Scotoma, I don't understand how what you just said shows that science would agree that there is greater probability of advanced beings in the multiverse than there is of God. What science, and how, agrees with what you said? Thank you.
Peace,
Tammy
Liberal Christians and Conservative Christians---The Inescapable Quandries
by mankkeli 21 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
FlyingHighNow
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.You have liberal Christians in too tight a box there. It's a box you made. Liberal Christians are not limited to a God who thinks people must be redeemed or follow commands. They don't all think the same things. Unlike Jehovah's Witnesses, they do not believe everyone has to believe the same things or draw the same conclusions about God or life.
-
FlyingHighNow
What are your criteria for saying something is truth?
I know one way I wipe out a lot of the non sense that is attributed to God is to take 1 John 4:8 and 1 Corinthians 13:4-8 and measure all scripture against them. If they do not fit the definition of love, they are not from God. I'd say that the two scriptures I mentioned don't allow for tons of the Bible to be from God's pen. I look at scientific accuracy, too.
-
Qcmbr
Believers - confronted by the clear level of human involvement in the bible's creation and the factually incorrect statements (like a 6 day creation period) are left trying to backpeddle into a soft bible universe where any statement that disagrees with their modern secular sentiments (be they pro/ambivalent gay, ant-genocide, womens lib etc.) is therefore NOT what christ said or wanted and is a reflection of the culture whereas anything that does agree with their sensibilities (turn the other cheek, love your neighbour etc..) has been written down almost verbatum from the lips of Christ and anything not falling into those two categories is conveniently revealed by the spirit (but oddly matches the individuals pre conceived beliefs!!! So AGuest gets her revelation from her christ/spirit, OBVES gets his, Tec gets hers - all the other believers are getting theirs - apparently direct from the spirit.)
So here's a quandry - if the spirit trumps the recorded bible, whose spirit trumps whose (is Myleine tapped into the true spirit or is Psac etc.?) If this spirit is so cleary recognisable and always dispenses TRUTH why do those inspirations rarely agree? And why are believers so sure they have the truth when the next believer also is receiving truth but the two truths do not match?
Quandry - a last one I present - why can I back up my non-spirit induced truth with facts and evidence while every single believer is unable to do the same except in the form of storytime. Why are my truths testable and repeatable and bring actual practical, physical benefit while believers TRUTHS reveal nothing of any physical benefit (nothing of any scientific use), repeat trite wisdoms that are at worst pathetically absolute (e.g. love everyone) and in some situations downright dangerous (I refuse to turn the other cheek to child abusers or suicide bombers but that's just me - I see them as a clear and present threat to those I actually , authentically love - for biological and social reasons- that must be dealt with. )
-
FlyingHighNow
Q, you can't really claim that all of your truths are 100 % provable. Something else you should acknowledge is that only a certain percent of Christians have ever claimed the Bible was written by God and infallible.
-
Qcmbr
I see what you are saying but that's not what I said however, even truths that are some percentage backed by facts trumps TRUTHS. Imo.
-
tec
So here's a quandry - if the spirit trumps the recorded bible, whose spirit trumps whose (is Myleine tapped into the true spirit or is Psac etc.?) If this spirit is so cleary recognisable and always dispenses TRUTH why do those inspirations rarely agree? And why are believers so sure they have the truth when the next believer also is receiving truth but the two truths do not match?
In the same way that you would test the writings held in the bible (or outside of the canon as well), then test the spirit. Christ first. If you want to see something physical, then test the spirit against the words and deeds of Christ. But all of those (including the spirit that a person claims)... test against love. If something said or taught is not in the spirit of love or mercy, then it cannot come from Christ or God.
Is this foolproof? No, nothing is, imo. But making a mistake based on love/mercy is understandable (love covers over a multitude of sins)... making a mistake based on anger, or hatred, or self-righteousness - not so much.
Peace,
Tammy
-
scotoma
Tec:
Unfortunately, your whole concept of Christ is simply an archetype of "good". There is no proof of what Christ actually said. Islam looks at Mohammed as the "good". You are primarily a Christian because you were raised in Christendom.
-
tec
Was that your answer to the question I asked?
Peace,
Tammy
-
Qcmbr
tec - your answer assumes too much. It presupposes one knows what love is and that it is the final measure and that it is a synonym for Christ. These are just arbitrary circular, assumptions you made up to support your whole philosophy. Your entire argument requires you to understand the final product in order to judge the product that is its constituent part.