Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: tblake@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu (Thomas Blake) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: man mere play things? Message-ID: Date: 2 May 91 09:15:24 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: State University of New York at Binghamton Lines: 87 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article lindborg@deer.cs.washington.edu (Jeff Lindborg) writes: (Jeff had stated that he believed the Bible was written by men [males]) (I attempting to make a minor point suggested that the author of the "Book of `J'" felt that one of the theoretical authors of the Old Testament was a woman [when will I learn?]. To which Jeff replies...) >Yes, and what else does he suggest? He says that it was probably a PLAY written >by a woman (I've read the book in question). One of the reasons he comes to the >conclusion it must have been a woman writing the sections credited to the J source >is that these sections don't treat women at objects owned by men as much of the >rest of the bible does. I assume, then, you don't buy this man's hypothesis? Or >just the selected parts you like... As I have stated before, I do not believe in the absolute inerrancy of the Bible. (Maybe someday I will, but not today.) I believe that it would be farer to say that the stories of the Old Testament are meant to instruct. Whether Adam, Eve et al existed or not, the stories in the Old Testament are provided to teach us about mankind, and our relationship with God. To me it really does not matter a great deal whether or not these people existed, what is of importance is why did the authors choose to include these accounts in the Bible. (What lessons are we to learn from Caine and Able?) While one of the theoretical authors was quite keen on numbers and such, J leaned more toward human interest. (Would you say this is a fair representation?) >>In order to create humans which were incapable of sin, God >>would needed to have created us with no free will. (No freedom to >>choose between good and evil.) Humans would need to be automatons. We >>would therefore be very poor images of God. > >Yes but if we are capable of sin it stands to reason that at some point we >would employ that option given the time and numbers of humans God must >surely had anticipated would swarm the earth. If NOT ONE PERSON employed >sin then I would argue that it was not TRUE free will. So by exercising >that free will in a way that displeases God we 'earn' our spot in hell. > >>Think of the parent who must eventually allow their children "to make >>their own mistakes", even if those mistakes mean that the children will >>disobey their parents, and their parents will punish them. (I can't >>help it, I love the image of "God the Father"). The parent knows that >>unless they give their children the freedom to make their own mistakes, >>they will never learn, and they will never mature. > >This is one of the most over-used annalagies in Christianity... God the >"Father" if fine if He would reach down and spank us each time we get out of >hand. However, we don't get such interaction and many times (unless we are >told) we don't even realize we are sinning. My father always took care of >the situation right up front when he caught me doing something wrong and used >the belt right there... sent a pretty clear message. We get no such message >(clear of otherwise) from your god. The only interaction I'll get from God >(according to you) will be when I'm being 'sentenced' to hell after I die. >At this point its obviously too late to do anything about it. On the contrary. You have a conscience. Paul makes the point that even those who do not have the Law have been given their consciences to remind them of what is right and what is wrong. >>You imply that a "loving" God would not punish his children. I assume >>your parents punished you as a child. Would you say that they didn't >>love you? > >If by "punishment" you mean my father kept out of my view and didn't make his >presence known at all... doing nothing but keeping track of everything I did wrong >and then picking some random moment to burn me to death for the wrong I committed, >then no... my father did not "punish" me. > He was more loving than that. You apparantly claim that God has not made his presense know to you. Well, your parents told you, but you didn't believe them. The Bible told you, but you didn't believe it. Something deep inside of you tells you, but you deny it. The world around you speaks testimony, but you choose to ignore it. What would it take for you to believe? A voice booming from the heavens? Some nice looking guy with a white beard saying, "Hi, I'm God, and you've really been screwing up lately..."? Our justice system says that ignorance of the law is no excuse. (You can get punnished for a crime even though you had no way of knowing what you were doing was illegal.) God's laws have been presented to you, will you blame God because *you chose* to ignore them, and he may hold you to task? Remember, Jesus said that all your sins can be forgiven, (except a sin against the spirit), will our justice system give you a deal like that? Tom Blake SUNY-Binghamton