An Improved Bible

[Migdalin]

Following the Reformation, Protestants removed the Apocrypha (about 14 Old Testament books) from their formal canon. Maybe it's time for another Reformation, where Christians remove everything from The Bible that is contrary to the Two Commandments of Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems that if Christians formally removed the Old Testament and Revelation from their holy book, it would be a huge step forward, morally, ethically, and spiritually.

Even better, what if The Bible became just the gospels? "All Jesus, All the Time."

Thanks,
Jim

 

[cyberjosh]

There seems to be no point of comparison at all with why the Apocrypha was removed (or why the Apocrypha was even 'designated' as such by Jerome) and what you mention here. I mean really, what are you even suggesting? Tear out verses mid-sentance, mid-paragraph, mid-thought and out of the actual historical and theological contexts in which they occured? If you thought the Gospels show only a cushy, love-everyone-regardless, and unjudging God then you didn't read them very closely (judgment is certainly coming and the Gospels speak of it plainly). We would have to tear Jesus himself out of the Bible to avoid God's judgment on the wicked. It wouldn't even matter if you ignored the Old Testament and Revelation. The Gospels themselves bear witness to the validity of their contents and of God's coming judgment of all people for their thoughts and deeds.

-Josh

 

[Tina]

.

Maybe it's time for another Reformation, where Christians remove everything from The Bible that is contrary to the Two Commandments of Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems that if Christians formally removed the Old Testament and Revelation from their holy book, it would be a huge step forward, morally, ethically, and spiritually.

Even better, what if The Bible became just the gospels? "All Jesus, All the Time."

Actually you're kinda right. All that one needs for salvation is belief in Christ (in short). But let's bear in mind that false beliefs propagated by false or distorted doctrines can also lead one astray and cost him his salvation. Having a right understanding of God and His Will according to the Bible is imperative for believer's eternal life.

 

[cyberjosh]

Actually you're kinda right. All that one needs for salvation is belief in Christ (in short).

'Right' that we should ignore the OT and Revelation because of (improperly) perceived conflicts in emphasis and theology to make us feel better about our "superior Christian morality"? Consider what you are telling the author you agree with. If that's not what you meant then you should be more careful not to send the wrong message to someone with ideas like this. I'm just saying.

-Josh

 

[Tina]

.

'Right' that we should ignore the OT and Revelation because of (improperly) perceived conflicts in emphasis and theology to make us feel better about our "superior Christian morality"? Consider what you are telling the author you agree with. If that's not what you meant then you should be more careful not to send the wrong message to someone with ideas like this. I'm just saying.

-Josh

I could also say the same about "superior educational privileges" that causes some Christians to think that just because they know the bible in-depth from top to bottom, ignoring certain parts of the Bible makes them less of true Christians !

I certainly neither agree nor disagree with the author of this thread as I do not know his motives. But let's think out of the box ... educationally underprivileged people in third world countries who come to know and believe in Jesus Christ are not gonna be shortchanged of eternal life or unfairly penalized of their salvation just because they do not know the OT or Revelations.

Of course, as I said earlier, working out our salvation is part and parcel of a Christian's life, and that involves understanding God's Word from Genesis to Revelation.

 

[sherri2]

if there was a smilie with pom poms I'd be waving them for cyberjosh right now.

the Apocrypha were not divinely inspired. you might as well have put snow white and the seven dwarves in there as well. they were removed for a reason (and added for one too, I might add.)

God is who he is and denying that will never bless anyone.

 

[mlqurgw]

Following the Reformation, Protestants removed the Apocrypha (about 14 Old Testament books) from their formal canon. Maybe it's time for another Reformation, where Christians remove everything from The Bible that is contrary to the Two Commandments of Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems that if Christians formally removed the Old Testament and Revelation from their holy book, it would be a huge step forward, morally, ethically, and spiritually.

Even better, what if The Bible became just the gospels? "All Jesus, All the Time."

Thanks,
Jim

The Bible from Gen. to Rev. is all Jesus all the time.

 

[cyberjosh]

.I could also say the same about "superior educational privileges" that causes some Christians to think that just because they know the bible in-depth from top to bottom, ignoring certain parts of the Bible makes them less of true Christians !

I certainly understand that just because someone does not "understand" with scholarly depth certain portions of the Bible or has not read all of it that they still can have outstanding faith and be a wonderful person. My grandmother has driven home this point to me many times, since she is a great woman of faith but does not study scholarly things concerning the Bible. However that is a positive assertion in the opposite direction, that God does not require our intellect to work in us. It is however (as I understood the author's intent) quite another thing to say, "Hey why don't we just remove large portions of the Bible so that we only see a God of love, we don't need that nasty God of the Old Testament, He's just problematic to good morals".

Have you ever seen the Skeptics Annotated Bible (I don't recommend)? That's exactly what they believe and do with the Bible, and it's disgusting.

P.S. I think you took a different track of thought, and I'm not much in disagreement with you as regards your points. I just wanted to make sure we don't (unintentionally) feed disbelief and a basic ignorance that God's revelations of Himself in Scripture (in both OT and NT) are not inconsistent with one another (which the OP strongly suggests). You wisely made the point that one must have a " a right understanding of God", and that includes that God has been and always will be the same (from OT to NT and beyond). And I already know that you know that. I just said what I said mostly for the benefit of the author. I hope you understand my intentions now.

Peace,

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

The Bible from Gen. to Rev. is all Jesus all the time.

Quite succinctly, that was my point exactly.

 

[cyberjosh]

I'm curious to see if the author of this thread will return or if it is just bait.

 

[Migdalin]

I'm curious to see if the author of this thread will return or if it is just bait.

Thank you all for your feedback. I'm trying to understand the Christian attitude toward The Bible. The conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist attitude, I think I understand well enough, and it seems quite consistent. I just wasn't sure if there were more moderate Christians lingering around the board, the sort of people who have read (with approval) books like John Shelby Spong's The Sins of The Bible. The "modern" Christian position is one I don't quite understand. If they see all these problems with The Bible, then why do they continue carrying it to church every Sunday, etc.? Just as truth in advertising, I think they should cut out the bits that they say are "sinful."

 

[cyberjosh]

Hi Migdalin,

The following is not personally directed at you, just so you know.

Thank you all for your feedback. I'm trying to understand the Christian attitude toward The Bible. The conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist attitude, I think I understand well enough, and it seems quite consistent. I just wasn't sure if there were more moderate Christians lingering around the board, the sort of people who have read (with approval) books like John Shelby Spong's The Sins of The Bible. The "modern" Christian position is one I don't quite understand. If they see all these problems with The Bible, then why do they continue carrying it to church every Sunday, etc.? Just as truth in advertising, I think they should cut out the bits that they say are "sinful."

I see you mentioned my favorite person. Mr. Spong is not a moderate, he is a downright liberal! He appears to have "fresh" interesting ideas sometimes, but only because he has taken it upon himself to liberate his understanding of the Bible from any traditional boundaries of interpretation such as Biblical inerrancy or the actual historical/theological meaning of the Hebrew and Greek texts, which wreaks havoc on any hermeneutical method of interpretation he may try to employ (or lack thereof). I read part of his book "This Hebrew Lord" several years ago and what I saw was someone who yearned so much to have a "living", real, and exciting interpretation of the Bible (since he says his former faith was smothered/destroyed in college) that he had to disregard correct understandings of the Bible, its authority, inerrancy, and historical truth in order to feel that sense of "freedom" he craved. I have news for Mr. Spong though, I have found the Bible very lively, refreshing, and brimming with spiritual truth and life as illuminated by the Spirit without disregarding the Bible's historicity, spiritual and moral authority, and inerrancy. Any Christian filled with the Spirit and walking in communion with God will experience that liveliness and even joy in the Christian life, and see it in the Scriptures as well.

John S. Spong compromised his views because his faith in the Bible as it stood was too weak for him to put forth the effort to look for the liveliness and truth of the Bible that has always been there. In spiritual realities this indicates that the Holy Spirit was not in him illuminating his understanding to see the truths in the Word of God. Spong liberaly throws out "problematic" texts when he does not want to deal with them or regard them, and thus instead of addressing the issues he steps around them, avoids them, or else twists them (and he has been running from them ever since his faith in the Bible's integrity was shaken and destroyed by liberal professors in college - he mentions his broken faith in his book "This Hebrew Lord"). Because of that I do not listen to anything he says, because he has taken a very liberal path in his understanding of the Bible and assumes that all traditional and historical understandings of the Bible prior to his "discoveries" of the "true meaning" of the Bible were wrong and ignorantly dogmatic. This is not to say that all traditional understandings of the Bible are correct, but he was wrong to look for an answer outside Biblical inerrancy and to in fact even ignore whole portions of Scripture to suit his views.

That is my opinion on John Shelby Spong in a nut shell.

~Josh

 

[Oats]

Hi Migdalin,

The following is not personally directed at you, just so you know.



I see you mentioned my favorite person. Mr. Spong is not a moderate, he is a downright liberal! He appears to have "fresh" interesting ideas sometimes, but only because he has taken it upon himself to liberate his understanding of the Bible from any traditional boundaries of interpretation such as Biblical inerrancy or the actual historical/theological meaning of the Hebrew and Greek texts, which wreaks havoc on any hermeneutical method of interpretation he may try to employ (or lack thereof). I read part of his book "This Hebrew Lord" several years ago and what I saw was someone who yearned so much to have a "living", real, and exciting interpretation of the Bible (since he says his former faith was smothered/destroyed in college) that he had to disregard correct understandings of the Bible, its authority, inerrancy, and historical truth in order to feel that sense of "freedom" he craved. I have news for Mr. Spong though, I have found the Bible very lively, refreshing, and brimming with spiritual truth and life as illuminated by the Spirit without disregarding the Bible's historicity, spiritual and moral authority, and inerrancy. Any Christian filled with the Spirit and walking in communion with God will experience that liveliness and even joy in the Christian life, and see it in the Scriptures as well.

John S. Spong compromised his views because his faith in the Bible as it stood was too weak for him to put forth the effort to look for the liveliness and truth of the Bible that has always been there. In spiritual realities this indicates that the Holy Spirit was not in him illuminating his understanding to see the truths in the Word of God. Spong liberaly throws out "problematic" texts when he does not want to deal with them or regard them, and thus instead of addressing the issues he steps around them, avoids them, or else twists them (and he has been running from them ever since his faith in the Bible's integrity was shaken and destroyed by liberal professors in college - he mentions his broken faith in his book "This Hebrew Lord"). Because of that I do not listen to anything he says, because he has taken a very liberal path in his understanding of the Bible and assumes that all traditional and historical understandings of the Bible prior to his "discoveries" of the "true meaning" of the Bible were wrong and ignorantly dogmatic. This is not to say that all traditional understandings of the Bible are correct, but he was wrong to look for an answer outside Biblical inerrancy and to in fact even ignore whole portions of Scripture to suit his views.

That is my opinion on John Shelby Spong in a nut shell.

~Josh

great post

you are much intelligent

 

[Pard]

The Bible carries a single, unwavering theme from Genesis 1:1 all the way through Revelations 22:21. This theme is the same that is found in Jesus' command to "Love your neighbor as yourself" and in "harder" verses that you wish to strike from the Good Book. The theme is a complex one, weaving love and corruption and redemption and justice together. It is a multidimensional theme that breaks the barriers of time and space and stretches backwards to Creation and forwards into forever. If you strike the "hard" stuff from the Bible than it is as good as striking the entire book in its entirety.

Ever word, period, and quotation are set by God, Himself. He meant every word on every page of the Bible and to strike any single word from His Book would be a violation of the commandment you wish to be kept in the Bible. Much like with the rest of life, ignoring verses, chapters, and books of the Bible is a managable in the short term, but in the long term they are things you just have to stand up to and "get".

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

My friend, in your striving to create a "All Jesus, all the time" Bible you are going to strike out Jesus! Jesus was in Genesis. He has always been in the Bible, He is in every word and phrase.

Some verses are hard to understand and explain. Some verses you just want to ignore and shove into a dark corner because they are "hard". Some verses call the voices of critics to ridicule the Bible and all who read it. These are not the lowest of verses though, they test your faith and grow your spirit. Instead of ignoring the Tanakh and Revelations you should go and understand them and seek God's blessing over you so that you may confront the scoffers instead of hiding the means of their jests.

Quickly, I once went to a UU church. UU churches are essentially the most liberal churches you will EVER attend in your entire life. They do not preach the Gospel as Jesus intended, but teach His morals instead. In Philosophic circles a UU church isn't even considered Christian (and in many/most Christian circles they are not considered Christian either). It is hard to get more "liberal" than that. Anyways, our minister was a smart guy and a nice guy. I do not remember many things from that church, but I remember learning about Adam and Eve and the Old Testament and I remember sermons that came from the Old Testament alone. If such a liberal church uses the Old Testamnet I dare say you will have a hard time finding anyone who will agree with your idea. (Note, I am not saying your sentiment, your heart seems to be in the right place.)

 

[theophilus3213]

Following the Reformation, Protestants removed the Apocrypha (about 14 Old Testament books) from their formal canon. Maybe it's time for another Reformation, where Christians remove everything from The Bible that is contrary to the Two Commandments of Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems that if Christians formally removed the Old Testament and Revelation from their holy book, it would be a huge step forward, morally, ethically, and spiritually.

Even better, what if The Bible became just the gospels? "All Jesus, All the Time."

Thanks,
Jim

the old testament is the new testament consealed; and the new testament is the old testament revealed!

It is impossible to properly understand the new testament without having a good understanding of the old testament.

I have read the apocrypha and there is good reason why those books were removed from the bible; there are teachings in them that contradict the teachings of Paul and the other apostles, and there are stories that simply are not true. Like Enoch saying that he saw the groves in which the sun traveled as it circled the earth. So I agree with those who removed them from the cannon. That is not to say that those books have no spiritual value; for there are some great stories that have exellant morales in them. But the errors in them is so great as to justify removing them from the cannon!

Shaloam

 

[Scotth1960]

Following the Reformation, Protestants removed the Apocrypha (about 14 Old Testament books) from their formal canon. Maybe it's time for another Reformation, where Christians remove everything from The Bible that is contrary to the Two Commandments of Love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

It seems that if Christians formally removed the Old Testament and Revelation from their holy book, it would be a huge step forward, morally, ethically, and spiritually.

Even better, what if The Bible became just the gospels? "All Jesus, All the Time."

Thanks,
Jim

Dear Jim, That has already been tried before, by a heretic named Marcion. His view was rejected by THE WHOLE CHURCH. So today we have the ORIGINAL OT WITH THE ADDITIONAL BOOKS TAKEN OUT BY THE LUTHERANS. AND WE HAVE THE COMMON 27 BOOKS OF THE NT. See Sparks, Jack N., Ph.D., ed. & trans. (2008). THE ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE. Nashville, TN: THOMAS NELSON BIBLES.
GET AN ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE IF YOU WANT THE REAL, TRUE BIBLE, THE COMPLETE BIBLE IN ENGLISH. IT IS ONLY WRONG IN HEBREWS 6:6, WHICH FOLLOWS THE NKJV VERSION OF THE KJV, AND THIS VERSE IS SHEER CALVINISM, WHICH IS HERESY. OH WELL. MOST BIBLE TRANSLATIONS HAVE SOME PROBLEMS. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

PS I don't mean to imply that you are a heretic, but to take out things from the Bible that we don't like is something people often try to do. The homosexuals want to delete Romans 1 and the book of Leviticus.