Theologicamol Questions

[Pastor Josh]

Ah I never thought anyone did it out of sheer curiosity. I thought they did it because Jesus celebrated it...

Maybe I didn't explain myself well.  The point is that while Jesus was a Jew, we are not,

But if Jesus was a jew, and you honor him as the messiah, then why not take on some of his customs as well? I guess I just never understood that.

if Jesus is the messiah he completed all the Jewish prophecies and none of that stuff counts for Christians, dietary laws etc.

The Jewish people should be proud their faith inspired a  couple of spinoffs: Christianity and Islam and those two spunoff a few of their own. So basically everywhere u go on planet earth is influenced either directly or indirectly from Jewish thought.

congrats.

Part the First: Okay, the simple answer is that we aren't Jews.  To repeat, it seems condescending of us to grab their traditions as say that they're really just part of our tradition.  I don't understand what would be the point of celebrating passover.  Unlike Jews, we don't look back to the Exodus as our formative theological experience.  We look back to the resurrection.  To conflate the two is to dishonor the traditions of our messiah. 

Part the Second: I think you're misunderstanding the role of prophecy and of the messiah in Jewish tradition.  The biblical answer for why dietary laws don't apply to Christians is because of a vision Peter has in Acts.  The real reason is that, as Christianity spread among Gentiles, the holiness codes, which include a lot more than food (see Lev. 19:19 for an interesting example), were not a part of the social customs of the converts.  This became a stumbling block, as noted by Paul.  Christianity is not the fulfillment of Judaism.  It combines some elements of Judaism, but it is primarily Greek in character.  For instance, the way most Christians think of God is far closer to Plato than anything biblical, althugh some really good theological work is being done now to correct that, especially in Process and various liberation theologies.  In messianic Jewish thought, I think that the messiah wouldn't overthrow any element of Judaism.  Instead, he would bring about a world in which all humanity relates to God through what some Jewish thinkers would call God's supreme revelation to humans--the Torah, which includes all the holiness codes.

[Pastor Josh]

pastor josh did you see this nightline thing on satanism? they didnt interview a single satanist!

well in case you werent interviewed for this nightline episode, pastor josh, DOES SATAN EXIST?

that was the name of the segment.

I missed the segment, but it seemed pretty stupid.  How, even in this media environment, can a news show justify that discussion?  I don't think Satan exists.  There's not a consistent Satan character in the scriptures.  I can't imagine how the universe can have a devil and God without being dualistic, and, although it's not practiced as such by many believers, Christianity is monotheistic.  It's not good vs. evil.  It's people who are starting to understand vs. some people who don't get it yet.

[Pastor Josh]

Pastor Josh, which do you prefer, the Old Testament or the New Testament?

Well, the OT does pretty well by itself, but to have the NT, you need the OT.  The NT didn't just pop up out of nowhere.  Both Jesus and Paul were prett grounded in the OT, and to dismiss it would lead us to dramatically misinterpret both.  Just for fun readin', I like the gospels and the prophets.  I don't think I could pick one over the other, although, as I said earlier, I think the prophets have more to say to us right now.

[mcphee from the forum]

Can you recommend a good history of the Bible as a text? I've found it surprisingly hard to find a good history of the book itself and not one that follows world history as told by the Bible (such as the Oxford History of the Bible). Am I making any sense? I want something that explains how the Bible itself evolved and changed through translations, how certain books were added/removed, etc.

[Pastor Josh]

Can you recommend a good history of the Bible as a text? I've found it surprisingly hard to find a good history of the book itself and not one that follows world history as told by the Bible (such as the Oxford History of the Bible). Am I making any sense? I want something that explains how the Bible itself evolved and changed through translations, how certain books were added/removed, etc.

The best one I've read is called _Misquoting Jesus_ by Bart Erhman, but it just covers the gospels.  Many of the issues he discusses are relevant to the to the bible as a whole, though, and it's written for laypeople, so it's actually an entertaining read.  Walter Brueggeman's _Introduction to the Old Testament_ is a seminary standard and very good, although very dry.  I wanted to make sure I got the title right, so I typed it into Amazon.  This came up as a suggested read: _Who Wrote the Bible_ by Richard E. Friedman.  I don't know the book, but it looks pretty good.  I added it to my wish list.

[mcphee from the forum]

thank you!

[Pastor Josh]

thank you!

If you read them, tell me what you think.  I really, really enjoyed the Erhman book.

[KickTheBobo]

ok, you go back in time and take a swab out of historical jesus' inner cheek. you travel back to our time and perform a paternity test on the dna. the dad is totally Joseph, right?

[Pastor Josh]

ok, you go back in time and take a swab out of historical jesus' inner cheek. you travel back to our time and perform a paternity test on the dna. the dad is totally Joseph, right?

Well, short answer=yes.  An angel didn't diddle Mary.  However, that question totally misses the point.  I mean, it's entirely possible that Jesus didn't actually exist, but, as far as I'm concerned, that wouldn't change anything.  Calling someone "son of God" is a confessional claim, not a factual, and it wasn't until Greek thinking got all mixed up in this that we started worrying about all this crap.  "Jesus is the (or, according to Mark, a) Son of God" means that Jesus is like God, and God is like Jesus.  Basically, they're in the same business.  Of course, a lot of well-meaning Christians would consider me terribly heretical for saying that, or, for that matter, half the stuff I've already posted.  I generally assume I'm wrong about these things unless proved otherwise.

[Keith Whitener]

Pastor Josh: What is your concept of God?

What are your thoughts on proofs for and against the existence of the Western Concept of God? (Including the problem of evil and the ontological proofs pls)

Have you read any Kierkegaard?

Where did you study theology and such?

Thanks for taking the time to answer all the questions!

[nec13]

Thank you for answering my question Pastor Josh.

[Pastor Josh]

Thank you for answering my question Pastor Josh.

It was my pleasure.

[Pastor Josh]

Pastor Josh: What is your concept of God?

What are your thoughts on proofs for and against the existence of the Western Concept of God? (Including the problem of evil and the ontological proofs pls)

Have you read any Kierkegaard?

Where did you study theology and such?

Thanks for taking the time to answer all the questions!

Wow, a multi-parter.  One question per post, please.  I want to get my post count up.     Okay, my concept of God could fill a book, as could anyone's, but I like to say that the only verse of the bible I take literally is I John 4:8:  "Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love."  Through love, we come to know God and grow into unity with God.  We know how to love based on the teachings and example of Jesus.  I can say more, but I would probably write an entire essay.  Feel free to ask any follow-up clarification questions.

I think trying to prove the existence of God misses the point.  Honestly, even if there is no God, I would still want to live in a way that would please the God testified to through Jesus Christ.  I find such exercizes interesting, but ultimately meaningless.  And about evil, again at the risk of being too brief, free will makes messes.  We have free will, and we live in a chaotic (undesigned) universe, so bad shit happens.  I don't believe that God could just snap his fingers and make things right (sorry for the sexist language), because if he could, he would.  Otherwise he's evil or indifferent.  To me, it's more important for God to be good and loving than powerful.  You can't claim both without denying the reality of evil.

I have read precious little Kierkegaard, but what I have read, I like.  I've been meaning to get through Fear and Trembling one of these days.  Any recommendations?

I've always been a philosophy nerd, but my formal training in theology was at Eden Theological Seminary in St. Louis, Mo.  It's a UCC school, and although it's rather weak academically and a little hippyish culturally, there are some great minds at that school, students and faculty, who challenged me in very good ways.  I'd recommend them to anyone in the area.

Did I miss anything?  Like I said, I was really brief on these, so please follow up on anything I weaseled out of answering.  Thanks for the good questions, though, to you and everyone.  I'm really glad I opened this thread.

[A.M. Thomas]

Pastor Josh:

I'm going to ask several questions here, but you can reply through multiple posts if you'd like.

First question:
Are you part of a specific denomination?  Because I seem to agree with most of your theology and I want to know where churches with your particular progressive/non-literal approach to biblical text exist.

Next question:
How much of an impact do you think narrative had on the spread of Christianity?  The four gospels are written as narratives.  Jesus was pretty into allegory.  And the writers of the Bible were clearly great storytellers.  So do you think the strength of Jesus' narrative had a lot to do with the success of the religion?  I've always thought that a religion needs a great story to base itself on in order to be successful.

Final question:
Do you like the Danielson Famile?  How about Page France?

Thanks!

Thomas.

[DoodleJump!]

First question:
Are you part of a specific denomination?  Because I seem to agree with most of your theology and I want to know where churches with your particular progressive/non-literal approach to biblical text exist.

Obviously ain't Baptist, son.