Ship of Fools: Progressive Revelation

Thread: Progressive Revelation Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=026597

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

So, on IngoB's hell thread, I'm authoritatively informed that the Schism churches don't do progressive revelation.

Which would mean that the bible is flat, random, you can read it like a cook book.

Which is how I've come NOT to read it, exponentially.

To the point where of course God didn't order Samuel to order the Israelites to murder every man woman and child, but Samuel nonethelss did say it in good faith. Which says a lot about faith. There was no way as God's prophet, a thousand BC, that he couldn't, with his consciousness in the culture of the time and place.

But to be a GLE or GLC or GLO I have to believe Samuel was only obeying orders?

That God is The Killer? As I used to argue here for 15 years?

Posted by Magic Wand (# 4227) on :

What is a "Schism church?"

Posted by Laurelin (# 17211) on :

I think what IngoB would mean by a 'schism' church is a Protestant church (or even the Orthodox Church, the Ship has taught me how much little love sometimes exists between the RC and the Orthodox).

Meanwhile, I want to know what a GLE or GLC or GLO are. [Confused]

And not all evangelicals read the Bible like a flat, random cookbook.

Sigh.

[ 03. December 2013, 13:45: Message edited by: Laurelin ]

Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Magic Wand:
What is a "Schism church?"

What isn't?

quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
Meanwhile, I want to know what a GLE or GLC or GLO are.

Good Little
- Evangelical
- Catholic
- Orthodox

Posted by deano (# 12063) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
That God is The Killer? As I used to argue here for 15 years?

Would we be able to tell?

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Capital ess Schism refers to The Great East-West Schism of Chalcedonian Christianity in 1054 in to Eastern (Greek) - Orthodox - and Western (Latin) - Roman Catholic - branches over the critical differences of the source of the Holy Spirit ("filioque"), whether leavened or unleavened bread should be used in the Eucharist, the place of Constantinople in relation to the Pentarchy and some trivial issue about the Pope's claim to universal jurisdiction.

Glad to hear it Laurelin.

So Samuel didn't relay God's orders to commit genocide then? He made them up in good faith?

And the trajectory continues with sex and marriage?

Posted by anteater (# 11435) on :

quote:
So, on IngoB's hell thread, I'm authoritatively informed that the Schism churches don't do progressive revelation.

A reference links would help if you want us to respond to IngoB. But IIANM: in Catholic theology, any teaching that is given as part of the faith to be believed, is never rescinded, but may be clarified, and so within limits, qualified. In Reformed thought it is allowable that the Church may have been just plain wrong with respect to some doctrine, so that it can be retracted and openly admitted as never correct.

I would think a conservative Evangelical would believe that the command was indeed issued by God.

I'm pretty sure Jesus would agree, but then as I already know, you're unconvinced about His Jewish faith.

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

As I have argued here the bible has to be read as progressive revelation of God to people. Or, to be more accurate, it is about people seeking God and the stories are the reflection of this seeking.

So was God a killer? No, Samuel, Joshua, the soldiers are the killers. They were behaving as they understood God to be telling them.. Sometimes, they got it wrong. Sometimes they got it right. it is not easy for us to know which was which.

And the point is that we need to understand other peoples search for God to help ours.

Posted by anteater (# 11435) on :

Schrodinger's Cat:
The issue, though, is whether a "revelation" which starts by stating things that are plainly untrue, in really a progressive revelation?

So you could a explain a difficult concept to a child which could then be elaborated with a more mature explanations as they are able to grasp it.

But I wouldn't consider telling a child about the tooth-fairy and then later explaining that it's really Mum and Dad, is a progressive revelation. It's a fantasy (arguably harmless) followed later by the truth.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Much like a six day creation or a global flood.

Jesus couldn't not have had a Jewish faith for it to have been so comprehensively transcended in Him.

Posted by balaam (# 4543) on :

I think it's great that critics of John Calvin like progressive revelation. One of Calvin's better ideas.

The problem is when Progressive Revelation leads to dispensationalism leads to...

But that what happens when conservatives pick and choose their theology.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Aye, theological conservatism is in the more progressive direction from burn witches, stone homosexuals and leave the corners of your fields for the poor and even slave women are entitled to an affectionate marriage, which is remarkably progressive for the Bronze age. Although admittedly most conservatives can't get that far.

Posted by David (# 3) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:

To the point where of course God didn't order Samuel to order the Israelites to murder every man woman and child, but Samuel nonethelss did say it in good faith. Which says a lot about faith. There was no way as God's prophet, a thousand BC, that he couldn't, with his consciousness in the culture of the time and place.

But to be a GLE or GLC or GLO I have to believe Samuel was only obeying orders?

That God is The Killer? As I used to argue here for 15 years?

People are going to die, the issue seems to be with the timing.

[ 03. December 2013, 21:02: Message edited by: David ]

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Ahhhhhh. So God is Killer directly or indirectly and it's all the same. Yeah I've argued that pathetic category error for years and years.

Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :

Martin has my admiration for the willingness to change his mind.

I still cannot fathom some of his posts.

But I have a basic confidence that he speaks a truth.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

HA! The damn thing was changed despite me! Against my will! I can't play Call Of Duty any more!! I mean what's that about?!

What I was willing to do in my desperation, in my loss, in my affliction, in my hopelessness was beg for metanoia, understanding, peace, forgiveness.

The last thing I wanted was 'progressive revelation'.

From the Truth Himself. In so far as a cracked chamber pot can receive and retain any of Him.

Posted by Jammy Dodger (# 17872) on :

What shamwari said!

Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
As I have argued here the bible has to be read as progressive revelation of God to people. Or, to be more accurate, it is about people seeking God and the stories are the reflection of this seeking.

So was God a killer? No, Samuel, Joshua, the soldiers are the killers. They were behaving as they understood God to be telling them.. Sometimes, they got it wrong. Sometimes they got it right. it is not easy for us to know which was which.

And the point is that we need to understand other peoples search for God to help ours.

Why do we need to understand other peoples search for God to help ours?

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Laurelin:
I think what IngoB would mean by a 'schism' church is a Protestant church (or even the Orthodox Church, the Ship has taught me how much little love sometimes exists between the RC and the Orthodox).

I do not recall using the term "Schism church" on my current hell thread, or indeed ever. This is Martin's invention. Not that I deny the various schisms that have occurred, of course. Martin's dropping of my name here is gratuitous, as are his current attempts to derail my Hell thread into discussing progressive revelation and the Amalekites. I have not shown any particular interest in this topic, beyond dealing with the latter once here, on a different thread where Martin also kept going on about it. I have no intention to contribute anything further. I merely wanted to make clear that Martin mentioning my name does not mean that I actually have any investment in this.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Darling! I didn't know you cared!!

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

I'm multiply astounded. Not just amused by The Magisterium Personified Having Spoken. That it can be questioned why we need to understand other people's searches for God to help ours. My 50 year understanding of God as Killer, though still fighting a rearguard action, is on the ropes. That has only come through understanding other people's searches. Despite The Unrescindable Faith Of The Medes And Persians.

Posted by daronmedway (# 3012) on :

Martin, sometimes reading your posts is like being inside the mind of the King Nebuchadnezzar of Daniel 4. In reverse.

Posted by EtymologicalEvangelical (# 15091) on :

Some people go on about God as "the killer", but if those selfsame people put as much effort into denouncing human killers as they do into condemning God, then I would be more willing to listen to them. But it's always a case of "oh but man is so innocent, and that perverted and psychopathic mass murderer really has some good in him, surely, but it's really God who is the rogue..."

While it may be difficult (in fact, in some cases, virtually impossible) to understand every instance of God's acts of judgment that result in the death of people, He would certainly not do any of this if He were not faced with having to deal with the murderous tendencies of man!

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Murder all murderers. So You must murder Yourself surely? So the Crucixion was suicide by Roman?

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Fi! That's what comes of a hurried post at work.

[ 04. December 2013, 20:17: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]

Posted by David (# 3) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Ahhhhhh. So God is Killer directly or indirectly and it's all the same. Yeah I've argued that pathetic category error for years and years.

It would help greatly if you didn't stick arguments in my mouth, if I'd wanted to accuse God of being a killer by whatever means I would have done so.

The fact of the matter is that everyone dies at some point. It sees to me that we prize life-to-the-longest as the pinnacle of humanity and the basis of all morality, but I don't think it's difficult to contend that there may be worse things than a seemingly premature death.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

It would help if you didn't put them in mine by the ineffable ambiguity of language and thought colliding in this narrative. How many narratives are here? See, it's all your fault David.

And I apologize for wrongly inferring that you personally had fallen in to my pit. I have argued here for years that God doomed, killed us all in Eden, deconstructed to made us mortal, which is why He might as well be pragmatic about killing us more immediately by proxy or not.

But of course He had no choice in the way we evolved and there is no justification from evolution to Him killing by intervention on top.

And I'm sorry for being offended at your offendedness at my offensiveness. [Smile]

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Why do we need to understand other peoples search for God to help ours?

It tends to be a useful prophylactic against solipsism

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0