Divine Inspiration or Divine Dictation?

[Martinus]

In what respect are clergy closer to God?

They have a vested interest in keeping their jobs, so they will come up with any type of ridiculous double think to justify the inconsistencies and contradictions, whereas laymen may simply not care enough to bother.

As a lawyer, you should know that. :p

[dps]

Everyone in the room is already a devout believer and the point of the class is neither to convince or cast doubt in anyone's mind about the validity of what's written in the Bible.

A surprising number of free-thinkers are born of intelligent, often innocent, questions raised in Bible study.

And hence Magnus' admonition not to engage in such questions.

The argument that one should not be allowed or should be discouraged from engaging in thinking about God absent a "trained professional" there to make sure you don't think too much is one of my very favorite religious memes.

Fucking Luther - he messed the entire thing up, what with translating the bible and all that nonsense!

Yeah, Magnus' position is a great example of the kind of Catholic thinking that the Protestantism rejected.  But while I don't know enough about Catholicism to say for sure, it seems to me that his attitude would be considered very reactionary even in today's Catholic Church.  "What reason is there to read the Bible unless you are going to become a priest."  Wow.

[Magnus]

Yeah, Magnus' position is a great example of the kind of Catholic thinking that the Protestantism rejected.  But while I don't know enough about Catholicism to say for sure, it seems to me that his attitude would be considered very reactionary even in today's Catholic Church.  "What reason is there to read the Bible unless you are going to become a priest."  Wow.

It should be noted that it was a fake position, though I was putting it on a bit too think. You probably shouldn't deal with it as a real position, more as a caricature of the position.

I'd imagine most clergy would most likely say something along the lines of reading and asking clergy questions is all well and good, infact it should be somewhat encouraged. People showing an interest in religion is considered a good thing by most clergy.
To argue over the correct interpretation of a bible passage during a bible study, not so good. Though issues that come up should be brought to your priest, not to a bunch of college kids.

Many catholics I know, much of my family for instance, have read the Bible, well parts of it, not so much the whole thing.
When I was Catholic I did actually read it, though I don't read it anymore, not much of a use for it.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, Magnus' position is a great example of the kind of Catholic thinking that the Protestantism rejected.  But while I don't know enough about Catholicism to say for sure, it seems to me that his attitude would be considered very reactionary even in today's Catholic Church.  "What reason is there to read the Bible unless you are going to become a priest."  Wow.

I don't know if it's that weird.  I don't know anyone, Catholic or Protestant, who's read the Bible.
It does seem a bit useless for Catholics and rather too close to religion for Anglicans.

[Neil]

Not a perfect analogy.  After all, you'd still be you if aliens landed tomorrow.  Your thought processes would still work the same way.  However, Religious grumbler would think a different way, to the point where it would be difficult for you to say what he would do, especially because of your extremely close relationship with the current you.  You're very invested in your current thought processes since, after all, they're yours.

I guess my point is that I can imagine you as the Supreme Being a lot easier than I can imagine a non-responsive entity as such.  You respond to posts.  That is the minimum I would expect of a deity (and, thus, DGullible sacrifices godhood ).

It's a shame we won't get an outraged reply from that post.

[Valmy]

The thing is, people like him are perfectly happy to rant about those prohibitions that do not concern them (e.g. saying that homosexuality is a sin) but those that could somehow affect their life are "interpreted out".

I agree with Faelin that it is cherry picking. If you think Bible is the word of God, then you are a hypocrite and a sinner if you are not more conservative than Fred Phelps. If not, then it is a collection of rather ludicrous (or, at best, anachronistic) prohibitions and tribal stories, written in a dreary and tedious language by half-literate shepherds, and should be treated as such (rather than considered "one of the most important books").

Um...it was not then shepherd class who wrote the fucking thing idiot.  It was the priestly intelligentsia.  They were the most brilliant people of their time and they have alot of interesting things to say.

[Valmy]

Because it is a contradictory, illogical piece of shit that anyone with two brains cells could easily figure out, thus being led astray?

I don't find anything illogical about an ancient people thinking their God chose them.  The Athenians thought Athena was the protector of their city to.  Do you also hammer Greek philosophy as being 'contradictory, illogical pieces of shit'?  I mean not all the philosophers agree and their ways of thinking changed over the centuries.  OMG!  We need to destroy everything ever written by any culture ever!  They might not think the same way consistently for thousands of years!

Seriously issues much?

[Valmy]

He'll just have to refrain from debating religion with a Grande Ecole alum.

I know.  What a snob.

[Neil]

Because it is a contradictory, illogical piece of shit that anyone with two brains cells could easily figure out, thus being led astray?

I don't find anything illogical about an ancient people thinking their God chose them.  The Athenians thought Athena was the protector of their city to.  Do you also hammer Greek philosophy as being 'contradictory, illogical pieces of shit'?  I mean not all the philosophers agree and their ways of thinking changed over the centuries.  OMG!  We need to destroy everything ever written by any culture ever!  They might not think the same way consistently for thousands of years!

Seriously issues much?

Greeks were more accepting of homos, and thus Martinus has no problem with them.

[crazy canuck]

Do you have a reason for why people should not study the Bible other then they might be lead astray.  Do you think that no one other then the Clergy should read it?  Do you think the Clergy infallable?

Honeslty by that point I was pretty much out of any arguments, I'm not really used to having to a give a "real" faith based argument, it's a little bit hard.
Anyway try going back to my comment on page one and read the part grumbler didn't quote, actually I'll qoute the relevent part to you.
"Or follow the path that most logic based arguments about god lead to: "I don't know."
Sometimes followed with, "It doesn't matter, I'll live a good live regardless""
Hopefully Things make a bit moresense now, if they don't I've stopped caring.

You disappoint me Magnus.  I thought you were going to give the traditional Catholic argument that the Bible can only be fully understood through the interpretations and teaching of the Church and it is the Churches teachings that must be studied.

Your position that study is pointless and people can never understand (only priests) is not one currently held by the Caltholic Church - although it certainly once was.  Are you sure you are Catholic?

[Sheilbh]

You disappoint me Magnus.  I thought you were going to give the traditional Catholic argument that the Bible can only be fully understood through the interpretations and teaching of the Church and it is the Churches teachings that must be studied.

I'd agree with that

[crazy canuck]

You disappoint me Magnus.  I thought you were going to give the traditional Catholic argument that the Bible can only be fully understood through the interpretations and teaching of the Church and it is the Churches teachings that must be studied.

I'd agree with that

It would have given a much better departure for discussion then the line he used, hence why I said I was disappointed.

[PDH]

The Bible is best understood when drunk.  Or stoned.

[Valmy]

The Bible is best understood when drunk.  Or stoned.

LSD.  The Bible is best understood under the influence of mind expanding drugs.

[Barrister]

I guess my point is that I can imagine you as the Supreme Being a lot easier than I can imagine a non-responsive entity as such.  You respond to posts.  That is the minimum I would expect of a deity (and, thus, DGullible sacrifices godhood ).

Of course the religious veiwpoint is that God is very responsive to you - and that you just aren't listening.