Last year was the climax of my awakening from the nightmare of poisonous religious beliefs. One incident that led to my escape was an update on the life of someone who was a committed and strong Christian. Before I get to the point, I should give you some background info. While away at college, I became friendly with a group of Christians who never allowed themselves to be tainted with the hedonistic ways of the secular youth on campus. I’ll never forget the Christian couple who brought their preteen daughter with them to our meetings. Here they were, a married mother and father together in harmony with their child.
This young lady was on fire for the Lord. She prayed, eloquently quoted scripture, and was basically a good girl. I can still remember her mother telling me how proud she was of her. She was the type of girl whom you knew had a bright future in Christendom. It was September of last year when I found out what had become of this young lady. The young soldier for Christ who seemed so rock solid in her faith ended up committing suicide. She had been diagnosed as schizophrenic in her early 20’s. It’s been about 10 months since I heard the news, but I can’t stop pondering the all important question. WHAT HAPPENED?
Was the “fire” we witnessed her schizophrenic disorder all along? Did she develop it later? And if so, how could a christian end up with such a debilitating mental disorder? After all, doesn’t the bible speak of a renewed mind? I should stress that I don’t know what really caused her disease. I suspect that her condition developed much later than when I last saw her. The problem is, there is a huge and sometimes dangerous problem within pentecostal/charismatic circles (I’d say charismatics much more so). You would not be hard pressed to hear people claim, “God spoke to my heart” or “the Lord told me…” so on and so on. Now what is schizophrenia?
It most commonly manifests as auditory hallucinations, paranoid or bizarre delusions or disorganized speech and thinking in the context of significant social or occupational dysfunction.
Auditory hallucinations…delusions? Would those symptoms include, God told me… The Lord spoke to me…? That is not to say that all pents and charismatics are mentally ill. However, there are some Christians who frown on the two groups while maintaining that God only speaks through his word (i.e. just read the bible instead of chasing after a voice). To them, looking for a voice or a sign is both foolish and unbliblical. Was the young lady who took her life a victim of the “God told me” doctrine? That is likely the case, IMO.
Sadly, her story left me hesitant of embracing certain aspects of prayer and faith. Rationality has taken root in my life and I feel much better now. I’m not an atheist nor an agnostic, but I simply cannot go along with the madness that’s found in some forms of Pentecostalism.
Filed under: Life | Tagged: Atheism, Born Again Christian, Charismatic Movement, Christian, Christianity, Death, Faith, Grief, Life, LorMarie, Mental Health, Pentecostalism, Rationalism, Reason, Religion, Schizophrenia, Secularism, Suicide, Tragedy, Youth
Hey Lormarie:
First, let me say that I am sorry to hear about such a tragedy. You wrote:
“Was the “fire” we witnessed her schizophrenic disorder all along?”
I don’t follow. On “fire” for Christ (from what I am told and observed) is generally a person who is fervent in their activities for God, preaching the Gospel, etc. I guess those of the Pentecostal / Charismatic persuasion might add to that ones “evidence” of tongues and such, however, the former (Pentecostals) seem to have a bit of error in understanding the whole “tongues” thing, but I digress.
“And if so, how could a christian end up with such a debilitating mental disorder?”
I don’t know of anything that scripture every suggesting that a Christian (or the righteous) cannot or will not get diseases. Life is life, good and bad, Christians are not immune to life, neither did Christ suggest that we were. What one who follows Christ is promised, is to be resurrected into a new life free from the pains of the former.
You continued with:
“After all, doesn’t the bible speak of a renewed mind?”
A renewed mind is a renewed spiritual disposition (same as born again, one does not actually get reborn from a womb, neither does one actually get a new “brain”), that being, seeking Christ way as opposed to our own. Sickness (mental and physical) can be part of the human condition regardless of faith or lack of. There are Christians with aids, cancer, bipolar disorders, etc.,etc., it can happen to any human.
You continued with:
“However, there are some Christians who frown on the two groups while maintaining that God only speaks through his word (i.e. just read the bible instead of chasing after a voice).”
Well, I say that frowning upon a group because they at least seek the SPIRITUAL is a bit inane and extremely prideful for any groups of so- called “Christians”.
Fact is, that God does talk to His people by His Spirit (that is if one believes what John 14 states), I would say this is not so much as a “HEY, this is GOD, do this or that” as much as it is the leading of god, similarly in a way we hear our own thoughts before we do things.
Either way, it is sad to hear about someone so young dying, I pray for her family, and I believe she is with God, and we’ll all understand it better in due time.
Lormaire:
You wrote: “Rationality has taken root in my life and I feel much better now.”
I apologize ahead of time if I am overstepping, but what do you mean by this statement? (And no I am not a “Pentecostal”).
Hey Lormarie:
First, let me say that I am sorry to hear about such a tragedy. You wrote:
“Was the “fire” we witnessed her schizophrenic disorder all along?”
I don’t follow. On “fire” for Christ (from what I am told and observed) is generally a person who is fervent in their activities for God, preaching the Gospel, etc–DJ Adam
Hi DJ Adam,
The main problem that I have with certain aspects of pent/charismatic culture is the tendency to get so super-spiritual that they avoid what is happening in the real world. This is similar to those who avoid medical treatment and end up dying instead of getting the divine healing they thought they would. We’ve even seen some unfortunate cases in the media. This led me to wonder if what this young lady was exhibiting was her illness rather than being truly on fire for her faith. But again, due certain groups relying on “spiritual experience” her illness could have been ignored.
“You wrote: “Rationality has taken root in my life and I feel much better now.”
I apologize ahead of time if I am overstepping, but what do you mean by this statement? (And no I am not a “Pentecostal”).”–DJ Black Adam
In my life, I have found that I can rely on what I see rather than what I think or feel. It all comes down to wishful thinking vs. reality. Three or so years ago, I went through a serious questioning phase in regards to theism vs. atheism. So I did the usual, read, read read… I participated in forums, read books by leading atheists (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris) and simply listened. While I can’t embrace atheism (that’s another post in itself), I cannot deny that what I read and was told by them made a lot of sense and even lifted me out of a pit. Atheists tend to have a “take a licking but keep on ticking” attitude that I admire. In other words, persevere without wondering why this or that happens…life happens. It is still strange for me to admit that atheists, (not christians nor the bible) helped me tremendously to understand life’s difficulties. So I needed some type of balance between what atheists were saying and what I believe concerning Christianity. That is not to say that my way of looking at the world will help everyone, but it works for me.
Long gone are the days when I’d wonder, “is it God’s will to move here, take xyz job, or date such and such guy?” Now I just use plain old common sense. Life has gotten much better for me. That’s what I call rationality.
@Lormarie:
Thank you for sharing, again I know that was a very personal question I asked. I do understand where you are coming from.
Though I am a Christian, and by that definition a “Theist”, I count amongst some of my best and most enlightened friends those who call themselves atheist, many of our conversations have helped me on my spiritual path.
You had written:
“Long gone are the days when I’d wonder, “is it God’s will to move here, take xyz job, or date such and such guy?” Now I just use plain old common sense. Life has gotten much better for me. That’s what I call rationality.”
I see, it is a matter of definition and presuppositions. I have come to find, that my particular way of looking at what a “Christian” is, is a bit unorthodox as far as the religion goes, there are some things I presuppose which are basic predicates of my faith, that fly in the face of many religious theological and traditional views of the “Christian” religion.
I think that what the Christian church needs collectively, is a good ole dose of common sense, or, at least looking at the scriptures in an honest way, to evaluate some of the currently accepted traditions and ideas, and get to a point of understanding what is truly expected of one who believes.
I myself see no conflict with rationality and a spiritual walk, what is “rational” I guess is subject to what a person accepts. I know many Christians whose worldview rejects many things that I have found as truths, both esoteric and scientific. So I can see how adhering to one of the traditional sets of dogma and doctrine offered within a faith structure can be inhibiting.
Studying atheism allows for a person to look outside of that framework, or at least is one way to begin doing that.
I think Pentecostalism, the movement, had merit during its onset at Azuza street and the subsequent movements of the Church of God in Christ and the Assemblies of God, etc., however, as with most things, people allowed dogma and doctrine to replace a spiritual walk.
You had written:
“The main problem that I have with certain aspects of pent/charismatic culture is the tendency to get so super-spiritual that they avoid what is happening in the real world.”
Well, I am sure you have heard the term of people “beings so spiritual yet of no earthly use”, so I understand what you mean.
I believe all things are possible through Christ, yet I see no reason to not take medicine when one is ill. But again, I presuppose differently. I presuppose that God is capable of all things, I also presuppose that He never said he would keep us from going through the pain of life. We are imperfect beings, flawed both spiritually and physically as scripture communicates, we will get sick, and all of us one day will ultimately perish that is the truth of our human condition, and is never debated in scripture.
God has given us many things in nature that we need (water, air, etc.) to assist us in this life, since most medicines are predicated on naturally occurring substances, I see no need to avoid them for the same reason.
I think where Pentecostals miss it, and even most protestant, orthodox and catholic traditions miss it, is by compartmentalizing their faiths, OR by replacing dogma, tradition, etc. in place of true spirituality. Spirituality is a way of life, there is no wondering what God thinks, there is either going with or ignoring what the Spirit of God is communicating to you. I have never known a Christian who sought the Spirit of God not to have an immediate answer or leading in a direction on decisions, I know many who for the sake of politeness, fear or their own desires who chose to ignore what the Spirit of God was communicating.
Anyway, I apologize for prattling on…
I have never known a Christian who sought the Spirit of God not to have an immediate answer or leading in a direction on decisions, I know many who for the sake of politeness, fear or their own desires who chose to ignore what the Spirit of God was communicating.
Anyway, I apologize for prattling on…–DJ Black Adam
The problem as I see it is that the process of seeking the Spirit of God in and of itself is frustrating…that’s before one even gets to the answer. While it may be easy for some, not knowing if you are listening to God, your own selfish desire, or fear is the difficult part. In fact, the most common statement I often heard was, “what if I didn’t really listen to God, but rather my own mind.” So I concluded that for my own peace of mind, just use common sense when making any decision. If mistakes are made, just learn from them and move on.
Don’t worry about prattling on. One of the reasons I create posts is to generate discussion.
I should add that perhaps common sense does come from God.
@Lormarie:
Thanks for tolerating me
You wrote:
“I should add that perhaps common sense does come from God”.
I would agree that it does, and add that, if one claims Christ, there is a relationship that we can utilize to keep us walking in a right spiritual direction. If I may suggest something; feel perfectly free to ignore me.
What I come to find is that many people misunderstand and many ministers misinterpret what being lead by the Spirit of God is. It is not so much “asking” God what His opinion is, it is knowing how to hear what the Spirit of God is saying, by first accepting that His Spirit actually is inside of you (the Christians) already. John 14:16-17 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.”
Shall be IN you. That is truly apowerful statement. 1st Corinthian 3.16 the goes further: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?”. That is a very simple as serious qualifier for John the 14th chapter. At this point Apostle Paul is sharing this information with the Corinthian church, which clearly shows the words that Jesus spoke went beyond the original audience and to the further Church. With it being established that the Holy Ghost (Holy Spirit, Spirit of God, the Comforter) is IN all who believe, then the beginning of understanding is to accept what we have IN us and utilize it for understanding TRUTH.
Further in John 14, we come to another piece of this foundational truth: John 14.26 “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”
With the Spirit being in us, it is a matter of listening. Let me give you an example:
A few days ago a friend of mind asked me some serious theological question, my desire was to answer him immediately, however; I heard in that voice we all have our conscious or common sense say “do not proceed”. At that point, I had a choice, to either listen or move on. The moment I began to rationalize, is the moment I knew to leave it alone.
Another example I have found in talking with people who seek “prophetic” words (I believe a prophetic word will only confirm the truth you already know). A young lady asked me what I thought God was saying regarding a man she didn’t know if she should be with, I gave her what I knew by the Spirit, and she knew already what I was going to say, because she already knew what God was saying, but she didn’t want to hear that, she wanted what she wanted regardless of everything that was saying the contrary, she chose to ignore that.
I hear what you are saying in regard to second guessing, that’s where relationship comes into play, the more time we spend in communion with God BEFORE these things come or these choices come, the MORE we’’ll know what HE is saying clearly and can have confidence in listening.
A person who wishes to be spiritual, has to read the Word of God and spend time in prayer, real prayer not religious exercise.
BUT, again I go on….
Interesting. Having grown up in pentecostal circles (my father was a preacher, along with almost everyone else in his family) and participating in it for a number of years, your sentiments are exactly what I would have advised others on and utilized myself. But I’d have to ask, where does one draw the line between following God’s leading and mental illness. In the course of my reading, I have found that some would classify it all as a mental illness although I personally think that’s unfair to categorize it all in such a way.
What would I advise someone today? If one really wants to follow God, check out what the bible may have to say about an issue and run with that. If the bible is clear on a certain issue, then so are you. If it’s not clear, God gave you common sense.
@Lormarie:
“What would I advise someone today? If one really wants to follow God, check out what the bible may have to say about an issue and run with that. If the bible is clear on a certain issue, then so are you. If it’s not clear, God gave you common sense.”
Well I of course agree that scripture is our first source, yet scripture says clearly we are to strive to be spiritual, and strive to be Led by God’s Spirit in regard to truth.
We have to ask, was Jesus mentally ill when he prayed and asked God for guidance? Was he schizophrenic when he spoke to the devil? Was Mary when she spoke to Gabriel? Was Apostle John when he had his visions of the future? Was Daniel when Michael spoke to him in regard to the answer to his prayers?
You see if we say one should go to scripture, scripture tells us some things that may not be in line with what little of the natural temporal / spatial world we can observe.
It comes down to knowing God’s voice, to differentiate from other voices we may hear from mental illness perhaps, or from other places (drugs, alcohol, subliminal suggestions, etc.).
It’s like this, a Treasury Officer from the IRS, knows counterfeit money NOT because he or she has familiarized themselves with every counterfeit in the world (which would be useless because another one wul;d be made immediately after you learned the last one) BUT because he or she has familiarized themselves with what REAL currency is.
We know God’s voice, because we should be spending time getting to know Him, perosnally and intimately, how else do we recognize His voice?
Well I of course agree that scripture is our first source, yet scripture says clearly we are to strive to be spiritual, and strive to be Led by God’s Spirit in regard to truth.–DJ
Strive to be spiritual? Which passage are you referring to? Whatever the case, there are many Christians who believe that using scripture is being led by the Spirit.
“We have to ask, was Jesus mentally ill when he prayed and asked God for guidance? Was he schizophrenic when he spoke to the devil? Was Mary when she spoke to Gabriel? Was Apostle John when he had his visions of the future? Was Daniel when Michael spoke to him in regard to the answer to his prayers?”–DJ
Jesus wasn’t schizophrenic, but then again, he is the savior of the world according to Christianity. The writers of the gospels offer no evidence or claims that Jesus was mentally ill. Many people are diagnosed as mentally ill today, though. That’s the important difference.
“We know God’s voice, because we should be spending time getting to know Him, perosnally and intimately, how else do we recognize His voice?”–DJ
I believe that if one wants to hear God’s voice, they just need to read the bible, meditate on it, etc. Anything outside of that isn’t necessary.
@Lormarie:
I am not trying to antagonize you, but looking at what you wrote:
“I believe that if one wants to hear God’s voice, they just need to read the bible, meditate on it, etc. Anything outside of that isn’t necessary.”
O.K., so what about when one reads the Bible and it says things like John 14.26:
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”
or that we are to be Spirit Led, how do you reconcile that?
“
DJ,
Don’t worry about antagonizing me. I’ll give you a bit of background. I am a biblically literate woman who has debated atheists, muslims, other christians, pagans, etc both on and off the internet. I asked you to bring in a bible passages as a dig to be honest. With that said, I encourage you to ask any question or challenge you wish. I thrive on such. I don’t say that to boast, I say that because I love debate…especially about the bible. But regarding the passage your brought in, take a look at the last 6 words:
“But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”
Jesus says that the Comforter would bring all things to our remembrance. What things has he said? The statement implies that they are things said already…nothing new or added. Thus, whatever we need is clearly laid out in the bible. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit would teach us principles that aren’t already given to us in the Bible?
@Lormarie:
“Do you believe that the Holy Spirit would teach us principles that aren’t already given to us in the Bible?”
Not at all, however, I do believe not even the best of us can remember every teaching in the Bible, so I beleive that the Holy Ghost does bring it back to our remembernce when we need it, thererfore it is something that happens outside of our natural mind that affects it.
Just to conclude my point, that yes we are to study scripture, however; God, by His Spirit does help us outside of that normal study or at the least, can bring to our minds something appropiate to our natural minds, when necessary. the timing being God acting outside of our natural ability.
Or even better, that God can bring something to someone that they have not read, but that He has stated.
#
DJ Black Adam, on July 20th, 2008 at 12:19 am Said: Edit Comment
Or even better, that God can bring something to someone that they have not read, but that He has stated.
As long as it is something that he’s stated already, that’s the key.
But there is still the issue of mental illness. There should be a red flag when one speaks of hearing voices (even if they claim it’s the voice of God). We should not automatically assume it’s a genuine spiritual experience.
@Lormarie:
“But there is still the issue of mental illness. There should be a red flag when one speaks of hearing voices (even if they claim it’s the voice of God). We should not automatically assume it’s a genuine spiritual experience.”
I think there generally is, I have been around charismatics and pentecostals, and for the most part, if someone starts talking about “hearing voices”, sure folks might lay hands on them and pray, but most folks I know would suggest a trip to a psychologist or pyschatrist.
However, I do know what you are getting at, you go some traditions that don’t do doctors, and that is tragic.
“As long as it is something that he’s stated already, that’s the key.”
I wouldn’t limit God to “what He has stated” though, I believe if wants to speak to someone regarding something specific to their live, He can and does.
The question is, when He does, do we listen, or go check for bi-polar disorders, and if checked off listen?
#
DJ Black Adam, on July 21st, 2008 at 8:10 pm Said: Edit Comment
“As long as it is something that he’s stated already, that’s the key.”
I wouldn’t limit God to “what He has stated” though, I believe if wants to speak to someone regarding something specific to their live, He can and does.
The question is, when He does, do we listen, or go check for bi-polar disorders, and if checked off listen?
I sure wish that someone in the mental health field would participate, both Christian and non. I also think that we come from different schools of thought. I don’t believe in the concept of “God speaking to our hearts” so on and so forth. Nor do I believe that one who does is necessarily mentally ill. I prefer reason, common sense, and experience. That is how God teaches us. Then again, there are plenty who don’t believe in God at all.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel about ministries such as…Joel Osteen, Todd Bently, etc…
@Lormarie:
“I prefer reason, common sense, and experience. That is how God teaches us.”
How do you come to that conclusion? Don’t get me wrong I believe in reason, and common sense is one of our survial mechanisms, but surely, what is “reasonable” (in the purely sceintific sense of the word) with believing that there is a cosmic being of immense power who is capable of parting the red sea, destroying the earth with a flood that He caused, immaculate conceptions, fire coming down from the sky to slay the prophets of Ba’al, stopping time so Joshua could slay the enemies of Israel, walking on water, turning water to wine, etc., raising the dead, giving sight to a blind man with His own spit, dying on a cross and coming back from the dead three days later, etc.?
The fact is, if the Bible is the source that you say we learn about God and hear from Him, there are alot of things that are communicated in its pages that don’t “stand to reason”, and by what we see in its pages, God communicates to His people in many ways, some of those ways are beyond our natural temporal and spatial confines and are SPIRITUAL. We are to exercise SPIRITUAL WISDOM even when it doesn’ make common sense.
Common sense would indicate that we are NOT coming back from the dead (as I have never met someone who has), common sense would have told Peter NOT to walk ON water towards Jesus, Common Sense would have told Prophet Elijah to RUN from the prophets of ba’al, UNLESS, they believed, and we believe in something beyond our “minds ability to understand”.
You continue with:
“Then again, there are plenty who don’t believe in God at all. ”
Which is reasonable to a degree, however, when you figure that we can see and are aware of very little of our temporal and spatial actuality, and known even less about the little bit we apprehend, there isn’t much that we have to base “reason” on. Heck the rules of physics aren’t even conistent threw time and space, again “reason” is a matter of what pressupositions you accept.
“Out of curiosity, how do you feel about ministries such as…Joel Osteen, Todd Bently, etc…”
I don’t know Todd Bently (is he related to Farnsworth Bently? I kid, I kid
But as for Joel, I don’t know enough about him to have a serious opinion. He seems sincere from what I have seen, but like I said, I don’t know what his ministry is about down there in Texas.
“The fact is, if the Bible is the source that you say we learn about God and hear from Him, there are alot of things that are communicated in its pages that don’t “stand to reason”, and by what we see in its pages, God communicates to His people in many ways, some of those ways are beyond our natural temporal and spatial confines and are SPIRITUAL. We are to exercise SPIRITUAL WISDOM even when it doesn’ make common sense.”–DJ
You say that some things in the bible would not stand against reason. I say reason according to who? To some it is beyond reason to believe in evolution (or more specifically that humans evolved from creatures). To others, that is perfectly reasonable. To me, atheism is unreasonable. But to others, I am unreasonable for not declaring atheism. Do you believe that Jonah was swallowed by a whale and then spit out again? Do you believe in talking snakes or talking donkeys? Do you know for sure that everything in the bible is literal?
But here is reason:
If one has pancreatic cancer, common sense says you are going to die from it. No amount of prayer is going to change that statistic, with few exceptions. Even then, one can beat cancer without spending one second in prayer.
If you are blind, common sense and reason says that you are going to stay blind regardless of how much you pray or scripture you quote…again, with few exceptions. One can receive their eyesight without prayer.
If you lose a limb, common sense and reason says that it will not grow back. Ever hear of the website titled Why God Will Not Heal Amputees? Prayer will not bring back your missing limb. Has that type of miracle been recorded even in the bible? When John the Baptist lost his head, there was no miracle placing it back on his shoulders.
Common sense and reason also says that the war in Iraq will not end tomorrow, or even next month…no matter how much faith one claims to have, it will not happen. Reason and common sense teaches us so.
Reason and common sense also shows us that if we want money, we have to work.
If we want to do well in school, we must study.
If you want to be healthy, take care of yourself.
One need not be a theist to have any of the above. Case in point, Lance Armstrong appears to be cancer free at the moment. He’s an atheist. He was an atheist before his treatment, during, and after.
Why do I believe Christianity survives? The God of the Bible is realistic. Human beings would at times react the same way Yahweh does… but that’s another post.
What do you feel is the purpose of Christianity?
“Prayer will not bring back your missing limb. Has that type of miracle been recorded even in the bible?”
Does it mean that it is not possible no matter how unlikely?
“What do you feel is the purpose of Christianity?”
I would say that the initial purpose was to spread the Gospel of the Kingdom of God, which is repentence and self spiritual growth, I do not know if that is the case now.
“Do you know for sure that everything in the bible is literal?”
The Bible is pretty clear when it is literal and when it is not. People generally ignor that when convienent.
@Lormarie
“You say that some things in the bible would not stand against reason. I say reason according to who?”
My point exactly, “according to whom”, thereby reason becomes a subjective standard not an objective one, very fluid depending upon the individual, not common.
So what is reasonable to you may or may not be reasonable to someone else depending on what starting point and foundation.
Are you then advocating that everyone subscribe to their own subjective standard? Do Christians have an objective standard, and if they do what is is?
So what is reasonable to you may or may not be reasonable to someone else depending on what starting point and foundation.
Are you then advocating that everyone subscribe to their own subjective standard? Do Christians have an objective standard, and if they do what is is?–DJ
No, that is your argument actually. The contrast that I was making was clearly between atheism and theism.
Are you then advocating that everyone subscribe to their own subjective standard? Do Christians have an objective standard, and if they do what is is?–DJ
That appeared to be what you were advocating (you stated that subjectivity was your point exactly).
On the other hand, I believe that Christians should have an objective standard…the Bible. But Christendom is so convoluted that it is too complicated to narrow down exactly what the specifics are.
The Bible is pretty clear when it is literal and when it is not. People generally ignor that when convienent.–DJ
Are you familiar with the atheism/theism debate? I ask because I notice that you tend to reduce the biblical perspectives of some to “wanting to ignore” or “not wanting to listen…” That is not the motive in many cases. The motive is often biblical or even theistic defense. Some issues are called figurative events because they are simply too difficult or even too horrible to reconcile with morality or even what some say is logic.
Logic: talking serpent
Genesis 3
The Fall of Man
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’
Can you imagine a talking snake? Some apologists call this figurative because of the concept of a talking snake. I do wonder if a serpent really refers to a snake in that case. Different dictionaries give different definitions.
Horror:
2 Kings 2:23-24
23 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. “Go on up, you baldhead!” they said. “Go on up, you baldhead!” 24 He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
What we have here is children getting torn to pieces by bears for teasing a man about his a bald head. If I am not mistaken, the Hebrew Chaldee word used to describe the tortured children was Yelad (sp) meaning they could have been teenagers. Still, they were torn to pieces. It’s things such as that that are sometimes dismissed as metaphorical because no one wants to believe that God wanted children to be eaten by bears. Then again, did God really “release those bears”? I should add that this is one among quite a few passages.
I’ll take things a bit further and say that not all scripture (although all might be divinely inspired) necessarily shows God’s desire or intent for us to follow.
Bible verses courtesy of http://www.biblegateway.com/
You mentioned that you were once practicing the Jewish faith. Have you read this post? http://lormarie.com/2008/06/23/why-not-criticize-the-talmud-as-well/
Are those things really in the Talmud?
@Lormarie:
You wrote:
“Are you familiar with the atheism/theism debate? I ask because I notice that you tend to reduce the biblical perspectives of some to “wanting to ignore” or “not wanting to listen…” That is not the motive in many cases. ”
I have to agree to disagree with you on this. Let me give you some background so you may see better why I disagree.
Since I have become a follower of Christ (all those years ago lol) I have debated and discussed my faith with those of my former faith of Judaism, as well as Muslims, Atheist, Theist, Pantheist, 5%’ers, Nation of Islam members, Pagans, Wiccans, Jehovah’s Witnesseses, Mormons, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhist, Taoist, secular philosophers, self described “Satan: Worshippers, etc., etc. And last but not least CHRISTIANS protestant, catholic, orthodox and non-sectarians.
What I have come to find from my experiences, is that in most cases people accept what they want to accept, believe what they want to believe, ignore what they want to ignore and practice what they want to practice, in spite of whatever may be clearly stated to the contrary of what their specific dogmatic position is.
The Bible is a book of Law, History, Prophecy and Wisdom, comprised of narrative, wisdom writings, law writings, prophetic writings, poetic writings sometimes containing hyperbole, metaphor, analogies, etc., etc.
Now, again, most people conveniently pick and choose what they wish to accept from it, and what they wish to ignore, because I have found most people differ to their religious tradition and doctrines, above and beyond what the scripture is communicating when shown in its proper historical and literary context.
I find this particularly when they are cornered with a contextually expanded upon truth. For example, take the discussions I have had with anti-Missionaries (and some atheist for that matter) from my former faith. Some of them actually choose to believe that Jesus never existed as a historical person. They cling to this because every argument they put up against him being the “Moshiach” that is prophesied about in scripture has been shown to be invalid, at which point the: “Well he never existed” argument comes out, and when that is shown to be historically WEAK, they generally revert to: “Well, I reject those Roman / Jewish historical accounts in favor of whatever the new flavor of the day A&E historian has to say”…
Same with Christians on matters of doctrine, take “speaking in” or specifically “praying in the Spirit” question. Those of the “Pentecostals are bamified fools” camp, will argue against that spiritual gift, even when in proper exegetical fashion it is clearly shown that though all Christians will not have the gift of diverse tongues, as Jude explains, ALL should pray in the Spirit in their own private place. When you ask them do they do as Jude said: “But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,” 1.20 they still cling to that old “That aint my gift” argument.
These are just two examples, but I assure you, I have heard hundreds. My favorite is from Muslims, I went to a mosque a few years ago with a Muslim friend to talk with his Iman, well, they gave me the ole’ (100 contradictions in the Bible) tract, of which, I went threw each one and showed the scriptures in question in the proper historical, textual and historical context and they even agreed with what was actually being communicated by the author of the scripture in question and that they had it wrong, and guess what, THEY STILL went on in their belief that there are 100 contradictions in the Bible.
So again, we’ll just have to agree to disagree there.
Surely, do I think everything is completely clear? Surely not, we can never know with 100% certainty when it comes to any account of past events without eyewitnesses, however, the overall theme of scripture, that being the creation of the human family, the fall of man, the journey of Israel, the redemption of man in Christ Jesus…scripture is quite clear.
Let’s take Genesis 5.1, since you brought that one up. If you think its literal, and I think its metaphorical, does it change the overall point of what is being communicated?
Nope, unless I want to ignore what is being communicated, in favor of debating if it was a real snake, or the snake being symbolic of temptation of what is forbidden.
@Lormarie:
You wrote:
“So what is reasonable to you may or may not be reasonable to someone else depending on what starting point and foundation.”
My reply:
Are you then advocating that everyone subscribe to their own subjective standard? Do Christians have an objective standard, and if they do what is is?–DJ
No, that is your argument actually. The contrast that I was making was clearly between atheism and theism.
But surely you must see that your logic can’t stop there. Predicated on your original statement, to some Christians it is unreasonable that Mary had a child without having intercourse with a man or at least being inseminated by some natural means, to some Christian Mary was always and always remained a Virgin, who to say who is right or wrong in that? Some Christians believe that the crucifixion was not so much an event but the symbolization of something, some believe it happened as the Gospels describe,
So who determines what that starting point is to even Christians within the Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox traditions? Heck, how do these traditions conclude that Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are a cult as opposed to yet other denominations or sects that “Have a different starting point and foundation”?
You wrote:
“That appeared to be what you were advocating (you stated that subjectivity was your point exactly).”
Not at all, and quite the contrary, I adovacate one clear and consistant point of authority and object truth for a Christian, THAT being the Spirit of God. My point is that all Christians who profess Christ in truth, have access to Him, and from Him comes all Truth, as Jesus said.
I don’t believe it is subjective at all, and I honestly believe, any Christian who profess Christ in truth, is quite clear on the Spirit of God’s leading, however, it is my observation and belief that confusion comes, when these same “Christians” want to do something that they KNOW is not the will of God.
Which goes back to God speaking to the individual, you may substitute that “speaking” in the literal voice sense, to “leading” by this Spirit.
“Are those things really in the Talmud?”
Yes. Taken out of context in several points made. The Talmud is a serious read, Rabbinical students at JTS take years in learning how to read it, let alone interperteing that vast aray of rabinnical opinion.
White Supremist groups and other vested anti-semites have cherry picked verses to forward their agendas.
@Lormarie:
You wrote:
“Are you familiar with the atheism/theism debate? I ask because I notice that you tend to reduce the biblical perspectives of some to “wanting to ignore” or “not wanting to listen…” That is not the motive in many cases. ”
I have to agree to disagree with you on this. Let me give you some background so you may see better why I disagree.
Since I have become a follower of Christ (all those years ago lol) I have debated and discussed my faith with those of my former faith of Judaism, as well as Muslims, Atheist, Theist, Pantheist, 5%’ers, Nation of Islam members, Pagans, Wiccans, Jehovah’s Witnesseses, Mormons, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhist, Taoist, secular philosophers, self described “Satan: Worshippers, etc., etc. And last but not least CHRISTIANS protestant, catholic, orthodox and non-sectarians.”–DJ
I understand what you are telling me, but I still don’t think that I was clear to you. The atheism/theism debate is distinct from all the others you mentioned (and yes, I do see that you mentioned atheism–but amongst the others). Let me try it this way using my comment again:
Are you familiar with the atheism/theism debate? I ask because I notice that you tend to reduce the biblical perspectives of some to “wanting to ignore” or “not wanting to listen…”
What exactly do you feel Christian apologists are trying to ignore, or not listen to about the bible? Also, why do you feel an apologist would attempt to ignore God when debating atheists?
“Let’s take Genesis 5.1, since you brought that one up. If you think its literal, and I think its metaphorical, does it change the overall point of what is being communicated?
Nope, unless I want to ignore what is being communicated, in favor of debating if it was a real snake, or the snake being symbolic of temptation of what is forbidden.”
How does it change things?
If the Genesis account was symbolic, why does humanity need a savior in your opinion?
“Are those things really in the Talmud?”
Yes. Taken out of context in several points made. The Talmud is a serious read, Rabbinical students at JTS take years in learning how to read it, let alone interperteing that vast aray of rabinnical opinion.–DJ
I suspect that the person who gave me those passages may have been of the anti-Semetic leaning which is why I put in the disclaimer. But, how are those verses taken out of context?
These specifically:
Sanhedrin 54b. A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.
Kethuboth 11b. “When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing.”
@Lor marie:
1st regarding the Talmud.
Let me disclaim that though I am familiar with the Talmud, I am not a Talmudic scholar, I do have a CD version that coast me quite a few bucks, and though I no longer practice Judaism, I will address these falsehood because they forward anti-semitism.
The claim is that Sanhedrin 54b states that “A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.”
Well, that is flatly false, it clearly doesn’t say that. You have to understand that the Talmud is basically hundreds of years of rabbinical opinion regard the Bible (Tanakh) specifically the books of Law. This tractate of the Talmud is opinion regarding a Mitzvah (Law) in the Book of Leviticus.
Leviticus says that if a man lies with another man, both must be killed. What Sanhedrin 54b gives as rabbinical opinion regarding that Mitzvah, is to allow for a male who is involved that is under 9 to not be killed because at that time boys under 9 were not considered men, so it would not be required to put that male child to death.
As for Kethuboth 11b, is just out of context, “When a man lies with a little girl less than three, it is nothing” (Kethuboth 11b) is a regarding the circumstances under which a girl is considered to have lost her virginity and thus be ineligible for the entitlement of a virgin bride upon marriage; in regard to the phrase “it is nothing” is actually a purposed distortion of a translation of a Talmudic legal idiom for “it has no bearing on this
matter” - in this example, “it has no bearing on her status as a virgin.
That tractate was not about child abuse, but about status of virginity for women getting married.
Here is a link to a sight that debunks some of these falsehoods (wish I had of found it BEFORE I had to look this stuff up
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/8815/exp01b.html
“The claim is that Sanhedrin 54b states that “A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.”
Well, that is flatly false, it clearly doesn’t say that. You have to understand that the Talmud is basically hundreds of years of rabbinical opinion regard the Bible (Tanakh) specifically the books of Law. This tractate of the Talmud is opinion regarding a Mitzvah (Law) in the Book of Leviticus.”–DJ Black Adam
What exactly does it say? So I guess the website fabricated that (which is certainly possible and what I figured about both). Or were they perhaps taking things out of context?
But I need to backtrack a bit to your previous statements:
@Lormarie
“You say that some things in the bible would not stand against reason. I say reason according to who?”–LorMarie
“My point exactly, “according to whom”, thereby reason becomes a subjective standard not an objective one, very fluid depending upon the individual, not common.”–DJ
That’s not the case. Reason is reason, not something subjective. Reason is based on facts and logic rather than a subjective experience. It is a fact that a healthy lifestyle leads to good health. Religion on the other hand often depends on experience. Reason is exclusive of emotional experiences.
“But surely you must see that your logic can’t stop there. Predicated on your original statement, to some Christians it is unreasonable that Mary had a child without having intercourse with a man or at least being inseminated by some natural means, to some Christian Mary was always and always remained a Virgin, who to say who is right or wrong in that?–” DJ Black Adam
I’m not sure you understood what I said. Remember when I stated this:
On the other hand, I believe that Christians should have an objective standard…the Bible. But Christendom is so convoluted that it is too complicated to narrow down exactly what the specifics are.
In other words, Christians may have varying views about biblical issues, but some are clearly right and some are clearly wrong in what they believe. Nothing I said suggested otherwise.
“they gave me the ole’ (100 contradictions in the Bible) tract, of which, I went threw each one and showed the scriptures in question in the proper historical, textual and historical context and they even agreed with what was actually being communicated by the author of the scripture in question and that they had it wrong, and guess what, THEY STILL went on in their belief that there are 100 contradictions in the Bible.”–DJ
Those were muslims which is a completely different debate than those with atheists. There is a problem with discussing contradictions. That lies with the use of extra biblical sources to try and explain the suspected contradictions away. For example, how did or would you explain this:
2 Kings 8
26Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.
2 Chronicles 22:2
2Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.
I’ve heard every explanation from it being the result of a “copyist error” to there being two different Ahaziahs. Some claim that the original documents have 22 for both. But who has a copy of the originals?
I have no doubt you’ve heard of this one:
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli
Many (myself included) suspect that Heli was actually the father of Mary. But how do you know that to be the case using only the Bible whether in English or using Greek? When I say only the bible, I mean without the use of commentaries (or I should say, the opinions of others).
@Lormarie:
The Sanhedrin section is (institutions of government; criminal penalties), you have to understand that the Talmud is NOT a “Bible” , it is legal commentary, here is what it actually says:
http://www.dafyomi.co.il/sanhedrin/points/sn-ps-054.htm
Wow, you made me find a Talmud IN ENGLISH on-line (not an easy task)
When you look at it says QUITE a bit. Here is theconclusion of what I explained to you in the other post:
-quote-
3) RELATIONS OF A MINOR
(a) (Beraisa): A boy is not considered like a man, a small animal is considered like a grown animal.
(b) (Rav): This means that we do not consider relations with a boy less than nine years old like relations with a boy above nine.
(c) (Shmuel): It means that we do not consider relations with a boy less than three like relations with a boy above three.
(d) Question: On what do they argue?
(e) Answer: Rav holds that only one who can be Shochev (i.e. a nine-year old, his Shechivah is considered relations) can be Nishkav;
1. Shmuel learns from “Mishkevei Ishah” (a boy that is Nishkav is like a girl - if a three-year old girl is Nishkeves, it is considered relations). - end quote-
When you look at the text it is a group of Rabbis discussing the law and how it applies in different situations, simple as that, they were discussing what Leviticus says regarding a man lying with another man, that both must be killed. What Sanhedrin 54b gives as rabbinical opinion regarding that Mitzvah, is to allow for a male who is involved that is under 9 to not be killed because at that time boys under 9 were not considered a man.
@Lormarie:
I had written:
“My point exactly, “according to whom”, thereby reason becomes a subjective standard not an objective one, very fluid depending upon the individual, not common.”–DJ
Your reply:
“That’s not the case. Reason is reason, not something subjective. Reason is based on facts and logic rather than a subjective experience.”
What makes reason fluid is the FOUNDATION or Premises, Presupposition and Postulates that one builds their reason upon. You write:
“Religion on the other hand often depends on experience. Reason is exclusive of emotional experiences.”
So how can one rely on reason in a religious situation, and I have to assert that an emotional experience and a spiritual one are two entirely different things.
Also, I concede that we seem to agree that the Bible should be an objective standard to Christians, however; we disagree in my assertion that the Bible communicates that the Spirit of God as He leads and gives wisdom to believers is also a standard, in fact it works as a compliment to the former. I don’t believe either one is subjective.
BTW, regarding the copyist errors, you have to understand that I am not of the Bible is “inerrant” camp, I am of the Bible is “authoritive” group.
BTW, regarding the copyist errors, you have to understand that I am not of the Bible is “inerrant” camp, I am of the Bible is “authoritive” group.”–DJ
Understood. I think the problem has to do with language transfer issues more so than the bible being contradictory.
Sorry to post again, you wrote:
“But how do you know that to be the case using only the Bible whether in English or using Greek? When I say only the bible, I mean without the use of commentaries (or I should say, the opinions of others).”
With matters of copiest errors, I don’t have an opinion since again I am not of the “inerrant” group, I can accept that a Bible can have spelling erros or transpositions of numbers, and as for who exactly Mary’s father is, I would agree with the commentator or historians that clarify the issue.
Yes, I believe scripture should be taken in light of other scripture first and foremost, and that scripture is authoritative, however, historical and grammatical context are also necessary. Heck, even the Old testament had notes (Masoretic Text) and commentary. The Talmud is commentary for the faith of Judaism, and as for Christians, I say that we also have to have spiritual context as given by the Spirit.
BUT, that’s me…
well, I grew up in a pentecostal/evangelical home, too. I have spoken and disagreed with my mom on what constitutes “hearing from God” and “God speaking to me”. I came to believe that people made their own decisions and that it is easier to say God decided so that whatever happens
1) if it works out for the good, you were blessed for listening to God or
2) if it works out for the bad, then “God let it happen for a reason.”
It’s much harder to make decisions in life and stand up for them on your own two feet and back them up and live with the consequences whatever they may be.
As to hearing from God while reading the Bible, I don’t believe in that anymore. I think that God gave us all wisdom. and good brains. If I have insight then that is my brain, not some being or spirit transmitting thoughts to me.
@Femme:
Your disagreement then, would be with what Jesus stated and Paul reiterated in the scriptures in regard to “Spiritual” wisdom.
God “speaking” to people directly per-se, may not be the point, and can be debated exegetically and theologically on both sides, but SPIRITUAL WISDOM is a precept that scripture clearly communicates in both the Old and the New Testament.
1 Corinthians 2.1-5 addresses the topic of Spiritual Wisdom, Apostle Paul specifies that when he came to the church of Corinth, he didn’t profess his own wisdom, but declared “The Testimony of God”. Not with enticing words but in demonstration of the Spirit. The scripture is emphasizing that our faith should not be in the “Wisdom of Men” but in the POWER of GOD.
Apostle Paul continues to put the subject of wisdom in its spiritual context in 1st Corinthians 2.12: “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.” As Jesus stated in John 14, the Spirit we have received (which is the Holy Ghost) is of God and that we can know the things that are freely given to us by God from the Spirit. In verses 13 and 14 Paul speaks about how spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Clearly stating that the natural mind does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, in fact they are foolishness to a natural minded person.
True wisdom, the wisdom which comes from God, can be known only by believers (2.6-10), and fully grasped only by mature believers (2.11-16). The unbeliever, because of his volition, is not at all able to grasp the wisdom of God (2.14). This foundation can be found in the Gospels as well, specifically in John 14.26. “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”, further, in that same chapter Jesus makes clear that the Holy Ghost (Spirit of God) is for believers only. In 1st Corinthians 3.16, Paul reminds that Corinthians of the fact that the Holy Ghost is in them, therefore; they need to mature and be able to be led by Him, above their allegiances to individual leaders.
As for God “leading” people spiritually, you wrote:
1) if it works out for the good, you were blessed for listening to God or
2) if it works out for the bad, then “God let it happen for a reason.”
I have heard that before myself. Personally, good and bad are things that happen, such is life, as King Solomon said, there is a time for everything. Now as for listening to God as He leads, like I said to Lormarie, I think people who are truly seeking God’s lead, know which way to go, just ignore what he is saying for their own self desires.
Anyway, I wrote an E-book on the subject, you can check it out here: http://www.lulu.com/content/1131729
Shalom
@Lormarie:
I apologize I did not address your point regarding the “atheist” argument. I just take the atheist argument to its logical end, that being that an atheist can choose to not believe in God or any gods more specifically, not believe in the supernatural or esoteric worlds, however; their argument always comes down to this: “I don’t believe in God, I believe the things that defy scientific reason that are in the Bible are not likely and improbable, however, I cannot say that they are impossible.”
Basically, we ultimately have to agree to disagree, because we begin from two entirely different starting points, generally theirs is scientific postulates and theories, which may impress them, yet I find their starting point lacking and inefficient to explain the actuality that we exist in.
In regards to the temporal and spatial existence, we see very little of it, and understand even less, from a “scientific” position. I find it supreme and utter arrogance for anyone to rule out the existence of supernatural, when they barely apprehend the cusp of the natural.
Again, that’s me…
well, I grew up in a pentecostal/evangelical home, too. I have spoken and disagreed with my mom on what constitutes “hearing from God” and “God speaking to me”. I came to believe that people made their own decisions and that it is easier to say God decided so that whatever happens
1) if it works out for the good, you were blessed for listening to God or
2) if it works out for the bad, then “God let it happen for a reason.”–Femmeautonome
I see. I also believe that this is one of the dangers of “super spirituality” that I alluded to before. It is almost like some people want so much for God to be real that they need these experiences in order to keep believing. That is really what it all boils down to, any little thing that happens gives them the assurance that “God was involved” when it is clearly the case of life happening. Take Hurricane Katrina as an example, there were preachers actually claiming that it was God’s judgment. That makes absolutely no sense since there are plenty of cities on earth much worse than New Orleans.
“It’s much harder to make decisions in life and stand up for them on your own two feet and back them up and live with the consequences whatever they may be.
As to hearing from God while reading the Bible, I don’t believe in that anymore. I think that God gave us all wisdom. and good brains. If I have insight then that is my brain, not some being or spirit transmitting thoughts to me.–Femmeautonome
I actually shudder when I think of the “hearing from God” and relying on impressions that I was taught to embrace. Now I see the danger in going that route. I still believe in God but I’ve learned not to rely on thoughts or impressions since they can be deceiving. If I want to know what God is saying, I’ll just study the bible, memorize passages, and meditate as needed. Whether I like what I read or not, its all right there. Things are much clearer now.
@Lormarie:
Why take a job and never utilize the benefits? I understand that you come from a tradition that is at the least “not clear” on “spirituality” but religion without spirituality is just an overblown study of philosophy.
Lormaire, you say you read the bible, I gave you chapter and verse in context with scripture itself that shows there is a spiritual component of being a Christian, and listening to or being led by God’s Spirit is central to that, why ignore that, if scripture is authoritative to you?
Why take a job and never utilize the benefits? I understand that you come from a tradition that is at the least “not clear” on “spirituality” but religion without spirituality is just an overblown study of philosophy.
Lormaire, you say you read the bible, I gave you chapter and verse in context with scripture itself that shows there is a spiritual component of being a Christian, and listening to or being led by God’s Spirit is central to that, why ignore that, if scripture is authoritative to you?–DJ
None of the scriptures you brought in proved your claim. No believer has to walk around relying on “impressions” or voices in their heads. If one wants a spiritual experience, they are not required to go any further than reading the bible and obeying what it says. If one wants to get emotional and super spiritual, that is totally up to them. What they should not do is pretend there is some biblical mandate to participate in that. After all, people claim the bible mandates many things it does not.
With that said, you still have not responded to the point I was making about the atheism/theism debate. You also appear to be inconsistent in your view of the bible (see your comments about Biblical inerrancy vs authoritative along with your comments about responding to contradictions). At this point, the debate is futile if we think the other should adopt our point of view.
@Lormaire:
“None of the scriptures you brought in proved your claim. No believer has to walk around relying on “impressions” or voices in their heads.”
Lormarie, you have to look at this OUTSIDE of a “Pentecostal / Charismatic / Word of Faith” context here, I am only communicating what the scripture is communicating.
My claim is that CHRISTIANS are to be LED by the SPIRIT of GOD. My claim is that further is that Christians have the Holy Ghost IN THEM, and are to strive to be Spiritual by exercising the SPIRITUAL WISDOM which is GIVEN to them BY God.
You continue with:
“If one wants a spiritual experience, they are not required to go any further than reading the bible and obeying what it says.”
OBEYING what the scripture says:
What does scripture say regarding what I am saying?
Let’s see…
Jude 1.20: “But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, PRAYING IN THE HOLY GHOST,
Jesus said in John 14.26
Apostle Paul reiterates this here 1 Cor 2.10-12
“BUT GOD HATH REVEALED THEM UNTO US BY HIS SPIRIT: FOR THE SPIRIT SEARCHETH ALL THINGS, YEA, THE DEEP THINGS OF GOD. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; THAT WE MIGHT KNOW THE THINGS THAT ARE FREELY GIVEN TO US OF GOD.”
We know the things of God which are freely given BY his Spirit. Where is this Spirit?
Jesus said: John 14.17:
“Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: BUT YE KNOW HIM; FOR HE DWELLETH WITH YOU, AND SHALL BE IN YOU”
Paul reiterates: 1 Cr 3.16: “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of GOD DWELLETH IN YOU?
You wrote:
“If wants to get emotional and super spiritual, that is totally up to them.”
I don’t recall bring “emotion” into this discussion, you did, which is also paramount of the classical “Pentecostal / charismatic / word of faith” debate that has gone on since Azusa, again, in order to understand what I am saying, you have to look at what I am saying from hwere I am coming from, not from a paradigm that does not apply.
No one is saying “super-spiritual” I am saying nothing more than what should be NORMAL for one who professes Christ.
You wrote:
“With that said, you still have not responded to the point I was making about the atheism/theism debate.”
Please express what exactly that argument is again, I was distracted by that whole Talmud thing. I expressed where the logical end of the “atheist” position goes, however, I will answer your point if you would be kind enough to outline it again.
You wrote:
“You also appear to be inconsistent in your view of the bible (see your comments about Biblical inerrancy vs authoritative along with your comments about responding to contradictions)”
You appear not to understand what I mean by “Inerrant” and “authoritative”. Let me explain:
(Inerrant: Of or pertaining to inerrancy. Without error, particularly used in reference to the Bible)
I don’t believe the Bible is inerrant. Inerrant is defined as “Of or pertaining to inerrancy. Without error, particularly used in reference to the Bible”, meaning I don’t think the Bible is without ERROR, as in Spelling errors, copyist or scriveners errors” so when someone points out a “error” that is in regard to spelling, punctuation or obvious transposition i.e. 42 as opposed to 24, I go with what the scholars correct in their understanding of Greek and Hebrew with the codices they have available.
(Authoritative: having authority or ascendancy or influence; “an important official”
Is were we seem to agree, as in stating that the Bible is my final authority on matters of doctrine
So sense I can admit that there are Spelling errors, copyist or scriveners errors in some copies of the Bible, I dismiss any so-called contradiction that is clarified by scripture itself or clarified by language scholars over the course of history who have had access to codices, manuscripts, etc. that clarify the so-called “contradiction”, further, these contradictions do not deal with the essential doctrines expressed in scripture upon which I predicate my faith.
You conclude with:
“At this point, the debate is futile if we think the other should adopt our point of view.”
I am not trying to get you to adopt a view, I AM trying to understand how it is you are avoiding scriptures which are giving information contrary to your doctrine in regard to being led by God’s Spirit. I see a logical fallacy, you say you believe the Bible, yet you seem to be ignoring points that disagree with how “YOU” want to proceed, that is the same thing that you have pointed out that “Pentecostals” do in their dogma regarding “spiritual” revelations.
Again, not trying to “change” your way of thought, just trying to understand how you substitute one dogmatic doctrine that conveniently ignores scriptures to the contrary for another. Since I don’t think you would ignore scripture (as you say it is authoritative to you as well as I) then it appears that you think I am interpreting the reference scriptures I gave you wrong, THEREFORE, if you could correct my exegetical errors, I would like to see how you conclude that my exegesis is wrong on this issue.
Again, I am not trying to convert your thinking, or antagonize or insult you, I AM trying to understand HOW you see the scriptures I have shared with you.
Shabbat Shalom.
Lormarie, you have to look at this OUTSIDE of a “Pentecostal / Charismatic / Word of Faith” context here, I am only communicating what the scripture is communicating.
My claim is that CHRISTIANS are to be LED by the SPIRIT of GOD. My claim is that further is that Christians have the Holy Ghost IN THEM, and are to strive to be Spiritual by exercising the SPIRITUAL WISDOM which is GIVEN to them BY God.
Again, I am not trying to convert your thinking, or antagonize or insult you, I AM trying to understand HOW you see the scriptures I have shared with you.–DJ
DJ,
Even if you were trying to convert my thinking, antagonize, or insult me, you could not. That is not the point. The point is, it’s futile for you to keep bringing in scriptures to support your personal view. I’d have to say at this point I find your responses to be amusing rather than enlightening. Honestly, does it really matter to you if others feel your interpretation is wrong?
Just to add
This does not mean that you are not welcome to post here. To some it all up, you see spirituality much differently than I do. That’s what it boils down to.
@Lormarie:
“Honestly, does it really matter to you if others feel your interpretation is wrong?”
What you or I “feel” is of no consequence really, if you disagree with my exegesis, I am curious as to what your exegesis of the scriptures in question is.
You wrote:
“The point is, it’s futile for you to keep bringing in scriptures to support your personal view”
How is that futile? Unless and of course if you don’t care if scripture supports my view in regards to you adopting my point of view. I’m sorry Lormarie, I’m like this, if someone can exegetically show me where I am in error in my “personal” view, I will change my personal view to line up with scripture. I am not committed to my personal view, I am committed to Christ.
You add:
“I’d have to say at this point I find your responses to be amusing rather than enlightening.”
Well, I am glad you are at least entertained or “amused” as you say; it is unfortunate that you were unable or unwilling to find anything of substantive value in what I was communicating.
On the other hand, I have found your posts quite enlightening; you have helped me immensely in understanding my purpose in ministry going forward (as well I finally found an online Talmud! Wish I had of found it sooner, could of saved about 12 hundred)
That being said, I have to exercise spiritual wisdom at this point, that being to discontinue THIS discussion as you have requested However, I enjoy your blog and will continue to comment on the “non” religious postings, wouldn’t want to amuse too much you know
I pray you well in all things.
That being said, I have to exercise spiritual wisdom at this point, that being to discontinue THIS discussion as you have requested–DJ
Actually, it was the manner in which this conversation was going that should be discontinued. But spiritual wisdom=common sense…