27 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterActually, I have very strong opinions and have a high level of confidence in them. But I recognize that they are just that: opinions. You seem to see being "definite" as strength. I see it as weakness. I see it as closing the door to Truth. The Truth is only hidden if one closes the door to it.
I would not say I have a complete understanding at all but that does not mean that one can't say "X is the truth and Y isn't" For example , scientists have an incomplete understanding of quantum physics but if you ask a physicist if he thinks that the basic fundamentals of quantum physics are the truth he will say "yes , definitely". Your reasoning se ther if I love my children what's the point if I don't demonstrate it to them?
Matthew 18:3-4
Most certainly I tell you, unless you turn, and become as little children, you will in no way enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Whoever therefore humbles himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneMy impression is that you have an all or nothing approach to this subject. Things are either "definite" to you and therefore closing the door on truth or indefinite and open to truth. Has it occurred to you that it's possible to be definite and open at the same time? It's not an either/or situation. I am quite definite about who Jesus is and is not but that does not mean I am not open to the idea that other religions have certain things to offer as well. If by "definite" you mean dogmatic then I would agree with you it's not strength, but that's not what I mean by definite. Being rigid and dogmatic is actually a very brittle position and quite weak , but again that's not what I mean by definite.
Actually, I have very strong opinions and have a high level of confidence in them. But I recognize that they are just that: opinions. You seem to see being "definite" as strength. I see it as weakness. I see it as closing the door to Truth. The Truth is only hidden if one closes the door to it.
Matthew 18:3-4
Most certainly I tell you, unless you turn ...[text shortened]... efore humbles himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.
Being open to Truth means being open to surprises , including the idea that the Truth might not conform to what we expect. I notice that you are quite hard to pin down on anything and yet you are "dogmatic" about humility and pride. You argue like a politician who likes to leave things open for fear of making a definite statement on anything. Staying on the fence is also a weakness you know.
So is this Jesus you quote so often the son of the living God or is he potty? This is the major question at hand. Jesus specifically and explicitly asked Peter who he thought he was. This was a self conscious decision designed to blow away ambiguity and interpretation. When Peter replies "You are the son of the living God" Jesus confirms this to Peter in a definite unambiguous way. The problem you have is that sections of the NT like this put us all on the spot. Like Peter we are put in the position where interpretation is gone , a decision has to be made. Why? Because that's exactly the way God wanted it to be. Truth can't always hide behind a veil of interpretations and approximations. I know it's tough and seems harsh and ruthless but 2+2 = 4 not 5 whichever way you choose to "interpret" it. And guess what? Accepting this does not mean there's nothing more to learn or that all the doors are closed , Jesus is still an immense mystery.
27 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterEvidently we have different definitions of "definite". The reason I have an "all or nothing" approach to the word "definite" is because I see it as being absolute. So no, it doesn't make sense to me that one can be both "definite and open at the same time."
My impression is that you have an all or nothing approach to this subject. Things are either "definite" to you and therefore closing the door on truth or indefinite and open to truth. Has it occurred to you that it's possible to be definite and open at the same time? It's not an either/or situation. I am quite definite about who Jesus is and is not bu o learn or that all the doors are closed , Jesus is still an immense mystery.
Like I've tried to express before, I see Truth as absolute and eternal. That means never changing. I don't see it as hiding "behind a veil of interpretations and approximations." I see man as being limited in his understanding of Truth, since he isn't God. I leave things open, not out of fear, but in recognition of my limitations. Because of these limitations the best I can have are beliefs and opinions. Sometimes I sense that this is also how you see it, but then you'll say things that make me think otherwise. Color me "confused".
27 Nov 06
I see man as being limited in his understanding of Truth, since he isn't God. I leave things open, not out of fear, but in recognition of my limitations. Because of these limitations the best I can have are beliefs and opinions. Sometimes I sense that this is also how you see it, but then you'll say things that make me think otherwise. Color me "confused". THINK OF ONE
It is precisely because we are limited in our understanding that we need God's help. I too recognise my limitations but I also recognise that God is not limited. If I perceive any truth clearly then it is with God's assistance , and this is a position of humility not pride. You are right , the best we can have is beliefs and opinions ON OUR OWN but with God's help we might expect something else. When Peter tells Christ "You are the son of the living God" Jesus tells Peter he is blessed because this has been REVEALED to him by God.
In your world view your God or truth and love or whatever you call it/ him/ seems incredibly passive. Does God not want to be known? Is he at all bothered? Is he even personal? I ask again- what kind of love is this? Also your world view just seems to be based on human qualities and limitations. Where is the activity of God or the presence of the divine in all this? Man is not God , you are right on this , but man has been inspired by God for centuries to perceive him. In the christian tradition God has made the leap for us and has drawn near to us , nearer than we dare imagine. But everything happens because God is working through men to preach , prophesy , heal , discern truth etc etc.
This is what makes Christianity definite and distinct . All other religions are about man's search for God. Christianity is about God's search for man. The truth comes to find us not the other way around. Truth is not a static or distant thing it is intimate passionate and dynamic. It is a felt experience not a concept , a living presence not a religion. If you don't understand this then for all your quoting of the Bible you have completely missed the point. Don't get me wrong , I'm not angry with you or indulging in pride. I'm not in the least bit "religious" really , but I know what I expect from a living breathing God.
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterIf your understanding of 'Truth' is so limited, then how can you know anything about god? Your post seems to be a contradiction. You claim to know an awful lot about god for someone with such limited understanding.
I see man as being limited in his understanding of Truth, since he isn't God. I leave things open, not out of fear, but in recognition of my limitations. Because of these limitations the best I can have are beliefs and opinions. Sometimes I sense that this is also how you see it, but then you'll say things that make me think otherwise. Color me "confus ...[text shortened]... bit "religious" really , but I know what I expect from a living breathing God.
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterDo you believe that a voice (or spirit) dwells in all individuals that guides them to Truth, regardless of gender, race or creed?
I see man as being limited in his understanding of Truth, since he isn't God. I leave things open, not out of fear, but in recognition of my limitations. Because of these limitations the best I can have are beliefs and opinions. Sometimes I sense that this is also how you see it, but then you'll say things that make me think otherwise. Color me "confus ...[text shortened]... bit "religious" really , but I know what I expect from a living breathing God.
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneAbsolutely , I believe this. it is beyond race or creed. That voice is the Holy Spirit and the Truth is the truth of love which found it's fullest expression in Jesus. Mind you there would be no voice at all if it weren't for Jesus.
Do you believe that a voice (or spirit) dwells in all individuals that guides them to Truth, regardless of gender, race or creed?
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterDoes that mean that before Jesus was born (or maybe before he died?), people had no guidance?
Absolutely , I believe this. it is beyond race or creed. That voice is the Holy Spirit and the Truth is the truth of love which found it's fullest expression in Jesus. Mind you there would be no voice at all if it weren't for Jesus.
27 Nov 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterDoesn't it therefore stand to reason that if one were to follow this voice, he would be following the will of God? Wouldn't this apply to non-Christians as well as Christians?
Absolutely , I believe this. it is beyond race or creed. That voice is the Holy Spirit and the Truth is the truth of love which found it's fullest expression in Jesus. Mind you there would be no voice at all if it weren't for Jesus.
28 Nov 06
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneAnd if one listens to the voices in ones head and, as they instruct, everyone must DIE DIE DIE, (since, if you listen to the Xians on this site, God is the font of all morality) is it still murder?
Doesn't it therefore stand to reason that if one were to follow this voice, he would be following the will of God? Wouldn't this apply to non-Christians as well as Christians?
28 Nov 06
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneSure. A well-dressed executive just woke up one morning in 1st century Palestine (or 8th century Arabia or BC 10th century Palestine or BC 15th century India etc.) and said to himself, "Why don't I just invent an exclusive claim to God so we can gain marketshare and crowd out the competition?"
Truth or means devised by religions institutions to create and maintain marketshare?
28 Nov 06
1 edit
Originally posted by lucifershammerGood one 🙂
Sure. A well-dressed executive just woke up one morning in 1st century Palestine (or 8th century Arabia or BC 10th century Palestine or BC 15th century India etc.) and said to himself, "Why don't I just invent an exclusive claim to God so we can gain marketshare and crowd out the competition?"
A more plausible scenario would be that believers in God X are asked by a non-believer why he should no longer believe God Y and switch to God X. I imagine a common response would be that God Y is a false God and the only true God is God X.
28 Nov 06
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThat's putting the cart before the horse. A believer in God X would not give the answer you suppose unless he did believe that God X is the only true God. If he doesn't, there is nothing to gain from a person switching from God Y to God X.
Good one 🙂
A more plausible scenario would be that believers in God X are asked by a non-believer why he should no longer believe God Y and switch to God X. I imagine a common response would be that God Y is a false God and the only true God is God X.
28 Nov 06
Originally posted by lucifershammerThat's completely false. Don't you think there exist cults that are complete shams run by devious leaders who don't believe a word of what they preach to get converts?
That's putting the cart before the horse. A believer in God X would not give the answer you suppose unless he did believe that God X is the only true God. If he doesn't, there is nothing to gain from a person switching from God Y to God X.