It seems to me that whether you are a liberal Christian (for purposes of this discussion, one who believes that the Bible isn't the inerrant word of God) or a conservative Christian (for purposes of this discussion one who believes that the Bible is the inerrant word of God), you have quandries that make your faiths untenable. Interestingly, these quandries are based on logical premises that each group of Christians maintain, premises which are reasonable.
The Christian who believes that the Bible is inerrant has the logical premise that a God who wanted man to know him and understand his commands would give him a book that accurately reflects his nature and commands. The quandry for these Christians is that they must defend the Bible, which contains contradictions, scientific and historical inaccuracies, and morals that would make most Christians today shudder if they came in any context other than the Bible.
Liberal Christians, on the other hand, reason that since God is a good and loving God and that because he wouldn't write something that weren't true, that therefore the Bible reflects the imperfect humanity of its authors. Since they believe that God wouldn't tolerate slavery or forbid women from preaching, or kill babies to get a point across, they conclude that these teachings and stories don't reflect the real nature of God. The quandry that they face is answering why God, who allegedly wants people to be redeemed and follow his commands, allows himself to be represented in a "half ass" manner, with a book that sort of represents him and sort of doesn't. Or they are forced to finesse what the Bible says in order to make it fit their liberal, enlightened premises.
Logic on both sides of the aisle. Quandries on both sides, as well.
Liberal Christians and Conservative Christians---The Inescapable Quandries
by mankkeli 21 Replies latest jw friends
-
mankkeli
-
james_woods
Be careful - such thinking can lead to agnosticism.
-
XJW4EVR
The quandry for these Christians is that they must defend the Bible, which contains contradictions, scientific and historical inaccuracies, and morals that would make most Christians today shudder if they came in any context other than the Bible.
Examples please? I find it hard to respond to generalized assertions. I prefer specific arguments with some sort of factual basis.
-
tec
The quandry that they face is answering why God, who allegedly wants people to be redeemed and follow his commands, allows himself to be represented in a "half ass" manner, with a book that sort of represents him and sort of doesn't. Or they are forced to finesse what
the Bible says in order to make it fit their liberal, enlightened premises.
Its not really a quandry. People misrepresent God all the time. In a book or out of a book. He should kill them all to silence them? Or... send His Son to show us the truth, so that if we look to the Son, we know not to look to all those others who are represenging him falsely.
Peace,
Tammy
-
botchtowersociety
(for purposes of this discussion one who believes that the Bible is the inerrant word of God)
That actually doesn't cut the mustard for a real discussion. There is more than one kind of inerrancy, or definition for the term, if you will.
-
jgnat
Let's back up a little further. It's impossible to defend faith on logic. To do so is to be played a fool, or perhaps even worse, bastardize the faith.
-
botchtowersociety
Let's back up a little further. It's impossible to defend faith on logic. To do so is to be played a fool, or perhaps even worse, bastardize the faith.
I do not consider faith to be irrational.
It is also impossible to defend logic without faith.
-
scotoma
Another quandry is to believe that some of the Bible is true and some of it is false. You then have to sort out several problems.
What are your criteria for saying something is truth?
Why would an omnipotent and omniscient being mix truth and lie together thus confounding a simple understanding of his intentions?
The Bible appears to be such a mix.
Or do you achieve the greatest coherence by believing that this "being" is quasipotent and quasiscient.
If this is the case we are not talking about God as western man imagines but something higher by some degree than humans.
Might there be such beings? Science would agree that there is a greater probability of advanced beings in the multiverse than there is of God.
If there are such beings it would explain how there could be a "revered" collection of stories, history, prophecy, that would form a "medium" for the propagation of certain "memes" that might organize humans for growth and survival with a minimum interference in their natural cultural evolution.
-
tec
Another quandry is to believe that some of the Bible is true and some of it is false. You then have to sort out several problems.
What are your criteria for saying something is truth?
Listen to Christ and his words first and foremost (from the written accounts, that is)... and test even those against love. (because of the lying pen of the scribes)
If one has the faith, however, then one might also 'listen' for Him to tell us what is true and what is not. Or simply to teach us so that we recognize truth against a lie.
Why would an omnipotent and omniscient being mix truth and lie together thus confounding a simple understanding of his intentions?
He would not. Man would though, due to his own lack of understanding and personal desires/ambitions.
The Bible appears to be such a mix.
It is that. Agreed.
Science would agree that there is a greater probability of advanced beings in the multiverse than there is of God.
Science would agree? May I ask how so?
Peace,
Tammy
-
scotoma
Tammy,
There is no way a human could possibly determine if some entity had achieved all-knowing without being all knowing themselves. And if an all-knowing (omniscient) entity needed to investigate another entity to determine if it were all-knowing then it wouldn't really be all knowing since it didn't know whether the entity it was investigating was all-knowing.
Therefore, the only thing scientists could determine is if an entity had super human knowledge.
It's kind of like systems used to predict stock prices. They work until they don't.
The fact that humans have been suffering horrendously throughout history suggests that at best those super human watchers that may be looking over mankind can't really do much to change things.