Subject:
|
Re: Why not Both?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:15:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
517 times
|
| |
|
|
David Eaton wrote:
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jon Kozan writes:
> > > > > I'll second that question-- why pick the Bible? Why pick Jesus? Why pick
> > > > > your (Jon's) particular sect of Christianity?
> > > > ...[snip]...
> > > > Although the 'sect' comment was a bit divisive.
> > >
> > > Oh? How so? I don't see it any less divisive than any other choices I might
> > > have offered... Unless you think it my purpose to pick apart Christianity
> > > thanks to its diversity, which I'm not after...
> >
> > Good - an easy one!
> > "Sect" I usally take to mean a small, off-the-beaten-path branch of something
> > greater. Although that may not have been your intention, I _did_ only say 'a
> > bit.'
> > My branch of Christianity is actually pretty mainstream - I believe in a
> > literal, evangelical Bible. Now this means a host of other things, but that's
> > not getting back to your question...
>
> I still don't really see it as any more divisive than had I said "branch" or
> something... I was simply going down the narrower path. The Bible is common
> to Judaism (at least the Old Testament), Christianity, and I think also
> Islam, even though they expound on it with the Koran. Jesus is almost
> strictly Christian, and narrower still than that is your particular 'area'
> of Christianity. The question was "Why believe what you specifically
> believe?"... It wasn't a direct attempt at dismantling Christianity.
Clarification on Islam (and this is just my understanding, please
correct me if any of the following is wrong):
Islam acknowledges that the bible is a "good book" and does contain
revelation from God (Allah), but holds that it is not the full and
correct revelation. That is only contained in the Koran and is complete
in the Koran. Islam also acknowledges that Jesus is one of the great
prophets, but again, didn't have the complete and correct deal. In other
words, Islam respects the foundations of Christianity as revelation, but
does not depend on Christian revelation at all. Islam also accepts the
Jewish writings (Talmud?) and Moses etc. as containing revelation.
So in effect, Christianity is the only one of the three to combine
sources.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why not Both?
|
| (...) I still don't really see it as any more divisive than had I said "branch" or something... I was simply going down the narrower path. The Bible is common to Judaism (at least the Old Testament), Christianity, and I think also Islam, even though (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
