Principles of Christianity (For MeDeFe) the Tzor edition

[tzor]

In honor to MeDeFe I present the CC version of Christianity.

(It helps to be listening to Anonymous 4's singing shape notes on Gloryland ... gosh how those gals can ring chords!)

• God (whom Paul once said "God is Love") created man.
• God created woman to share man's love.
• Man and Woman discover good/evil and lie about it.
• Men and women go their selfish ways.
• God helps one family in a natural disaster. They also go their selfish ways.
• God gets serious with one family, and gets "engaged."
• God gets serious with a whole tribe, they dis him for a cow.
• God marries tribe on the spot and promises himself to them.
• But first we have a whole lot of time in detention. And then there is the parole.
• Tribe disses God again and again.
• God calls tribe a adulterous woman but still says he loves them.
• God sends his messengers to tell them how he loves them.
• God finally sends his own word, to show them by example.
• God's word shows them love the way by example.
• God's word's expression of true love, combined with God's love is sent to his followers.

This is true love, the giving of self to others. The self was discovered in the garden, the other takes an eternity to discover. True love wanted us to love in turn. Not a false love but a true love in return. There is only way to show us what true love was. This true love changed the world.

[got tonkaed]

these sort of seem like the principles of Christian interpretation of Jewish history. Most of it seems like before the birth of Christ. I think you could add a few things to the list about what the message goes on to from there.

[tzor]

these sort of seem like the principles of Christian interpretation of Jewish history.

To some extent this is true. Christianity is in effectment the "fufillment" of Jewish history (at least according to the Christians). Going beyond is not exactly necessary. All public revelation (or so says the church) ended with the death of the last apostle and the rest are private revelations. These extend from the early church fathers, to the eastern mystics, to the western mystics like Francis, and eventually to Saint Faustina.

[Zaqq]

• God created woman to share man's love.

There are actually two creation stories in the bible and one says what you did while the other says he made both sexes at the same time and as equals. That is the storey where he also gives man dominion ove rthe earth which he creates in seven days, two things absent in the other storey.

You cant just pick one part that tells a different way of getting to the same place. That didn't make sense, srry. You shouldn't leave out biblical contradictions when telling someone about your faith.

There, that's better.

and I dont care about every little detail, but be careful not to mislead. It gets taken the wrong way too often.

[Ray Rider]

• God created woman to share man's love.

There are actually two creation stories in the bible and one says what you did while the other says he made both sexes at the same time and as equals. That is the storey where he also gives man dominion ove rthe earth which he creates in seven days, two things absent in the other storey.

You cant just pick one part that tells a different way of getting to the same place. That didn't make sense, srry. You shouldn't leave out biblical contradictions when telling someone about your faith.

There, that's better.

and I dont care about every little detail, but be careful not to mislead. It gets taken the wrong way too often.

Huh?? The first chapter (actually up to verse 4 of chapter 2) is talking broadly and chronologically about creation. In the second section, the focus is on mankind and our beginnings. I don't see any contradiction. Chapter one is the big picture; the second section is the blow-up of how mankind fits in the picture.

[Zaqq]

I have the Bible sitting write in front of me. It says that: "... God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him, male and femal he created them..." Chapter 1, verse seven.

THEN there are verses 21-24 in Ch. 2 which is from "So the Lord God cast a deep sleep..." yadayadayada bone of my bone etc. Where he creates Eve from Adam's rib. But the first story tells how they were made at the same time from nothingness.

That is the very definition of contradiction.

[Ray Rider]

I have the Bible sitting write in front of me. It says that: "... God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him, male and femal he created them..." Chapter 1, verse seven.

THEN there are verses 21-24 in Ch. 2 which is from "So the Lord God cast a deep sleep..." yadayadayada bone of my bone etc. Where he creates Eve from Adam's rib. But the first story tells how they were made at the same time from nothingness.

That is the very definition of contradiction.

I think you're jumping to conclusions. In the broad picture of the first section it says that God "created him, male and female he created them." The first section doesn't say they were created at the same time; it says God created them. It doesn't say they were both created from nothingness; all it says is that God created them. Also notice that it only says they were created; it gives no specifics as to when (other than that it was on the 6th day), how, or where. Then in the second section--the expanded version--it tells:
A) How--verse 7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Verse 22 "And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man."
B) When--man before woman^^
C) Where--verse 8 "And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed."

[protectedbygold]

I think you're jumping to conclusions. In the broad picture of the first section it says that God "created him, male and female he created them." The first section doesn't say they were created at the same time; it says God created them. It doesn't say they were both created from nothingness; all it says is that God created them. Also notice that it only says they were created; it gives no specifics as to when (other than that it was on the 6th day), how, or where. Then in the second section--the expanded version--it tells:
A) How--verse 7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Verse 22 "And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man."
B) When--man before woman^^
C) Where--verse 8 "And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed."

I get your point. One would wonder why, for all the incredulous statements that the Bible makes, that this particular part would be the one where the skeptic attacks. It's a generalized statement which then goes into further detail later on in the next chapter. The part that is difficult to believe though is in the further details. I mean come on! Eve was made from Adam's rib?

[MeDeFe]

So my 4 point summary was too short?

[satenialynn]

It appears to me that what seems to be missing here is the fact that the Bible is a work of fiction. Simply a story that was told and retold from one generation to the next and then put into print. Although many people choose to follow the ideas that are put forth within this piece of literature it still remains a story. Hence, it is full of contradictions throughout, based upon stories from memory that were passed down from one generation to the next before they were printed. So why the need to debate a piece of fictional literature as if it were non-fictional?

[tzor]

• God created woman to share man's love.

There are actually two creation stories in the bible and one says what you did while the other says he made both sexes at the same time and as equals. That is the storey where he also gives man dominion ove rthe earth which he creates in seven days, two things absent in the other storey.

Yes there are "two" creation stories. Chapter 1 concerns men & women and their relation to the created universe. The story simply says that he created them both male and female, without a reason why he did so. The second story is about the fall of man and interestingly enough the archtype of the temple.

By the way, the world is not created in seven days. The world was created in three days. The first three days are devoted to the creation of the world, the second three days are devoted to the population of the parts of the world by their perspective rullers. Nothing happened on the seventh day which is why they adopted the seven day week and not just because their neighbors happened to have a seven god rotation system.

It is misleading to call Genesis a "work of fiction." Technically it is because it can hardly be considered "non fiction." But it is more than that. Genesis presents abstract concepts in an attempt to explain in a number of ways the basic principles on which the tribes formed their society.

Anyway back to the topic. if I recall correctly, Jesus quotes the first chapter to justify the perpetual union of marriage, not the second, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female?' " (Matthew 19:4) Thus from my point both chapters point towards the nature of unity as a source of mutual love.

If you really want a contradiction consider this.
Genesis 4:1 Cain is born
Genesis 4:2 Abel is born
Genesis 4:8 Cain kills Abel
Genesis 4:14 Cain complains about his sentence, "anyone may kill me at sight"

Anyone? Note that Cain's other brother isn't born until Genesis 4:25 Cain already has an entire city by this time.

[MeDeFe]

Yes Tzor, that has also been pointed out in various threads whenever someone appears to be in favour of a literal interpretation of Genesis. If god created the first two humans then, how come all these other tribes were around already?

[Snorri1234]

Yes Tzor, that has also been pointed out in various threads whenever someone appears to be in favour of a literal interpretation of Genesis. If god created the first two humans then, how come all these other tribes were around already?

Magic.

[tzor]

If god created the first two humans then, how come all these other tribes were around already?

Magic.

I'm pretty sure that Ronald McDonald wasn't involved.

[suggs]

Anyone else find these discussions of old, useless Cults pretty boring?
Obviously, I have the utmost respect for people who like to spend their time sitting in groups chanting slogans and talking to someone who isn't there.
Particularly if there are lots of candle and bangles involved!
But why let them out at the weekends?

[Zaqq]

I think you're jumping to conclusions. In the broad picture of the first section it says that God "created him, male and female he created them." The first section doesn't say they were created at the same time; it says God created them. It doesn't say they were both created from nothingness; all it says is that God created them. Also notice that it only says they were created; it gives no specifics as to when (other than that it was on the 6th day), how, or where. Then in the second section--the expanded version--it tells:
A) How--verse 7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Verse 22 "And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man."
B) When--man before woman^^
C) Where--verse 8 "And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed."

So you're telling me that God created man on the sixth day, then made all the animals for man to name, then performed a surgury to get a rib and made woman before they day was out? I see why he would want to rest on the seventh, eh? My bad [insert sacrcasm here], no contradiction whatsoever.

I'm sorry, but there is contradiction here. Even IF you wanted to beleive that he did all that in ONE day (I mean, he is God after all...) the Bible also says that woman was created after all of the animals, but man before them ( Ch. 2, verses 18-23) after it says that the animals came on the fifth day and man on the sixth. But that contradiction is little more than casting reasonable doubt upon the storeys alltogether, and indeed not the specific section we are argueing about.

My arguement is that the Bible implies (in my honest and rather unbiased opionion rather clearly) that in the 7 day storey man and woman were created at the same time. I am not saying that the Pentatauch should be taken literally or not, personally I dont think so but for those who do you should not pick and choose storeys because some would just misinterpret that as propaganda. And there is a contradiction.

[OnlyAmbrose]

I have the Bible sitting write in front of me. It says that: "... God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him, male and femal he created them..." Chapter 1, verse seven.

THEN there are verses 21-24 in Ch. 2 which is from "So the Lord God cast a deep sleep..." yadayadayada bone of my bone etc. Where he creates Eve from Adam's rib. But the first story tells how they were made at the same time from nothingness.

That is the very definition of contradiction.

Are you kidding?

Let's say I'm an artist with two blocks of wood. I paint one block red. Then I put it down and I paint the next block blue.

Now let's say I said, "Red and blue, I painted them." Does that imply that I painted them at the same time? Probably not. In fact, if I said "Red and blue I painted them," you'd naturally assume that I DIDN'T paint them at the same time, since in human experience it is difficult to do such things at the same time.

Come on man, use your head

[Napoleon Ier]

Ahhh Ambrose...doing the evangelising donkey work other Christians can't be arsed to.

[Neoteny]

Yes Tzor, that has also been pointed out in various threads whenever someone appears to be in favour of a literal interpretation of Genesis. If god created the first two humans then, how come all these other tribes were around already?

Magic.

You know...

[Zaqq]

Are you kidding?

Let's say I'm an artist with two blocks of wood. I paint one block red. Then I put it down and I paint the next block blue.

Now let's say I said, "Red and blue, I painted them." Does that imply that I painted them at the same time? Probably not. In fact, if I said "Red and blue I painted them," you'd naturally assume that I DIDN'T paint them at the same time, since in human experience it is difficult to do such things at the same time.

Come on man, use your head

First off, I love to use my head. It is simply the BEST tool I have ever seen for cracking those damn walnuts. Tasty, but difficult.

Secondly, I DO think it was meant to be implied that they were made at the same time, if nothing else on the same day. And as I said, man had to at least name all the animals before God created Eve. These are two different stories that ended up in the Bible, and I think there is a contradiction.

If you dont mind me again using my mother as an example here, she does not think women were made FOR men. She just doesn't think it adds up, and she thinks that that entire part of the Bible some jackass-called-prophet pulled out of his ass to get back at his ex or something.

Not every Christian thinks women were created for men, and I ask you to go around polling people that call themselves Christian and see just how much that is considered at "Christian Principle" for yourself.

Heads are better than just nutcrackers.

[OnlyAmbrose]

If you dont mind me again using my mother as an example here, she does not think women were made FOR men. She just doesn't think it adds up, and she thinks that that entire part of the Bible some jackass-called-prophet pulled out of his ass to get back at his ex or something.

Not every Christian thinks women were created for men, and I ask you to go around polling people that call themselves Christian and see just how much that is considered at "Christian Principle" for yourself.

Heads are better than just nutcrackers.

That's just peachy keen, but we're not talking about what people "think" of the Bible, we're talking about whether or not it contradicts itself.

Secondly, I DO think it was meant to be implied that they were made at the same time, if nothing else on the same day.

That is also peachy keen, but what you "think" doesn't invalidate my analogy one bit.

If I said to you, "Hey, today I wrote a history paper and an english paper," would you assume that I wrote them simultaneously? I highly doubt it.

If I were writing in my diary about my day, what if I started out with a summary, such as:

"Today I wrote a history paper and an english paper. Then I went to the beach, etc etc..."

A few lines later, going into more detail, what if I said,

"So, I wrote the history paper, and it was difficult. Then I got hungry and got something to eat. Then I wrote my English paper..."

Is that a contradiction? Hells no it's not.

[Zaqq]

RELEVANT TO ORIGINAL TOPIC:

K so let's assume (for a second) that there is absolutely NO contradiction in that section of the Bible (but there eeeeesssssssss ). That women were created for or because of man's loneliness is NOT a view shared by all Christians. Maybe it is in our neck of the woods, but not out here. I use my neigbors as evidence. As the jury can see, young Ellie wears a (knida creepy) cross around her neck 3-5 times a week amongst her other necklaces. However, as the recording shows, she calls it silly that women were made to do anything other than perhaps save men from all staying out in the sun too long, developing advanced skin cancer, and killing themselves slowly over the next few years.

RELEVANT TO TANGENT ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A CONTRADICTION IN THE CREATION STORIES:

Hmm. OK I suppose that you are indeed correct in that I should not assume one's interpretation of the Bible and that superimposing my personal opinions on it as the "chrisitan principle" would be very assuming of me. HOWEVER, Not only do I find there is a contradiction in what is implied, I also find a contradiction that differentiates between the two stories in when the animals were made. I think these are two independant stories and that they do contradict each other, no? Or am i just slaming my head against walnuts again?

[OnlyAmbrose]

RELEVANT TO ORIGINAL TOPIC:

Hmm. OK I suppose that you are indeed correct in that I should not assume one's interpretation of the Bible and that superimposing my personal opinions on it as the "chrisitan principle" would be very assuming of me. HOWEVER, Not only do I find there is a contradiction in what is implied, I also find a contradiction that differentiates between the two stories in when the animals were made. I think these are two independant stories and that they do contradict each other, no? Or am i just slaming my head against walnuts again?

Zaqq, it's my policy to respect any opinion that is backed up by some amount of evidence and reason. So far yours hasn't gotten there. You "find that a contradiction is implied..." well that's great, but why? I have already given you more than enough cause NOT to find that a contradiction is implied. If Genesis had no religious implications, you certainly would not suspect a contradiction. The language is not at all ambiguous.

If you think it is, kindly tell me why. It's not enough to simply tell me that you see a contradiction, I want to know why you think it's a contradiction, and I would also appreciate it if you could explain why my explanation about how it is NOT a contradiction is invalid.

[Zaqq]

The Bible says "male and female he created them", right? Not male THEN female? Would the divinely inspired author say then if there was an order? But he didn't, so how don't we know that God created woman then man? The order listed? Or because the Bible says God "created MAN in His own image"? Because if those are your reasons for thinking this Chapter allows for woman to be created for man I think you're stretching it to cover for the next chapter, which is seperate because of the bit with the animals.

It says man and woman he created them, but nothing about the reasons or order fo doing so, which comes up in the NEXT, SPERATE storey. I would interpret the meaning as he created man and woman at the same time, either simultaneously or one after another. The next Chapter differs from that, and in my mind is contradictory. Maybe I AM alone in this thought, but I dont think so. If i said I ate food and drank water, that doesnt mean I did it at the simultaneously any more than saying I painted two block implies I painted sequentially. If you dont catch this I dont know what else to say.

I really do think that you're stretching it to say that there is not a contradiction between chapters regarding women, and to say that there is no contradiction is just silly because the two sections differentiate when God created the animals anyway so there is already one very blatant contradiction and it would not be surprising if there was another.

[OnlyAmbrose]

What I think you're doing is splitting hairs and trying to find a contradiction where there isn't one. I think that in order to see a contradiction here, considerable bias has to be present.

In saying "Man and woman he created them," NO ORDER OF EVENTS IS IMPLIED. That means that it is neither implied that man and woman were created simultaneously nor sequentially.

The next chapter then goes into more detail about HOW God created man. In Chapter 2, it is state that man came first, then woman.

There is no contradiction. There is a general statement, then a more specific statement.

Anywho, you might find this interesting:

http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0401sbs.asp