|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Hell: Do I have to share heaven with this guy?
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Please list two mutually exclusive statements that can be simultaneously true. Or better yet, I'll give you an example and you can explain to me how they both can be true:
1. Jesus was God Incarnate.
2. Jesus was not God Incarnate.
Please refer to the use of the term "all powerful" and explain why your supposed god would have to conform to our limited causality and perception of logic. If you want to shoehorn your god into obeying the laws that we perceive, your whole bible thingie starts looking pretty outlandish and stupid.
Which, really, is my viewpoint anyway.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LowFreqDude
Shipmate
# 3152
|
Posted
One of the great things about (what I believe) the Bible teaches is that human beans don't have a say in who is a "sheep" and a "goat"*. Yes, we can squeeze the fruit, but we don't grade the crop.
Bottom line? A lot of surprises are lined up on That Day. All I can do is make v. sure that I get my house in order, and once that's locked in, humbly commend the Way to others.
LFD
*I am not getting into the whole keys to the kingdom/Peter/Papal inheritance hoohah... I'm...I'm a Protestant dammit!
Posts: 625 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
Please refer to the use of the term "all powerful" and explain why your supposed god would have to conform to our limited causality and perception of logic.
To quote C.S. Lewis (from memory) "not because it constitutes a limitation to God's omnipotence but because nonsense does not cease to be nonsense when it is talked about God".
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Callan:
To quote C.S. Lewis (from memory) "not because it constitutes a limitation to God's omnipotence but because nonsense does not cease to be nonsense when it is talked about God".
A valiant attempt, he-who-was-Yaffle, but what is Greek to one person is nonsense to another. Who presumes to decide what makes sense to an omniscient entity? I personally can see how it would be eminently sensible, in a mind-bending sort of way.
Besides, I think it's all nonsense anyway. I'm just making it difficult for you folks to arbitrarily pick what you want to have make sense.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jerry Boam
Shipmate
# 4551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
OK, I admit to being fundamentally unable to really conceptualize a zealot mindset. Mea culpa.
You may find it helpful to imagine that this is a discussion regarding rival OSs or standards.
"OK but you can't say IEEE 1394 is the best option and say that USB 2.0 is the best option!"
"Look, either BSD is more secure than XP or it's not, don't confuse the issue with talk of patches!"
"You can't have it both ways! If the developer made a crap interface, it isn't fair to blame the user, no matter how clueless the user may be."
I bet that zealot mindset is less inaccessible than you thought... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
Posts: 2165 | From: Miskatonic University | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Please list two mutually exclusive statements that can be simultaneously true. Or better yet, I'll give you an example and you can explain to me how they both can be true:
1. Jesus was God Incarnate.
2. Jesus was not God Incarnate.
Please refer to the use of the term "all powerful" and explain why your supposed god would have to conform to our limited causality and perception of logic. If you want to shoehorn your god into obeying the laws that we perceive, your whole bible thingie starts looking pretty outlandish and stupid.
Which, really, is my viewpoint anyway.
Way to wuss out, RooK. YOU are the one making the statements that something can and cannot be X at the same time, now you get to prove it.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Saying that if Christianity is true then Islam must be false is a sort of religious zero-sum game that I refuse to play. God is not reducible to "A is not equal to not-A" equations.
And the arrogance of declaring Islam to be false is breathtaking; the reality is that many of us are Christians because it is the default religion where we live, and if we had been born in Indonesia or Syria or any number of other places we would be Muslims convinced of the rightness of our beliefs. This is not to denigrate the value or depth of dearly held beliefs; but let's admit how much the accidents of birth and culture have contributed to making us who we are and making Muslims who they are.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
I agree with what you say about culture and environment, Ruth.
But assuming you believe that Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, who died and rose from the dead, doesn't that sort of limit things vis a vis Islam?
So is Christ God incarnate, or just a really nice man to be esteemed?
If he's God incarnate, doesn't that mean that Islam is wrong about that?
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
You preach it, RuthW.
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Way to wuss out, RooK. YOU are the one making the statements that something can and cannot be X at the same time, now you get to prove it.
I'm not wussing out, but rather think I've got you pinned by your ilk's arbitrarily determined view of reality. If statements claiming miraculous contradicions like "a bush that burned and yet was not consumed" or "he died and then was brought back to life" or "fully human and fully god simultaneously" don't make you flinch, what's so difficult about Christianity being true for some and Islam true for others?
And, as a cherry, the penultimate example of something that can and cannot be X simultaneously: quantum physics. It's a particle! It's a wave! It's relative.
You may resume squirming.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
But assuming you believe that Jesus Christ was God Incarnate, who died and rose from the dead, doesn't that sort of limit things vis a vis Islam?
So is Christ God incarnate, or just a really nice man to be esteemed?
If he's God incarnate, doesn't that mean that Islam is wrong about that?
This is exactly what I mean by "A is not equal to not-A" thinking.
Yes, I believe Jesus is God incarnate. But I don't presume to make judgements about other religions that I don't know very much about based on that belief. And I have no problem with the possibility that something could be true for me and something else could be true for someone else, or that my idea of what constitutes "truth" is laughably limited from God's larger point of view.
It's traditionally been called seeing through a glass darkly. We're on remarkably thin ice when we make exclusionary truth claims about God.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
But you're STILL wimping out, RooK! I asked you to tell me how Jesus could and could not be God Incarnate, because THAT is a big honking part of the differences in religions. So explain to me how he both could and could not be God Incarnate, if you maintain that one can hold the belief that Islam and Christianity are both true with any sort of intellectual integrity.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jerry Boam
Shipmate
# 4551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
But you're STILL wimping out, RooK! I asked you to tell me how Jesus could and could not be God Incarnate, because THAT is a big honking part of the differences in religions. So explain to me how he both could and could not be God Incarnate, if you maintain that one can hold the belief that Islam and Christianity are both true with any sort of intellectual integrity.
First you have to identify which Islam and which Christianity you are talking about.
Jack Chick and Mullah Omar?
Spong and Ibn 'Arabi?
The terms cover some pretty broad ranges of belief and it isn't hard to find ways in which both could be "true" and non-contradictory, if you want to.
[fixing stupid typos]
[ 12. December 2003, 22:45: Message edited by: Jerry Boam ]
--------------------
If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving is not for you.
Posts: 2165 | From: Miskatonic University | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
But you're STILL wimping out, RooK! I asked you to tell me how Jesus could and could not be God Incarnate, because THAT is a big honking part of the differences in religions. So explain to me how he both could and could not be God Incarnate, if you maintain that one can hold the belief that Islam and Christianity are both true with any sort of intellectual integrity.
That's quite the little hole you've dug for yourself there. I can see why you can't get out of it on your own. Have all of my other posts really failed to answer this already for you?
Fine. I'll crawl down to your plane of existence and fish out a specific example for you. Postulate the possibility that every single person lives in a completely separate world, and that we interact with only shadows of similarity that are shared between our personal worlds. Perhaps these worlds have been created individually to suit what some creator decides is appropriate for us (by some unknown measure). In one persons world, it is obvious that Jesus H. Christ Esquire was the creators presence in that world. Meanwhile, in the parallel world of someone in the next petri dish of a perception-defined existence finds that Mr. Christ turns out to be just another messenger from god.
While that's unlikely to fit into your personal worldview, I think you'll find that it's sufficiently intellectually airtight.
Now, care to comment on anything else I've said? I'm guessing not, because, well, what could you say other than an abject capitulation?
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
I guess I should have qualified my statement, although who knew you'd pull parallel universes out of your butt? According to what you've just said, there is no such thing as an absolute truth. Black can never be absolutely black; down can never be absolutely down; you can never be absolutely you. I was not aware that you, of all people, inhabited such a world. Just goes to show you're never safe from being surprised until you're dead.
In the real world (i.e., mine), absolute truths do exist. It has jack to do with my perception of the event. To go back to my example -- if Jesus is God Incarnate, he's God Incarnate regardless of the fact that you think it's a load of crap. Your perception has no bearing on the facts at hand.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
It's traditionally been called seeing through a glass darkly. We're on remarkably thin ice when we make exclusionary truth claims about God.
Well, what about the part of the Trinity called Christ? There are some fairly specific claims made about him in the NT.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266
|
Posted
The classic answers to the relationship between other religions and christianity are
- Christainity is the only true religion all others are mere devil worship.
- Christianity is the only true religion others religions see some glimpse of God but they need to be converted to Christianity.
- Christianity is the most developed religion others are not so developed so people should be converted to christianity but other relgions may take people to heaven (darwin model of religions).
- Christianity is the most developed religion but Christ works in other faith bringing them to God. Conversion is not that important dialogue is the key for relationships between the faiths.
- All religions are equal and take people to God but Christ is possibly the supreme messenger amongst others. Dialogue between faiths is the norm conversion from one faith to another is wrong. The true enemy of faith is unfaith and religions should work together to bring kingdom values to the world.
[ 12. December 2003, 23:55: Message edited by: Nightlamp ]
--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp
Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thistle
Apprentice
# 5142
|
Posted
Originally posted by Halcyon Sailor:
quote:
Jesus never said, "You have to be a Christian to be saved." In fact, I remember him saying, "Anyone who is not against me is for me."
RSV has "he who is not with me is against me." (Matthew 12.30) Which puts a slightly different slant on the matter. And there was the old "No-one comes to the Father except through me," which you may or may not count as saying you have to be a Christian. I guess that's a bit of a tangent though.
Thank God that handing out Chick pamphlets isn't the criteria for salvation. We hope.
Posts: 24 | From: Oxford | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave the Bass
Shipmate
# 155
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
I think Chick's tracts are pretty horrible, but I can't wish him (or anyone) to be in Hell. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
... PS: I suppose we could do with God (in the form of the Giant, Light-Bulb-Headed Judge (tm) we see in Chick's tracts) giving Chick the "you're-off-to-Hell" speech he so often puts in those tracts -- and then, as Chick wails, God says, "... PSYCH! No, actually, you're forgiven, Jack, I just wanted to see the look on your face..."
I'd rather see his face when he gets to heaven, and finds it full of exactly the sort of people he condemned to hell in his tracts.
Posts: 2162 | From: In a forest | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sine Nomine:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
It's traditionally been called seeing through a glass darkly. We're on remarkably thin ice when we make exclusionary truth claims about God.
Well, what about the part of the Trinity called Christ? There are some fairly specific claims made about him in the NT.
Yeah, so? I don't think the folks who wrote the NT had a grip on "absolute truth" much more than Erin does.
That doesn't mean I don't think they were inspired. But they were human, fallible, and limited. And if you think Jesus really said "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one cometh to the Father but by me," well, then, we just will have to agree to disagree about the nature of the gospel of John. This is early Christian theology, not words Jesus actually said.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
I guess I should have qualified my statement, although who knew you'd pull parallel universes out of your butt? According to what you've just said, there is no such thing as an absolute truth Black can never be absolutely black; down can never be absolutely down; you can never be absolutely you. I was not aware that you, of all people, inhabited such a world.
I'm hurt. Hurt I tell you. How long have I been hanging around stating that I don't believe in "good" or "evil" because I think it's all relative? Plenty long for people to know that this sort of shit flows freely from my metaphysical butt.
And from elementary philosophy textbooks, but let's not quibble with technicalities.
quote:
Just goes to show you're never safe from being surprised until you're dead.
Many would claim that it's possible even after that.
quote:
In the real world (i.e., mine), absolute truths do exist. It has jack to do with my perception of the event. To go back to my example -- if Jesus is God Incarnate, he's God Incarnate regardless of the fact that you think it's a load of crap. Your perception has no bearing on the facts at hand.
Wow, way to dig. It's amazing to see someone so vehemently unwilling to admit that they don't have an absolute answer. Well, I guess if you're happy in your hole, there's no real harm in it.
Just out of curiosity, though, after you've finished polishing your secret collection of physical proof that jesus was anything other than a fairy tale, maybe you could answer ANY of my other questions posted earlier? I won't hold my breath though; sometimes you're almost as bad as Ley Druid at answering direct questions. I mean, I already admitted being unable to understand your cemented thoughts - what's so wrong about helping me out by answering some simple questions?
[gauntlet action]
Well, other than I suspect that you can't.
[/gauntlet action]
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And if you think Jesus really said "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one cometh to the Father but by me," well, then, we just will have to agree to disagree about the nature of the gospel of John. This is early Christian theology, not words Jesus actually said.
You were standing there when he said them?
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And if you think Jesus really said "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one cometh to the Father but by me," well, then, we just will have to agree to disagree about the nature of the gospel of John. This is early Christian theology, not words Jesus actually said.
You were standing there when he said them?
Well, of course not. 'Cause he didn't say them.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sine Nomine*
Ship's backstabbing bastard
# 3631
|
Posted
OK, well I'm glad I'm just an Episcopalian and not a Christian.
Otherwise I'd be real confused.
Posts: 10696 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomb
Shipmate
# 174
|
Posted
You know, I've been reading this thread without commenting, and after awhile, about the only thing I could think of was the Red Queen who "believed seven impossible things before breakfast."
I have always admired Lewis Carroll for his ability to satirize things that most people weren't even noticing. Seemingly this particular syndrome has become even more acute as we enter the earnestness of the 21st century.
Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Trying to figure out what the fuck you meant by answering your questions, I'm going to pull out every single sentence you've posted on this thread that ends in a question mark and was not directed to someone else.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Isn't that just revealing a lack of imagination?
No.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
If you believe in an all-power being, what's stopping it from having two simultaneous truths?
Nothing. However, contradictory truths are not possible.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Oh, right, your nifty magical book of truth. Hey, wait, don't they have one too?
Yes, I believe they do. Although this was in the same paragraph as the previous question, it is a complete non sequitur. We won't even get into the fact that I am so not an inerrantist.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
If statements claiming miraculous contradicions like "a bush that burned and yet was not consumed" or "he died and then was brought back to life" or "fully human and fully god simultaneously" don't make you flinch, what's so difficult about Christianity being true for some and Islam true for others?
Because God Himself is making the claim in both religions. If Jesus was God Incarnate and said so, He cannot turn around and say He wasn't. Part of the nature of God is that He cannot lie. So either Jesus was God Incarnate or was not. He cannot be both.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Have all of my other posts really failed to answer this already for you?
Yes. And completely, as you've not ever really answered my objection to the claim that both Islam and Christianity cannot be true. All you've done is yammer on about perceptions, as if they count for anything. (Hint: they do not, not in this discussion.)
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
Now, care to comment on anything else I've said?
Not particularly, because relative truths are stupid and a waste of time. Why believe something if you don't hold it as true? That is intellectually and spiritually dishonest, almost like some bizarre, twisted form of Pascal's Wager.
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
I'm guessing not, because, well, what could you say other than an abject capitulation?
See above.
Your instincts told you to buy a Betamax machine, too, didn't they?
See, RooK, I haven't answered any of your questions because you haven't really answered any of mine. I'm not talking about relative truths or perceptions. I'm talking about actual truths that exist independent of what you or I or any other person in the universe thinks, feels or believes.
I'll make it simple for you. I am wearing a shirt that is colored coral and white. You can say that in your world it's really a green shirt or even that it doesn't exist, and that can be your "relative truth". However, you are still wrong, because it DOES exist, and it IS coral and white, and what you say/feel/think about it makes no difference to its objective reality.
[ 13. December 2003, 01:36: Message edited by: Erin ]
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Why should RooK take your word about the color of your shirt, or anything else for that matter? For all we know your perception of color is off, and the shirt is really orange and cream.
I am willing to accept the possibility that there are absolute truths in the universe, but I don't think you or I know what they are.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
See, RooK, I haven't answered any of your questions because you haven't really answered any of mine. I'm not talking about relative truths or perceptions. I'm talking about actual truths that exist independent of what you or I or any other person in the universe thinks, feels or believes.
Well, damn, girlie - you've got persistance and determination enough to almost compensate for you lack of imagination. Full points for effort, and I appreciate the effort. I feel honoured.
The basic trend in your answers is that you reject any possible world view than the one you currently subscribe to. This begs the question: What do you use as a standard for determining "truth"? Keep in mind that I cling passionately to a similar proof-required view. How can one miracle (resurrection) be considered true while another miracle (separate universes for everyone) cannot?
I personally doubt both, but I don't pretend to be able to dismiss them absolutely.
quote:
I'll make it simple for you. I am wearing a shirt that is colored coral and white. You can say that in your world it's really a green shirt or even that it doesn't exist, and that can be your "relative truth". However, you are still wrong, because it DOES exist, and it IS coral and white, and what you say/feel/think about it makes no difference to its objective reality.
Actually, it could be argued that your shirt happens to not absorb very much of the spectrum perceivable to your eyes (except for the bits that make it appear "coral"). Rather dependant on your eyes. Freehand, who is colourblind, might see it slightly differently - and that would be just as true from his point of view. Tell me, what colour is your shirt in a room with only a red light? I wonder what it looks like with infrared goggles.
Let's play a little game, if you want. Line up any "absolute truth", and I'll give you an alternate explanation. Relatively speaking, of course.
Or, alternately, you could admit that perhaps you don't have absolute knowledge after all. If not, maybe we'll eventually get back to that pesky particle/wave logical contradiction and you can explain it so I'll understand how it works in your universe.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomb
Shipmate
# 174
|
Posted
Erin is right. RooK and RuthW are wrong.
'Nuff said.
Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Why should RooK take your word about the color of your shirt, or anything else for that matter?
I don't care if RooK takes my word or not. I'm not an evangelist, I don't give two flying shits what other people believe. It's none of my business, and I don't really care that much about other people for it to keep me awake at night. That isn't my point. My point is, and ALWAYS has been, that two statements which by definition deny the other cannot both be true. It is not possible for Jesus to be and not be God Incarnate. Believe he was or believe he wasn't, whichever floats your boat. But you can't believe both.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomb
Shipmate
# 174
|
Posted
You know, Erin, a couple of years ago, we were at a dinner party of folks I guess I would call "universalists," and I said about the same thing over the canapees you wrote above (though I didn't use the word "Fuck") .
Mrs. tomb has been pissed at me ever since. Everyone there were so "outraged" that I would say something almost identical to what you said, because it implied that what they believed wasn't on" par" with what I believed.
Well, the sad truth is, what they believe really isn't on par with what I believe.
Get used to it.
I believe that God cares/d enough about me to Do Something about how I tend to muck up my life.
Islam doesn't.
Nor does any other religion.
Christianity is unique in the revelation that God took steps to welcome us into his presence regardless of what assholes we were. Every other religion requires something of an admissions test.
Now, I would be the first to acknowledge that, in a pluriform world, my particular understanding of the nature of that sacrifice might be flawed. And I would be equally eager to admit that I don't have a clue about what it means, ultimately.
In metaphysical terms, I just hope that, at some time, all the parts of my being that want to worship God will have an opportunity to do so, and that I will preserve enough of my personality to recognize what I do as worship--if only for a moment.
I really don't give a damn about whether I'm "right" or "wrong" here. Nor would I be so presumptious as to deny any other religious tradition the equal possibility of worship. And worship is what it's all about, really.
I follow a tradition that's older than Islam, so forgive me if I tend to regard it, at best, as an adolescent brother.
Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
Ok, can Jesus be God Incarnate and still( through the Holy Spirit) reach people through the religions in which they are born? Surely if Ruth has the intelligence to say"My religion and worldview is very much determined by chance of birth" then the omniscient ruler of all things must have some sort of dim grasp of this dynamic, also.
I buy into the Incarnation--I need a God who had the chutzpah and commitment to get down in the dirt with the rest of us. But I also believe in the Hound of Heaven that pursues souls through any means possible-even it is another faith.Who the heck are we to tell God what tools he can and can't use, and to dictate what the result of His work will be, as least as far as it pertains to the parroting back of a specific theology?
Just for the record, I do believe that there is a yes-or no answer to the question of Jesus's divinity. I happen to believe the answer is yes. but I definitely don't believe our need, for others to arrange the right words in the right order to convince US of their salvation, is shared by Jesus. To use RooK's word, I believe he has more "creativity" than that.
{ETA-crossposted with tomb, if that makes a difference]
[ 13. December 2003, 03:06: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
How does "Christians, Jews, and Moslems both serve the same God, the God of Abraham, but only one of the three can actually be right about the right way to serve God, but we don't know whose right until we die, so we should just believe in Christianity" sound?
OTOH, right now Jews and Moselms are trying to kill each other over religious differences. I think that argues in Christianity's favor.
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
I would just like to add, for the record, that Jack Chick's theology is repellant to me. I hope that he is not so alianted from God as to merit dammnation. I hope he gains a sense of perspective before he dies.
--------------------
“I’m so glad to be a translator in the 20th century. They only burn Bibles now, not the translators!” - the Rev. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomb
Shipmate
# 174
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Ok, can Jesus be God Incarnate and still( through the Holy Spirit) reach people through the religions in which they are born? Surely if Ruth has the intelligence to say"My religion and worldview is very much determined by chance of birth" then the omniscient ruler of all things must have some sort of dim grasp of this dynamic, also.
Indeed he does/must have a grasp of this particular dynamic. The secret here is to embrace what you have been taught while keeping it in the inevitable tension. There is nothing wrong with trying on other "realities" for size. Just realize that you have to start from somewhere. It's also something of a good idea to have a clue where you're heading.
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I buy into the Incarnation--I need a God who had the chutzpah and commitment to get down in the dirt with the rest of us. But I also believe in the Hound of Heaven that pursues souls through any means possible-even it is another faith. Who the heck are we to tell God what tools he can and can't use, and to dictate what the result of His work will be, as least as far as it pertains to the parroting back of a specific theology?
We cannot possibly put ourselves in a position to tell God through what agencies He can/must operate.
We can, however, have some confidence that the context in which we find ourselves is, as least, "valid." At the very least. it cannot be more true than the "other religions" that surround us. This is, at best, a starting point.
And when we begin to contemplate something as radical as the Incarnation, then it isn't outrageous to speculate that perhaps, indeed, God cares about us, individually and corporately.
The outrageous context of Christian belief lies precisely in the miasma of claims that it isn't "unique," that it isn't "different," that there are wide varieties of religious expression all over the globe that mimic or equate the Christian message.
These just aren't true.
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Just for the record, I do believe that there is a yes-or no answer to the question of Jesus's divinity. I happen to believe the answer is yes. but I definitely don't believe our need, for others to arrange the right words in the right order to convince US of their salvation, is shared by Jesus. To use RooK's word, I believe he has more "creativity" than that.
I agree with you, Kelly. The history of the world is fraught with instances where "right language" was substituted for "right belief."
One of the fascinating things about discussions of "salvation" has to do with what we are going to achieve or "get" when we're "saved."
My answer is "the opportunity to worship." Others undoubtedly will have other responses.
Whatever. I'm not expecting "salvation" to be particulary pleasant given any context I can place that word.
But I expect it will make me more myself, give me more joy, show me true colors and true smells--show me reality--more than I have heretofore been able to imagine.
Whatever. It'll be a good ride.
Posts: 5039 | From: Denver, Colorado | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
welsh dragon
Shipmate
# 3249
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Try:
How does "Christians, Jews, and Moslems both serve the same God, the God of Abraham, but only one of the three can actually be right about the right way to serve God, but we don't know whose right until we die, so we should just believe in Christianity" sound?
OTOH, right now Jews and Moselms are trying to kill each other over religious differences. I think that argues in Christianity's favor.
I think there are various points in Christianity's favour.
However, regarding killing each other over religious differences, I think we've been there and done that..
Posts: 5352 | From: ebay | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tomb:
Now, I would be the first to acknowledge that, in a pluriform world, my particular understanding of the nature of that sacrifice might be flawed. And I would be equally eager to admit that I don't have a clue about what it means, ultimately.
[snip]
I really don't give a damn about whether I'm "right" or "wrong" here. Nor would I be so presumptious as to deny any other religious tradition the equal possibility of worship. And worship is what it's all about, really.
This doesn't seem all that incompatible with what I was saying before. I don't see why you think I'm wrong.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
KenWritez
Shipmate
# 3238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
quote:
Originally posted by Kenwritez:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And if you think Jesus really said "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no one cometh to the Father but by me," well, then, we just will have to agree to disagree about the nature of the gospel of John. This is early Christian theology, not words Jesus actually said.
You were standing there when he said them?
Well, of course not. 'Cause he didn't say them.
And you know this how?
--------------------
"The truth is you're the weak. And I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin', Ringo. I'm tryin' real hard to be a shepherd." --Quentin Tarantino, Pulp Fiction
My blog: http://oxygenofgrace.blogspot.com
Posts: 11102 | From: Left coast of Wonderland, by the rabbit hole | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Try
Shipmate
# 4951
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by welsh dragon:
I think there are various points in Christianity's favour.
However, regarding killing each other over religious differences, I think we've been there and done that..
Ah, yes, but we aren't right now, and the last time Christians tried to kill Moslems just because they were Moslems other Christians stopped them (Kosovo).
I think that Christianity has largely overcome much that is shameful in its past, and I can't say the same for Islam. In some places, Judaism actually seems to be regressing.
--------------------
“I’m so glad to be a translator in the 20th century. They only burn Bibles now, not the translators!” - the Rev. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger
Posts: 852 | From: Beautiful Ohio, in dreams again I see... | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Thistle:
Originally posted by Halcyon Sailor:
quote:
Jesus never said, "You have to be a Christian to be saved." In fact, I remember him saying, "Anyone who is not against me is for me."
RSV has "he who is not with me is against me." (Matthew 12.30) Which puts a slightly different slant on the matter. And there was the old "No-one comes to the Father except through me," which you may or may not count as saying you have to be a Christian. I guess that's a bit of a tangent though.
Thank God that handing out Chick pamphlets isn't the criteria for salvation. We hope.
Actually both things were said by Jesus. The first saying was actually, "...whoever is not against us is for us."~Mark 9:40 which refered to an incident where healers who were not officially affiliated with Christ's group were casting out demons in Jesus' name and the disciples got huffy about it. Jesus told them anyone who was using his name to work miracles wouldn't be trash talking him the next moment. Besides, anyone doing good things for Christians because they are Christians will be rewarded. Good news for people who are nice to us fellow People of the Book.
The second was Jesus giving the Pharisees what-for for impugning his ability to cast out demons by implying he did it in league with the devil. Go ahead and insult me, but don't mess with the Spirit that makes all this good work possible. If you aren't with me, you are against me, assholes. ~profane paraphrase of Matt 12:30-32 courtesy of Lyda Rose. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moschops
Ship's dinosaur
# 3034
|
Posted
quote:
Originally Posted by RooK:
Let's play a little game, if you want. Line up any "absolute truth", and I'll give you an alternate explanation. Relatively speaking, of course.
Okay, I'll bite.
2 + 2 = 4
(Note: I don't mean the symbols; I mean the actual mathematical entities that we call "2" and "4" in base 10; so no slipping into another number base, because the things are still the same even if you use a different symbol for them; the same applies for the addition symbol and the equals sign. And no crappy "I had 2 apples and someone gave me 2 more but I'd eaten one of the first 2 apples so I only had 3", either).
I expect a watertight, valid mathematical proof that whatever alternate version of this statement you can come up with is true. You can take the standard mathematical axioms as read if you like.
Okay, that's a silly example, but at the end of the day any "fact" either has the same sort of truth as I perceive that statement to have, or it doesn't. I don't mean "facts" like "Shakespeare's plays are amongst the best ever written"; all that tells you is that the speaker happens to like Shakespeare a lot. But I would take it that historical events have this type of reality, at least at the level of single statements like "Jesus said", and that the statement "Jesus was God incarnate" is of this nature.
As far as I can see, either we all live in the same universe, which has certain absolute truths (and I don't claim to know what they are), and we all have slightly differing perceptions of that universe or we all live in completely separate universes which happen to coincide in large part with everyone else's private little universe (so, for example, my wife lives in a different universe to me, but our corporeal forms have managed to be in the same universe often enough to manage two children and be expecting a third any day now).
I suppose you might come up with a reality where there is some sort of "base" universe and then other universes are "derived" from it (hey, anybody done any OO programming lately?) and that therefore there's a common base; but surely that just comes down to the "same universe but different perceptions" thing again.
The only other alternative I can think of is Solipsism. In which case, am I a figment of your imagination or are you a figment of mine? And if I'm a figment of yours, can I have a Porsche please?
You've pretty much admitted that you don't in fact subscribe to this world view; that in fact, you'd consider the idea of different universes for all to be "a miracle". Which kind of begs the question: what exactly do you believe about the nature of the universe? Do you accept that there are any "absolute truths" or not? (If you say "there are no absolute truths" then umm...isn't that an absolute?)
I think all that Erin is claiming here is that there is such a thing as absolute truth, and that some things are therefore true regardless of my (or your) perceptions. Same here; I don't claim to know what they are, but I believe that certain facts are true.
--------------------
"A salesperson's first job is to make you miserable, because happy people don't want anything." - Scott Adams.
Posts: 559 | From: The Permian Period | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Off Centre View
Shipmate
# 4254
|
Posted
Blimey, and I thought purgatory had some manic arguments. There's pretty much a war going on down here.
I don't want to get drawn into either side as I'm sure there could be loads of arguments that would go way over my head.
But, I just wanted to say - is this Jack Chick guy serious and if so how does he get so often published? I have to be honest and say that I actually thought it was a spoof when I first read it. Death cookie just made me laugh in a really inappropriate way. When I stopped laughing it made me think about how we should not judge for we will be judged in the same way. This Chick cartoonist likes to point out "enemies" treating loads of issues with black and white (no pun intended) without any shades of grey whatsoever. He also seems to point out different groups as evil all the time (i.e. Chick argues that Muslims are all effectively terrorists and Christ haters, and also that Catholics are evil control freaks!!) without even contemplating that their humanity is the same as that of anyone else.
One last note. Now that spoof Cthulu tract makes sense to me ("all you can hope is that you are eaten first"!). Being a Brit I had not heard of Jack Chick before or the bile that passes for Jack Chick tracts. Anyone got anymore links to spoofs or parodies of this piece of sh...work?
Off-centre view
--------------------
Looking for Authenticity in the Corporate Abyss? Change Your Self, Change Your Workplace, Change Your World: www.corporateabyss.com
Posts: 1685 | From: wherever I may wander | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moschops:
I think all that Erin is claiming here is that there is such a thing as absolute truth, and that some things are therefore true regardless of my (or your) perceptions. Same here; I don't claim to know what they are, but I believe that certain facts are true.
Yes, that's it, although I did go one step further and say that if X and Y are contradictory statements, then believing that X is true means that you believe Y is false.
Kelly, I have not ever said that God can't work through other religions. I firmly believe He can. However, I think that saying that all religions are equal is hugely, hugely insulting to Jesus, for it makes the ICR just a sadistic little magic trick that didn't really matter. I believe that Christianity is far more right than other religions, and I'd have to question the faith of a Jew or Muslim if they didn't believe similar about their religions.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
It seems to me that most of the time that we are quite happy to operate with some notion of absolute truth. If I posted on these boards that the CIA arranged for those planes to be flown into the World Trade Centre, or that, according to Holy Scripture black people were the children of Ham and could, therefore, licitly be enslaved, or that reports of an extermination camp at Auschwitz had been exaggerated by interested parties in order to encourage US support for Israel, I think that one or two of you might wish to put me straight. For that matter I think that most of us object to the comic strip linked to in the OP because we don't believe that Muslim grandparents routinely put their children down as suicide bombers at birth, in rather the same way that the children of the aristocracy put their children down for Eton. Suddenly, at this juncture, the notion of absolute truth looks terribly attractive. On none of these issues can both sides be right.
We routinely prefer medicine to faith healing, take seriously signs that say "Danger 1000 volts" and assume that the football results on Saturday evening are not concealing the six-nil tonking of Manchester United by Accrington Stanley. We assume that arguments between creationists and evolutionists, steady state theorists and apologists for the big bang, those who think Richard III did away with the Princes in the Tower and those who think that it was Henry VII wot done it are about something.
So why is it so terribly wicked and authoritarian to suggest that either our Lord did die on the cross or did not, that either He was the incarnate deity or he wasn't? When did religion become a kind of cognitive caucus race, in which all must have prizes?
Anyway, if there is no such thing as absolute truth then clearly the truth that there is no such thing as absolute truth is not absolute. So we can take it or leave it. Relativism is self-refuting.
And anyway, it's just not me.
[ 13. December 2003, 13:40: Message edited by: Mr Callan ]
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Halcyon Sailor
Shipmate
# 5270
|
Posted
In reference to all the different things Christ said about the way to Heaven, I find it constantly interesting how he never pointed out any specific path. I'm sure it confounded his disciples as well: "He who is not against us is for us," "I am the Way, Truth, and the Life," "What you did not do to the least of my brethren, you did not do unto me," etc. (Not to mention his many parables, which could have multiple interpretations.) It's almost as if Christ wasn't proclaiming an absolute truth but was rather saying there's many ways to Heaven. Or perhaps he was saying that HE is the absolute truth, but getting to him is not as clear-cut as we try to make it.
I think that's what made me most furious about Chick's theology. And those of you who try to point out the error in Chick's ways by proclaiming what YOU believe is the correct nature of God, aren't you just behaving like Chick in an opposite manner? Remember, as C.S. Lewis said, God is not the opposite of Satan... He goes beyond opposites. And He probably goes beyong our comprehension and definitions as well.
Personally, I'm thankful. It makes the journey exciting and fresh every day. I doubt I'll ever understand any more about Christ than a Muslim will; the difference may not be even an inch compared to how far both of us are from understanding Him fully, especially in regards to His dying on the cross. I mean, really, who CAN understand something like that?
Posts: 67 | From: Indiana, USA | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Halcyon Sailor, the trick to reconciling all of those statements is simple and can be summed up in two sentences:
1. Jesus is the only way to God.
2. Christianity is not the only way to Jesus.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Pithy and well said, Erin. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Melon
Ship's desserter
# 4038
|
Posted
Well,that's a very nice arguement you're all having, but I think it rather misses the point.
Whether or not Islam is "wrong", "differently right", "incomplete", "partly right", "satanic", all of the above or none of the above, does that make any difference to whether or not it is appropriate to do evangelism by painting caricatures of other faiths and preying on people's media-fed fears? Personally, I don't think that what the Chick tract says is that far from the truth, or at least from how at least some moslems see things. The problem for me is that I don't see how turning this into a cartoon booklet serves to promote the gospel to Westerners or Moslems. The danger is that westerners say "I'm not a primitive zealot like that so I'm OK", and moslems say "These people hate us so why should we be interested in their Jesus?"
--------------------
French Whine
Posts: 4177 | From: Cavaillon, France | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
There are extremist, hate-filled Muslims. There are also extremist, hate-filled Christians, of whom Jack Chick is one.
But I think the vast majority of people of all faiths and none might be ever so very slightly offended to be lumped in with either of them, for any reason.
I know we can't make comments about the sincerity with which Chick loves Jesus. I just struggle to think of a single fruit of the spirit that he evinces.
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
Janine, love ya, but your quoted quiz could be manipulated not too difficultly to illumine Christians as equally murderous. From the Crusades forward, there is a long, undistinguished list of appaling events in Christian history that are similarly horriffic.
Are suicide bombers being raised from the cradle in some parts of the Islamic world? Sure. Was America attacked on 09/11/01 by radical Islamic terrorists of Arab decent? Sure. Is Islam a religion of peace? Ideally, yes. In practice, though, obviously, not always. Same for Christianity.
Riv, when was the last time a major christian entity, such as the RCC, declared holy war on a nation and began bombing civilians at random? You have to go fairly far back in time to find that. There are sects of Islam that do want all infidels dead, just as there are sects that want to just be left in peace. The difference is that Islam's bible can easily support both groups and justify their actions. There is nothing in the NT that would support christians murdering innocent civilians to spread God's message of love and hope.
Islam is a religion of peace, but only regarding other muslims. It is akin to the old Judaism where there are two classes of people: Jews, gentiles. The muslims need a NT.
As for Chick - I love the little check box at the end: Do you accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior? __ Yes ___No _______Date.
Chick tracks are dialogues in extreme fundamentalism. I think he does more to aid "the Devil's" cause than muslim terrorists ever could.
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nonpropheteer
6 Syllable Master
# 5053
|
Posted
Last Rites and Are Catholics Christians?in which is revealed the "lies" of the catholic church. Perhaps he is the only person actually going to be in heaven.
I think somebody should make a Chick tract that deals with Jack trying to get into heaven.
Posts: 2086 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
