If you want to ask a question

Discussions wouldn't last long if only those who agree with an opinion contributed ceesnan!
I also think that whereas we are all entitled you our opinions, facts which are wrong or prejudices may, sometimes even must be challenged.

Ah well, back to "I like fluffy kittens" and similar non-contentious topics perhaps?

I guess Ceesnan there's a very good reason for saying about never discussing politics or religion at the dinner table!
I find some posts make me feel rather uncomfortable so avoid them most of the time........

I suspect that having established the Bible as the ultimate authority, some people don't ever read anything else on the subject. There is a great deal to learn about the things mentioned in it from other sources, which throw light on the events from different sides, making things a lot more three-dimensional than they can at first appear.

There is a lot to learn about the history of the actual writings, too,

How what is in them (particularly in the OT) began as oral tradition, handed on by people who had memorised them for telling round the camp-fire to nomads who could not read. There must have been many places where they remembered the bones of the stories but not the flesh, but they told them to make them come alive to their hearers.

How they came to be written down years, sometimes centuries, after they happened, and were modified by others from the very start, so what we read is not necessarily what was first put onto paper.

How successive hierarchies pruned out the bits they didn't like, the bits they believed were false, the bits that seemed irrelevant.

How it was changed from the original language into others - into Greek or Latin, and from those into the language spoken in each country at the time of the translation, with an accumulation of inaccurate translation, local bias in interpretation, political influence and so on.

And always there is human fallibility. Human hands, writing human words, heard by human ears and interpreted by human hearts.

Some 'explanations' have been put forward that have to be questioned more closely.
'Because it's in the Bible' or 'because it was written by writers' provide no answer, no explanation.

I remember a bright 16year-old nieghbour who was adored by my 4year-old but
was becoming a tad frustrated by her constant questions out in the garden.

'Why don't worms have legs?' was the one which elicited the reply 'Because that's the way God wants it.'

Question answered to child's satisfaction and for a little while the questioning stopped.

Seems to me that would be the level of this discussion if soon were to be given the freedom to keep it there.

Nothing intrinsically wrong in having a child-like faith if that satisfies you and gives you a sense of being content. Not however enough to justify setting oneself up to answer general questions on one of the major world religions, particularly at a time when many are having doubts and are truly seeking to have questions answered.

I take your point Soutra, but what I really disliked was the implication that the OP had no right to say "If you have any questions...." Etc etc. maybe she was just trying to be helpful? Perhaps you could point me in the direction of the fluffy kittens thread....

I am not too sure however, but if I wanted to ask personal questions or indeed answer them, isn't that what PMs are for?
This seems a strange platform unless a person is an expert on their topic such as we read on the Q&A sessions with authors etc.
I can't imagine many people being interested enough in my personal views on life or the meaning of everything to justify my own thread!!

If forum rules are not broken then if one doesn't like a thread why not ignore it, no need to attack or mock surely

A very fair point ANNIE.

Attack/mock or question/discuss?
I've seen questioning and possibly misunderstanding. I've seen requests for clarification and criticism of naivety but no attacks and no mocking.
Could you perhaps give specific examples?
If it's a thread which is controversial should we just ignore it rather than enter the discussion?
It's not about 'disliking'.

I would say that the subject has been discussed in a very civilised way. Anyone who puts themselves forward to answer questions on a subject must surely be aware that some of the questions will be searching ones, and may be outside their ability to answer. That may prompt those with more knowledge to add their answers, which could teach everyone more.

Is anybody attacking or ^ mocking^?
Soontobe offered to answer questions on Christianity, mine or in general the latter presupposes some knowledge or authority and as other posters have commented so far all there is is recourse dogma and an absence of research or independent thinking.

Look around at the many denominations of Christianity and it isn't rocket science to understand that the faith has many faces. I'm always minded to think of the story of the blind men describing an elephant and they can each only say what 'their' little bit of it looks/feels like.
Forty two years ago I became a Christian after reading a bible that had been given to me as a gift at Christmas. (At the time I was very disappointed to find out that's what my gift was - I'd been hoping for a good novel.) Two years later I began dutifully attending a church. (Not a good experience for me, but because of that I began to question very early on my understanding of what 'church' is.)
Since then I have changed enormously in my thinking and understanding of what it is for me to be a Christian. My understanding of scripture has been challenged and changed through study and questioning, as has my thinking about church. My husband of almost thirty years (who is also a Christian believer) asks questions more fierce than any atheist I know and grapples with many of the dearly held tenets of the faith on an almost daily basis. We both read books that challenge our faith and others that build it up.
We don't 'attend' church any longer (having been in leadership roles in traditional churches for decades). Rather we meet often with a group of friends whose journey has taken them along a similar path and in doing so we believe that we are 'being' church.
Christian experiences are diverse and wide ranging and I think, to use the analogy above, that none of us see the 'elephant' in its entirety.
At the end of the day, Christian or not, we can all choose to be kind.

Yes, we can choose to be kind. I think that soontobe has taken the questioning on other threads of what she believes in at face value and is attempting to answer those who questioned her.
Some posts may have questioned her in a challenging or even sarcastic manner which she has either not picked up on or chosen to ignore.

I cannot speak for her but that is how I see it.

Grappling with the tenets of the faith describes how I feel, so jingls yes, I do look on it as a sort of insurance policy. How can this possibly be true if one thinks logically and scientifically, but perhaps I should still believe just in case it is.

Surely to reply immediately with since when have you been the expert followed by the oracle remark, I don't think that was fair questioning or disagreeing, it was an attack

Unlike soontobe I would never set up a Q&A thread on any subject as I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable on any one subject! So fair do's to her.

However, from reading her posts on various threads with their simplistic and dogmatic approach to Christianity, and her lack of response so far on this thread, I doubt she has the theological insight to answer any serious questions of faith.

My point precisely riverwalk. To ask for some clarification is not 'point-scoring' and to admit that one is out of one's depth is not 'defeat'. But if a poster invites questions it's almost inevitable that there will be difficult, searching ones and every one of us would struggle to answer them without a sound grounding in theology.

In fairness, today's apparent lack of response might reasonably be explained by soons attendance at church.

I did think that, too, mcem ( your last para).

How do you deal with the fact that the Bible is amass of contradictions? The fact that apart from one interpolated paragraph in Josephus, there are no records in history of the events later recorded in the synoptic gospels? The fact that Paul who authored at least some of the earliest documents of the New Testament, never mentions anything about a 'life ' of Yeshua ben Joseph on Earth?

Is theology just old men sitting in ivory towers making it up as they go along?

Hi
I am not sure whether to start answering this thread from the end, the beginning or the middle!

Yes, I have been to church.

I tend to stick to the bible. I find that difficult enough to unravel, without reading a whole heap of books besides.
Plus, I am probably a simple person at heart.

All christians are different, as all people are different from one another.
I do not speak on behalf of others, christian or otherwise.

This is not my thread. I dont think gransnet works that way?

feetlebaum's last question is one I personally am unable to answer.
I know this will frustrate some posters, but I can only do my best to answer.

I have not studied theology, or had any formal training of that sort.

I do know that most vicars, ministers etc are more than happy to answer emails. I think most of them welcome them a lot.
They often enjoy talking about and debating with christians. And especially non christians.

*Some 'explanations' have been put forward that have to be questioned more closely.
'Because it's in the Bible' or 'because it was written by writers' provide no answer, no explanation*

It is the best I have mcem.

My further answer is probably the same as I have written for feetlebaum.
I realise that I am not able to answer everyones' properly.

May be I can answer a few satisfactorily for some, may be I cant.

Good for you, soon! Whatever else the Bible is, it is a collection of material which has kept a large number of highly intelligent people arguing, thinking and discussing important issues for several thousand years. And, at least as important, it has provided guidance and comfort for many of us. Worth something, surely?

Agus. I didnt mean for it to happen that way. I dont have anyone who regularly pms me for instance.

The "pick and choose which bits to believe" approach to the bible is the only one possible as it is so contradictory, and, as others have said, man-written under circumstances that mean it cannot be taken literally. This is why I am concerned about those who quote the bible as a justification for their actions; it is a cop-out, as what they are really saying is that they justify their actions on the basis of those bits of the bible that they agree with

I do think there are quite a number of christians who do this.

I would hope that I am not one.

Actually I will come back to this question again, as I cant quite think of all the right words to say at this point.

But isn't the thwory that the NT God saw that the retributional, patriarchal system needed reforming, and that therefore Jesus was sent to suffer for all our sins, so that we didn't have to be punished. And that therefore, since we do not need to fear divine retribution, we must lead our own moral lives and make our own decisions? Which is actually, a difficult thing to do!

Unfortunately for all of us, I dont think that, or I am not aware that there is anywhere at all in the bible that states that we wont be punished if we have not said sorry for our sins.