If you think Mormonism is retarded, why you think the Bible is any different?

[The Minsky Moment]

Can you give some examples of these rather forward thinkers?

Descartes for one.  I know Galileo had a number of supporters within the Church, which is why it took so long for him to be subject to sanction, but I can't enumerate by name. 

[crazy canuck]

Can you give some examples of these rather forward thinkers?

Descartes for one.  I know Galileo had a number of supporters within the Church, which is why it took so long for him to be subject to sanction, but I can't enumerate by name.

Descartes is not a very good example given the fact he delayed publication because of his fear of the Church.

[The Minsky Moment]

Descartes is not a very good example given the fact he delayed publication because of his fear of the Church.

He delayed publication b/c he found out about what happened to Galileo!
He is a very good example because he was (a) Catholic, (b) religious, (c) heliocentrist, and (d) well-known at that time.

[crazy canuck]

Descartes is not a very good example given the fact he delayed publication because of his fear of the Church.

He delayed publication b/c he found out about what happened to Galileo!
He is a very good example because he was (a) Catholic, (b) religious, (c) heliocentrist, and (d) well-known at that time.

that was one of the reasons he delayed he was also concerned how his views might be recieved before hand and the treatment of Galileo confirmed his fears.

Again, not a good example for an example for the argument you seemed to be making.

[Sheilbh]

This is more the counter to Viking's bizarre argument that in order to be a Christian you MUST believe everything in the bible to be literally true.  That really doesn't match with most Christians - both today and historically.

Not least because the majority of Christians, historically and today, subscribe to Churches which believe that the Universal Church pre-dates the Bible.  The Bible was composed and declared canonical by Church Councils.  The Catholic, Anglican and Orthodox Churches would all claim that they are of the Universal Church that began with the immediate followers of Christ.  It's the Church which decided what was in the Bible, the Church which decided the meaning to be extracted and the Church which shows correct interpretation.  Scripture the root of Christian doctrine but, for Anglicans, Catholics and Orthodox, there is an awareness that scripture came from the Church not vice versa and that you can't have sola scriptura away from that tradition.

The Puritans suggested there was a division between 'science' (by which they meant reason) and scripture was there alone, inerrant, unsullied by previous interpretations and open.  This was something that Richard Hooker discussed 'when they and their Bibles were alone together, what strange fantastical opinion soever at any time entered into their heads, their use was to think the Spirit taught it them.'  Hooker's point was that scripture is the basis of all theology but should be read with reason, tradition and the authority of the Church or it would lead to 'private frenzies'.  (Admittedly the Anglicans may not be the best example, they started doubting the literal devil in the 18th century and currently have Bishops who aren't convinced by 'God' )

The traditional Christian approach to scripture is that it can simultaneously be literal, moral and allegorical.  The classic example is Jerusalem which is interpreted to mean the city, the Church and Christians as an idealised group (good, pure Christians).

I'd also add that literalism would be odd for the Reformation period given the huge excitement and effort of many contemporary scholars 'correcting' the Bible.  They had a large number of new sources and learning from Byzantium which led to things like the Hebrew, Latin and Greek Bible - trying to establish the most accurate text for translation.  This was a period when there was significant doubt on the Bible as it was understood.  It's like 19th century Biblical criticism.  The Renaissance re-engagement with the Greek tradition, more scholars learning Hebrew and the debate of 'accurate' translations made it a period when they were engaging with scripture to correct it as much as to learn from it.  It's one of the reasons I always find the fundamentalist fetishisation of the King James Bible a bit peculiar (from a literary perspective, they've superb taste).

[garbon]

(from a literary perspective, they've superb taste).

[Ideologue]

Actually I don't have an objection to that. If I knew that you were about to suffer eternal torture I would do what I could to help save you from that horrid fate. I can't fully respect somebody who thinks I'm going to hell and is willing to let it happen.

I have no problem with them offering advice based on their beliefs when asked. I have a problem with them coming to my door and trying to change me from my own views because they think they're better at judging what's best for me than I am.

when you go off to do whatever it you females call urinating and you do not know that.

I think it's just urinating.  Maybe sometimes defecation, but that's cool.  I'm not totally upfront when I have to release the Kraken myself.

Anyway, I agree with Tam, and it's something I've argued before, although I'll add the caveat that the requirements that Mormonism places upon its adherents and the religion's insularity do make it goofier than mainstream* Christianity.  However, evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity is roughly equally as goofy.

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

[Eddie Teach]

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

Kinda like saying Christianity and Islam are branches of Judaism.

[HVC]

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

ya, no. No it really isn't.

[garbon]

Anyway, I agree with Tam, and it's something I've argued before, although I'll add the caveat that the requirements that Mormonism places upon its adherents and the religion's insularity do make it goofier than mainstream* Christianity.  However, evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity is roughly equally as goofy.

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

So do you agree with Tam that if one doesn't think everything in the Bible should be taken literally that one isn't a Christian?

[garbon]

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

Kinda like saying Christianity and Islam are branches of Judaism.

Indeed.

[Ideologue]

Anyway, I agree with Tam, and it's something I've argued before, although I'll add the caveat that the requirements that Mormonism places upon its adherents and the religion's insularity do make it goofier than mainstream* Christianity.  However, evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity is roughly equally as goofy.

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

So do you agree with Tam that if one doesn't think everything in the Bible should be taken literally that one isn't a Christian?

I just meant the opening post.  Did he say that there?  I may've missed it.  That's dumb.

[garbon]

Anyway, I agree with Tam, and it's something I've argued before, although I'll add the caveat that the requirements that Mormonism places upon its adherents and the religion's insularity do make it goofier than mainstream* Christianity.  However, evangelical and fundamentalist Christianity is roughly equally as goofy.

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

So do you agree with Tam that if one doesn't think everything in the Bible should be taken literally that one isn't a Christian?

I just meant the opening post.  Did he say that there?  I may've missed it.  That's dumb.

Yeah he said it more than a few times after his initial post. Just wanted to check.

[Ideologue]

*Mormonism is a branch of Christianity.  Live with it.

Kinda like saying Christianity and Islam are branches of Judaism.

From an outsider's, or even a taxonomic, perspective, I think that's an arguable proposition.  You could go as far as to say there are only three major religions on Earth--Abrahamism, Dharmism, and whatever Chinese people believe that says it's okay to force advanced nations into wage slavery and kill female newborns.

But that's another topic.

As for Mormonism being Christian, do they believe in the divinity of Christ?  What else do you want?  Or what additional element counterbalances that seemingly overriding fact?

[Razgovory]

Both Jews and Christians believe that Moses delivered the Israelites from Egypt, however we don't say that Jews and Christians are the same.  Why are Christians not Jews?  Cause Christians have their own holy book they added on.  Why are Mormons not Christians?  Cause Mormons have their own holy book they added on.