Homeschooling? (Read 1986 times)

If there can be a New Testament, can there not be a newer New Testament?  Isn't that what the Koran is?

You can always write prequels... my favorite is the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics.  

I'm afraid I can't give a definitive answer to this - you may believe that I am a weak Christian for what I'm about to say... but.... I use my common sense and disregard those views which I believe to be outdated, and those which I believe to be inflammatory... I respect other faiths (often more than I respect some aspects of Christianity) and their right to have their own God. There is more than one God. I guess you could say that I cherry pick the bits that I like.... I would say that I cherry pick the bits which I think make the world a better place.

it really isn't my place, nor would I want to, judge your strength or weakness.  I would encourage research and contemplation so you could arrive at a definitive answer one way or another.

I was all set to make a Phantom Menace or Attack of the Babylonian Clones joke, but it occurs to me that everything starts with Genesis... for which there is no "before".  So what's the prequel?  "On the zeroth day, God mowed the lawn and fixed the squeak on the pearly gates."

I dunno.  What was Gd doing for all that time before Genesis 1:1?

Base building

Arguing on a message board.

With who(m)?  Michael and Gabriel?

You know what happens when you start a message board argument with God?  You lose.

My bet is that M and G knew this and chose to be somewhere else.

Not that they could hide.

As for base building, you know what God says about that?

All your base are belong to us.

 I believe the bible takes off from Issac and the Koran takes off Ishmael.  I have no data to support this, just a fuzzy inkling...its a brotherly rival of sorts...

Oh no, not at all.  The Koran refers to and then moves beyond the history mentioned in your New Testament.  Your fuzzy inkling is incorrect.

An easy read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

"Like all prophets in Islam, Jesus is considered to have been a Muslim"

If ithe bible isn't all true, then how do you decide which parts are not?

 

If there can be a New Testament, can there not be a newer New Testament?  Isn't that what the Koran is?

I did not say it is not true, but that you have to take it in chronological context.  Leviticus is not "untrue", it's just that in Christianity the Law that was laid out by God to the Isrealites became outdated with the new teachings of Christ.  Believers are no longer held under that Law.

One can argue the definition of "true".  Take for example my baptized denomination, Lutheran (Missouri Synod).  They ascribe to believe that the Bible is word-for-word accurate in a literal sense.  Now I believe fully in modern science as well as my faith, and one cannot reconcile modern science with a literal interpretation of Genesis Chapter 1.  While religion is not science and should not be treated as such those types of misalignments should be explained.  Internally, I disagree with the literal attitude of Missouri Synod teaching.  I believe historical context is important and the Bible was written by people at a certain time, to be comprehended by people of that time.  If we assume modern science is true, if you got in a time machine and went back to 2000 BC, would anyone be able to understand you trying to explain the Big Bang and evolution to them?  Heck no.  However Genesis Chapter 1 does pretty much this, told in a way that ancient people could understand.  This is not awfully different from what Jesus did with parables in the New Testament to reach people with his messages in a way they could understand.  This is more or less in line with what Lutheran (ELCA) ascribes to....perhaps not coincidentally I now attend ELCA.

Some may say that what I just described is the same as saying the Bible is not true.  I totally disagree.  So it is important to define what you mean by "True". 

The 4+ years I spent working in Marketing gave me great perspective into the interesting workings of human behavior.  We like to say data and science are impartial, yet almost without exception a hard data set can be interpreted multiple ways.  I'm seldom surprised about the disagreement that can stem from even the most outwardly apparent objective data.