|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Politcally Correct Christ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Hey Robin,
Have you read "The Problem of Pain" by CS Lewis?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
I'm talking about what it says in a book. To my mind, there's a lot about Christ dying for our sins in the Bible, but Jar and Ringo find it plausible to reject that idea, apparently thinking that they can just interpret a passage any way they care to to make it fit with their modern beliefs. That doesn't sound very legitimate to me. Its not a modern view Robin - it's as old as the hills. In Romans, Paul constantly refers back to the OT in order to show that what he is arguing for is in fact something that has always been the case. For example, in his argument regarding righteousness by faith he points back to the very father of the nation, Abraham - and points out that the OT said it was his believing God which resulted in righteousness being credited to him. Jar and Ringo share the same blindness which caused the Pharisees then to see it as they did. Sure, there is some spannering at the edges, some moulding into current philopsopy but the essential view behind it is the same: your standing before God depends on what you do. What is 'behaving yourself' but another way of saying you need to adhere to Gods laws? There is nothing new under the sun Robin. Absolutely nothing. You say you've read The Problem of Pain. Well you will remember what it his CS says about the Fall. What it is that man sought and seeks to maintain - to not have to be dependant on God. There is, I repeat, nothing modern about the view which attempts to achieve own righteouness. You'll have seen as much of that in the Bible as you have Christ dying for our sins. Now I can understand how someone like me might argue with Ringo or Jar or the like. But given what you know - why are YOU dissecting their views. You trying to be an evangelist or something
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Robin is a Christian, you seem to be about the only one here doesn't know that. What! Did I miss an EvC confession of faith?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
I prefer to attack the sources of boredom rather than ignore them Is nihilism interesting?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Yes, in that it has the savor of reality. So which do you find interesting: the map (nihilism) or the territory it plots out (reality)? I assume it must be the map, for the territory so plotted seems only to offer boredom. And more on topic: does your attraction to Christ (in so far as you are attracted to him) lie in a reading that sees him as non PC, anti-establishment, counter-culture, revolutionary
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
I mean, I am an atheist and I couldnt care less how people choose to define their faith. However, I do get a chuckle at the Christians fighting amongst themselves about who is a Christian and who isn't, it just confirms that I made the correct decision to walk away from this joke of a religion. You do know that if any (general) version is true this means that you have fallen for the very simplest sleights of hand. The spirtitual equivilent of the "three cups and a pea" trick? You would have been one of satans easier lays... "Here lieth Brian. He went without a whimper"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
I find many of Christ's sayings attractive in a literary sense. His "anti-establishment" side doesn't interest me. Literary sense! Literary sense!! I give up....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Indeed Iano... You may very well have picked the wrong one too. Afraid that's not possible Crevo. God can prove he is not satan (by just being God as it happens). If he couldn't manage that then he wouldn't be God - now would he?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
well I've only got your word for that haven't I? Well, you have the Bibles as well but you don't believe that either so lets not go there. To be honest, I wouldn't place my trust in what a book or some individual on an internet discussion group says - certainly not on what is arguably the most important question you could ever get an answer to. On such matters you need something a lot more convincing than that. Don't settle for anything less than overwhelming conviction y'hear. It'll help you avoid the cults if they come a calling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Well, from a moral standpoint, these generalized abstract rules such as "Love your neighbor as you love yourself" don't make much sense to me. For one, I don't think it's possible and two, I'm not even sure it's desirable. It doesn't seem to apply to real life as I know it. Perhaps you are a Christian afterall. Your obtuseness for one seemingly smart is evidence in favour of that view. There is (as seems a popular expression yourside) a disconnect. You know the law, whether summed up in two Great Commandments or in its expanded whole, is not given that it may be followed by all as some moral guide. You've already plumped for CS Lewis' option of Christ being deluded. Let's not now switch tracks to suppose he was some great moral teacher. You know what the purpose of the law is Mr. Schoolteacher (thats a hint lest you've forgotten) I'm not sure what you mean about desirability. Heaven on earth is what you would get and for sure it doesn't apply in real life. Its not supposed to. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
I know he's not a Christian - I was using the bs mudflinging as a tool to make a point. He IS honest and insightful and sensitive - insofar as Jar & Co demand that of anyone (oh! physician heal thyself). But c'mon - talking of Jesus as the great moral teacher at this stage. There is no excuse for that. He has read the argument already...
quote: Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Phat on page 1 this thread writes: The Bible is just a book---its not an object of worship. I worship God. But I don't consider the Bible as "just a book" either. Any views you have of Jesus rely on "just a book" rendering them worthless or they rely upon the Word of God - rendering them worth a listen. What say ye Phat? "Just a book" or the Word of God and to be treated as such. Not idolising but with the reverence due his word. If "just a book" then tell me...from whence any view you have? Your own feelings? Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
So the injunction of the Great Commandment is so abstract as to be meaningless. The injunction of the great commandments is not so abstract so as to be meaningless. There are two obvious conclusions to be drawn out of them. Firstly they are commandments. You are instructed, by someone who says he is God, to do these things and he has made it crystal clear what will happen to anyone who does not do what these commandments demand of them. To hell they shall go. The second conclusion you have already arrived at yourself - the most obvious conclusion of all. You agree that you cannot love your neighbour as yourself. You give one reason why following this commandment is impossible and I agree with that reason. But there are other, far more straightforward reasons why you cannot do this - no matter how you try: selfishness, greed, spitfulness, meaness, pride,lust etc. I have never met a person who does not possess all these attributes in some measure or other - no even myself. I suppose neither have you. Concluding as you do makes the commandment meaningless only if you insist that it was supposed to be plain old moral teaching to be sat up alongside the sayings of Gandhi and Buddha. Belief that he is or isn't God incarnate is irrelevant: you must take what he says in the context of what he says he is. Or you can persist in insisting his purpose was 'moral teaching'
That leaves the literary part. To merely dismiss this aspect as frivolous is to make a mistake. Compared to the above conclusions which may be drawn, frivolous the literary aspect most certainly is. {abe}
The religious part--that which deals with the supernatural--I don't relate to because I have never experienced anything supernatural. I'm not sure how you can say this. For instance, is your conscience the result of natural activity or supernatural activity? You could be experiencing supernatural activity far more frequently than you suspect. Science is a relative tiddlywink when it comes to answering such questions so there is no point in turning Mr Tentitive for questions that require Mr Definitive to answer. Face it - any certainty you have is purely on the basis of personal choice - in the heel of the hunt. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
To save me time, do you observe all 613 commandments? I follow some of the laws all the time, I follow all of the laws some of the time (usually when I am sleeping). But I don't follow all of the laws all of the time. Some of the laws (lust for example) I dance all over on occasion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1970 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
So, I will see you in Hell? 'Fraid not Brian. The purpose of the law is not primarily that it be followed. It is a tool which is used by the Holy Spirit to convince a person that they are hopeless sinners. And that being thus they are hellbound. That's the bad news - not the good news. It's a game of two halves... Hopefully I'll see you there with me in heaven. Never say never.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024