|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: biblical inerrancy
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
The problem is not "I can't believe God would say that", it's "a loving, merciful and forgiving God as revealed by Jesus is at odds with the God apparently revealed here".
On a personal level, it's "and this violent, barbaric bastard of a God wants me to serve Him out of love? Get out of it!"
This is a partcularly weak argument from someone who believes that the records of Jesus life could well be full of factual mistakes.
What if I say the only bits of the Gospels I believe are those that show Jesus as angry? Fits perfectly well then.
I do love God for his holiness. I do love him that he will some day put the whole world to rights, and make peopele face up to the consequences of their actions. I do love him that even though he hates sin that much, he sent Jesus so we could be saved.
And I love Jesus for all those things too.
Your non-acceptance of what the Bible says about judgement is merely a symptom of the fact that you don't accept what it says about sin, and about God. As I said, there is no reason to accept what it says about these things if you don't believe the words are inspired.
Ken. I'm not sure who you think disagrees with you or Corgi on this. It isn't me.
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
On a personal level, it's "and this violent, barbaric bastard of a God wants me to serve Him out of love? Get out of it!"
Would God be loving if he didn't punish sin?
Would he be loving if he turned a blind eye to the victims of the holocaust and left it unpunished?
Would he be loving if he shrugged his shoulders at al-Qaida and left the terrorists unpunished?
No - he'd be an indifferent, cruel, uncaring God.
There is good news - God does not let sin go unpunished.
But thats bad news for me - because I am a sinner.
But its great news that Jesus died in my place.
How I love God for his justice and fairness. And how I love him since his love for me is so great that he is punished in my place.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I don't get it. Really I don't.
Let's get this straight.
Most of my family are not Christians. Consequently, according to traditional, bible-based, fundamentalist if you like, theology, they are going to burn in agony for eternity.
And you expect me to love God for this?
No way.
[ 18. February 2004, 13:20: Message edited by: Karl - Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
On a personal level, it's "and this violent, barbaric bastard of a God wants me to serve Him out of love? Get out of it!"
Would God be loving if he didn't punish sin?
Would he be loving if he turned a blind eye to the victims of the holocaust and left it unpunished?
Would he be loving if he shrugged his shoulders at al-Qaida and left the terrorists unpunished?
No - he'd be an indifferent, cruel, uncaring God.[/qb]
Classic tactic, this, Fish Fish. Point to the very worst atrocities as if they were representative of the point at issue. They are not.
The point is not whether God punishes Al-Qaeda. It is, in this particular case, that God allegedly told Joshua to go in and slay men, women and children, in a manner that had anyone else done it would probably be used in your example along with the Nazis and Al-Qaeda. Indeed, the only actions I can think of in recent years comparable with the conquest of Canaan as allegedly ordered by God were perpetrated by Saddam Hussein and Pol Pot. Perhaps they were actually agents of God's wrath, and not bad guys at all?
quote:
There is good news - God does not let sin go unpunished.
But thats bad news for me - because I am a sinner.
Can't be both.
quote:
But its great news that Jesus died in my place.
How I love God for his justice and fairness. And how I love him since his love for me is so great that he is punished in my place.
Shame He wasn't in such a good mood when He gave Joshua his mass murder orders, wasn't it?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
Karl - If only you'd get saved, and maybe if you'd been a christian for as long as fish fish, then you'd understand...
Regards
M UK
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
I don't get it. Really I don't.
What's the most serious sin in the Bible? Is is terrorism? Genocide? Or is it rebellion against God?
It seems that its rebellion against God that is the ultimate sin, (which of course leads to the others). I've been studying Amos recenly. The 1st few chapters list the sins of the nations, which get increasingly serious and gross. But then God turns to Judah, his own people - and their sin is the worst of all "...I will not turn back my wrath. Because they have rejected the law of the LORD and have not kept his decrees..." (Amos 2:4)
Your responses take a human centred view of sin. But God's view of sin is different. He hates rebellion against him. And so he hates the rebellion of al-Qaida, and he hates the rebellion of the Amekelites, and he hates my rebellion as well.
But he gives me the choice - rebel, and reap the consequences (be without him who I reject for ever), or repent.
And this isn't just an OT view. Its consistent throughout the whole Bible. And Jesus taught this himself...
quote:
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels.
Mark 8:38
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
In other words, the answer to the question:
quote:
Most of my family are not Christians. Consequently, according to traditional, bible-based, fundamentalist if you like, theology, they are going to burn in agony for eternity.
And you expect me to love God for this?
Is "Yes"?
Well, you know what you can do with it. I don't see anything holy, just or good about this image of God whatsoever.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
AB
Shipmate
# 4060
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Would God be loving if he didn't punish sin?
Would he be loving if he turned a blind eye to the victims of the holocaust and left it unpunished?
Would he be loving if he shrugged his shoulders at al-Qaida and left the terrorists unpunished?
No - he'd be an indifferent, cruel, uncaring God.
There is good news - God does not let sin go unpunished.
But thats bad news for me - because I am a sinner.
But its great news that Jesus died in my place.
How I love God for his justice and fairness. And how I love him since his love for me is so great that he is punished in my place.
Whilst I'm sure you are aware of it, and will surely dismiss it nevertheless, I feel I ought to point you towards the thread on Substitionary Atonement to reveal that not everyone has your take on justice, sin and mercy.
But avoiding that particular topic - Fish Fish, do you think that everyone deserves a horrible gruesome death as recompense for not always knowing differently? Specifically thinking of Joshua 6-10 here, were God orders the bloody genocide of an entire race, women and children too. I would much rather believe in an errant Bible, than assume that the Lord I love, is the Lord who commanded that.
AB
--------------------
"This is all that I've known for certain, that God is love. Even if I have been mistaken on this or that point: God is nevertheless love."
- Søren Kierkegaard
Posts: 513 | From: not so sunny Warwickshire | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AB:
But avoiding that particular topic - Fish Fish, do you think...
AB
I wonder if the question should have stopped just there?
Regards
M UK
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
AB
Shipmate
# 4060
|
Posted
Cross posted with Karl, nice to know we are thinking along similar lines ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Fish Fish, don't suppose you could try a slightly less confrontational conversation style, could you? Something less along the lines of, this is the truth, accept it, and more along the lines of, this is how I see it.
It'd save me calling you down to the hot place, y'see.
AB
[ 18. February 2004, 13:49: Message edited by: AB ]
--------------------
"This is all that I've known for certain, that God is love. Even if I have been mistaken on this or that point: God is nevertheless love."
- Søren Kierkegaard
Posts: 513 | From: not so sunny Warwickshire | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AB:
Fish Fish, don't suppose you could try a slightly less confrontational conversation style, could you? Something less along the lines of, this is the truth, accept it, and more along the lines of, this is how I see it.
Ok, sorry - sometimes what seems reasonable when huredly typed here comes across as confrontational - so I appologise for that.
In my defence, others make equal claims to know the truth with statements such as
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
Karl - If only you'd get saved, and maybe if you'd been a christian for as long as fish fish, then you'd understand...
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
quote:
Originally posted by AB:
Fish Fish, don't suppose you could try a slightly less confrontational conversation style, could you? Something less along the lines of, this is the truth, accept it, and more along the lines of, this is how I see it.
Ok, sorry - sometimes what seems reasonable when huredly typed here comes across as confrontational - so I appologise for that.
In my defence, others make equal claims to know the truth with statements such as
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
Karl - If only you'd get saved, and maybe if you'd been a christian for as long as fish fish, then you'd understand...
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Fish Fish
quote:
What's the most serious sin in the Bible? Is is terrorism? Genocide? Or is it rebellion against God?
It seems that its rebellion against God that is the ultimate sin, (which of course leads to the others).
So God commands genocide as a punishment for the ultimate sin of rebelling against him?
Do you realise that this is precisely the rhetoric that Al-Quaida uses to defend its jihad against the godless west? Yet, you say that God punishes Al-Quaida. Surely by your description God is on the side of Al-Quaida? If you respond that Al-Quaida are worshipping a false God ... even Satan ... could that not be the charge laid against anyone who believes in a genocidal God? Is that not just another coal on the fire of atheism?
Biblical inerrancy is heady dangerous stuff. In the wrong hands it can easily lead to international terrorism ... Christian or Islamic. I am sure you are sincere and mean well but not every inerrantist with a political agenda in the name of God is like yourself. Be careful what you preach.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Dear Fish Fish
So God commands genocide as a punishment for the ultimate sin of rebelling against him?
When a nation starts burning its children as sacrifices, and other oher revolting sins, and is in total rebellion to God (Deut 25:18), what should God do? Sit and watch?
It seems to me that God needed to act before this revolting cancer spread to other nations around about.
Crucially, Israel was not to feel smug or self righteous about their participation in God's judgment - "It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations..." (Deut 9:5)
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Biblical inerrancy is heady dangerous stuff. In the wrong hands it can easily lead to international terrorism ...
It seems to me that this danger can be applied more easily to those who reject innerancy. If we reject Biblical authority, then we assume the right to determine our own rules, and moral chaos ensues...
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
I simply went into a meeting at work, and came out to find that this discussion on inerrancy has been hijacked into a discussion about terrorism/genocide/ whether we should love God etc.
I think I may have inadvertently caused this. Many apologies if I did.
However, I will say that the argument of "I just don't accept that this can be true" is both philisophically, and logically extremely weak, not based on historical evidence, or any sensible hermeneutic consideration. That's what I want to talk about. If others don't want to, then fine, but I'm not going to join in any discussion that lacks any logical coherence.
IF you want to discuss how those extremely difficult passages of the OT should be applied in the light of the NT with some sort of Biblical theology hermeneutic, I am happy to do that. But not here on this thread about inerrancy.
And I'm also upset that what was a measured discussion in which I was learning a lot, as well as putting forward my own opinions, has now turned into a party political slanging match. If you want to indulge in that, go and do it in Hell. I want to have an intelligent conversation about the matter in hand. Can we do that?
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Dear Fish Fish
So God commands genocide as a punishment for the ultimate sin of rebelling against him?
When a nation starts burning its children as sacrifices, and other oher revolting sins, and is in total rebellion to God (Deut 25:18), what should God do? Sit and watch?
The answer according to the Book of Joshua appears to be "kill all the children". There is some kind of non-sequitur between "These people are terrible, killing their children" and "Therefore, I'm going to get Joshua to kill them all, including the children I'm so concerned about".
quote:
It seems to me that God needed to act before this revolting cancer spread to other nations around about.
But you also miss Fr Greg's point. I think you'll find that Al Qaeda think they need to act to prevent the "cancer" of western secularism and imperialism from infecting the good Muslim world.
quote:
Crucially, Israel was not to feel smug or self righteous about their participation in God's judgment - "It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of their land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations..." (Deut 9:5)
Genocide's OK as long as the culture you are destroying has nasty enough people in it?
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Biblical inerrancy is heady dangerous stuff. In the wrong hands it can easily lead to international terrorism ...
It seems to me that this danger can be applied more easily to those who reject innerancy. If we reject Biblical authority, then we assume the right to determine our own rules, and moral chaos ensues...
I'd rather the rational own rules of most of the people I know than the authority that commends genocide.
[ 18. February 2004, 15:09: Message edited by: Karl - Liberal Backslider ]
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Fish Fish,
This whole Joshua/genocide argument was made and discussed at length right at the beginning of this thread on pages 2-4 onwards.
When you contribute to a Dead Horse thread you are expected to have read the whole thread and to have made some effort to digest the arguments. Otherwise people just end up repeating the same old arguments which other posters have answered over and over again and we don't get anywhere new.
I suggest you go back and read the original discussion of this and then raise any points you don't think have been answered already.
L.
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Louise:
Fish Fish,
This whole Joshua/genocide argument was made and discussed at length right at the beginning of this thread on pages 2-4 onwards.
To be fair Louise, it was Father G who raised the genocide thing, and that was to answer me. I haven't read the whole thread so the repetition is probably my fault.
Sorry.
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Louise:
Fish Fish,
This whole Joshua/genocide argument was made and discussed at length right at the beginning of this thread on pages 2-4 onwards.
Erm, yeah - I was responding to what others had raised on this issue. But I'm sure I stoked the flames! Sorry again, everyone, for being too blunt in my postings here.
Can I move the argument away from the trench warfare on genocide, and raise an issue I raised in a thread on morality (which was then shot as a dead horse). I find this quite a compelling argument - and would welcome comments on what you may see as its weaknesses.
So here's a rehashed version of my argument for accepting the Bible as irrerant. It is related, I think, to whats come before about tricky passages and contradictions:
The more I read the Bible, the less "contradictions" I find. I used to see millions. I don’t see so many now. The vast majority of the Bible ties together wonderfully – with common themes, prophecies, and fulfilled prophecies etc. Since its written by many different people over many centuries and many places, this alone is a remarkable thing. And compelling evidence for the Bible’s authority as the revealed word of God. That’s probably the main reason I started taking it as God's word.
But I freely admit I find some bizarre stuff, and a number of verses which seem contradictory, or at odds with scientific theory etc. My argument is that, if there is an explanation that resolves an apparent contradiction, its fair to accept this explanation.
Lets assume 5% of the Bible is made up of these allegedly contradictory texts. One person states categorically that they contradict with the rest of the text, or with modern science etc. Another person says they can be solved. Both people can claim to have equally valid opinions. The latter looks stupid as they seem to contradict a considerable weight of scientific evidence etc.
But I believe they look stupid because the "contradiction" is seen in isolation from the rest of the Bible. When I realise that 95% of the Bible ties together beautifully, that gives much more weight to those arguing for solutions to the “contradictions”. If you like, the weight of evidence for the consistency of the Bible is so strong, that when we find one of those problems, any proposed solution isn’t just a “fly in the face of science” type argument. It carries much more weight than that.
Now I took the number as 5%. But the number of apparent contradictions is, I would suggest, much much smaller than that. There are some verses about Pi, rabbits chewing cud, and no doubt some others. But compared to the rest of the Bible’s consistent message, any solution to these minor problems of little significance must be much more compelling than you are giving credit. I would go further, and say the solutions are almost unavoidable!
So – to summarise – I find the Bible compelling as it is so consistent – and the inconsistencies are so minor. What an incredible book (books!) it is.
I'd love to know your comments on this.
Cheers,
FishFish
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
This is true Louise .. it "were me wat dun it." I tagged on to the end of this thread being brought here by something else. I couldn't face reading it all. It just struck me as an apposite example.
Fish Fish
Why is it so important to you that the Bible has it ALL right?
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
Fish Fish
Why is it so important to you that the Bible has it ALL right?
If it is, then we have an authoritative gold mine from God and this would be marvelous, and could transform the debates riddling the church, and revitalise all we do.
If it isn't, then the way I'm living my life and building my faith could change rather radically. My life has been shaped by an increasing conviction that the Bible is God's word. But I don't want to preserve this if there are good reasons not to.
Does that make sense?
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
p.s. Cos it seems to me that (say) 95% is so consistent, then there's a lot of momentum to show that the rest is actually consistant too.
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
quote:
If it is, then we have an authoritative gold mine from God and this would be marvelous, and could transform the debates riddling the church, and revitalise all we do.
Um... yes that's what people thought at the Reformation and we all know how that transformed debates leading to no-one disagreeing on anything, no differences of interpretation and everything being settled once and for all.
Not.
L.
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
But Louise, all we have to do is read it the exact same way that FishFish does, and then we'll all be in agreement.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
But MT, in order to do that we'll all need to get saved, then fishfish's crusade will be over here and we'll be robbed of his excellent posts...
My, it's a great idea!
M UK
[ 19. February 2004, 08:26: Message edited by: MatrixUK ]
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear FishFish
If it could be proved that there truly was 5% inconsistency ... non-inerrancy if you like ... how would that affect your faith?
I know it's hypothetical and probably an impossible speculation for yourself but I am genuinely interested in how you would adapt ... or not as the case might be.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr. Gregory:
If it could be proved that there truly was 5% inconsistency ... non-inerrancy if you like ... how would that affect your faith?
I know it's hypothetical and probably an impossible speculation for yourself but I am genuinely interested in how you would adapt ... or not as the case might be.
Its not a hypothetical speculation! As I tried to say above, I've come to the conclusion of innerancy, not becuase I have any reason to, excpet I think the evidence pushes me in that direction. I'm not the inflexable bigott I'm sometimes portrayed as - thats too easy an insult!
But, to answer your question, I guess I would want to see the proof. And I'd want to wait a while as well. Sometimes what seems like proof today will lose credibility tomorrow.
But if there was real proof, I guess I'd have to think through how I work out my faith. I guess I wouldn't lose my faith - but I'd lose confidence in how I know anything at all about God.
However, I've yet to see such a proof! There are things that trouble me, and questions I ask (not least about Genocide) - but it seems to me there are valid answers to these questions. And as the weight of evidence for consistency seems way higher than 95%, then these expanations carry much to make them believable.
Hope I've answered your question?
[ 19. February 2004, 10:19: Message edited by: Fish Fish ]
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
But Louise, all we have to do is read it the exact same way that FishFish does, and then we'll all be in agreement.
The way I read your response, you are agreeing with absolutely everything I say. I understand that you think I am the wisest thread writer you have ever encountered.
Is this valid reading of what you wrote? Is it an valid interpretation which is as equally valid to any other interpretation of your text?! If not, then why are all interpretations of the Bible meant to be equally valid?!
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
AB
Shipmate
# 4060
|
Posted
Fish Fish,
Perhaps truth rests with more than just facts. Perhaps truth is much more about how it brings about redemption and love and all things Christ-like.
I could therefore happily see more than one valid 'truth'. For the Truth is found in Jesus Christ alone and all truths lead to him - but not necessarily with facts.
AB
--------------------
"This is all that I've known for certain, that God is love. Even if I have been mistaken on this or that point: God is nevertheless love."
- Søren Kierkegaard
Posts: 513 | From: not so sunny Warwickshire | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
Karl - If only you'd get saved, and maybe if you'd been a christian for as long as fish fish, then you'd understand...
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
But MT, in order to do that we'll all need to get saved, then fishfish's crusade will be over here and we'll be robbed of his excellent posts...
My, it's a great idea!
Matrix, I'm enjoying reading this thread. Do you think you could see your way to dispensing with the hit and run personal attacks?
Thanks.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Matrix, I'm enjoying reading this thread. Do you think you could see your way to dispensing with the hit and run personal attacks?
Thanks.
Seconded.
[ 19. February 2004, 11:22: Message edited by: Leprechaun ]
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by AB:
Fish Fish,
Perhaps truth rests with more than just facts. Perhaps truth is much more about how it brings about redemption and love and all things Christ-like.
I could therefore happily see more than one valid 'truth'. For the Truth is found in Jesus Christ alone and all truths lead to him - but not necessarily with facts.
AB
I (think) I agree with this. Did you think I wouldn't? Perhaps I'm missing something! Sorry - Fish have tiny brains!!
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matrix
Shipmate
# 3452
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
Karl - If only you'd get saved, and maybe if you'd been a christian for as long as fish fish, then you'd understand...
quote:
Originally posted by MatrixUK:
But MT, in order to do that we'll all need to get saved, then fishfish's crusade will be over here and we'll be robbed of his excellent posts...
My, it's a great idea!
Matrix, I'm enjoying reading this thread. Do you think you could see your way to dispensing with the hit and run personal attacks?
Thanks.
These are not personal attacks, merely amusing (i hope) comments that seek to point out the oversimplicity or narrow-mindedness that lies behind certain posts. If, however, you would like to see an example of a personal attack, i refer you to my recent posts in hell. Alternatively, you could call me there and experience them for yourself.
You may disagree, that's your perogative, and you could ask for a ruling from an A or H.
Regards
M UK
--------------------
Maybe that's all a family really is; a group of people who miss the same imaginary place. - Garden State
Posts: 3847 | From: The courts of the King | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
If not, then why are all interpretations of the Bible meant to be equally valid?!
False dichotomy. There is a hell of a lot of real estate between "This interpretation is the only valid one" and "All interpretations are equally valid."
Let's say just for grins that there is only one valid interpretation. Okay, which one is it? Yours? Mine? The Roman Catholic Church's? The Southern Baptist Convention's?
Merely admitting to the fact that not all interpretations are equally valid doesn't all of a sudden make the Bible self-interpreting. It isn't now and never has been. This is the problem I have with your not-terribly-touching naïveté. Your sarcasm, on the other hand, is just lame. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
[not all spellings are equally valid either ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) ]
[ 19. February 2004, 20:03: Message edited by: Mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
What Mousethief said, and to beat my portion of the horse yet again, I submit that even if there were interpretational agreement in whole or in part, there will necessarily be wide variation on application of scripture to real-life situations.
Let's assume that we all agree that the Sabbath should be kept holy. Fine, but which day is the Sabbath? At what times does it begin and end? Is necessary labor permitted? What constitutes necessary labor? Can we hire unbelievers to do our work for us on the Sabbath? Is sport allowed? All sports? Spectator events? Can one drive on the Sabbath? Can one go on a pleasure drive? If so, what if the car needs gas or breaks down? And on and on and on......
Greta
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Would God be loving if he didn't punish sin?
Yeah, sure, why not?
quote:
Would he be loving if he turned a blind eye to the victims of the holocaust and left it unpunished?
How does punishing the perpetrators help the victims? Why is punishment the only response that isn't "turning a blind eye"?
quote:
Would he be loving if he shrugged his shoulders at al-Qaida and left the terrorists unpunished?
False dichotomy. There are a myriad of other choices between revenge (sorry punishment) and "shrugging his shoulders".
quote:
No - he'd be an indifferent, cruel, uncaring God.
I don't buy it.
quote:
There is good news - God does not let sin go unpunished.
This is good news? Dude, that's messed up.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
[QUOTE]QUOTE]False dichotomy. There is a hell of a lot of real estate between "This interpretation is the only valid one" and "All interpretations are equally valid."
Fair enough. Absiolutely right. I've never claimed to have the true interpretation. I'm just argueing that there is truth, and (in this thread) that the Bible is an innerant document, and so a great source for that truth. But I don't ever claim to be the sole authoritative interpreter of that truth!
There's a big difference between an innerance book and claiming to have an innerant interpretation of the book. The latter would be arrogance - but the former can be an oppinion held with humilty. Perhaps the confusion is why "conservatives" are often called arrogant?
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Would God be loving if he didn't punish sin?
Yeah, sure, why not?
Is it loving to the victim of sin foir God to shrug his shoulders and over look their pain?
I guess we are all happy to believe the Bible's teaching that God is love - but less happy to acccept he is a fair judge. So, perhaps I should change my statement to "Would God be fair and just if he didn't punish sin?"
And thats what I mean when I say
quote:
No - he'd be an indifferent, cruel, uncaring God.
Hope that makes sense
quote:
Originally posted by Mousethief:
quote:
There is good news - God does not let sin go unpunished.
This is good news? Dude, that's messed up.
I think its good news when we take into account he provides a complete and perfect means of forgiveness and cleansing through his own death. Wow - I consider that to be very good news!!!
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
If we are not punished for our sin, then God does let sin go unpunished.
I call that good news. You call it unjust. I know which I hope for.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
Actually, I find "God-breathed" and "profitable for..." rather a weak claim compared with the inerrancy and "actual Word of God" doctrines that are hung upon it. In Genesis Adam's life was "God breathed" but it didn't make him perfect by a long shot, as evidenced by his rather easily accomplished transition to the Dark Side.
Sorry - I forgot to respond to this a week or so ago!
Since its the writings that are God breathed this must surely be understood as a metaphor for speaking the words of scripture?
Try also 2 Peter 1:20-21
quote:
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
The ultimate source of prophetic writings was not man (though he wrote them and shaped them and his personality can be seen in them) but God writing through man.
Add to that the very frequent phrase "Thus says the Lord" in the OT applied to much of its text, and we build a picture of the authority of the scriptrues
And since God cannot lie (2 Sam 7:28, Titus 1:2, Heb 6:18), then the scriptures are true and without error. And God's word is even the ultimate standard of truth, according to Jesus "Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth." (John 17:17)
Sorry for the delay in response to this!
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fish Fish
Shipmate
# 5448
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl - Liberal Backslider:
If we are not punished for our sin, then God does let sin go unpunished.
I call that good news. You call it unjust. I know which I hope for.
I'm just going by what the Bible seems to say!
quote:
The LORD detests men of perverse heart but he delights in those whose ways are blameless.
Be sure of this: The wicked will not go unpunished, but those who are righteous will go free.
Proverbs 11:20-21
quote:
The LORD is slow to anger and great in power; the LORD will not leave the guilty unpunished. His way is in the whirlwind and the storm, and clouds are the dust of his feet.
Nahum 1:3
But Jesus was punished in our place
quote:
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.
Isaiah 53:5
--------------------
Thought about changing my name - but it would be a shame to lose all the credibility and good will I have on the Ship...
Posts: 672 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stoo
Mighty Pirate
# 254
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Fish:
Is it loving to the victim of sin foir God to shrug his shoulders and over look their pain?
Imagine I punched you in the face.
Which of the following scenarios is the most loving towards you (and, if you like, me):
a) Your dad comes over and punches me in the face
b) Your dad comes over and breaks my kneecaps
c) Your dad sits you on his knee, buys you an ice-cream and mops up your bloody nose whilst listening to what you have to say.
d) Your dad does (a) or (b) AND (c)
e) Your dad comes to find out why I punched you in the face and tries to work through my anger issues with me.
f) Your dad does (c) AND (e)
IMHO, punishment is only useful if we learn from it. But then, I'm a goddam left-winger, so what do I know.
--------------------
This space left blank
Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle
Shipmate
# 4792
|
Posted
Isn't it the case that you can't prove that the Bible is inerrant simply by saying it's consistent? In fact, you can't prove it's inerrant at all. You can believe that it's inerrant - or have faith that it's inerrant - but that's a different thing. It seems to me that it's pointless to keep on discussing that - why not move the debate to where it's really at - whether or not it we can end up in the same place spiritually speaking from both sides of the debate. I believe that we can (in as much as 2 Christians would ever agree that they are in the same place as someone else who doesn't 100% agree with them on every point of theology!). Possibly someone like Fish Fish believes that we can't.
Isn't the debate simply a question of whether it's a problem if you don't believe the Bible is inerrant? I don't believe the bible is inerrant. I think it's a response to God by man - not an intervention by God to man. I'm not saying by that that God doesn't exist - or that Jesus himself can't have been an intervention by God in our world. As far as I can see, neither of those two things stands or falls by whether or not the Bible is inerrant. That doesn't mean that it, or what it says become any less important - or that we need to study it any less. So what are the problems inherent in my view? Are they real or simply perceived? Or are they real problems if not checked by the application of church tradition and reason?
--------------------
where am I going... and why am I in this handbasket?
Posts: 318 | From: Kent, UK | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
IMHO, punishment is only useful if we learn from it. But then, I'm a goddam left-winger, so what do I know.
In that case I think it would be best if we didn't punish people for committing crimes at all. Let's just work out who's most likely to commit a crime and teach them not to with a bit of punishment.
After all, if moral culpability has nothing to do with punishment, and its only relevant to education, there's no point in waiting for the person to commit the crime, is there?
[ 20. February 2004, 15:09: Message edited by: Leprechaun ]
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stoo
Mighty Pirate
# 254
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
In that case I think it would be best if we didn't punish people for committing crimes at all. Let's just work out who's most likely to commit a crime and teach them not to with a bit of punishment.
With respect, you're talking rubbish. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Punishment works because of cause and correlation. If no crime/sin has been committed, then there is no link to forge to encourage the perpertrator not to re-offend.
An animal, or a child, will associate the punishment with the "crime" and learn not to do it again. If you're punishing for any other reason, it's just plain masochism.
Punishment must have a reason. If it's not to teach the offender, then what is it?
--------------------
This space left blank
Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stoo:
Punishment works because of cause and correlation.
Which is why it so often doesn't work at all.
A consequence that is separated from the antecedent behavior by time, by intervening events, by illogical reasoning on the part of the person, by impaired cognitive abilities, or by any other thing may end up being connected with the wrong thing. So, for example, when a child is playing in the street, if you call them to come to you out of the street, then smack their bottom (or whatever you're going to do), it's quite likely that the child will associate the consequence, not with being in the street, but with leaving the street, or with coming to you.
quote:
Originally posted by fish fish:
I guess we are all happy to believe the Bible's teaching that God is love - but less happy to acccept he is a fair judge. So, perhaps I should change my statement to "Would God be fair and just if he didn't punish sin?"
And the answer to that question is, "No." God is not fair and just. And why should he be?
Fairness and justice are tools for teaching us how to treat each other. And God commanded us to be fair and just in the OT -- "an eye for an eye" and all that.
But when God became incarnate for our sake, he told us that to be fair and just wasn't good enough any more. Instead, we are to be like God, who is not fair and just, but who is Love and the lover of mankind.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stoo:
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
[qb]In that case I think it would be best if we didn't punish people for committing crimes at all. Let's just work out who's most likely to commit a crime and teach them not to with a bit of punishment.
With respect, you're talking rubbish.
Punishment works because of cause and correlation. If no crime/sin has been committed, then there is no link to forge to encourage the perpertrator not to re-offend.
With respect. I am not.
the point I was making is that you were oversimplifying your theories of punishment. Rehabilitative is fine, but, as you rightly point out, there must always be a punitive link. Punishment will always be linked to the commission of wrongdoing, because it is punishment. So it is "rubbish" to say the main point is to change the behaviour of the offender. If so then we would try to do it before they offend. It will always be linked to wrongdoing - that is fairness or justice as we all understand it. Retribution will always be at least part of punishment
It does not therefore make God a sadist that he uses punishment retributively for eternity (although he does, throughout the OT especially, use it to correct) Retribution for wrongdoing is the core of punishment, says our moral consience. God works the same way.
[ 20. February 2004, 16:06: Message edited by: Leprechaun ]
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stoo
Mighty Pirate
# 254
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
Rehabilitative is fine, but, as you rightly point out, there must always be a punitive link.
Not quite what I was trying to say. I was saying that if punishment is to rehabilitate, there must be a link between the crime committed and the punishment. Without the link, it won't work.
quote:
So it is "rubbish" to say the main point is to change the behaviour of the offender. If so then we would try to do it before they offend.
Only if we were mind readers. You may think it rubbish to say that the point of punishment is is rehabilitate. I, on the other hand, believe it is one of the hall marks of civilisation. I believe Socrates agreed with me.
quote:
Retribution for wrongdoing is the core of punishment, says our moral consience. God works the same way.
Funny how Jesus didn't, though.
[ 20. February 2004, 16:17: Message edited by: Stoo ]
--------------------
This space left blank
Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Not quite what I was trying to say. I was saying that if punishment is to rehabilitate, there must be a link between the crime committed and the punishment. Without the link, it won't work.
Er..yes. A punitive link.
quote:
Only if we were mind readers. You may think it rubbish to say that the point of punishment is is rehabilitate. I, on the other hand, believe it is one of the hall marks of civilisation. I believe Socrates agreed with me.
Thare are plenty of ways to discover the likely groups of people to commit particular crimes. In your view - punish them! Stop them behaving that way!
We can't though, because read my lips Crime is linked to punishment. Punitively.
quote:
Funny how Jesus didn't, though.
Er,..yes, he went round demanding that people who had done nothing wrong be punished all the time. ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stoo
Mighty Pirate
# 254
|
Posted
We're arguing at cross purposes.
I am saying that punishment should have one purpose only - to rehabilitate. Any other purpose is, in my opinion, morally suspect.
I believe that Jesus specifically taught that we should not punish for the sake of retribution. (Matthew 5:38-44)
I believe that if we can rehabilitate without punishment, we should.
--------------------
This space left blank
Posts: 5266 | From: the director of "Bikini Traffic School" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
