Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Why I Believe...

This may be a little long and disjointed, hopefully not too much so.

On a recent loooonnng series of responses to a blog entry of mine (Twofer Tuesday, below), the question was raised about the logic of believing in Christianity or the Bible. You can make the case that, since God is not “provable,” that why would you believe something on faith alone. And, some said, answering, “Because the Bible says so,” can just lead to a round of circular thinking.

True on both counts, I’d say.

And yet I do believe. I believe in God and I believe in the teachings of Jesus.

But why?

Well, like most others, I reckon I believe because it makes sense to me.

While I think the idea of ID (intelligent design) as a science is a crock, as a logical notion, it makes sense to me. I look around and see a beautiful and complex world and it seems reasonable to me that it took a creator and some planning to create it.

Can I test that in a lab? No, not really. But neither can scientific folk create something out of nothing in a lab.

As I said, it makes sense to me, poor simple mind that I have. Don’t want to believe? That’s okay with me.

But if you accept the notion that a creation took a creator, then that only gets us as far as a Creator God, not Christianity. So why would I believe Christianity specifically?

And I’d answer again, because it makes sense to me.

Oh sure, at one point in my life when I believed in a fire and brimstone hell and that I had to do something to get saved from it, I believed in Christianity because it had been taught to me and I knew naught else.

But I know more now. I know about the failures of The Church and about other teachers and their failures. And Jesus’ teachings still make sense to me.

Jesus – along with many others – taught us the Golden Rule, to “Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you,” and the logic and glory of that astounds me (again, keeping in mind my poor feeble brain and limited logic).


I think I appreciate it because it’s a consistent logic. In other words, if everyone lived that way, it would work just fine (more on the reality that everyone doesn’t live that way in a minute).

Other reasoning suggests that “Might makes Right,” or “Do unto others before they do unto you…” and the problem with that sort of philosophy is that, if everyone lived by it, the world would be a hellish place. To the degree that the world is a hellish place, I’d suggest it’s because many people do live by that sort of logic.

A logic that can’t be consistently applied seems to me to be a faulty logic. “It’s okay for us to bomb their civilians because we must do so to save lives, but it’s terrorism if they bomb our civilians for whatever reason!”

But Jesus, it seems to me, teaches us another way. A consistent way.

Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you. Love your neighbor as yourself. Love your enemies.

It makes a certain elegant sense to me.

But, what of the fact that we don’t live in a world where everyone follows the Golden Rule? Well, it still seems to me that the logic is consistent and to abandon that logic would be to abandon logic.

I’ll love my enemies even if they don’t treat me well. As Paul followed up on Jesus teachings by saying, “By so doing, you will be pouring burning coals upon their heads,” indicating to me not vengeance (“Ha! You’re mean to me, well…take this! I’ll be nice to you and then you’ll suffer!”) but the workable reality of fallen human nature.

“A soft answer turns away wrath,” the book of Proverbs teaches us. It’s hard to be hateful to someone who only treats you with kindness my own life teaches me. Again, there’s a certain elegant logic to the thinking.

So, maybe I’ve turned away the wrath of some mean-spirited people, but what about the really evil people who are determined to hurt you no matter what?

The Bible doesn’t teach us – nor does my reality teach me – that there are two types of people: Really evil people and regular people. There’s just people.

All of our poor fallen selves who sometimes, God help us, do mean stuff and sometimes even commit evil actions. I’m not denying the reality of evil – dropping bombs on children is evil, running an airplane in to a building is evil – I’m saying that there aren’t monsters in the world. Only people.

That’s what I learn from the Jesus of the Bible on at least one topic (albeit The Big One). That, and that it still makes sense to return evil with good nonetheless. Because if not, then what do we have? A dog-eat-dog world, the strongest meanest dude wins? That makes no sense.

At least to me. Maybe I’m wrong. I’m fallible and it’s quite possible.

But we all believe something, don’t we? We have our logic and reasoning and sometimes that logic is consistent and sometimes it isn’t and we just do the best we can with our own poor minds and sometimes mean-as-a-hornet attitudes.

And so, I believe because it makes sense. At least to me.

82 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oh sure, at one point in my life when I believed in a fire and brimstone hell and that I had to do something to get saved from it, I believed in Christianity because it had been taught to me and I knew naught else.

But I know more now. I know about the failures of The Church and about other teachers and their failures. And Jesus’ teachings still make sense to me.

I don't understand why your growth has caused you to not be able to tolerate the association of your former church teachers and associates when I read on to learn how you tolerate all others in spite of what they do or say to you.

Eleutheros said...

"Do unto others as you’d have them do unto you. Love your neighbor as yourself. Love your enemies.

It makes a certain elegant sense to me."

Does it? And if everyone followed that we'd all be OK? What about the Muslim terrorist that believes that if he blows himself and others up for Allah, not only will he go to paradise, but if you are killed in the blast and you are innocent, YOU will go to paradise as well! If you asked him, "If the roles were reversed and I had the bomb, would you WANT to be killed when I set it off?"

Absolutely, b'Allah! It means I would go to paradise!

Now do you want this terrorist to do unto you as he would have you do unto him?

Call me picky, but NOT ME!

Dan Trabue said...

anon said:
"I don't understand why your growth has caused you to not be able to tolerate the association of your former church teachers..."

What makes you think I don't tolerate my former church teachers?

I oftentimes disagree with some of their interpretations now, but I do much more than tolerate them. I love them, they taught me to take the Bible seriously!

Dan Trabue said...

As I said, Ellie, it makes sense to me. Disagree if you wish.

What makes sense to you? Is it internally consistent logic? Would you be glad if I had the same reasoning?

madcapmum said...

"I don't understand why your growth has caused you to not be able to tolerate the association of your former church teachers and associates when I read on to learn how you tolerate all others in spite of what they do or say to you."

I read the post through, and found nothing there to indicate that Dan wouldn't associate with his former teachers. What he was trying to convey was that he thought they were wrong, not that he wouldn't have coffee with them. Of course, there are some people who can't abide anyone disagreeing with them, and for them it amounts to the same thing.

Eleutheros said...

MadCap"I read the post through, and found nothing there to indicate that Dan wouldn't associate with his former teachers."

I didn't either. I had such teachers in my misspent youth and I still hold them with great fondness, although they couldn't be more wrong if the got up early in the morning, brought a lunch, and worked on it all day.

Dan:"As I said, Ellie, it makes sense to me. Disagree if you wish."

Ah, is that a trick question? No, I don't hold that it makes sense except when you can be assured that the 'other' holds very similar values as you do, of which there is little guarantee. But as to what makes sense to you, how could I agree or disagree with it.

"What makes sense to you? "

Do you mean in a religious or philosophical sense? If it makes sense, I am highly suspicious of it (see below).

"Is it internally consistent logic?"
No, not a bit of it.

"Would you be glad if I had the same reasoning?" Yes, I imagine you might. And quite sad at the same time.

So what is it? I can't possibly tell you. When European invaders with their precocieved notion of "this Guy named God" encountered many of the native cultures here, they asked about what 'lay beyond the horizon' as it were, in their view. When they were told, in terms that COULD be taken as Great Spirit [Gichi Manitou (Algonquin), Gulanlante (Iriqoisian (Tsalagi)), or Wankan Tanka (Lakota)], they [the Europeans] said, 'See, that's God, that's our Guy named God. You just have an imperfect kowledge of Him.'

But the terms in every case mean closer to "Great Mysterious" or "It is very Mysterious!"

Now, would I expect the "Great Mysterious" to make sense? What would be the point in that? Just how mysterious are you going to be if you go about making sense all the time?

Never saw the point of putting God in a test tube.

Dan Trabue said...

You're a delightful fella to chat with, Dr. E.

Marty said...

Dan,

You are a treasure. I don't remember how I found my way to you. It might have been through Outside the Camp. But I've been enriched by your simplicity of faith and the way in which you lovingly share it with others, always without condemnation. You have a pure and honest heart my friend. Your encouragement to me in my struggles regarding this dreadful war are appreciated beyond what any words can adequately express.

Dan Trabue said...

You're too kind, Marty.

Say, you know who's coming to my town tomorrow, don't you? The Big W hisself.

Look for me on the news. I'll be the one being hauled away by the cops for bicycling around Limo One with my Stop Bush sign all the while yelling, "SHAME! SHAME! SHAME!!!"

Marty said...

I hope W doesn't salute Kentucky like he did Oklahoma. See Dr. Kear's post over at Emmaus.

Anonymous said...

Dan, I believe I have seen some of your posts in which you expressed some harshness towards your former denomination and how you had to leave. My point was, it is easier to talk peace in the world than it is to really keep peace. Even in small things, people can get pretty worked up at each other and just imagine the whole world, different races, ideas and life conditions.
I don't mean to imply that you hate your former associates, but if I remember right you left their church. If you had to leave because you couldn't agree with them, again I ask you to imagine what it is like trying to keep peace in the world.
I think you should run for president. Put yourself in the presidents shoes.

Dan Trabue said...

I don't know that I've talked much about my former churches except for maybe saying how glad I am they taught me the Bible so well.

I've left churches before, but mostly in an effort to find a church where I felt like I fit in, which I've found now.

My church now WAS kicked out of its former building which was owned by southern baptists because of our stances (mainly at the time the fact that we hired a woman preacher), but that was their doing.

I have contemplated this issue of: Is it better to stay in a church with which you have fundamental differences in hopes of changing them or do you move on?

I reckon I'm on the side of moving on, especially if you're in the minority and have expressed your opinion, offered your teaching and it plain isn't accepted.

At the same time, I've had lunch meetings with those on "the other side," met them for coffee and debate and offered to continue the discussion. For the most part, the conversations have been ended by their request or when we both just reached a point where we felt it not especially helpful to continue to rehash our opinions.

Now with some whom I feel are acting in an oppressive way (think Al Mohler, Pat Robertson), I have reacted with harshness in my rebuke. But I find that consistent in the Jesus driving the moneychangers out of the temple sort of way.

Would you disagree with that approach?

Neo-Con Tastic said...

I'm so dizzy from all of the circles!!!

Dan Trabue said...

anon said:
"I think you should run for president. Put yourself in the presidents shoes."

I'm electable. Who'd vote for a pacifist? We're in the minority and I accept that. I'm not asking the US citizenry to accept pacifism on my say-so. I do think it something for Christians to prayerfully consider.

On putting myself in the president's shoes: we (christians) are not asked to follow in W's steps, but Jesus'.

Neo-Con Tastic said...

BTW MCM, I've given you an answer on the Twofer comments.

Dan Trabue said...

UNelectable, I meant to say. I'm UNelectable...

Anonymous said...

Dan, Here's a topic for you to work out, seeing as how you seem to feel that we can talk ourselves out of every bad situation.

Iran Pops Seals on Nuke Plants

I admire you for keeping your site open to comments. That is one way of people working out differences of opinions to the point of at least being civil, but it is similar to situations in the world - in that you are probably now changing many minds and neither are we. By this, I am just asking you to pray for our President more and protest less.
Remember, we have elections and I have voted both tickets. Still, there is no peace in the world.

Marty said...

Not likely to be peace in the world anon with so much greed, but does that mean we stop working for peace and stop protesting policies that prohibit peace? You speak as if protesting/dissenting is a bad thing. It's not.

Anonymous said...

When I have watched protests on tv, it doesn't usually look very peaceful or very good. Is that what you want to promote? I thought you, Marty want peace at any cost.

Dan Trabue said...

"When I have watched protests on tv, it doesn't usually look very peaceful or very good."

Jesus was fighting for justice when he protested at the temple. He did so without using deadly violence. Fighting for justice non-violently may be a prayer vigil or it may sometimes be overturning tables and driving people out of a temple, depends upon what the situation calls for and what might best work.

Folk often have a limited idea of what Just Peacemaking is.

"Is that what you want to promote? I thought you, Marty want peace at any cost."

Pacifists and non-violent resisters do not want peace "at any cost." We want justice gained peacefully.

Marty said...

Anonymous,

Do you also have a problem with those protesting/dissenting against abortion? Or are you ok with that?

Dan Trabue said...

Earlier, anonymous (whom I shall henceforth call Eustace) said:

"Dan, Here's a topic for you to work out, seeing as how you seem to feel that we can talk ourselves out of every bad situation.

Iran Pops Seals on Nuke Plants..."

And I'd be glad to explain my position, Eustace.

Some preliminary points:
1. As you know, I'm a pacifist, or at least a non-violent resister,
2. I believe thus because that is how I interpret Jesus teachings (which seem fairly clear cut to me - love your enemies, do unto others, etc)
3. I acknowledge that pacifists are not the majority position in this Republic and as that is the case, I don't expect our gov't to have a pacifist policy.
4. I DO expect our gov't to have a well-reasoned, responsible policy in regards to war-making and foreign policy.
5. Further, I believe polls have/would back the position that a large majority of citizens believe that they believe in Just War Theory (although a good many don't know JWT tenets)
6. That being the case, I think a foreign policy and war-making policy in this country could reasonably be asked to shoot for something that approaches a JWT policy.

With me so far?

Anonymous said...

I've been gone most of the day, but to answer your question. No, I am not with you and probably never will be, but that is ok. I will be accountable for my life as you will also.
God bless and may we all grow in our love and knowledge of Him.
Politics will never solve anything and I will best be served by seeking to know my Savior more intimately.

Dan Trabue said...

Friend Eustace,

Don't you see? I'm not talking politics. Not talking Dems or Republicans.

I'm talking about following Jesus.

Yes, by all means. Let's get to know our Savior better.

Daniel Levesque said...

Personally, I find human logic and reasoning as it applies to behavior and morals to be sorely lacking and entirely too prtean. I prefer the absolutes presented under the authority of God.

www.ravingconservative.com

Dan Trabue said...

Human reason has its limits. But who's going to determine what God has told us are absolutes? Do we not have to rely upon God (Mystery) as well as God's gift of reason (Logic) for revelation?

And when it comes to determining how we live, myself, I like that my belief system makes room for some fallible human logic.

Roger said...

>But who's going to determine what God has told us are absolutes?

Jesus spoke the truth didn't He? Then what He said answers your question:

Read John chapter 15 again.
26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

The Holy Spirit inhabits every believer. He's called the Spirit of Truth.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Jesus spoke the truth didn't He? Then what He said answers your question:"

OK. Dan says the Spirit of Truth tells him bombing Iraq is wrong. The same Spirty of Truth tells W that it's God's will. Which one has the spirit of truth and which is a lying SOB. The SoT tellysome of you that Gays are going to Hell and it tells Dan's chruch to celebrate their unions. Which is the real SoT and which has a lying Spirit of Truth sock puppet on their fist? Etc.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Anonymous said...

I had not read anywhere that W. said God told Him to bomb Iraq. Sarcasm is not necessarily truth.
"Real" inquiring minds can find out.

Marty said...

Eustace,

Here's the info on Bush saying God told him to bomb Iraq:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4317498.stm

The White House denies it. Someone is lying.

Dan Trabue said...

The point, Eustace, (if I may speak for Ellie) is that W is claiming as a Christian that he believes that God would have him wage war - that it is a good, or at least an allowable thing as far as the Bible is concerned.

While I contend that the Bible would not condone participating in wars, as W is doing.

Roger had said that Christians have within them the Spirit of Truth and Ellie was asking how we determine which of us, if either, has the Spirit of Truth within and what does that say about the other?

Anonymous said...

Nice choice of sources bbc/uk. (sarcasm)
As for why you call me Eustace and Marty calls me anoymous, did Jesus tell you to do that?
If you think you are the one following Jesus, are you not judging me and you don't even know me.

Marty said...

I should speak for myself. No it was NOT a typo. I should have reserved the name anoymous for you on my own blog. I apologize to Dan for using it here. From henceforth you will be known as "anon" by me here on Dan's blog.

Roger said...

>Roger had said that Christians have within them the Spirit of Truth and Ellie was asking how we determine which of us, if either, has the Spirit of Truth within and what does that say about the other?

Why do Christians sin even after they have been born again and the Holy Spirit inhabits them? It's because we choose to yield to self, instead of the Spirit. No where in scripture does it say that the Holy Spirit takes over our free will. Also, no where in scripture do we have the principle that the Holy Spirit leaves us on our own. To the contrary, that goes against Jesus' very words - that is if scripture is inerrant and we can trust that what is recorded about Him is true. Man, we just can't get away from the importance of the inerrancy of God's word can we? ;)

So again:
>Roger had said that Christians have within them the Spirit of Truth and Ellie was asking how we determine which of us, if either, has the Spirit of Truth within and what does that say about the other?

Here's the test: do we read the world's newspapers or do we pray over it, and study God's word? You know, you said (or someone did) earlier that the Bible just didn't fall in our laps - from God's mind to our coffee tables. Yes, so why do we think God will reveal truth to us through the secular news sources? Prayer and Bible study are necessary for growth.

Eleutheros said...

I have a tendancy to believe the White House denials, W has not demonstrated that he is that uncareful a man. What I am refering to is that just as Saddam was a Koran thumper, so Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, and Bush 2 have all been Bible thumpers, professing to be guided by something very akin to the 'Spirit of Truth' mentioned here. Bush does not say "This war thing is strictly my call relying on reality as I see it ..." rather he builds his own Goldbergian machine where God if for America, America was attacked, God wants us to defend America against all attacks (present, future, imagined, real) and therefore God wants us to invade Iraq. Absolutely no different that the twisty and clever path that gets one to 'Jesus is against abortion'.

And Jesus never said, "Don't Judge [period]" rather he said, "However you judge, that's the way you will be judged, so don't judge unless thou art OKeth with that."

I'm OKeth with that.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Here's the test: do we read the world's newspapers or do we pray over it, and study God's word?"

Roger, your test is no good. Dan no doubt prays over the world newspapers and study's God's word, and W does the same. Yet the SoT leads them to two opposed and mutually exclusive conclusions.

Roger said...

Eleutheros:
>Roger, your test is no good. Dan no doubt prays over the world newspapers and study's God's word, and W does the same. Yet the SoT leads them to two opposed and mutually exclusive conclusions.

Are you a believer? Seriously, only those that have acted in faith on God's word are qualified to talk about the truthfulness of it - and Him. God has a lot of promises in His word...they can be for you too, you know. You don't have to live outside of God's grace...unless of course, you choose to. And that logic, is 'no good'. :) What are you waiting for? An invitation? God's already given it...it's up to you to accept.

Dan Trabue said...

Well said, Ellie, but Roger, on your comment:

"Yes, so why do we think God will reveal truth to us through the secular news sources?"

Why not? God spoke through an ass (and here, I'm talking about Balaam's donkey, not you or me, or even Ellie), God can speak to us anyway God chooses to speak to us.

Myself, I'm always a little concerned about those who'd choose to know nothing of the world's business (W, saying he doesn't read the papers, for instance).

======
On a personal note, Ellie: You know I'm joking with you sometimes, right? I love you most of all...well, except for Miss Marty and a few others.

Dan Trabue said...

Roger:
"only those that have acted in faith on God's word are qualified to talk about the truthfulness of it - and Him...."

Says who?

No evangelizing on my blog, please.

Ellie is a big boy and seems to know more about more stuff than just about anyone I know. He's a free agent heathen with plenty of God and Grace to spare.

Roger said...

...if you see someone walking towards a cliff, one that they're apparently going to fall off of and die if they don't change their path, do you walk along side them and talk about trivial things, or do you urgently shout, "Hey, look out, you're going to fall off that cliff".....? What is my apparent motive for doing that? What is their incentive for dismissing my statement?


All the resourcefulness and intelligence in the world doesn't exclude us from the need of God's grace. Thankfully, even though we're sinners, God offers it to us. Again I say (to anyone that needs it), don't refuse it.

Roger said...

Dan:
>>"only those that have acted in faith on God's word are qualified to talk about the truthfulness of it - and Him...."

>Says who
?

God's word says faith without works is dead. Now, what that means is not that we work for salvation, but that there's a difference between a 'said faith' and a 'real faith'. When someone says they have faith, and subsequently never act upon that, it's apparent that they never had faith at all, that they just said they did. Real faith requires that I act upon what I say I believe. I trust it enough to move on it. There's a difference between believing about Jesus and believing in Jesus. All the knowledge of scripture in the world won't save you if you never put it to the test. What's cool is, when we take God at His word, scripture becomes alive, and more real as he works and we know from experience that what He said in His word, is indeed true. That's why you'll hear theologians sometimes say are more sure of God than they are of themselves. They don't trust their own behavior very far, however, through their lifetime - they have seen that God is faithful, and therefore they confidently stake their lives - even all of eternity - on the truthfulness of His word.

Anonymous said...

You do a lot of "splaining"; first if you did not want to offend me, then why choose that name and even go to the trouble of explaining what it meant and where it came from?
Now, best of I remember we have been told over and over to do unto others as we would have them do unto us. I have not called you any names or Marty. I have just let you have your fun and you can go ahead, if that gives you joy.
I do my share of sinning and I always have to examine myself and my attitudes and take them to Jesus for His forgiveness. Then I try to do better because I remember whose I am.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Are you a believer? Seriously, only those that have acted in faith on God's word are qualified to talk about the truthfulness of it - and Him."

That's just some more of that circular thinking. You will only know that it's true if you accept it as true and act on it. You reckon? Have you ever talked to (listened to the pitch from) the Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, or the Christian Scientists? They say exactly the same thing. Exactly! And the Moslems do as well. If you only accept Mohamed as the Prophet (PBUH) and act on that as if it were true, then you will see the truth of it. Otherwise Allah will not act through you.

It works for anything. I can set up a stone here on the farm and say that it is God. What? You don't believe it! You don't see the truth of it!? That's ONLY because you don't believe and act in faith as if it were true.

Am I a believer? If I were, this discussion on the basis of faith would leave me tugging at the beard and having second thoughts.

Anonymous said...

Deuteronomy 4:15-40 is an excellent scripture telling us of the one True God. The True God is a Spirit and we do not see Him, but we can hear Him. False gods can be seen, but they will not speak to you.
I challange anyone here to get alone, ask God to reveal himself to you (don't expect any spectacular event) but wait and see if you don't find Him if you see Him in earnest and sincerity.

Eleutheros said...

Anon:"I challange anyone here to get alone, ask God to reveal himself to you"

What would that get us? The Jews, Buddhists, Mormons, Moslems, and Hindus all say exactly the same thing and sure enough, anyone taking up the challenge earnestly finds Jehovah, Buddha, Moroni, Allah, Bhrama, Krishna, etc.

Eleutheros said...

OK, guys, I wouldn't normally get into this, but Jesus just said He wants me to explain someting. I told Him it was a bad idea, but He's been a decent Sort lately and so I am inclinded to indulge Him. Now don't get upset at me, I'm against revealing this, think it's a bad idea.

You are all so utterly wrong about the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, the Paraklete. Jesus explained it to you in very simple terms and yet all of you just skip right over it as if it weren't there, give it some other unlikely explaination and go on. That's why you keep trying to blame everything from bombing Iraq to redistributing wealth and concerning yourself what passes between consenting adults on the Spirit of Truth rather than having a smidgin of the Holy Spirit tell you otherwise.

Here's what Jesus said about the Holy Spirit, and b'Jesus, it's right there above the part (Roger?) quoted about the Spirit of Truth, how could you have missed it. It is the entire crux (no pun intended) of the matter upon which everything else hangs. Misunderstand this and you misunderstand the lot:

"I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

There. The Holy Spirit only comes when Jesus goes away. Oh, I know, the cliche explaination is that He was talking about his crucifixion and as soon as that was over, Ol' Jesus is back. But that's NOT what He's talking about. You have to let go of Jesus before the Spirity of Truth will come to you.

But you won't let Him go! You cling onto Him as if He were a personal possession (complete with owner's manual, the Bible). Jesus this and Jesus that, what would Jesus do? Would he bomb the Iraqis, would he be friends with a homosexual, would he approve of this, would he approve of that, Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, Jesme, Jesyou .... aagggh! It's enough to drive Him to drink (hence His trips to my house).

You carry Jesus around alike a rag doll, sew him into a sock puppet - a puppet of the type in the Punch and Judy show where he has a big club to clobber everyone else's sock puppet.

And so the Spirit of Truth (true to Jesus' words) stays away until you let Jesus depart.

Dan Trabue said...

Ellie said:
"If I were, this discussion on the basis of faith would leave me tugging at the beard..."

As it would me, if I didn't get some deranged pleasure out of these conversations. I'm sick, I know it.

And the only cure is Dr. Jesus!

Eleutheros said...

Anon:"Why not do it and find out? I am not throwing out a challenge that will harm you in any way."

Why not, then, yourself take the Buddha challenge? Or the Krishna challenge, or the Allah challenge, or the Mithras challenge. I'm not throwing out a challenge that will harm you in any way.

Answer that and you have the answer to your own question.

Eleutheros said...

Dan:"And the only cure is Dr. Jesus!"

Take two Messiahs and call me in the morning. Ah, then there's the problem, Dan, you're not taking the adult dose!

Dan Trabue said...

Well, I don't want to be all groggy...

Anonymous said...

And the only cure is Dr. Jesus. by Dan

That statement takes me by surprise because I don't quite know whether you think you are making a statement for my benefit or if it is sacrilegious.

Why not, then, yourself take the Buddha challenge? Or the Krishna challenge, or the Allah challenge, or the Mithras challenge. I'm not throwing out a challenge that will harm you in any way. this by Eleutheros

Eleutheros, I believe Deuteronomy 4:15 through 40 and I have commited my life to the One True God. I have no doubts about His Deity and Supremecy. I took the challenge from the Almighty God and found Him faithful and True. So, are you going to take the challenge?

Eleutheros said...

Anon:"So, are you going to take the challenge?"

Been there, done that, bought the Jesus T-shirt. And then I moved beyond it. Got out of the revolving door.

Now, back to the rut you're stuck in. You are only handing out the same line the Moslems, Buddhists, Shintoists, Shaman, and everyone else hands out. THey too have found the true God. Why is yours any better than theirs?

Anonymous said...

Eleuthores,
My God is the Creator of the Universe, His Son Jesus died on a cross and was resurrected - came back to life, the Third person of my God's Person is the Holy Spirit and He dwells within me from the moment I acknowledged my sins and my need of Him as my Savior. I asked Him to be my Savior.

The gods of these that you mentioned
the Moslems, Buddhists, Shintoists, Shaman, are man made gods or men that people chose to acknowledge as their god. None of them died and rose again. None of them could cleanse my sins because they themselves were not sinless and only a perfect sacrifice could atone for sin.

More times than I can count, God has shown Himself to me and has provided and protected me when I was in a totally helpless position. I admit that I cannot take care of myself without Him. What if a drought occurs and it would be so dry, no crops would grow? Who gives us the rain? As righteous as Job was, he could not argue with God. I surely can't either.

Dan Trabue said...

Eustace, I'll have to be honest with you: This sort of "witnessing" tends to push away more people than it reaches. If that's your goal.

If you really want to start effectively witnessing, I'd suggest beginning by listening.

One man's opinion.

Eleutheros said...

Anon, Dan is right, that sort of witnessing only works when you are preaching to the choir. It only works when you are in one of those revolving doors of thinking. If you apply any external standards to it, it falls apart like a wet saltine:

To wit:

"My God is the Creator of the Universe,"

That's what everyone says. Well, except for those religions that see through the utter illogic of there needing to be a creation to begin with.


Anon:"The gods of these that you mentioned
the Moslems, Buddhists, Shintoists, Shaman, are man made gods or men that people chose to acknowledge as their god."

That's exactly what they say about your god. What makes them wrong and you right other than the sock puppet saying so?

Anon:" None of them died and rose again."

That's not true. The gods of many religions died on a cross or a tree and rose again. For example, from the Havamal:

"I know I hung on that windswept tree
Nights all of nine
Wounded by spear
Sacrificed to Odhin
Myself and offering to myself
None gave bread
None gave me drink
As I hung on that tree
Whither the roots of it run
No man knows"

There are twelve religions that had a crucified savior just like Christianity and make exactly the same claims about it.

Anon:" None of them could cleanse my sins because they themselves were not sinless and only a perfect sacrifice could atone for sin."

All this does is identify the 'faith' as an AlkaSeltzer religion. When the Bayer corporation couldn't get anyone to buy their effervescent antacic with aspirin, they launched an ad campaign to first sell a disease and then sell the cure. So the invented the 'Blahs' and then sold you AlkaSeltzer to cure it. The way you are describing Christianity is just like that. You have to sell the disease (sins that need cleansing) and then how wonderful, here's the cure. The AlkaSeltzer Jesus.

Anon:"More times than I can count, God has shown Himself to me and has provided and protected me when I was in a totally helpless position."

And that's exactly what people say of Allah, Mithras, Buddha. No difference.


Anon:"What if a drought occurs and it would be so dry, no crops would grow? Who gives us the rain?"

Pan. Zephyr. Tlaloc.

Or maybe Agwe, as we hear in the tale of Ti Moune:

"Asaka, grow me a garden
Please Agwe, don't flood my garden
....
To the music of the gods
The music of the breezes through
The green plaintain
The murmur of the river and
The roar of rain
We dance to the earth
We dance to the water
The Gods awake and we take no chance
Our hearts hear the song
Our feet move along
And to the music of the Gods
We dance!"


Anon:"As righteous as Job was, he could not argue with God. I surely can't either."
Oh, I though Job did pretty good and God shuffled His feet embarassed by some of the questions and dodged them. A person can argue with God, He doesn't mind. What they can't argue with is their own sock puppet.

Dan Trabue said...

"There are twelve religions that had a crucified savior just like Christianity and make exactly the same claims about it."

Ellie,

Are you extremely well-read, over-educated, widely-experienced or just a grand googler? Your knowledge intrigues me. And sometimes even your wisdom, but mostly your knowledge...

Anonymous said...

Dan, Your view concerning "my sort of witnessing": Mark 16:15 Jesus said "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." Rom. l: 16-17 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written. "The just shall live by faith". Now, did I get from those scriptures that I should be careful not to offend anyone?
As for your suggesion that I begin by listening. Who do you suggest I listen to? I choose God and His Word.

Eleutheros, Why would my Bible views be more of a revolving door than what I read from your posts with ONLY men's opinions to back them up?

As for the gods of many religions that died on a cross and rose again: were there prophecies (ageless) to foretell them and later - proof to validate it? It was so of Jesus.

Then, you said that I have to sell disease (sins that need cleansing): No, I don't have to sell sin, but I had to recognize that I was and am a sinner. Jesus IS the remedy for sin through cleansing by His precious blood AND my acceptance of that remedy. He will not force Himself upon us.

When I asked who gives us the rain, your reply was for me to consider Agwe, as we hear in the tale of Ti Moune. Is this not more "wisdom" of man?

I know that what I say is of no importance, but I hope that you and Dan will go to the Bible and consider what we discuss.

Dan Trabue said...

That's just it, Eustace. We've BEEN in the Bible and discussing it and considering it.

No one is suggesting you ought to be ashamed of the Gospel (after all, that's what I've been trying to proclaim here myself) or worried about "offending" anyone, I don't think anyone here will be offended by much of what you've said (except inasmuch as you may be insulting our intelligence).

No, you won't likely offend us but you may bore us with banal repitition, at which point we will likely just turn you off and you will have become irrelevant.

I'm just suggesting - from YOUR point of view of wanting to "win the lost at all costs" - that you're not being very effective here.

I suggested listening to what others have said because Ellie and others are making some valid points (some of which I disagree with, but they are points to be reckoned with) and I have tried to engage you in Bible study but you have opted not to respond to my questions except to cite some irrelevant (to the issue at hand) Bible passage.

If you're concerned about honest dialog and/or bible study, then let's have a bit of give and take, with you hearing what we're saying or asking. At this point, that does not seem to be the case.

Good luck!

Eleutheros said...

Dan:"Are you extremely well-read, over-educated, widely-experienced or just a grand googler? "

No, I'm just old.

And slipping. It piqued my interest so I looked into my notes and it's SIXTEEN crucified saviors, not twelve.

Dan Trabue said...

And which notebook was that in? "My list of cruxicentric religions?"

Eleutheros said...

Anon:(quotes are not in the order they appear on your comment)"... but I hope that you and Dan will go to the Bible and consider what we discuss."

You want Dan and I to go to the Bible. Do you really believe from what you're read here that there are active participants in this discussion that do not know the Bible up one side, down the other, 'kiver to kiver'? Do you think there is much of the Bible Dan or I (or most people commenting here, as far as I can tell) could not quote upside down in a rainbarrel?

Go to the Bible, you suggest? Isn't it painfully obvious that we've all been there. Extensively. Repeatedly.

As to your questions:" were there prophecies (ageless) to foretell them and later - proof to validate it? It was so of Jesus."

Prophecies? Oh, heavens yes! In the case of Krishna, for example, there are prophecies of a volume more than the entire Bible combined. As for proof of Jesus, there's no actual proof (historical, archeological) that Jesus actually lived. There are only two writers in antiquity that ever mentioned him (Josephus and Tacitus) but the oldest extant copies of their work date from the ninth century and it's rather certain the one line references to Jesus were added by Christian copyists [Christian apolotists sometimes cite an ambiguous passage in Suetonius about a contemporary (in the second century) named 'Chrestus' and try to make this be a reference to Jesus and they also cite ficticious letter from Pliny the Elder to the emperor mentioning Christians, and yet in Pliny's exhaustive and cross referenced 'History', he never mentions Jesus, Christ, or Christians. In short, Anon, there's no a jot of historical proof that Jesus ever existed. At best he was a third century composite of various people real and imagined.

Anon:"Eleutheros, Why would my Bible views be more of a revolving door than what I read from your posts with ONLY men's opinions to back them up?"

Quite simply, Anon, I can step out of the revolving door at any minute. Any time anyone posts anything here (or anywhere) to say, "Hey, Eleutheros, you've got this wrong, consider this and see if I'm not correct." I do. And I am very happy to stand corrected. Dan wondered how I came by an acquaintence with what I know, and I can say first and foremost I did so by being willing and eager to stand corrected. But you, Anon, cannot stand corrected. When I bring tales of Krishna, Mithras, Odhin, or Ti Moune; I'm willing to let them go just as soon as it's clear they have nothing to offer. Do you come to this discussion that way?

Let me venture that the answer is 'no'. No matter what might be said, shown, proven, divinely inspired, it would make no difference to you. You could take five shots to the head and not flinch in your dogmatism. THAT is why you are in a revolving door and I am not.

Anon:"When I asked who gives us the rain, your reply was for me to consider Agwe, as we hear in the tale of Ti Moune. Is this not more "wisdom" of man?"

More revolving door circular thinking, Anon. You start from the dogmatism that the "Word" is from God and everything else is the wisdom of man. As they would say in forensics, this is NOT in evidence. It is gratuitously asserted and it can be just as gratuitiously denied. That's why I have posited before to state up front what the criteria are to interpret the Bible before we start (it's a rhetorical request, there ARE no such criteria used by anyone, I only say it to give people a glimpse into the fact that they are making up Bible 'truths' on the fly). You say it's God's word and the rest is man's wisdom. OK. What evidence do you have (besides your own imagination and purveyed through a sock puppet of your own devising) that it's so?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Eleutheros said...

Dan:"And which notebook was that in? "My list of cruxicentric religions?" "

My notebooks on Jung, of course, and the underlying archeotype of all religions.

Dan"Ellie and others are making some valid points (some of which I disagree with, but they are points to be reckoned with)"

Ah, and you think I agree with them just because I made them. No, no.

Dan Trabue said...

Ah, but you think that I think that you think you agree with them!

I would never presume to know what in the world you think.

Marty said...

Eleutheros said: "Go to the Bible, you suggest? Isn't it painfully obvious that we've all been there. Extensively. Repeatedly."

Yes, it is painfully obvious, excruciatingly so.

Roger said...

You know, I've been reading all the activity on here over the weekend - and thinking about and praying over what I wanted to say. I scrapped all my potential arguments and replies on this thread - and decided instead to link to a song I just recently heard.

Sometimes a song can communicate truth and reach our hearts directly ... bypassing our minds which can sometimes get in the way. So, having said that...download it...put on some headphones...and soak it up! :)

Download link:
"Awakening"

Isn't God good? He lets us ask hard questions of Him, argue with Him, make mistakes, even deny that He exists. And yet even still...He is merciful - he answers us...not with justice, but with grace.

Dan Trabue said...

Roger, friend, you're boring us.

Here's another cool song (with thanks to St Monty of Python):

Life is quite absurd, and death's the final word
We must always face the curtain with a bow
Forget about your sin, give the audience a grin
Enjoy it -- it's your last chance anyhow, so...

Always look on the bright side of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath

Life's a piece of shit, when you look at it
Life's a laugh and death's a joke it's true
You can see it's all a show, keep 'em laughing as you go
Just remember that the last laugh is on you, and...

Always look on the bright side of life
Always look on the bright side of life...

Anonymous said...

Dan, With all your talk of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", you can't do it yourself.
Look at how you came back to a civil reply from Roger. Then that song that you quote! I have about decided some good advice for you, would be to grow up! I'm older than eleutheros, so you can start with a little respect for your elders. Maybe, somewhere in life we have learned some lessons that you could benefit from if you will "listen" as you advised me to do.

Roger said...

>Roger, friend, you're boring us.

Seriously, you find God's grace boring?

>As it would me, if I didn't get some deranged pleasure out of these conversations. I'm sick, I know it.

And the only cure is Dr. Jesus!


Hmmm, that reminds me of something I heard recently. Take a listen...

Visiting Dr. Law...

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Seriously, you find God's grace boring?"

In the true believer's bag of tricks this is known as the 'cheap salesman ploy'.

Waaayy back I had a part time (college days) job at a Woolworth store in Atlanta, many years predating the WalMart era. The manager came in all a flutter and tried to recruit all and sundry for one a new business that was going to make him rich, rich rich! It was smoke alarms! You made an appointment to go to someone's home and demonstrated the new battery powered smoke alarms, gave the agonizing statistics along with tear-jerking anecdoatal stories about whole families burning up in their sleep for lack of alarms, and then for only $189, his company would install a smoke alarm in your house and guarantee it for a year. That's $189 a year, folks. That's 52 cents a day. He would then affect a serious demeanor, deeply concerned look on his face, and ask "Are you saying that your family isn't worth 52 cents a day?"

We told him that before long the alarms he was selling would be available in a blister pack in his own Woolworth store for $29.95 (back then they weren't made in China). He scoffed and quit his job. Within half a year I was stocking them on the display hooks myself.

Similar to that cheap salesman trick is when you've heard the ridiculous Amway pyramid scheme line and just want to get the loser out of your face, he has been trained in cheap salesmanship to retort, "I'm sorry to hear you're not interested in making money."

If you don't buy the overpriced smoke alarm, we'll equate that with not valuing your family.

If you don't join the loser club pyramid scheme, we'll equate that with not being interested in money.

If you don't download yet another trite 'this Guy named God' song and get excited about it, you don't take God's grace seriously.

Cheap salesman's trick. The sock puppet is getting a little threadbare, try a differnt one. It isn't God's grace we find boring, it's the sock puppet show that's delivering it. It wasn't Oscar material to begin with and the fifty-eleventh time we've seen it, it gets old. Saaayyy, I've got a good line of God sock puppets here, only $29.95 each. What? You don't want one?

You mean God isn't worth $29.95!?

Roger said...

hey Eleutheros,

Here's a homework assignment for you. What are your thoughts on grace? Why is it that grace is unique to the Christian faith? If you think Christianity is a fraud, why would man create a religion where man gets no glory for their salvation?

And secondly - what about those apostles? Why were they so timid while Jesus was alive, and then after his crucifixion and resurrection - they became dynamic witnesses for Him - resulting in all but one of them dying by martyrdom for the cause? Will people die for a lie? Not knowingly. But some people today will say, "Look at the suicide bombers of Islam." Yes, but those folks blowing themselves up today are not the ones who wrote the Koran or were around then. If you believe the apostles were schemers, that means they crafted a clever tale, and then allowed themselves to be martyred for it? Why when they were at the point of renouncing their faith and living - or standing on it and dying - did they not admit that it was a lie and save themselves? That doesn't square with the reality of human nature. So, the only conclusion is that they were testifying to what they had seen and heard (Acts 4:20), and were empowered and inhabited by God's Spirit to boldly communicate the truth of God's grace.

Dan Trabue said...

Roger:"Seriously, you find God's grace boring?"

No. Just cheap grace.

Roger said...

>No. Just cheap grace.

Dan, I don't understand. Please clarify what you mean.

Marty said...

Oops, that Bonhoeffer.

Dan Trabue said...

Roger,

Are you not familiar with the term "cheap grace" or are you asking in what manner am I referencing it?

Here's a link to one place to read Bonhoeffer:

http://www.crossroad.to/Persecution/Bonhoffer.html

If you're interested.

Dan Trabue said...

Eustace said:
"Look at how you came back to a civil reply from Roger..."

I've asked y'all to refrain from using this place to evangelize. You haven't. I've asked you to practice listening, you haven't.

So, I'm not particularly listening to much you're saying anymoer except inasmuch as it has to do with the topic at hand (in this case, my essay on why I believe what I believe).

As to respect: How would I have any idea how old you are? You've remained totally and cowardly anonymous. Another reason to not to listen to much of what you say.

Respect is earned.

And don't misrepresent rebukes as a lack of respect. Jesus, John the Baptist, etc often rebuked those who were in the wrong. Has nothing to do with respect except inasmuch as the lack of respect you two have displayed here.

And you don't like Monty Python songs? How do you feel about poetry?

The friendly men came aknockin' on my door this morn.
Suits and sweaty smiles in a 90 sun,
Bible tracts in hand and intractible.

Truth be told,
I'm always tempted to mess around with them.

Give them a chance to make
their spiel for
their safe God who conforms to
their rules and pray
their simple prayer and embrace
their teary-eyed embrace as
their new little brother in Christ,
only to tilt my head at an extreme angle and
say, in my best growling Linda Blair voice,
"NOW GET OUT OF HERE BEFORE SATAN
DEVOURS YOU WHOLE."

I suppose that means I have a mean-spirited streak in me
and am need of salvation.
That's fine.
I just don't care for theirs.

Roger said...

>Here's a link to one place to read Bonhoeffer:

http://www.crossroad.to/Persecution/Bonhoffer.html

Dan,
I'm listening, reading, and replying. How has what I posted on here amounted to cheap grace? You said that's what I did. If I'm guilty of it, I want to know it. I'm struggling to follow your argument...please clarify.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Here's a homework assignment for you. What are your thoughts on grace? Why is it that grace is unique to the Christian faith?"

I'm afraid you'd have to do your homework first. Another of the ploys in the Believers Bag of Tricks is to say "Christianity is unique because.." "Jesus was unique because..." All said straight off the top of their heads out of ususally complete ignorance. A great many religions are based on the grace of some deity.

The Quran opens thus:

"1 In the name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful.
2 Praise be to Allah the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds.
3 Most Gracious Most Merciful.
4 Master of the Day of Judgement.
5 It is you we worship and serve and it is you we seek help from.
6 Show us the straight way.
7 The way of those upon whom You bestowed Your Grace"

It is a recurring theme in Islam that the believer is saved by he grace of Allah and that works are only in gratitude for the grace. The same is true for a dozen other world religions and also religions of the past. There is nothing unique in Christianity, to say so is just another in the bag of rather cheap tricks.


Roger:"If you think Christianity is a fraud, why would man create a religion where man gets no glory for their salvation?"

I never said anything of the sort. I think people's sock puppets that pass for Christiantiy are frauds, what I think about it per se I haven't expressed. Christianity as we know it today was a fabrication of Constantine at the beginning of the 4th century where he wanted to equate salvation with obedience to the emperor.

Roger:"And secondly - what about those apostles? Why were they so timid while Jesus was alive, and then after his crucifixion and resurrection - they became dynamic witnesses for Him - resulting in all but one of them dying by martyrdom for the cause?"

The apostles and their exploits are largely 4th century constructs of bits and pieces of ledgend.

"Will people die for a lie?"

People do it all the time. There are Jihadists blowing themselves up every day for a lie. The militant pacifist might tell you that American soldiers are dying for a lie in Iraq.

Roger said...

>"Will people die for a lie?"

Ahhh, don't forget the most important part....a KNOWN lie. Our minds are the most precious piece of fertile ground on the planet. The enemy will target that till we die. Deception is what it is. But thankfully, the truth is what it is too. And you and me can't change that.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:"Ahhh, don't forget the most important part....a KNOWN lie."

That does make some difference. But if that 'proves' the NT story, what about the fact that many of the followers of Mohamed died as a reslult of their faith. Does it follow, then, that Mohamed's story MUST be true because after all, would anyone die for a known lie? Same with the followers of Krishna, Ahuramazda, Joseph Smith, etc. All had followers die rather than denounce the faith. Does that prove that each of them was right and the story true?


Our minds are the most precious piece of fertile ground on the planet. The enemy will target that till we die. Deception is what it is. But thankfully, the truth is what it is too. And you and me can't change that.

Eleutheros said...

Roger:" And you and me can't change that."

Ooops, meant to finish that comment. This is something else that is not in evidence and is only the musing of admittedly flawed human logic, that truth is static and never changes. There's no evidence presented here that such is so.

Dan Trabue said...

Roger, Bonhoeffer talks about cheap grace, saying:

"Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline…Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate."

One thing I get out of this notion is the "accepting of Christ" without the following of Christ's teachings. Without "Jesus Christ, living and incarnate" in today's world. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

That's what I mean.

Marty said...

FYI: Bonhoeffer is airing Monday, Feb 6 on PBS.

http://www.pbs.org/previews/bonhoeffer/