Bible Questions? III

A commitment to remain faithful is just that and there is nothing that we do not do for love. If we are created in the likeness and image of god then love is essentially what we are

 

I have no doubt that fundamentalists can be good Christians and are saved and can be kind and do good things. I know you're one of them. Every time you post, I sense theSpirit working in your heart. There are lots of good Muslims, many of whom are fundamentalists, who manage to lead decent lives and be kind and hospitable to non-Muslims, despite hateful imams. I spent some time with them once in Morocco, and have known our local imam, who gave me comfort and prayers when my mother and brother died. There are lots of good people who are decent despite their church's dogma. I had the pleasure once of being in a group of fundamentalist men who defied every stereotype and whom I considered to be my brothers. They had essentially been ostracized by the Church of Christ because their wives divorced them, and of course it was their fault for failing to control their wives. It's that kind of belief system I'm complaining about, and those "Christians" who would ostracize their brothers because they are blindly following their church doctrine, which I don't hesitate to call sick and unchristian. I can't judge them as individuals, since I don't know the circumstances of their lives, but I feel compelled to use my judgment to evaluate the position of the ostracizers as harmful.

I've often admitted the fallibility of human reason, and I expect that at least three-quarters or more of what I believe is crap. But our experience, our reason, our intuitions and our judgment are all we have, and when push comes to shove, mine is the one I go by. You and OWB often seem to suggest that I'm blowin' in the wind, chasing the latest fad of our zeitgeist. However, I think it's quite extreme to reject the scientific, peer reviewed work of generations of geologists, paleontologists, archaeologists and historians, who tell us that humans had domesticated the dog and created beautiful works of art before the time fundamentalists say God was creating the earth. Young Earth Creationists are not far removed from Flat Earthers in my opinion. It's fascinating to hear Creatonist Hugh Ross, who has a degree in Astrophysics, and believes the earth is billions of years old, debate Creationists who don't have such credentials. Science,like other human enterprises, is inherently fallible and tentative, but it is the result of rigorous peer reviewed testing of peer reviewed, refutable hypotheses. It's the gold standard of knowledge, and I respect it, while always retaining a critical perspective. Without it, we'd have none of the technology on which televangelism depends. One thing science can't do is give us meaning. That's what religion and philosophy are for. But I think religion and philosophy must be consistent with science and sound scholarship. I think Christianity, properly understood, is consistent with both. Do you believe I have no faith in God? God is my life's blood. He's what keeps me going. I've given my life to Jesus. Which is why I find the efforts of latter day Pharisees to hijack Him so offensive and dangerous.

I'm glad you enjoy Viktor Frankl. My brother credited him with enabling him to endure intractable pain (and eventually death) from cancer, and to find meaning in life in the knowledge that his life was slipping away. Lots of folks from several churches offered their healing prayers, but Frankl helped him to cope with the reality of dying. Frankl is not about biblical literalism. I think his understanding of religion (Judaism in his case) is metaphorical. There are plenty of religious people of all faiths who reject the harsh, rigid literalism of the legalists. I've heard it said (by you and OWB, I think) that if we just sit down and read the Bible, it provides a clear, coherent, consistent straightforward account of God's will. So far, I haven't seen evidence of that. Many passages seem inconsistent to me, and I've recently posted a few of them in this Forum so that fundamentalists can show me how they fit together--so far without success. The explanations that have been offered strike me as naive, like a child's effort to explain how reindeer can fly and Santa can fit down all those chimneys every Christmas. None of us is infallible, but that goes for Bible thumpers, too. They seem to start with the answers and search for arguments and evidence to support them. I prefer a more scientific approach, which reverses that sequence. I also find Occam's Razor to be a sensible way to make sense of reality. The Ptolemaic theory that the sun revolves around the earth gave way to the Copernican theory that the earth revolves around the sun, not because of conclusive "proof", but because the complicated assumptions about epicycles necessary to defend the Ptolemaic view were becoming so ridiculously complex that they struck intelligent people as unlikely. And Bible-believing Christians like Martin Luther heaped derision on these scholars whom, he said, were just trying to get attention by pushing a theory that seemed to conflict with Scripture.

So the dialogue continues. I'm afraid your argument that scientists can and have been wrong doesn't convince me, because I know that, and so do they--at least the good ones. I'm waiting to hear why the Bible is inerrant on matters of geology, astronomy, biology and history. I have yet to be convinced that the point of the story of Jonah and the fish has anything to do with whether or not a human survived for three days in the belly of such an animal. I consider Scripture to be inerrant in what it was intended to do: provide the truths we need for our salvation, and to convey them in the manner most effective for that purpose, which is often metaphor, parable, and allegory.

 

I'd guess you're personally committing no cruelty and evil. You impress me more than most who post here as an exceptionally sincere and gentle man. Who said you were cruel and evil? The only time I rember those words coming up was in my recent post where I said: "I have no problem with seeking answers and direction in life, as long as they... didn't make people do evil things in the name of good, didn't condone cruelty and injustice in the name of God...." Not only were you not mentioned there but the statement was about behavior I had a problem with, not people. I have, however, seen all of these things done by people calling themselves Christian of the Evangelical fundamentalist variety. You aren't burning the Qur'an. Good for you. But you've probably seen the article about a Qur'an burning being organized by Christian religious zealots in Florida. You may have heard Pat Robertson predict death and destruction for Orlando because of Disney Enterprises gay-friendly policies. You surely read about Rev. Phelps and his Westboro Baptist congregation demonstrating at funerals of our deceased armed forces personnel because the United States is soft on gays. Or have you read posts in this Forum justifying the slaughter of Canaanite babies, or slavery, or the subordination of women? So you're not exactly sure what I'm fighting against? That's it, brother, not you.

 

The experience of God transcends words and arguments. Whenever two are gathered in His name, wonderful things can occur. I had a similar experience at Sunday school a few days ago. Encountering people who seem obviously Spirit filled provides me with intuitive confirmation of the power of God at work in the world. From an analytical standpoint, I'd have to concede that this feeling is purely emotional. I wouldn't use it to arrive at any conclusions about the Bible or any of the creeds recited at the service, regardless of what my coreligionists might feel about them.(there are fundamentalists as well as non-fundamentalists in the group). "Delusional" is not a word I'd use, but I feel a duty to the same God to retain my critical faculties.

You speak of love in two contexts, the general kind toward everyone which we feel out of empathy,because they, like us, are reflections of God's image and likeness; and a more particular kind of devotion to particular people whose special care we have taken over by covenant, such as our wives and children. Yes, there are conditions (I'd say extra duties) to the latter kind, fidelity being one of the most important.

 

Well it is my feeling that there is only one love, gods love. I think that the many forms or our devotion attempt to emulate that. There are many forms of family in the world, there are many forms of matrimony in the world, many customs some of which include, sharing wives. Different states in the united states, have differing details about what "special devotion" means,at least on a civil administrative level.

That is not to say that a christian will be without special relationships because on a practical level we cannot be with or engage with everyone. To become aware of gods love is to have love in all of our relationships. God shines on all alike, the "special devotion" is vanities substitute for love. As many practice marriage today it is in direct contravention of the statement, "do not take oaths". How many well intended promises did I not keep in my life because real circumstances overtook the resolve that I thought I needed.

 

(a) We don't welcome the enemy to the sharing of our mutual hearts.

(b) We love on behalf of our parents; take up the responsibility for the meaning of distrust overcome in our ranks.

(c) we realize that the one love is felt in each one of Us independently; all can be ignored but the distrust of basic human nature is justified.

(d) in Politics we are instead ultimately irresponsible (the Ephesians.)

I am single now. Again I can trust in the whole for health and wealth.

 

I feel that it is not. What we experience is "hardness of heart." This hardness of heart is mineral hardness. " I hear the voice of your brothers blood crying to me from the ground." In the cooling of molten materials, crystals form. Crystals are a form of transducer taking one form of energy and converting it to another.

Congratulations, me too.

 

So we AXE the Ephesians, not the Corinthians.


That one works with the light of time alterable through western civilization and the the history in knowledge of religious people in general.

 

Life is God's plan In what time; the time of His memory for the trust of the wise and self-conscious; Or the time of my courage and will to acquire self-esteem. These should be one and the same. I think that's your view too; thedope?

 

I don't know what you mean by this. Which one is that one.
To learn something is an out of time interval, that knowledge is then expressed through the temporal.

Dawning is the day, an eureka moment.

 

When the first becomes last and the last first, then we begin to see reality as opposed to an echo of reality. What should be, is.
Heaven and earth are divergent perspectives in every way, of the same phenomena. The event horizon of time is an instant., a blink of an eye.

 

The mind is willing, but the flesh is weak.

 

Heh Heh, the flesh goes where the mind tells it. It is a confusion of mind, not knowing the difference between pain and pleasure, having only experienced relative comfort, uneven heating.

 

ANd we learn to love our enemies through our actions without words. The faith is to sadly to us now: be inpenetrably comparative for the Enemy.

But it gives them illusory strength, for imposition of a Common God.

 

It is powers and principalities with which we contend. One of those powers is condition. We enter the ark two by two, male and female each according to their kind. A pursuit takes the pursuer and the pursued for the condition of pursuit to exist. If we defend ourselves, we are attacked.

 

We allow that strength for the enemy as well as for ourselves. Is this a good will from the bible? Or a cool categorical imperative. We allow the strength for the enemy, and regard ourselves accordingly as weak, principally strong only by the "true" God. The good will is to distrust the law as working for us. Such as is the Other is strongly in Us with an unbalanced " spirit through the bond of peace..." the body in unity with the soul. I just review this stuff in vague memories. Yes, the united Corpus Christi. I don't think you like that as well referred.

 

The measure we give is the measure we get.

Faith is the only allowance, giving and receiving are the same truth.

Some of us it seems are ancient from the beginning.

In all that you are and do, re - member me.

 

Are you saying I do?

I wasn't talking about safety, I was talking about direction.

There are a lot of unambiguous answers in the Bible but there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Actually, what we've seen is there is a lot people who will interpret the scriptures to their own purposes.

The best guide to what the Bible says is the Bible itself. When "Reason, judgment, and knowledge" is used to say that the Bible is not saying what it actually says then they haven't been very good guides.

I don't believe that "Saint Augustine" claimed to be inspired by by God but whatever.

And as long as they don't come from God, Jesus or the Bible?

If it is your god that is bringing this "malestrom", why should I or anybody else be worried?

 

Excluding you, of course.

There is no word that means anything absent an embodied sense. The word of god is a living word.

I think this is what okiefreak means.

Why are you worried about me?

 

I suppose if you want say that I have a purpose in interpreting the scriptures, that is to point out what the scriptures actually say, then yes but then that wouldn't be my purpose but God's wouldn't it.

But what I was talking about is those who start with a pet subject and want the Bible to say what they want it to say and try to force the bible to say it.

Alcohol is a good example, there are many who feel that it is evil and no one should drink it and even say that Jesus drank only grape juice. There are others who say there is nothing wrong with drinking and try to use what the Bible says to cover alcoholism. The Bible does not favor either view but one of moderation.

The word of is a living word and thus the Bible interprets itself.

Okay.

I don't worry about you, I worry for you.