what religion was jesus?

Indy Hippie,
Just another word about the book "Zen flesh Zen bones", It's not a book of explanation but a collection of Zen stories and lithographs with a section on centering.

 

I don't know for sure but to me it seems he's asking what path I followed to get where I am.

As for the Bible being literal inerrant truth, I do believe the Bible to be inerrant but what do you mean when you say literal? I mean the Bible says that Jesus spoke to the crowds by illustrations and without an illustration he would not speak to them; so no, I don’t think Jesus’ illustrations should be taken literally.

 

I don’t think Jesus’ illustrations should be taken literally.

Me too, otherwise I'd be short a eyeball and a hand

 

Make it two eyeballs and a hand for me!

 

Guess it's my ego talking, but I like to think after the first eye coming out I'd behave myself

and good grief did you hear about the guy in Texas?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28582204/

 

Criminitaly!

Another sign we're living in the last days.

 

Last days... yeah i wonder if we are on some sort of expresslane... a big hurry to beat the 12-21-12 date...so we can prove the Mayans wrong ..:willy_nilly:

 

I think what Okie means is that it is literal history and literal science (Genesis 1-11 comes to mind). Yeah, I also am pretty sure he also means there is wiggle room in parables.

Not to say that it could be taken hyper literally, such as the snake handlers or eye-pluckers, but I don't think that was Okie's intent in asking.

Interesting thing from a graduate student in my "Acts" class in university, Jew/Judean and Judaism are two entirely different things (which someone has already said). Secondly, "Judaism" is best rendered "Judean customs" and even then, we have top ask ourselves--which Judean customs (Pharasee, Sadducee, and Essene)?

If you want to see the words in Greek (I don't know how to use Unicode on my Mac...or a PC) http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ιουδαία here is the wikipedia article for "Judea" in greek (instead of the last alpha, it would be omicron-sigma) and http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ιουδαϊσμός for Judaism. Something neat is that when you look at Christian in Greek the suffix does not render like Judean indicating that Judean was not a religious term.

You can find "Judaism" in 2 Macc 8:1; 14:38; Gal 1:13-14 where it does not necessarily mean a religious belief.

 

You may be right!

 

Ιουδαος - Judaean
Ιουδαϊσμός - Judaean Customs/way of life
χριστιανος - Christian/Follower of Christ
Χριστιανισμός - Christian customs/way of life
If these didn't work, let me know

 

I really don’t know what Okiefreak meant by literal but there are those who take the Bible “hyper literally” and I don’t believe that I am but I do believe that the Bible is literal history and although the Bible is not a science text book, I do believe that where the Bible and science meet the Bible is correct, where as science is not always correct.

PS I believe that the “hyper literal” have gone to the point of saying the Bible says things that it really doesn't say; such as the earth is only 6000 years old.

 

PS I believe that the “hyper literal” have gone to the point of saying the Bible says things that it really doesn't say; such as the earth is only 6000 years old.

isn't that based on a certain someone adding up all the begets and certain history events?

 

Ehem I'm back to weigh in. Nice long nap As to my original question it seems to me as tho you have the right idea of what I wanted to get at. As to your assumption up here about the bible beating science, I personally feel as though that is yet another Christian worldview taken wrong. The bible is good for some basic historical accuracy as long as you seperate the religious dogma from the actual history. When it comes to scientific facts it is slim to none. Biblical teachings of things like Jonah and the Whale can't be used as works of science Other than that I am greatly anticipating your answer to my previous questions some 3 or 4 pages ago :toetap05:

 

As I read it, the Bible has nothing at all to do with science and everything to do with morality and the meaning of life. The Bible uses myth and metaphor, as Jesus did, to convey basic truths. It also reflects the historical and ethical development of the Jewish people and their efforts to understand God. Genesis is particularly important to me, because of the central role it played in my rebirth as a Christian. To interpret it literally seems absurd to me, and in my opinion misses the point.

 

Very true, good insight. I have to agree with this, in the fact that the bible is mostly myth and parable, used to convey the message of God and his Son. I understand wholeheartedly about not taking it literally, guess the day I step into a furnace and come out untouched after like half a day I'll begin to believe in the literal idea of the bible

 

So you get to pick what you want and say the other is a metaphor ...cool .. I like it

It's okay with me... I'm agnostic

 

I don't think of it quite like that. Neither reality nor scripture are cafeterias. There's room for a degree of subjectivity in interpreting scripture, but the message isn't whatever we want it to be. I just look at the Bible as one of several means to understanding, others including reason, experience, intuition, and lots of reading and critical reflection. In this respect, I don't regard relgious knowledge as fundamentally different from other kinds of knowledge: which view seems most plausible to me in light of the available information and my own best judgment. So I don't plead guilty to the "cherry picking" charge that Dawkins and others level against progressive Christians. We have a rational system for harvesting our cherries.

 

I don't think of it quite like that.


Oh course not .. are you a JW?

 

you know I'm just screwing with you on the JW comment

 

But it seem like you believe in JC & God.. maybe even as one in the same... which really doesn't matter to me....but....

Do you believe in Satan?