Re: In the Lion's Den
Sep 13, 1995 04:44 AM
>but their evil
>wisdom may start creeping into your soul through hidden cracks in your mind
>(that are unknown even unto yourself!) and you may find yourself (gasp!)
>beginning to actually question your *own* beliefs!
Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death I will fear no
evil. For you are with me Lord.
> 1. You demand that we refute the claims of Christianity ... but isn't
>it more reasonable to assume that they need to be demonstrated before they
>must be refuted?
The historicity of the Scriptures provide ample evidence for even
a doubting Thomas.
> Thesis: Jesus is the only Son of God, and is the Lord of the World,
>and the Master of Masters.
> Proof: Jesus says he is, and *since* he is the Son of God and
>*says* he is the light and the truth, therefore He is.
Not only did he make those declarations but so did many others. Also
you should make yourself more keenly aware of fulfilled prophecies.
> Thesis: The "Bible" is the "Word" of God, and in it is the only
>real truth, and anyone who believes in it is right, and anyone who does
>not believe in it is wrong.
> Proof: The Bible *says* it is the word of God, and *since* therefore
>it says it is, *because it is the Word of God, it *must* be.
When the Lord demands respect for His written word...respect is given.
Read John 8:48-59
> 2. I've also been puzzled by the apparently bizarre misunderstanding
>of *scale* that appears to run throughout evangelical thought. Imagine
>a Being called God, a Being of such inconceivable stature that it is capable
>of creating, out of nothing, the entirety of the universe - the operative
>scale being literally billions of years of time and a space so large that
>it cannot even be measured with units as enormous as light-years - attempt
>for a moment to grasp (as impossible as it is to do) how almost unbelievably
>brief and immeasurably tiny the planet earth and the little specks on it
>that consider themselves immensely important and call themselves civilized;
This is one of the condsideration I make when you realize the the Omnipotent
God limits His creation and relationships to a speck of dust called Earth.
Granted there are different types of Angesl that He receives worship...
but there are no other earths, and no other civilizations.
Read the Fingerprint of God, by Dr. Hugh Ross and you will find some
very interesting thoughts on God's choice to limit Himself. Although
Dr. Ross is a Old Earth Creationist, I find His work appealing.
> Having postulated a being such as this, as evangelicals seem to do,
>does it then make sense to then say (as I've recently heard) that this Being
>actually thinks that it is desperately important that one political party
>gets elected instead of another? That it *cares* whether I have gone through
>a formal ceremony before I sleep with someone? That it not only *cares*
>whether or not I go to church on Sundays, but even judges some churches to
>be "right" and others "wrong"?
Error flows abundant in your declarations here. Politics? Marriage?
God created Adam & Eve not Adam & Steve. & the Institution of Marriage.
He wants your Praise & Worship not your ATTENDANCE.
His judgement is based on His Word...and God is a discerner of the Heart.
> While such assertions certainly have afforded me much mirth over
>the years (and hence serve a valuable function!), it certainly would be
>quite difficult to actually take such preposterous thought *seriously*.
The Cross of Christ is foolishness to those that are perishing.
> 3. The "Bible" ... which is, by the way, short for the Latin
>"biblia" or "books". Evangelicals, as I understand them, seem to insist
>that this is not simply *a* collection of books of religious metaphor
>(and as such, IMO, a very worthwhile contribution to humanity's wonderful
>storehouse of religious and spiritual exploration) - but is *the* book,
that it contains completely accurate historical truth, and that its words and
>injunctions must be taken as absolutes beyond question or interpretation.
It is this bible that declares that you are either for God or against God.
It is also this same bible that declares that you are in need of a Savior
and that that one Savior is Jesus Christ.
> Unfortunately, even a wee bit of research seems to raise some
>rather serious probleems with this. The "bible" is not *a* book, but is
>a rather more like an anthology - a collection of stories written by wildly
>different people over the course of (if the Old Testament is included)
This does not cause a break down, on the contrary it further
establishes its validity.
>several thousands of years - translated and re-written so many hundreds of
>times that the chances that any of the books even vaugely resembles the
>true "original" version are slim to none. What is to be followed exactly?
>The King James version? Why that one? How many evangelicals can read
>the original Greek, the various Aramaic dialects, the unpointed Hebrew of
Yes I know what the Tetragrammaton is. I also know what Sola Scriptura,
is, and many other considerations for biblical interpretation. You are
commiting eisegetical error in assuming less than that which is clearly
> How much depth have your studies taken you into? Have you
>discovered that there are two almost completely discrete creation stories
>in Genesis (for instance) - that the first mention of what is translated
>as "God" is not IHVH (Jehovah), but ALHIM (Elohim) ... a word that is a
>*plural* and suggests both masculine *and* feminine gender ...?
> The creation of man was left for the sixth and final day of creation
because man was special and was to rule over the rest of creation. "Then God
said, 'Let us make man in Our image, according to our likeness' "<Gen.
1:26>. This statement has fascinated thinkers for centuries. Just what does
the image of God in man mean? Since God is spirit-- not a material
substance-- it must mean more than physical resemblance. To be created in
God's image means that man, though a creature, is akin to God.
> God is Creator-- the only being capable of making something from nothing.
Yet, on a lesser level, man also has capacity to be creative. This is one
distinct meaning of the truth that we are created in God's image. God is
speaker and a ruler. Man was also told to have dominion over the creation.
God is holy, a moral and ethical God who is righteous. Man is also morally
and ethically responsible and must make moral choices. God has revealed that
he is a social being (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Man also is a social
being who needs relationship with others. Human experience and the biblical
record suggest that these are some ways in which man reflects the image of God.
> The Genesis writer also declared that God created humanity as "male and
female" <Gen. 1:27>. This account of creation does not give priority to
either male or female. Both are needed to reflect the image of God. The most
fundamental difference in humanity is not race but sex. The Greeks said man
once was androgynous-- both male and female. Somehow he lost the female half
and ever since has been looking for his other half. But the writer of
Genesis pointed out that sex is an order of creation which is good and
proper in God's sight.
> <Genesis 2> contains what some scholars call a second creation account.
But others point out that it sets the stage for what follows in the accounts
of man's temptation and sin. A major emphasis of <chapter 2> is the creation
of woman as a companion for man. Man's incompleteness apart from woman is
shown in his loneliness and frustration. None of the animals could meet
Adam's need. Then the Lord created woman from Adam's rib.
> Bible students have long seen symbolic truth in this rib imagery. Woman
was taken from under man's arm to symbolize his protection of her. She was
taken from near his heart that he might love and cherish her. She was not
made from a head bone to rule over man, nor from his foot to be trampled on
and degraded. Like the man, she reflects God's image. Together they formed
the blessed pair needed to replenish and subdue the earth.
> Many Bible students wonder about the six days of creation. Were these
24-hour days or indefinite periods of time? It may help us in our
interpretation if we remember that we use the word "day" in several ways,
even as the ancient Hebrews did. We speak of the day of reckoning, the day
of opportunity, and the day of trouble. These may signify more than a
24-hour day. In similar fashion, the biblical writers spoke of the "day of
the Lord" and "day of visitation."
> Skeptics have ridiculed the creation story in Genesis because it reports
that the creation occurred in six days. But the indefinite meaning of day
takes care of this objection. Besides, Scripture says that with the Lord, "A
day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day" <2 Pet. 3:8>. The
biblical writer was not writing a scientific journal. He was moved by God's
Spirit to give a revelation of spiritual reality. His primary emphasis was
not on the process by which the world was created but on the Creator and His
> Many of the pagan nations of the ancient world had their own creation
stories. But in these stories, their gods evolved out of natural processes
connected with the world itself. They believed the material universe was
eternal, and it brought their gods into being. But Genesis declares that God
existed before creation and is in full control of the physical universe. He
called the world into being by His word. His power is absolute. He does not
have to conform to nature and cannot be threatened by it. God is sovereign
and does not have to share His power with other supernatural beings.
> Since God created the universe out of nothing, it is His and will always
serve His purpose. As He shaped creation without any interference from
anyone, He will bring creation to its desired end. No power can frustrate
God in His purpose to complete the process started in creation and revealed
in Scripture. Our hope rests in the sovereign power of Him who created the
world and then re-created us through the saving power of His Son, Jesus Christ.
>(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary)
>(Copyright (C) 1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
> Well, 'nuff of this. You came here (apparently) on a mission,
>but perhaps you'll stay because ... well ... this is just a damn
>interesting group of people - *none* of whom believes the know the "whole"
>truth - all of whom are engaged in pursuing personal quests that range
>through almost eevery science, religion and art, past and present, on
>planet earth ... and even further, you may find (if you perhaps really
>decide to listen for awhile) that there are some on this list that have
>studied both the Old and New Testaments at levels of depth and with an
>independance of thought that perhaps surpasses many of those in the
>circles of evagelical fundamentalism.
12 inches of error.
> Even further, one of the most remarkable aspects of this list
>(and one that differs greatly from evangelical circles) is this: No one
>here will dispute your right to hold your beliefs, nor will doubt the
>intensity of your passion - and no one will try to "convert" you to
>anything. If you state strong positions, and even further, demand that
>those positions are the "only" true positions, those positions *will*
>be questioned - not because you're a "Christian" in a "Lion's Den"
>(with the somewhat disturbing hint of a martyr complex that such a
>position suggests), but because we *all* question one another, we all
>put one another's ideas through the testing of the alchemical hotfire:
The lat alchemist I met was fool for Talismans.
You beliefs are vaild and real, but when they collide with Truth, then
you owe it to truth to change your belief other wise you cintinue to
teach and believe a lie.
> This is a place were metal is refined, the dross burnt off of it,
>the hidden flaws in its structure revealed. If you remain with us (as I
>personally, would invite you to do (-:) you will find that you will not
>accomplish the goal you came here with (if, as it seems, that goal is
>to "convert" "unbelievers" to the "truth"), and you may wind up entering
>the inner turmoil that invariably accompanies genuine spiritual
>maturation, but if you have the tremendous courage (and few things in
>life require greater courage) to throw open to question beliefs you
>hold as the very foundation of your life - you may find that you emerge
>with your beliefs deepened, broadened, and *strengthened* beyond
>anything you currently imagine ... may find that the spiritual concepts
>you currently hold are actually the *seeds* of a much larger spiritual
>world - and that this strange list may actually supply the heat capable
>of germinating those seeds.
>Evangelical Economist & Chaos Theorist
Do not neglect the security of your own soul.
Daniel K. Hedrick
WebGold General Manager
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application