Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
Steve, I think it makes sense to make at least these differences regartding the bible: old versus new testament, and the gos0pels fopcussing on Jesus' teachings versus the rest. What for example Paul had to say on Jesus is not the same what the gospels report about what Jesus should have said, Paul was a self-exposer. The conception of Jesuus of what God is, imo is very different to the conception of a God as depicted in the old testament.
|
I agree. I've read a few good books on the development of both old and new testament. My point is not to thinkers, but to believers, who insist that it must be taken as a whole.
I didn't quote the Q'uran part because I wholeheartedly agree.
Quote:
|
However, the churches of course sell to the people the whole package, of course, and do not accept the idea that with Jesus a new conception of what God is entered the stage.
|
Which is my thinking as well. As I said, my comments are fairly tightly focused. When I said the Bible expects to be taken as a whole, I should have said that believers expect it to be taken as a whole.