Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: gdr2f@boole4.acc.Virginia.EDU (George D. Randels) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Is Satan a God? (was:Question for Net.theologians) Message-ID: Date: 7 Jun 90 02:48:37 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Virginia Lines: 41 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: > > I agree with C. Wingate; the problem with 'liberal' protestants is not >that they have denied tradition, it is that they have abandoned 'Sola >Scriptura' (Not to mention Sola Gratia and Sola (What's the word for faith? >Fide?). Too msny are committing Adam's sin: substituting their own sense >of 'right and wrong' for God's revelation. You can't criticize modern day >advocates of the three Sola's (principally confessional Lutherans, IMHO) >for the errors of those who have abandoned that confessional standard >(including, regrettably, some who still call themselves Lutheran). How many >churches are adding 'experience' to scripture? How many are implicitly adding >'science', or 'psychology'? How many pick and choose scripture to fit the >fashion of the age? What do you mean by substituting one's own sense of right and wrong for God's revelation? Certainly scripture and Christian teaching through the ages leaves room for conscience in interpreting scripture. Paul says that one should follow conscience (a person's own sense of right and wrong) when scripture is subject to interpretation for guiding conduct. If your conscience convicts you for eating meat sacrificed to idols -- then don't do it, for you would sin. But if your conscience tells you it is ok, that as long as you are thanking God for it. Eating this meat does not NECESSARILY violate the command against worshipping other gods. As for adding things like experience, or science, or psychology, doesn't Paul say that he agrees with the Greeks as much as he can, but then puts the gospel of Christ on top of whatever beliefs they may have. What's wrong with using the language of science, psychology, or experience to get the gospel message across? You have to use whatever language people are using. The early Christians used Greek (or whatever language the community used). If the vocabulary of science is in use by our culture, we should use it to bring out the gospel message. What John Howard Yoder has to say on this point (in _The Priestly Kingdom_) is quite interesting (and quite right, I think). -- -- George Randels University of Virginia Dept. of Religious Studies