Openness and biblical authority

[juliod]

So AiG sent me another flyer last week. In one section called "Genesis - it's worth a debate" they make the following statement.

For example, does it matter how you read the Word of God? If the Bible clearly states something like creation in six days, but we say we don't have to believe that, then we've unlocked a door that undermines biblical authority.

If we have this approach, what's to stop pushing that door more-widely open through the rest of the Bible, as many have done, and then deny the bodily resurrection of Christ and other vital doctrines?"

So, is that christianity? Is christianity a shutting off? A closing down? Questions that can't be asked, and statements that can't be made? A closing of doors (and locking them)?

And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy? What other things are there that are true, but cannot be questioned?

DanZ

[Easyrider]

So AiG sent me another flyer last week. In one section called "Genesis - it's worth a debate" they make the following statement.

For example, does it matter how you read the Word of God? If the Bible clearly states something like creation in six days, but we say we don't have to believe that, then we've unlocked a door that undermines biblical authority.

If we have this approach, what's to stop pushing that door more-widely open through the rest of the Bible, as many have done, and then deny the bodily resurrection of Christ and other vital doctrines?"

So, is that christianity? Is christianity a shutting off? A closing down? Questions that can't be asked, and statements that can't be made? A closing of doors (and locking them)?

And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy? What other things are there that are true, but cannot be questioned?

DanZ

You are living proof that questioning the Bible exists and isn't going away any time soon, so I think this whole thing of yours is just another attempt to try to marginalize anyone who questions your questions.

[juliod]

just another attempt to try to marginalize anyone who questions your questions.

What? I mean, What?!

Is that supposed to be a response?

DanZ

[Easyrider]

just another attempt to try to marginalize anyone who questions your questions.

What? I mean, What?!

Is that supposed to be a response?

DanZ

It certainly appears you never miss a single opportunity to question or bash the Bible and Christianity. And questions are one thing, but when you add to that denigrating statements like "And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy?", then you are taking it to a different and denigrating level (IMO).

[juliod]

It certainly appears you never miss a single opportunity to question or bash the Bible and Christianity.

The last time I checked, the title of this web page was Debating Christianity and Religion.

I only posted this thread because AiG sent me a creationist flyer with the above-quoted text. I'm not making it up.

"And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy?", then you are taking it to a different and denigrating level (IMO).

No, it's not denigrating, it's my point-of-view that I want to debate. Simply put, if something is true, why should one be concerned abount "unlocking doors" that might lead to questioning it? True things don't need to be protected in this way, like religions.

BTW, I'm not even sure why you are responding, since according to your posts in another thread you are not one of those who believe that you must believe in the 6-days of creation in order to be a christian.

DanZ

[Wyvern]

So AiG sent me another flyer last week. In one section called "Genesis - it's worth a debate" they make the following statement.

For example, does it matter how you read the Word of God? If the Bible clearly states something like creation in six days, but we say we don't have to believe that, then we've unlocked a door that undermines biblical authority.

If we have this approach, what's to stop pushing that door more-widely open through the rest of the Bible, as many have done, and then deny the bodily resurrection of Christ and other vital doctrines?"

So, is that christianity? Is christianity a shutting off? A closing down? Questions that can't be asked, and statements that can't be made? A closing of doors (and locking them)?

And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy? What other things are there that are true, but cannot be questioned?

DanZ

Taking this into account in addition to the pope asking Stephen Hawking not to explore the origins of the universe and it would seem like it proves the old saying whats old is new again, the only difference is the church doesn't have the tools available to it that it did in the past to discourage avenues of inquiry.
I wouldn't necessarily call this a sign of falsehood so much as a sign of weakness of position and the religious view is simply trying to shore up its position by limiting the lines of questions.

[Wyvern]

You are living proof that questioning the Bible exists and isn't going away any time soon, so I think this whole thing of yours is just another attempt to try to marginalize anyone who questions your questions.

I really don't think the question is whether questioning will continue, after all we are human and as such inquisitive by nature. The real question here is whether religious authorities are attempting to limit what can be questioned and what this means about the religion they are representing. I know my own views of a particular religion would get a major downgrade if I was told by people in positions of authority that certain areas are not to be questioned. The same is true for any sector of society, the instant they tell you to just trust them is the instant that same trust usually evaporates.

[Cathar1950]

I am reading Stark and he says something about persecutions happen when religions feel like there is some kind of threat to the institutions.
If they don't feel threatened then they let live and tolerate. Heresy is fine unless it looks like they are losing ground. Not very comforting is it?

[Wyvern]

It certainly appears you never miss a single opportunity to question or bash the Bible and Christianity. And questions are one thing, but when you add to that denigrating statements like "And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy?", then you are taking it to a different and denigrating level (IMO).

I certainly hope you don't think there is anything wrong with questioning things. After all the reason why our civilization is able to enjoy the level of comfort and technological achievement it does is because of the unceasing questioning of the world and how it operates.

What you see as a denigrating statement I see as part of the actual question for debate, so instead of denigrating the question itself how about going about showing how the statement is false in the first place. Certainly the question could have been restated so as not to offend those more sensitive people out there, but when you get down to it the people on these forums are not babes in the woods and should be expected to accept a certain level of rough and or leading language without it actually taking away from the argument.

[melikio]

So, is that christianity?

To many, it IS a very exclusive system of thought; but not to ALL.

Is christianity a shutting off? A closing down? Questions that can't be asked, and statements that can't be made? A closing of doors (and locking them)?

Sure it is, in MANY (but not all) cases. Some have worked HARD to ensure that their "interpetation" of what is "Christian", excludes ANY other human beings which they do not want "included". Jesus' unbrella (coverage) is BROADBAND or closer to full-spectrum-humanity, than certain "religious" folks tend to accept.

To keep Christianity as "exclusive" as the traditions many have become accustomed to actually warrant, many practices and definitions which justify or rationalize necessary "discrimination" have been employed over many centuries.

There is almost always a reaction to the questioning most honest and open-minded people bring to the tables or fora where religion is being discussed.

And isn't this a clear sign of falsity? That we must rely on authority rather than accuracy? What other things are there that are true, but cannot be questioned?

Just as surely as some are hated for identifying with Jesus Christ, so it is that many who ask truly "challenging" questions amongst the religious, will likely also suffer as a result of intransigence and manipulative agendas.

Many can claim to have "truth", but "questions" are the crucible by which such claims might be tested.

-Mel-