GENERAL
Quote:
The basic issue is the proper way to approach the Bible. One claim is that the Bible is to be taken at face value since it is “the word of God”. Another says the proper approach is to first use one's mental abilities to make any determination about the Bible – or anything else for that matter. That is an essential part of anyone's thought process. Before accepting the book as the word of God, a person first thinks and considers the matter. That should be apparent to anyone.
The next step is to determine what one thinks about the matter in question – in this case, the Bible. The process of discernment includes considering the idea with one's conscience. Jlisenbe, like anyone, goes through this process and determines the Bible is the word of God. That is his right and his right is not in dispute.
Others, also considering the matter through the lens of their conscience as all must do, arrive at a somewhat different conclusion – that the Bible is a good book, and is useful for following the path of Christianity, but it is not the literal “word of God”.
One cannot exclude consulting the conscience – the mind does it automatically.
The process of discernment concerns considering the idea with your mind and processes of reasoning.
Quote:
When you speak the simple truth about God, which you have done above, no book in the world is able to second guess you. To be challenged to defend your position by “quoting Scripture” is a fool's errand.
Jlisenbe's reply:
A simple example of a person elevating their own personal opinion above the Bible. It is equivalent to saying that the Bible is correct insofar as it agrees with me. So a person can say, "Like Jesus said to Mary, 'You have chosen the better part,'" and consider it be accurate because it agrees with his/her preconceived notions. But when the same Jesus said, " if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins," then that cannot be allowed since, after all, it does not agree with what that person has already concluded to be true. So Athos is basically saying that WG is right in her view since she agrees with his view. Stunning.
Please read carefully. Here is what you are confusing. You are saying: If one accepts one part of the Bible as correct, one must therefore accept all of the Bible as correct. That's not true with the Bible, nor is it true with any book. That's why we deliberate using our mental processes to understand. To discern. Evaluate. Examine. Test. In no sense does it mean I “elevate” my opinion above the Bible.
Thank you for not answering the question. You wrote that no book on the earth can second guess WG's religious opinion. That is elevating her opinion, and by necessary extension everyone's opinions, above that of the Bible. You have not explained why that would not be true.
Quote:
This is not to say the Bible is not a good book. I would never say that. It is invaluable in learning about Christianity and the man of the Gospels Jesus Christ.
Jlisenbe's reply:
This statement cannot be reconciled with the statement above.
Of course it can. As previously explained. A book can be good and invaluable and still require discernment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jlisenbe wrote:
If it is invaluable in learning about Christianity, then why wouldn't we believe what it says?
My reply:
We believe much of what it says, even most. Again, not every jot and tittle. You are confusing invaluable with infallible.
You are trying to straddle the fence. You consider the Bible to be true as long as it agrees with you. You say it's invaluable for understanding the Christian faith, but then you will not accept what it says about the Christian faith. So when Jesus says that if we do not believe in Him we will die in our sins, that bothers you so you just toss it out. You elevate your own opinions above what the Bible says.
Quote:
From Jlisenbe:
The problem is this. If I claim to be speaking the "simple truth" about God, then I have to ask where this simple truth came from.
My reply:
That's already been answered. The source is a person's discernment process – mind and conscience or “God's little gene” as nicely phrased by Dwashbur.
And again, you elevate your mind/conscience, above that of the Bible. That's the very simple difference we have.
Quote:
Jlisenbe wrote:
If it came from somewhere in me, then what authority can I claim to have?
My reply:
It's not a question of authority- never has been. I think this is where you are going off the rails. You need “authority” to tell you what to believe. What if that authority is wrong? Or, heaven forbid, evil? How do you determine that?
Of course it's about authority. How we determine that is the very core of the question. You believe yourself. I believe the Bible.
Quote:
Jlisenbe wrote:
People all around the world have various ideas about God which they consider to be the simple truth. Some of them will kill you in defense of that truth.
My reply:
That's true of Christians more than any other religion. What do we make of that? Does that mean the Bible is evil?
Yeah. We know that's true from how the Christians attacked America on 9/11. But even if your silly claim was true, it makes no difference. As long as those violent Christians were acting on their conscience, how can you say they are wrong? Once again, you did not answer the question.
__________________________________________________ _____________________
Quote:
Jlisenbe wrote:
Who's to say they are wrong if all of this is nothing more than a contest of opinions arrived at by what we contend is the voice of our conscience?
My reply:
In terms of Christianity, what you have said – a contest of opinions – is very close to the truth. At last count, Christianity has hundreds, (maybe thousands), of versions some of which have major theological differences. You ask, “Who's to say they are wrong”? Who, indeed? You?
Once again you do not answer the question. Is there anything to appeal to above the collective voices of billions of consciences?
Quote:
Jlisenbe wrote:
The truth always comes out sooner or later. Here it is, sadly I think, for Athos. "...no book in the world is able to second guess you." There would seem to be no other way to take that than to conclude that he considers his views to be king over the Bible.
My reply:
You may take it the way I intended it to be taken and which I described at length here in this reply.
No answer so no reply.
__________________________________________________ _______________________
Quote:
Jlisenbe wrote:
Perhaps he merely crafted his beliefs inartfully which led to wrong conclusions. I am certainly open to correction in this regard.
My reply:
Are you really? Open to correction? That's good because I hope you will consider the errors I have pointed out in your post.
If you had, I would.
Quote:
As previously stated here, I do not see Jlisenbe's posts. However, I will make an exception if he replies. If the reply requires a response, I will do so.
How noble of you.
