I am going to jump in here again--we may all be sorry.

--Somsuj--
the part I find facinating about the flood legends is the similar thread of a "good" (or "godly") personage who is saved by building a vessel (also saving his family and the creatures of the earth) while the "wicked" (the wickedness seems to fit local definitions) perish. Here are a couple of interesting links:

www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html

www.rags-international.com/floods.htm

1 other question--if you aren't a Christian what is it you need to be save from? If you are not a follower of Jesus--presumably you don't have Christian sins and therefore don't need to be saved. I have never understood the Christian cumpulsion to convert(save). Jesus may have said spread the Word--but I don't think he intended, events like the Inquision, or genocide of non-believers.

--Wandering Jew

Of course a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, etc. would not want to accept Christ-like as a self-definition or goal. They might all take more kindly to Ghandi-Like. However don't most religions have the old golden rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I think that is the point trying to be made.

I have never quite understood the rabid compulsion to convince everyone that there is only "One True Religion", or only one right way to live your life-only one truth. This unfortunately is part of what lead to my disenchantment with organized religion. Along with my perception of congregations behaving in less than Godly ways.


My personal thoughts regarding the Bible-particularily the New Testiment----

1. We cannot ever know who really wrote them.

2. You can choose to believe them or not.

3. Given the male orientation of times. I
believe it is possible Mary Magdalene was intended to have a greater role (even that of the new leader instead of Peter), may have written the book of John and all this was suppressed or prevented by the male disciples of the time. Accounts of the last supper say 12 disciples attended but nowhere are they all named--so it does not seem unreasonable to me that Mary Magdalene was there as the "disciple Jesus loved". Does any of this really matter now---Not in the slightest but it does make for some interesting conversations. :rolleyes:

Please excuse a side note here folks:


Wandering Jew:

Have you ever thought of the significance between the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the spring of 1947 and Israel becoming an independent state a year later?

The scrolls had remained undiscovered for 2,000 years until just before the independence of Israel was made final. I find the coincidence quite intriguing.

I have been reading that in recent years access to copies made of the scrolls has been easier. We should be hearing more about further interpretation soon I would imagine.

Squeek--

I had not considered the signicance--I don't think I realized the dates were so close. FYI
There is a exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls at the Library of Congress in Wash DC. There is a great web-site that includes pictures of some of the fragments and new translations.

www.loc.gov/exhbits/scrolls/toc.html

I have been wandering through it myself.

Oops it works better without typos.


www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/toc.html

Sorry

Thanks kateyes,

I was actually at that site earlier today! I am always looking online for some objective ponderings/interpretations of the Scrolls. Much more information is covered in books although much of it is biased. I always try to find independent sources for information first.

Forgive me but this post is going to be long. So much to consider & respond to.

PDM wrote: I've had similar experiences as well. THe old church I belonged to since I was a child up until I was in my 20's, the one I got married in, was like this. I believed that the members there didn't act the way Jesus had encouraged us to act so I left & it turned me away from "organized religion" for a very long time. Then in my 30's a friend reached out to me & I then joined the one I'm in now. A big difference.

somsuj wrote: It is highly unlikely that Mary Magdelene wrote John's gospel as women back in that age were not in high regard. And what I don't understand people arguing is this statement from that gospel - This is the disciple who testifies of these things & wrote these things; & we know that his testimony is true. This is what makes scholars believe that John himself is the one who wrote this gospel.

I was doing some more research on the "right hand of God" concept & I found some interesting opinions. It's not of a physical nature as actually right beside God the Father, but more as spiritual. I'll have to find that info again. It made for some interesting reading. I thought too of the physical but the more I research & study, I understand it more to be in a spiritual sense.

Haven't seen Faulty Towers. Matthew is the only gospel writer to include this story. I wonder where he got the story from? Jesus did not talk of his birth that we know of. Of course there are many things that aren't included in the gospels. To include everything he ever did would take up I don't know how many novels. I wonder if perhaps Matthew got the story from Jesus' mother, Mary? THat would be interesting to find out.

Yes, there are some sects out there that encourage you not to ask questions but just do as you're taught. Others, like the one I'm in, do encourage the questions b/c that's how we learn. God says himself that if we have questions, ask him. Don't think he'll throw us to the fire & brimstone if we do!

30% of the world population -- that is b/c people choose to reject the message. All a matter of choices. Jesus said that there are very few who find that narrow gate. 30% does seem low & few.

The fact that Jesus' purpose was to save does not mean that everyone accepts it. It is a gift & not many people will accept that gift. I had a grandmother who was ungrateful for everything that anyone did for her. I had gotten her a Christmas present last year & she told me that she liked it. Then she handed the present back to me a day later & told me that she had chosen to reject the gift b/c it wasn't what she wanted. I was very hurt. Can this be related to God's gift of sending His son? Possibly. God hands people a gift. It is up to them to accept it.

Christ disliked the Pharisees' rules & regulations that people had to follow in order to enter the church. I don't believe he disliked them per se, but the laws they had for the church. Much like if someone dislikes the government's laws or decisions but don't have a problem at all w/George BUsh as a person.

Definitely not. As a matter of fact, He told his disciples that if they were not accepted in the town, to "shake the dust off their sandels" & move on to the next town. All boiling down to individual choices.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. Thanks kateyes.

Hi kateyes, those links are very useful - thanks. Wow - did not thought of that - I thought the original sin was for the humankind - not exclusive to Christians, and used to think of that as a reason for the Christian compulsion for conversion - what does others think ?

Yes - Jesus certainly did not want many things which church allowed. How can a christian war against another christian and remain christian - i often wonder!

re Gospels - what you said is true - we do not know who wrote them - though i find it difficult to take Mary M wrote John!

Maybe I am wrong here but I thought Original Sin was part of Christian and Jewish doctrine, part of being cast out of the Garden of Eden. I did not know it was part of other doctrines.

sorry = i am not saying you are wrong - it is my perception which i want to be corrected - you may be right and i am wrong ................ it is becoming too complicated ..............

basically i thought that original sin was for humankind - you seem to think it is for jewish/christian people - though i know wandering jew would say jews do not believe in original sin .............

it is becoming too muddled now.