|
Post by Thorngrub on Jun 14, 2005 13:05:00 GMT -5
So ... did you taste, smell, hear, see, or feel God before you decided that you believed in Him? And where exactly did you discover that it made sense to call Him God? You did that on your own, did you?
Actually Chrisfan, I have written on the direct subject of our necessity to UNlearn the word "God", because in my opinion it has outlived its usefulness. Certainly not the concept behind the word - - that is and shall be everlasting. But this "Generic Omnicient Deity" which means distinct things to different people, should be fine-tuned a bit in my opinion.
So to answer your question - - I have accepted the use of the word "god", and found it wanting. So really, I don't think it makes too much sense to keep wielding this confounding 3-letter word. I think we need to get more specific.
And i would not say that I'm a religious prodigy. Just a person who was fortunate enough to be raised in a good church with a good confirmation program.
Amen to that.
|
|
|
Post by Meursault on Jun 14, 2005 13:41:27 GMT -5
perhaps it's the concept that's the problem.?? maybe
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Jun 14, 2005 14:13:05 GMT -5
So ... did you taste, smell, hear, see, or feel God before you decided that you believed in Him? And where exactly did you discover that it made sense to call Him God? You did that on your own, did you?Actually Chrisfan, I have written on the direct subject of our necessity to UNlearn the word "God", because in my opinion it has outlived its usefulness. Certainly not the concept behind the word - - that is and shall be everlasting. But this "Generic Omnicient Deity" which means distinct things to different people, should be fine-tuned a bit in my opinion. So to answer your question - - I have accepted the use of the word "god", and found it wanting. So really, I don't think it makes too much sense to keep wielding this confounding 3-letter word. I think we need to get more specific. Yes ... but your view on the relevance of the word really doesn't matter here. THe point is, you learned the word in a way other than simply using your five senses. You depended on other people to gain that knowledge. So, you're supporting my original point. Thanks for that.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Jun 14, 2005 14:51:12 GMT -5
So to answer your question - - I have accepted the use of the word "god", and found it wanting. So really, I don't think it makes too much sense to keep wielding this confounding 3-letter word. I think we need to get more specific. Pick a word, then, and we'll use it. If you find the word "God" wanting, that is a matter of semantics and has nothing whatsoever to do with what we're talking about here. I am sorry if I give the impression that I think I'm right and that you're wrong. The thing is, when you're dealing with ABSOLUTES there is no grey area. God either IS or He ISN'T. The Bible is either the word of God or it's the word of men. You already percieve this, as you have consigned it already to the enormous stack of works that make up "the words of men", refusing to even accept the possibility that it might be more. We're at a stage in this discussion where there is no escaping an "I'm right and you're wrong" position. If you think about it, you'll see that you also feel that you're right while I must be wrong. Surely you see this. You are just as resistant (if not more so) to the things I've presented as I have been to your philosophy. Despite postmodern attempts to gloss this over in the name of irony and "getting along with each other AT ANY COST", the fact remains that ethics and religion must needs be EITHER/OR propositions. The problem you seem to have is that it bothers you, frustrates you, upsets you that I would presume to be right on the basis of what the Bible teaches. It seems to irritate you that I don't assimilate (at least some of) your personal philosophy into my own beliefs, validating them to some degree. But even if I thought they were consistantly logical and wanted to I couldn't, because they just don't jibe with the paradigm I've accepted as the Kingdom of God that I live within. And so I hope you don't take offense...but it's not ME that's right...it's God's word, the Bible. As long as you (or anyone else) rejects that and espouses a belief system/personal philosophy that contradicts it, then according to it you are wrong. I don't judge you as "wrong", the Bible does... Hopefully you can see that it's not a matter of personal pride or ego (or especially some NEED to be right) that compels me to say things that give you this "I'm right You're wrong" impression. If that impression is out there it is because of my acceptance of the Bible as ABSOLUTE TRUTH. So I hope you won't hold it against me, just as I don't give a second thought the continuous implication I get from you that is more like "I MAY BE right, but YOU HAVE TO BE wrong BECAUSE you accept the 'WORDS OF MAN' as the word of God"......
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Jun 14, 2005 15:01:15 GMT -5
perhaps it's the concept that's the problem.?? maybe Shane, I respect that you are on a spiritual journey and are open to many different "concepts" about religion/philosophy, etc. That's fine and commendable, and I hope you find what you're looking for. But I refuse to discuss God as if He were a "concept". And I also refuse to belittle the revelation of God in the Holy Bible by discussing it as if it also were nothing more than a "concept". If it is something else that you're referring to as "a concept" (or if you're referring to something besides what I have been talking about) then you may disregard this post.
|
|
|
Post by Meursault on Jun 14, 2005 15:29:34 GMT -5
I'm saying the word "god" (the dictionary word) when used between two people who have different beliefs about him/it/her and his nature can easily.....
well i'll try and say it another way...you have an Orange and call it God, Thorn has an Apple and calls it God...Thorn refers to apples as god as well...you refer Apples only as God.
Have you ever heard the story about the two guys who thought they each had the perfect blue prints two build a house, but the houses were both different on paper? When each man saw the other mans house they picked out everything they thought was wrong with it, or what made it less of a house because it wasn'tthe same as his own? Perhaps this situation could be compared with that, am I off base with this idea?
If this makes no sense, please laugh with me.
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Jun 14, 2005 15:41:17 GMT -5
Here Shane, I'll try to illustrate it for you. First, I need your help. What is something in your life that you absolutely know to be true? It can be anything. It can be something as simple as "I live in Canada". Just something, that you know without question, is true?
|
|
|
Post by Meursault on Jun 14, 2005 15:45:15 GMT -5
I'm a butterfly dreaming she's a man.
|
|
|
Post by Meursault on Jun 14, 2005 15:50:27 GMT -5
More seriously though..lets say...the theory of gravity, because it is demonstrably true.
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Jun 14, 2005 15:55:29 GMT -5
More seriously though..lets say...the theory of gravity, because it is demonstrably true. Okay. So you know that gravity exsists, and that it keeps you and other people and things from floating off the earth, right? You know it's true. You've read it in books, and been taught it for years. You see that you're not floating around, so it's obviously true. Now, if Jac came along and said "Oh that's a nice theory. But don't you know that the reason that you don't float off the earth is because you have metal in your feet, and there's a magenetic force field in the earth. You just stick. That's why you don't float" it would seem rather absurd to you, right? Just like if you said "I'm Canadian" and I came along and said "Well, I'm not so sure that you ARE Canadian. I think that hte part of the earth where you've always lived is ACTUALLy Korea. You're Korean" it'd be absurd to you. It's the same way with me, Jac, Melon, Amp, or any other Christian when asked to entertain the idea of a "concept" of God, or that the bible may not REALLY be the word of God. It's not a theory for us. It's not a really interesting idea. It's not just a piece of fruit. It's as evident to us as it is that we've got 10 fingers and 10 toes (assuming that Jac, Melon, Amp and others have all their digits).
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Jun 14, 2005 16:07:23 GMT -5
God is not limited to my conception of Him. God is not limited to ANYONE'S conception of Him. But God has made Himself known through the words of Scripture. Scripture which has been validated by Jesus Christ's acceptance of it as truth. Jesus Christ's divinity has been validated by His resurrection from the dead (among many other signs and wonders). I've made this point before on this board, but I will repeat it. If Jesus Christ had said that Vishnu was His Father and that the Bhagavad Gita was the word of God, I would be proselytizing Hinduism today and not proclaiming YHWH as maker of heaven and earth. If Jesus had said "Do it your own way, as all paths lead to God" I would sample each and every religion as if they were fine vintages in a wine-tasting festival. As it stands, Jesus Christ testifies to the truth of YHWH, the LORD God Almighty, as the ONLY God. Therefore, having accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour, I also accept His testimony as TRUTH. This is why I reject other "spiritual paths"...not because they don't have something to offer. Many of them do. But insomuch as they don't have the Lord's "Seal of Approval", I cannot embrace them as revealed truth.
But your analogy that "my God is oranges" while Thorn's is "Apples AND oranges" is in error. We're not really discussing WHAT GOD IS (as if anyone could ever fully comprehend that) so much as we're debating WHAT HE HAS (OR HAS NOT) REVEALED TO US (via the Bible or nature or whatever means) and whether the revelations we've accepted are adequate. The house analogy is faulty as well, because I for one am not picking and choosing which attributes I think God should have. I'm not building Him as I go. I'm accepting the Bible as His revelation, and so what I am doing is adjusting to the Kingdom worldview I now exist in as a child of God (ie. a Christian). I don't reject Thorn's worldview because I think it's wrong. I reject it because it is antithetical to the paradigm of reality as revealed in the Bible, to the extent that I have so far understood it.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Jun 14, 2005 16:17:25 GMT -5
Last I checked, I DO have ten fingers and ten toes, though at one point I became confused when a postmodernist tried to convince me that I had eleven because he was a little bit drunk and was coinvinced he'd seen an extra thumb on my right hand. I never could convince him that it was just his alcohol blurred vision that was responsible for the hallucination. To this day he tells people about the "eleven fingered bass player" he saw at a Mad Laugh show. Alas, I know the truth, that I only have ten fingers, as I can count them even now as I use 4 of them to type this message. If I were to die tonight , this guy would go to his grave believing that I have eleven fingers. Oh, well. Not that it matters how many fingers I have. But what if the Bible is what it says it is? Can anyone really afford to dismiss it as handily as has been done by many on this board?
Excellent post, Chrisfan.
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Jun 14, 2005 16:26:18 GMT -5
Yes ... but your view on the relevance of the word really doesn't matter here. THe point is, you learned the word in a way other than simply using your five senses. You depended on other people to gain that knowledge. So, you're supporting my original point. Thanks for that. You're welcome. Happy to provide you with your little victory.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Jun 14, 2005 16:32:06 GMT -5
Yes ... but your view on the relevance of the word really doesn't matter here. THe point is, you learned the word in a way other than simply using your five senses. You depended on other people to gain that knowledge. So, you're supporting my original point. Thanks for that. You're welcome. Happy to provide you with your little victory. Why do you look at this as a battle with victories and defeats?
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Jun 14, 2005 16:38:25 GMT -5
I think what JAC is saying is understandable. He (as well as Chrisfan, and many others) have accepted the paradigm of spirituality as testified in the bible, and they have gone so far as to accept it as indisputable reality; whereas, I, myself, and me (amongst others) merely have chosen not to. Aside from that, we are quite similar & humbled before the majesty of this great universal mystery. Some may have had assistance in lending a "name" to the mystery, and through Faith, have devoted themselves to its cause; whereas some, on the other hand, are content with allowing this mystery to remain unsolved and unknown -- nameless -- and have devoted themselves to the idea they may never know, or "see the light". Me: After realizing this light cannot be seen in a conventional manner, remain content to be illuminated in it with my eyes shut tight.
I wish all herein a spiritually prosperous journey, and a fulfilling lifetime while dwelling upon the face of this earth.
|
|