally. You, like so many other Christians, want to bring out your magic decoder ring in determining what is literal and what is metaphor in the bible.  You want for instance, the resurrection of Christ to be literal but you want the instructions to give up all you have and trust in God to be metaphor.  

Your mentioning of a computer is an example of how your supposed divinely inspired holy book is just a book written by someone who couldn't conceive of communicating with another human being without scrolls or by talking directly to him. He didn't need think you needed anything but your two feet and trust in the divine to get the message out, all leave everythign of importance to you and be like the lilies and the birds. We see that even family should be left behind (Matthew 10, Mark 10:28-29, etc)  Now Christians have computers and rely on glurgy emails and websites, soemthing that this person, or God if you believe in it, never thought of.

I am always amused when Christians can come up with "reasons" that God wants them to have material possessions.  That's exactly what the "prosperity" minstries do, and that's what you are doing too.  When you point the finger at everyone else who you deem has "too much" interest in "material possessions and science" you are a hypocrite.  That science is what makes you comfy and what has shown your religion to be largely wrong in everything so far and likely to continue doing that.  I might believe your scenario if you used your computer for nothing else but "God's Work" but I really doubt that you do.    
 

[DoubtfulOne]

One of the tough questions that Christains can't seem to come to agree on is; what's to be taken literally, figuratively, or allegorically.

How does one know?

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure.  The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus.  But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.  I guess this was just my own interpretation.

[DoubtfulOne]

DO,

It's no suprise that you think we have have "interpreted" Mark 10:21 in error.  Many Christians do when we mention it because they don't want to follow it as it reads literally. You, like so many other Christians, want to bring out your magic decoder ring in determining what is literal and what is metaphor in the bible.  You want for instance, the resurrection of Christ to be literal but you want the instructions to give up all you have and trust in God to be metaphor.  

Your mentioning of a computer is an example of how your supposed divinely inspired holy book is just a book written by someone who couldn't conceive of communicating with another human being without scrolls or by talking directly to him. He didn't need think you needed anything but your two feet and trust in the divine to get the message out, all leave everythign of importance to you and be like the lilies and the birds. We see that even family should be left behind (Matthew 10, Mark 10:28-29, etc)  Now Christians have computers and rely on glurgy emails and websites, soemthing that this person, or God if you believe in it, never thought of.

I am always amused when Christians can come up with "reasons" that God wants them to have material possessions.  That's exactly what the "prosperity" minstries do, and that's what you are doing too.  When you point the finger at everyone else who you deem has "too much" interest in "material possessions and science" you are a hypocrite.  That science is what makes you comfy and what has shown your religion to be largely wrong in everything so far and likely to continue doing that.  I might believe your scenario if you used your computer for nothing else but "God's Work" but I really doubt that you do.    
 

Your right, I can't deny what you've just said.  In fact, much of my time on the pc is spent downloading torrents of secular movies and books. 

[OnePerson]

^Well, at least you're being honest.

[velkyn]

Your right, I can't deny what you've just said.  In fact, much of my time on the pc is spent downloading torrents of secular movies and books. 

My husband does the same thing.  I wish he wouldn't since it is basically stealing, even though we do eventually buy copies of what we like.  

DO you said this in your reply to Dante

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure.  The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus.  But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.  I guess this was just my own interpretation

Do you now understand why so many atheists think that theists have just made up their own version of God?  None of you can agree on much of anything. If there were a god, wouldn't you think it could be clearer?  and how would being an itinerate preacher be "impossible"?  Uncomfortable, dangerous, inconvenient, yes, but impossible? Not that I can see.

[dloubet]

But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.

No. It would merely be inconvenient. There is absolutely nothing stopping you from doing exactly as the Jesus character says except the fact that you would be uncomfortable.

So the Jesus character supposedly dies for you in all his sacrificial glory, and in return for this gift of eternal bliss you do what? Nothing? You can't bear a little abject poverty for the guy who was whipped bloody to save you? The god that sacrificed his omni qualities only to die on the cross to assure your ascension to heaven, you're going to choose your Big Mac and BMW over him?

Knock yourself out, but don't expect us to take you seriously. Granted your mea culpa is a refreshing perspective, but why be a Christian if you're not going to act like one?

[Omen]

I don't mean to sound trollish but I think your explanation on this site has slightly misconstrued the meaning of such verses as Mark 10:21 about selling everything you own.  I believe you have taken this too literally. 

The problem is that any interpretation, beginning with the assumption of truth based in myth, can rationalize to any conclusion that is desired.  You can't therefore imply that one person has taken it too literal or not literal enough, because there is frankly no reason to do either.

The consensus among scholars is that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who preached to jews that the end was near and to give up all worldly concerns in order to follow him.

Which scripture that implores its followers to follow blindly, to get rid of everything they own, to dismiss friends and family, and to consider everyone else who is not a 'brother' ( ie fellow believer ) to be not simply in error but contemptible, easily fits into that description and context.

Christians believe...

Which is the extent of any meaningful argument you have to offer, christians believe entirely contradictory things in between themselves.  One has no more authority over another.

[Dante]

I guess this was just my own interpretation.

All of your beliefs are "just your own interpretation". And there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you realize and respect others "interpretations", and don't try to force your's on others.

My disbelief is my own interpretation as well.

[screwtape]

First of all, welcome, DoubtfulOne.

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure. 

Kudos for that admission.  So often xians just go into full denial mode.  I know you are not exactly a xian and sort of walking in a grey area.  But still, honesty is appreciated.

The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus. 

Maybe, maybe not.  The apostles may have been real, but we cannot rely on the bible to accurately portray their adventures.  

But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.

I think it would be as possible now as at any time. It would a difficult decision, like joining a religious order, but not impossible.

I guess this was just my own interpretation.

And why might you interpret it that way?  What would be anyone's motivation to take that particular perspective on it?

[rev45]

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure.  The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus.  But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.  I guess this was just my own interpretation.

I wouldn't say its impossible as this man has been living with very little for 9 years. 

http://www.details.com/culture-trends/career-and-money/200907/meet-the-man-who-lives-on-zero-dollars

As dloubet said, to live as Jesus lived would only be inconvenient not impossible.  From what I recall from my 25 years in the church, even if the Bible says to do something, if its inconvenient, its a metaphor. 

[dloubet]

So what line do you walk, rev45?  If you're not a Christian, you have my apologies, and I can only blame my knee-jerk reaction to anything that's even been introduced to a duck.  ;-)

[Ambassador Pony]

Maybe, maybe not.  The apostles may have been real, but we cannot rely on the bible to accurately portray their adventures.  

Like the time the gang solved the riddle of the ghost who was stealing old man Wilson's prized Dahlias?

It was Mrs. Mitchell, that old bitch next door, and she would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for those lousy kids and their dog jesus!

[rev45]

So what line do you walk, rev45?  If you're not a Christian, you have my apologies, and I can only blame my knee-jerk reaction to anything that's even been introduced to a duck.  ;-)

I don't belong to a religion anymore.  I was a non-denominational Christian for 25 years and left the church about a year ago. 

[Azdgari]

Rev45, when people on this board ask if someone is a "Christian", the inquiry is typically about the beliefs of the one in question, rather than his or her religious affiliation (or lack thereof).

Your lack of church affiliation is off-topic.

[dloubet]

To be fair, I inadvertently conflated the two in my question. So if there's any off topic-ness, it's my doing.

Unfortunately, that still leaves me in the dark.

[Anfauglir]

One of the tough questions that Christains can't seem to come to agree on is; what's to be taken literally, figuratively, or allegorically.

How does one know?

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure.  The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus.  But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.  I guess this was just my own interpretation.

Ah, but "Behold the birds of the heaven, that they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye of much more value then they?"

You don't follow your own holy book because it would inconvenience you.  Either that you or don't really believe that your god WOULD look after you.

[Positiveaob]

You have a good point there, I'm not really sure.  The apostles did give up everything and follow Jesus.  But it would be simply impossible for us in this day and age to follow this exactly as it is stated.  I guess this was just my own interpretation.

DoubtfulOne, I hope you stick around this website, I think you can learn alot.  Admitting "I dont know" when confronted with questions such as these, instead of coming up with some cockamamie explanation that defies all logic, is the first step towards rationality.

It would not be impossible at all to give up all your earthly possessions.  Cult members do it all the time.  The only difference between cults such as Heaven's Gate, Branch Davidians, etc etc etc, and religions such as christianity, islam and judaism, etc etc, is the scale.  It's all the same.

[rev45]

To be fair, I inadvertently conflated the two in my question. So if there's any off topic-ness, it's my doing.

Unfortunately, that still leaves me in the dark.

I must have not understood your question.  If it will lead to getting off topic you can message me and I'll be happy to answer any questions. 

[dloubet]

Let me just ham-handedly blurt out the question: Are you theist or atheist?

If you answer theist, I'm still kind of in the dark, because since you don't adhere to any recognized religion I have no idea what it is you do believe.

If you answer atheist, then I don't remember what we were talking about anymore.  ;-)

[DoubtfulOne]

Here's a question for you guys that has probably been asked a zillion times.  Would you guys really deny God in a situation where death was near?  For instance, in the that movie "Frozen" where 3 people are trapped on a ski lift in the blizzard.  One guy tries jumping down so he can get help and then breaks both legs and 3 wolves eat him alive.  So the other two are faced the possibilities of either freezing to death, or falling and breaking bones then eaten.  You would think God may come up in a situation like that.

Dloubet, I don't really know, so I guess that is agnostic. I don't know that there isnt a God.  Yet, its easy to prove that there isn't.

[One Above All]

Would you guys really deny God in a situation where death was near?

No. To deny something, it has to exist in the first place

[Positiveaob]

Here's a question for you guys that has probably been asked a zillion times.  Would you guys really deny God in a situation where death was near?  For instance, in the that movie "Frozen" where 3 people are trapped on a ski lift in the blizzard.  One guy tries jumping down so he can get help and then breaks both legs and 3 wolves eat him alive.  So the other two are faced the possibilities of either freezing to death, or falling and breaking bones then eaten.  You would think God may come up in a situation like that.

I wouldnt invoke a god or gods in a situation like that..  I would be thinking through my options very carefully and trying to determine the course of action most likely to give me the best chance of survival.  Speaking to imaginary beings would be the last thing on my mind.  

If such a god existed, why the hell would he be waiting for one of his creations to praise him before helping out?  

Dloubet, I don't really know, so I guess that is agnostic. I don't know that there isnt a God.  Yet, its easy to prove that there isn't.

You can NOT prove the non-existence of invisible, silent, intangible beings!  No more than you can prove the non-existence of russel's teapot.  What you can do is use common sense, logic, and reason and deduce that such a being would have no reason to stay hidden, if he existed, and has no more validity than the countless other imaginary deities created by various cultures throughout mankind's history, and therefore can be reasonably discarded as a possibility.

[Zankuu]

Here's a question for you guys that has probably been asked a zillion times.  Would you guys really deny God in a situation where death was near?

Perhaps a bit off topic, but I have been in a life threatening situation and the thought of worshiping a supernatural deity just in case never crossed my mind. The thoughts that sparked were based purely on survival, or more accurately, the actions that would lead to it.

And I assume you're talking specifically about the Christian god Yahweh - in which case yes, I would flat out deny him even if he proved his existence to me on the basis of him being a crazed deity with poor morals and a bad temper as shown in the OT.

[velkyn]

Here's a question for you guys that has probably been asked a zillion times.  Would you guys really deny God in a situation where death was near?  For instance, in the that movie "Frozen" where 3 people are trapped on a ski lift in the blizzard.  One guy tries jumping down so he can get help and then breaks both legs and 3 wolves eat him alive.  So the other two are faced the possibilities of either freezing to death, or falling and breaking bones then eaten.  You would think God may come up in a situation like that.

Why should I decide that reality isn't real just because I might die?  Why should I think any magic sky god will do anything for me if it hasn't for billions?  This is basically that moronic Pascal's Wager.  Sorry, I'm not so poor of character to decide that I should give up my honesty for no chance of any magical help.