Rhian said: "especially on small-c conservative issues where they’re out of step with wider cultural trends "
It is where they are IN STEP with wider cultural trends that worries me, you know; justification of war, praying to the Golden Calf, ignoring specific directions, etc...

'Revelations' is of v dubious authenticity and should probably form part of the Apocrypha. Even the selected apostles did not understand Jesus all the time (according to Jesus) and Paul was a 'self-appointed apostle' who never actually met Jesus and so was certainly never authorised by him to preach.

"I would disagree with any assumption that the Hebrew Scriptures were all about judgementalism…"

So would I, I never said that and if you think I did - quote me.

It is an extraordinarily common 'technique' (if it can be called that) and I find it utterly tiresome for people to take some comments in support of an argument - exaggerate them to an absurd extreme, eg "all about judgementalism..." and then reject the original argument on the grounds that it is ‘too extreme’

Hmmmmm good to see both Rob and Rhian are at least grappling with the Scriptures.

So, that in part fits the description of 'read user manual'.....
But in both cases I think you are missing some important things. (like the central point)

Rhian simply 'assesses' the various books in terms of Liberal Documentary Hypothesis terms, and Rob is weary of other things.

Reveltion was included for good reason, in spite of some debate about it. Authenticity ? I don't think there is much doubt about that.
Written to real churches of the day.

Cherry picking verses is an awful way to regard scripture unless it is just to provide a word of encouragement "Let us all now stir one another up to good works" is something that can be taken in total isolation and still be quite valid.

Hal Lindsay (Late Great Planet Earth) and various others of a particular prophetic/eschatological perspective do tend to cherry pick to fit their grand schemes and as we know, a Text without a Context is a Pretext.
Having said that, I hardly think applying Isaiah 53 to Christ is cherry picking. The whole of chapters 40 to 53 are all about the Messiah.

Rather than try to understand 'Christendom' in terms of Liberal/Conservative/Fundamentalist, how nice it would be if we see the simple truth of "Jesus loves me this I know, because the Bible tells me so". A simple Gospel does not mean a simplistic one.

The message of the Gospel was "The Kingdom of God is at hand.. repent and believe in the Gospel" which of course means re reconciled to God, as per Pauls teaching in Ephesians 2 "You who were once far off, have been brought near in the Blood of Christ"

cheers.

The book of Revelations, logically, can only be sincerely regarded as a 'possible' future/outcome. If it hasn't happened, it can’t yet be considered to be an expression of ‘truth’. The title of the book is really a misnomer and probably has only as much value as the prophesies of Nostrodamus. As we sow, so shall we reap.

Logically, it is only possible to be 'decided' about the past, and possibly the present (though sometimes, a limited frame of reference can make even this difficult).

The future, by nature, is always open as it is determined by cause and effect. It is possible to change the future if we change present day causality. For example, a smoker can reduce the possibility of giving themselves cancer in the future by giving up cigarettes today.

Equally, humans can reverse (or at least reduce the effects) of global warming, by changing behaviour today - provided the 'collective will' is sufficient.

If people stop manufacturing and deploying weapons produced by the industrial military complex, then it would be unlikely that mankind will smash and burn itself to smithereens.

If humans continue with the behaviours they display today (such as those just described), it is possible for a person to 'reasonably' envision such a future as depicted in "Revelations" by means of their 'imagination'.

Revelations should be viewed as a warning, not an inevitability.

'Christians'- RC, Baptist, C of E, Lutheran, others/sects etc. 'Islamist'- Sunni, Shiite, Wahabbi, others/sects etc. 'Buddhist'- Shinto, Taoist, others/sects etc. 'Hindi'- others/sects etc.

How do your "gods" give you mandate to use violence against other persons throughout history. Why are there bombs blessed by 'holy' men, only to be detonated on little kids and old ladies in obscure villages and towns?

It wasn't only JC who said in so many words: "suffer the little children who come unto me..." It is as ancient a saying as humanity itself, but why can't we ever listen? Because we are collectively losing our humanity as a species on this crazy green/blue planet.

Why can't we just get "Smart bombs" with an actual intelligence substance that would zero in on, & target politicians? Now that would be a defence policy worth paying taxes for!

Rob, my apologies, I had other posters in mind more than you when I had a dig at those who dismiss the Old Testament. I agree about Revelation (it and Hebrews only just made it into the canon), though if you read it as I believe it was probably intended – as a fantasy/allegory on the political/theological situation in the Roman empire at the time, not a set of predictions about the future – it makes a bit more sense. I still think fundamentalists are distinguished more by their take on the New Testament than the Old, though.

BOAZ_David: yes, I find the documentary hypothesis useful, along with other elements from the liberals’ analytical toolbox useful for understanding the scriptures (form, source, historical, redaction and other types of "higher" criticism - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_criticism). These are not substitutes for faith and are only tools, but are invaluable for in-depth exegesis.

Albie, the quotation you cite is a misinterpretation of an old translation. “Suffer” was meant in the sense of “allow” not pain or distress. The NRSV (Mtt 19.13-14) translates it this way: “Then little children were being brought to him in order that he might lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples spoke sternly to those who brought them; but Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not stop them; for it is to such as these that the kingdom of heaven belongs."

I agree Rhian - it is also probably best to consider Revelations

"as a fantasy/allegory on the political/theological situation in the Roman empire at the time, not a set of predictions about the future".

It is probably geo-politically and historically confined and has little bearing on the modern world. Apart from being of tremendous use to those who would lead the vulnerable and the gullible - for a personal donation of course!