The Tension of Faith

So what about the commandment to worship only one god?What about GOD? Ganesha hardly qualifies as GOD. Get serious.

So does the mercy of God and the forgiveness of God. You seem to emphasize God's judgment more than His mercy. How do you know that the things you spend so much energy defending and denying may be the things He wants you to let go of?As a representative of the Living God, how is what you market helping anyone?People may conclude that your God is too judgmental and not One worth knowing...nevermind following.You have tried to show them your argument without elaborating on why God as you know Him is so wonderful.I'm not saying that I have any better answers at this point...but God surely has a plan for everyone and not just for those who use His written authority as their justification for concluding an argument rather than suspending their belief long enough to examine their own Faith. You claim that you used to do this...why did you stop?

Jesus never taught His Disciples to disobey nor challenge the Roman government. Likewise, any business run by Christians needs to obey the laws of the land. It is George Washington, not Jesus Christ who appears on the US Dollar.

In what way or ways am I asleep?

Since I'm being discussed, perhaps its best if I give my 2 cents on the commentary. I know as much of the traditional beliefs (within Evangelical Christianity) as you do, Faith. The only thing you may have studied more than I is Christian History, but since you say that . Biblical Christianity is not a mere academic subject that should be batted about in the world's forums I can agree that its irrelevant. Now, concerning what is and is not traditional and orthodox, I used to agree with what you probably still believe...namely that the Bible is given to us by God in communion with early writers. (Inspired of and by the Spirit) Some of the counter arguments here at EvC got me to question the idea of inerrancy and for awhile I grappled with this whole idea of questioning...thinking and believing that perhaps I was doubting the faith and security I had been given.(Through being born again)I never doubted my salvation, however. This despite the fact that EvC challenged me to justify salvation through belief as opposed to doing works for the evidence of salvation. Ringo is a self-admitted unbeliever who has gotten me to question everything I have been taught. jar is a believer yet values logic, reason, and reality over the Creeds he was confirmed by in his own Episcopal Church. These two were not what caused me to question my faith, the bible, and theology in general, however. It was you, Faith. I began to read your exchanges with many here at EvC concerning the Biblical Flood and the interpretation of evidence. I began to see your character come out through the words that you wrote. At first I saw you as being gutsy enough to stand for what you believed, but as the illogic of your arguments and the reactions which you had towards your opponents became glaringly obvious, I began to question why a member of my own belief system would be so stubborn and illogical towards learned opponents who had actually studied the topic. So in response to the idea that EvC and its legion of unbelievers caused me to capitulate from a firm stand, I will say that it was you a believer who led me in that direction.Apart from all that, I still believe in one GOD, Creator of all seen and unseen...though I wont limit myself to understanding Him through Calvinism since I agree that Calvinism is illogical and that even Theologians whom I traditionally have respected such as RC Sproul are not above being questioned and challenged. If GOD cannot understand why I am questioning these ideas, and if by questioning these ideas I am going against Him, than let me be judged accordingly when the time is right. You and I both will be judged on our day by day character and representation of the God whom we believe that we know. In my opinion, the stand that you take is not the sign of a martyr for christ but simply the sign of a human too stubborn and proud to dare question anything. And that is what led me to question my own faith.I dont simply agree with everyone here at EvC, but of all of the members here, you are the only one who rarely if ever responds to my debate topics. Even Jesus would likely respond to me. Thats all I have to say.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Personally, I try not to use scripture without understanding to some degree the context for which it was intended.I also seek information from others on subjects and then make my initial conclusion. Some may call this as weak, but I dont simply divide the world into believers and unbelievers as I perhaps used to do to a greater degree.Lets use a bit of scripture here to make my point more understandable. Note Matthew 23, which you referred to. Jesus was addressing teachers and Pharisees. Why was he angry with them? What was it that they were doing that caused this anger?As for the critics of the Jesus Seminar I had to look up information in context and see what all of the fuss was about from both sides. Apparently, according to this first article,

quote:

---

This criticism is based on the knowledge that the Jesus Seminar eliminates any evidence they cannot explain using modern scientific principles.

​

The critics of the Jesus Seminar point to the fact that since God works outside the natural realm, you cannot eliminate the documented evidence of what Jesus did ( the miracles), and what Jesus said (His teachings) if you are going to make an accurate assessment of finding the truth of who Jesus said He is (the Son of God).

---

Sounds a bit like our own EvC discussion on The science of Miracles. The seminar was founded by the Westar Institute and had a twofold mission, according to Wikipedia.

quote:

---

The Westar Institute, founded by Robert W. Funk in 1985, is a member-supported nonprofit educational institute with a twofold mission:

​

To foster collaborative, cumulative research in religious studies
To communicate the results of the scholarship of religion to a broad, non-specialist public(...)Because of its emphasis on historical foundations over against dogmatic faith, Westar Institute has been criticized by evangelical and fundamentalist-leaning organizations. This criticism has appeared "almost from the moment that they published their first paper on the life and death of Jesus Christ.

---

So we again get back to our core debate regarding imparted revelation(regarding Gods nature, floods, and any other miracle...as well as the origins of Calvinism and the question regarding inerrancy of scripture) vs facts and evidence.

I would argue that the Eastern Orthodox have as valid a claim as Rome. Christianity originated in five cities officially and Rome broke away from the other four. At least according to what I have read.

The day that "Big Brother" can define for me what I think and feel is definitely not social progress in my mind.

Remember when there was that controversy over corporations being represented as people? The same goes for this entity known as "the law". It is society literally creating a "Big Brother" personal entity and judge over everyone.Which strikes me as odd that people reject the idea of a God over everyone and then go and create the same thing.I know I'm ranting and being foolish right now...but my point is that there is a difference between breaking laws regarding human rights and being charged with thinking of doing so. Innocence until proven otherwise...rather than guilt by association (of thoughts)

jar can be an enigma at times. Its almost as if he uses his tactic of silence and reluctance to explain himself as a means of control within any given debate. I agree with you in that he simply should just explain his opinion, but perhaps he really feels no need to do so, and figures if we are not bright enough to see the meaning, its somehow our fault of ignorance.Likely he is challenging our knowledge of the history of English law, which is a form of arrogance on his part. Any good teacher will explain themselves rather than simply insulting their students.Edited by Phat, : No reason given.