Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Self-Serving Beliefs Message-ID: Date: 18 Jan 90 05:22:08 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Jet Propelled Lab - Pasadena CA Lines: 93 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!bmers58!davem@watmath.waterloo.edu (Dave Mielke) writes: >The correctness of a given doctrine is not determined by majority vote. >It is, rather, determined by what God has actually told us within the >Scriptures. Even the most devout Christians cannot help tainting God's >truths with lies as they are still living within sinful flesh. How can you, or anyone else determine if what you have just said is not tainted, or wrong? >There are some forms of pain, including headaches, which are not caused >by disease. If, for example, a heavy object were to fall on my head, it >would induce significant pain. While this pain in and of itself is not >the consequence of sin, my ill-tempered response to it would be. As one >of the attributes of sinlessness is selflessness, a sinless person >would not dwell on any personal inconveniences for even an instant. I >suspect that no one of us can imagine someone really having such an >ideal attitude, but then we have become so accustomed to our sinful >inclinations that we have begun to accept and even justify them as >being normal. I can imagine having such an ideal attitude. Bad things happen to me all the time, and I used to have all sorts of ill tempered responses towards them, but as time goes it seems that God has given me the tools to be able to not dwell on any personal inconvenience at all. He has taught me to instantly accept emotionally bad things when they happen. No anger. No hositlity. Just peace and love. I just want to point out that it *is* possible. And I'm not saying that I don't respond emotionally at times, or that I'm perfect, but just that as I grow older and change, I no longer accept these sinful inclinations as normal. >I do not declare something to be true until I am sure that it will >stand the scrutiny of the entire Bible. Many people read a few selected >passages here and there which seem to agree with one another and then >decide that they know what God is saying. This is a completely >inadequate approach. We can only know that we have come to truth when >we are also able to deal with all those passages that appear to >contradict them. A far better approach is to realize that we need not >necessarily understand, agree with, or even like the correct >interpretation of any given point, to be aware of lots of different >scenarios, and to constantly test each and every one of them with each >and every verse that is read, and then to do a lot of serious Bible >study, eliminating impossible scenarios on the basis that they cannot >stand the scrutiny of the verses that are being read during this study. >Only when coupling this approach with lots of prayer is it possible to >really be assured of what God's actual plan is. But what do you bring to and undertake this process with but your own faulty human reasoning? *Who* is studying the Bible, scrutinizing each individual scripture, assessing, judgeing, and determining what God has said in these imperfect, translated words? God? Or a flawed fallible sinful human? Your approach seems to presume that *You* can judge, and determine the correctness of doctrine and interpretation. Isn't this presumption ( or assumption ) arrogant? Prayer? Assuming that God, since you have prayed to him, has blessed you with divine understanding. Lots of people pray for understanding, and come up with different answers. Not praying for the right reason says you are of the confidence that *You* pray for the right reasons. But how can *You* know that without claiming that you are someone special? >I, too, believe that God is the only one who is perfect. He Himself has >declared that His message, when not tarnished with sinful human >misinterpretations, is not pleasing to man. I'm curious as to how you are privy to God's message untarnished, and and undistorted by human interpretation? >I am encouraged by the fact that a lot of the negative criticism of my >interpretations of the Scriptures is based on an attempt to impose >perceived earthly wisdom on top of what the Bible actually says. The >few times that people respond with Scriptural rebutals provide >marvelous oportunities for me to reassess my own beliefs. All the >others, which contain a lot of human reasoning, but usually not even >one Scriptural quotation, convince me more and more that I am becoming >more and more correct. It strikes me as odd that people want to see scriptures to support any kind of arguement. Does this not still require human reasoning? One must reason that the presented *evidence* ( scripture references ) supports the claim, much in the same way Scientists prove scientific theories. It still involves human reasoning. Worse, it addresses scripture, which is basically poetry, with a rational and methodical approach that is more fitting for scientists. Scripture, poetry, religious experiences, are very intuitive, and thus defy such analysis. -- -jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov ...the love shack is a little 'ol place -ames!elroy!jato!jrossi where we can G E T T O G E T H E R. **********************STANDARD DISCLAIMER******************************