Posted on 01/11/2005 6:18:33 PM PST by malakhi
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
After a nine month hiatus, The Neverending Story, the granddaddy of daily threads, has returned to Free Republic. Originally begun on March 24, 2001, as a religious discussion thread, the NES evolved over time into a daily thread spanning a wide variety of topics. The new and improved Neverending Story will feature conversation on religion, politics, culture, current events, business, sports, family, hobbies, general fellowship and more. We welcome you to hang your hat in our little corner of FR. We ask you to abide by the FR posting rules and, even in the midst of serious debate, to keep the discussion friendly and respectful. Those who wish to "duke it out" are asked to take it over to the Smoky Backroom. I placed this thread in "General/Chat" for a reason, so play nice and have fun! :o)
IMO, the problem isn't the "mystery" in religion per se....it's just that the Constantinian mysteries are anathema to what Jesus and Judaism teaches. Again, if you want to believe all those mysteries, fine. But it is incorrect to claim that such mysteries are based in Judaism.
There's mystery in God appearing in a burning bush. There's mystery in the creation. Some of us see those "mysteries" as literal truth, some see them as myth, created by man, in his attempt/desire to understand God, some as a little bit of both. If the mystery of the trinity (which ISN'T in scripture, which goes against the Shema, which is anathema to Jesus' faith, Judaism)helps you to understand God, so be it.
For many, the mere existence of God is a "mystery", because we don't literally "see" the God of our belief. We work to understand something/someONE that is invisible to the naked eye. We cannot "prove" God's existence (yet?)...so, in a sense, God remains a mystery. We all have our individual ways of "seeing God"... going deep into prayer, reading our Bible, walking along a magnificent beach, watching the sun rise and set, witnessing the miracle of birth, or experiencing love in our relationships with others. And though we may experience..or connect with God, there really is no way we fully comprehend Him. So in that sense He remains "mystery". We believe we have all kinds of evidence of the reality of God in the many good things we know and experience in real life. This is true, for those who believe in God, across the board. (C.S. Lewis, in the beginning of "Mere Christianity", IMO, presents an excellent case for the exisitence of God. In a very clear, straightforward manner, He illustrates other kinds of "evidence" for the existence of God.)
RE:
"Explain to me how God made the universe out of nothing. "
HOW God created the universe remains a mystery to me...but the universe is very real. We have evidence of it's existence. And IMO, there is evidence of God's existence. (OTOH, i see no evidence for the mystery teachings of the Nicene church. And even if i did, I'd have to scratch my head in wonderment at the claim they fulfill OT prophesy)
RE: "Explain how evil can exist in the created world of a Perfect Creator.
HOW is not exacly clear to me, but evil certainly exists. The OT tells us that God is the author of evil. Do you buy that?
RE: "Explain how a series of animal sacrifices can atone for sin."
Frankly, i can't explain it...I don't defend it... and i do question it. Certainly, you probably understand it better than i, because you accept (and understand?) the HUMAN SACRIFICE of Jesus as atonement for the sin of all mankind. It doesn't make sense to me, at all. OTOH, what Jesus preached (as opposed to what the Nicence church teaches)makes sense to me. It's easy to understand...it makes sense...it's NOT a msytery. Judaism's basic message (same message of Jesus, BTW) makes sense too. The Constantinian church, OTOH, instead of focusing on the message of Jesus, stresses the mystery stories surrounding him. And on top of that, they claim those mysteries are OT prophesies. IMO, Jesus' message is believable AND compatible w/ his faith, Judasim. For me, the message of the Nicene church is neither.
I can understand that many choose to believe the Constantinian mysteries...just as many Hindu's choose to believe their mysteries. BUT, the claim by the Constantinian Church that their mystery beliefs (in a "man-God", trinity, virgin birth etc...) are prophetic fullfillment of the OT scripture just doesn't wash. Yes all religion has some sense of "mystery"...but the msytery of the Constantinian Church is anathema to what Judaism (the faith of Jesus) taught.
Who the heck is doing any "shoving" around here? It ain't me. I play defense. You'll find in 1532 1 spark saying "it's the Nicene (Constantinian) Christians who did not accept ALL scripture. And, IMO, they even embellished the existing scripture."
I didn't come out attacking non-orthodox beliefs and "shoving" them on anyone.
Maybe someday you'll see that defending Catholicism is not the same as forcing it on anyone. We're allowed to talk, too.
SD
Yes. How can you claim to be "Biblical" and claim to know nothing at the same time.
It is also mystifying how no one can answer my simple questions about mysteries and revelation.
SD
I understand that is your position, and I don't really have a problem with that.
For many, the mere existence of God is a "mystery", because we don't literally "see" the God of our belief. We work to understand something/someONE that is invisible to the naked eye. We cannot "prove" God's existence (yet?)...so, in a sense, God remains a mystery. We all have our individual ways of "seeing God"... going deep into prayer, reading our Bible, walking along a magnificent beach, watching the sun rise and set, witnessing the miracle of birth, or experiencing love in our relationships with others. And though we may experience..or connect with God, there really is no way we fully comprehend Him. So in that sense He remains "mystery".
Yep. I don't think we have any need to further discuss the reality of mystery in faith. Thanks for the discussion.
RE: "Explain how evil can exist in the created world of a Perfect Creator.
HOW is not exacly clear to me, but evil certainly exists. The OT tells us that God is the author of evil. Do you buy that?
This is a perfect example of what I am talking about. The OT tells us God is One and Only. This is a benefit of Revelation that we must deal with, the problem of evil.
Most civilizations in existence have been pantheistic precisely because man's natural reason, his "look around you," leads to the conclusion that there must be competing forces, good and evil, that can influence man. The concept of there being but One God from which all creation emenates is a product of God telling us that, not of we deducing that.
And yet, given that revelation, we can continue to use our minds to explore what it means for there to be but One God.
SD
Is the "mystery" of the Trinity a purely Catholic (Roman version) teaching?
I accept fully that you believe the various "mysteries" for which you have no evidence except that some men told you so. That is fine with me.
Now if you'd just admit you know nothing. :-)
Two separate points:
1) The trinity denies the Shema. The Shema, as well as numerous other OT verses, clearly define God as ONE. (And yes, i'm aware of how Christians interpret plurality in the OT God of Genesis. Even if i could go along with their plural interpretation,(by simply ignoring how Jews define their scripture...as well as all those other verses claiming God is ONE) it still doesn't say God is THREE. Why not four, five, six, seven or more? . Why just a trinity when God could be 2 in One, or 4 in One, or 7 in One, or 100 in One? All those combinations too could relate to His Unity, His being, His essence, His Existence.
2) "The son's role in relation to the father is clearly subserviant, NOT equal." I was referring the the New Testament here. Even though Nicene Christianity has made Jesus equal to God, the overwhelming evidence of the NT shows Jesus to be subserviant, not equal, to God the Father.
Let's not be coy. You're not attacking Presbyterianism.
Is the "mystery" of the Trinity a purely Catholic (Roman version) teaching?
Inasmuch as the Trinity is professed by any Christian it is congruent with the teaching of the Church, then today's Catholic and Orthodox Churches combined.
SD
The Father and the Son are One. They are the same Divine Being, the Same Essence. They are One.
And it is three persons in this one God, cause that's what He revealed to us. If He were 4 or 6 or 12, HE would have let us know.
2) "The son's role in relation to the father is clearly subserviant, NOT equal." I was referring the the New Testament here. Even though Nicene Christianity has made Jesus equal to God, the overwhelming evidence of the NT shows Jesus to be subserviant, not equal, to God the Father.
The role of the Son is to be the Suffering Servant, not the Divine Majesty. Of course, it's going to be subserviant. That doesn't mean Jesus isn't God. You confuse person/role with essence.
SD
That's "plunging in the knife"???
You need to get out more.
He seemed to take it in the spirit it was offered.
Officially, now, the No Hockey League.
Inasmuch as the Trinity is professed by any Christian it is congruent with the teaching of the Church, then today's Catholic and Orthodox Churches combined.
Oh? Then you are saying the Protestant Churches which profess the Trinity are not Christian and are not members of the "Church"?
I am told by Protestants I am not a Christian because I don't accept belief in the Trinity. You seemingly go farther, claiming only Catholics (Roman version) and Orthodox as the only true "Christians".
You need to get out more.
He seemed to take it in the spirit it was offered.
It is simply a continuation of your snide remarks concerning his changing direction in life.
To his credit, he ignored your snide, gratuitous remark.
Oh well, between the owners, the players and their precious union, there is enough greed to go around.
The real injury is to the thousands of innocent workers and businesses which depend on the "game" to make a living. But then, what do they count?
I did answer you. NO Mystery. Which word do you not understand?
From my previous post:
YHWH tells people in Deuteronomy that they are given a 'choice' between LIFE or DEATH. YHWH then tells how to attain LIFE and how to save one's soul alive in Ezekiel. No mystery there.
YHWH didn't give us a 'religion' and He didn't assign a label, other than 'THW WAY'. YHWH gave us instructions as to how to live our lives. He gave us a 'way of life', NOT A RELIGION.
There is NO mystery as to how YHWH wanted us to live our lives.
YHWH can speak things into existence.
Explain how evil can exist in the created world of a Perfect Creator.
Because evil is a part of the world. Just because evil exists doesn't mean that the Perfect Creator failed. You can't know wrong if there is no wrong. Can you truly experience joy if you have never felt sorrow?
Explain how a series of animal sacrifices can atone for sin.
The same way killing a man can atone for sin. IT DOESN'T. Each person is responsible for their own actions/lives.
Does He? I thought it was Paul that used 'mystery' so much.
The First New Testament, written circa 150 CE didn't mention any virgin birth, family history or resurrection? Why leave out these very important pieces, unless of course, they hadn't been written into the gospels, yet?
Why the need for a New Testament anyway since salvation was already available to the Jew and Gentile within Judaism in their respective Covenants with God?
Was the First New Testament later altered, deleted, and parts invented to counter the earliest religious beliefs of the Jewish and Gentile Gnostics by Rome in the early second and later centuries?
Who found it necessary to respond to this "FIRST" New Testament with a "SECOND" New Testament which contradicted and corrected this "first" one in many places?
Did others follow the trend of adding to and further correcting the first New Testament theologically?
What was the motives of the writers of the "SECOND" New Testaments and where did these other books come from which were not previously available to the first collector?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.