Posted by: Christian Beyer | December 22, 2008
Having Your Bible and Eating it Too
Posted in Bible, Catholicism, Christianity, Protestantism, Religion, Spirituality, Theology
Responses
Leave a response
Categories
- Afterlife
- Apocalypse
- Art
- Atheism
- Bible
- biblical literalism
- Biography
- Blogging
- Books
- Brian McLaren
- Capital Punishment
- Catholicism
- Charity
- Christianity
- Christmas
- Church
- Civil Disobedience
- Civil Rights
- Cloning
- Communism
- Contemplative Prayer
- Cooking
- Creationism
- Crime and Punishment
- Cuisine
- Culinary Arts
- Culture
- Current Events
- Death Penalty
- Drug Legalization
- emergence
- Emergent
- Emerging Church
- End Times
- Environmentalism
- Epistemology
- esthetics
- Ethics
- Evangelism
- Evil
- Evolution
- Faith
- Family
- Fascism
- Food
- FRIENDS
- Fundamentalism
- Ghosts
- Global Crisis
- Global Warming
- God
- Gospel
- Heaven and Hell
- Hell
- Heresy
- Heroism
- Heterodoxy
- History
- Home
- Homosexuality
- Hope
- Humor
- hunger
- inerrancy
- Islam
- Jesus
- Justice
- Legalism
- Life
- Metaphysics
- Miracles
- Morality
- Music
- Nature
- News and Current Events
- Orthodoxy
- OTHER STUFF
- Pacifism
- Poetry and Prose
- poverty
- prayer
- Prohibition
- Protestantism
- Purpose
- Religion
- Religious Right
- Religious Tolerance
- religon
- salvation
- Satan
- SATIRE
- Science
- Sexual Morality
- sexuality
- Sin
- Social and Politics
- Spirituality
- Star Trek
- Supernatural
- Teaching
- Technology
- Thanksgiving
- Theology
- THOSE CRAZY FUNDIES
- tolerance
- Travel
- Uncategorized
- War
- War on Drugs
- Wine
OOH.
By: logiopsychopathivorytowerdweller on December 22, 2008
at 10:35 am
I don’t like religion too but people who are afraid to speak should not use insinuations.
By: pochp on December 22, 2008
at 10:55 am
Insinuation? I’m not insinuating anything. What I’m saying is that “If it’s not in the Bible so I don’t believe it” or that “Scripture interprets Scripture” or that “all Scriptural truths are plainly revealed” or that the “Papist traditions are man-made and thereby false” are your mantras then you gots some ’splainin’ to do.
Actually, I understand that “Sola Scriptura” does not discount all church tradition or special revelation. But I don’t think most people understand this.
Just pointing out some possible inconsistencies.
By: Christian Beyer on December 22, 2008
at 11:02 am
So what are you saying? In Scripture, God is addressed as Father, Son, (Hebrews 1) and Holy Spirit-Acts 5-at least that is the presumed form of address. Are you saying we should redefine God?
By: logiopsychopathivorytowerdweller on December 22, 2008
at 12:36 pm
Nope. (At least not here.) I am questioning the reasonableness of the popular Protestant idea of Sola Scriptura, especially as Biblical literalist present it. The Roman Catholics are often criticized for their ‘false’ traditions, which they supposedly have no Biblical support for. The progressive (liberal, emerging etc) churches are also criticized for creating their own theologies which are not clearly based upon scriptures. Yet one of the most sacred tenets of Protestantism (and Catholicism) is the Holy Trinity which is in no way clearly found in the Bible.
I’m not questioning the doctrine of the Trinity so much as wondering how and why the majority of Protestants can accept a Roman doctrine which has it’s roots in contentious human debate and is not articulated in scripture. I suspect it has something to do with Anselm.
By: Christian Beyer on December 22, 2008
at 1:53 pm
I wish God is like a piece of brick so everybody can view Him top, bottom and sides, break him apart so we can see what’s inside to settle him.
As a father, as a son, in some sense, we may say that.
“If it’s not in the Bible so I don’t believe it” I also don’t buy that. It is like saying God died with the last entry in the bible. And some entries in there were handed down since before Moses, or more than 5 thousand years ago!
What I am saying is, God is always here. He never lost control of the universe and mankind. How he created the universe, the world and man? He has science to tell us, exactly, although much have to be unravelled by science yet.
Hypothetical, if God wants to communicate with man how will he communicate with them? My guess is he’ll do it in the language that man readily understands.
7 day creation served its purpose during the times when men lived in caves and wore g-strings. More and more people today dont buy that idea.
There are much better ideas if the purpose is to impart to others the AWESOME powers of God other than this 7-day now fairytale. I think religion needs constant update. And definitely it is belief that should give way when there is hard fact and it is not fact that should be twisted or forced to suit belief.
By: rodj on December 22, 2008
at 1:56 pm
Nicely said rodj.
By: pochp on December 22, 2008
at 7:42 pm
May I share…“If it’s not in the Bible so I don’t believe it” I get to sense this attitude in people once in a while. My feeling is a mix of provoked and interested.
What did God do before creation?
Like everyone else, I also adhere to the world of spirits. I cling to the best of both worlds. THAT THERE IS GOD. That it was God who did the IMPOSSIBLE of creating matter. Therefore God is beyond the word “infinite” as he is before infinite matter.
[Physics: Matter CANNOT BE CREATED. Therefore, matter has no beginning. Matter has existed since infinite time]
I was born a Christian. But since I’ve made modifications in myself, I can’t even say what religion I would fit today.
Occasionally I find myself in church, like when attending wedding or baptism. And there is no space and time for argument in there. But, I have learned to feel comfortable in any church. The trick? I have my own translation running of whatever, which I think is outmoded, priest or pastor is preaching. Like 7-day Creation for example, is simply translated “God is great and awesome” In short, many things that now appear as myths I take them for their essence – the moral lessons out of them. There are things that I have ceased to take literally.
But there are things that should be stated the way they’ve always been. Sun up and Sun down, for example, still make sense. Sun shows and Sun hides instead would be more objective but would not they sound abnormal?
Exploring outside the Physical world I think can be dangerous. I have flapped my wings out there sometimes but I’d rather be safe with feet on solid ground, so to say.
God created Matter. The Physical world starts thereon. Behind this physical world are fathomless mysteries incomprehensible to man. For example, what did God do during infinite-infinity before God decided to create infinite matter? [Plant and animal life forms thereon, included] I gave up on that one, folks. And there would be follow-up questions to that. [But don’t anybody tell any answer because I might consider them idiocy if not insanity] … For me, God created matter dot.
How God created everything would be interesting. And, I think Science serves that purpose by doing all the explaining for God so man ceases to be silly. Some fairytales fed man when he was young but he is growing up. [In fact if we take away the words ‘God’ in the bible and replace them with someone else, some of them will fit well with Hans Christian Andersen’s and Magyar fairytales.]
And tomorrow, surely man will be more mature and better than he is today. And I suppose by then, static religious, if they have not evolved, would be funny weirdoes on their way to extinction… Ah, nothing one can do.
Clashing Religion with science? If that is one’s intention there is lots of them. Reconciling Religion with Science? I think, same conflicts can easily be re-configured…That’s what I’ve been doing in myself, in fact. Thanks
By: rodj on December 23, 2008
at 8:09 am
Coincidentally, there is a thread going on over at God Gal’s sight on the subject of Sola Scriptura:
http://1godsgal.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/sola-scriptura/
Check it out.
By: Christian Beyer on December 23, 2008
at 4:20 pm
Break. Happy Holidays to you all!
By: pochp on December 24, 2008
at 8:54 pm
And to all a good Christmas!
By: Christian Beyer on December 25, 2008
at 12:47 am
Christian… You said: “Yet one of the most sacred tenets of Protestantism (and Catholicism) is the Holy Trinity which is in no way clearly found in the Bible.”
Is this not clear?
John1:1-18 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life, [1] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.
9 The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own, [2] and his own people [3] did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) 16 And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, [4] who is at the Father’s side, [5] he has made him known.”
Just a question.
By: netprophet on December 28, 2008
at 6:36 pm
Actually…no. It’s not clear. Not at all.
Not as far as laying out the idea of a triune God. Even if it did spell out this point, it only addresses two of the three persons. Where’s the Spirit?
I think you are going to have to make a ‘leap of faith’ to find any Biblical support for the Trinity. Unless you are a Catholic who is told not to think about it – it’s just one of God’s mysteries (as I was told over and over). Of course, if it’s one of His mysteries I’d like to see where HE talks about it.
By: Christian Beyer on December 28, 2008
at 9:47 pm
God the Father – God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, I think that’s silly idea of the Unknown. God the Spirit makes most sense. He can connect to anybody, anything, anytime, like man clicking a remote to his appliance. A theory of the Unknown of course.
By: rltj on December 29, 2008
at 1:39 am
God is Spirit Chris. And what Spirit is more Holy? You have made your mind up and no amount of Scriptural reference will change it I’m sure. But to some of us it is clearer in the context of our faith than to others. Seeing that it doesn’t affect our salvation as far as I have been able to find in the Scriptures, it must not matter if one believes it or not. You may say I have a blind faith but I wouldn’t have used the words “Not at all” in your above dialog. That shows a blind ignorance, seeing that there are more Biblical passages that suggest it’s likelihood than there are to suggest otherwise. No offense intended. I think you have argued this before and frankly I can’t see how you can come to such a solidified conclusion. But, to each his own.
Here are a view on my side of thought.
Isaiah 9:6 “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” together with John 1:14 “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” and John 1:18 “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.”[26]The Bible says “God the One and Only” in NIV.
John 5:21 “For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.”
John 8:23–24: “But he continued,’You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins.’”
John 8:58 “I tell you the truth”, Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”[27]
John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.”
John 10:38: “But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
John 12:41: “Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him.”—As the context shows, this implied the Tetragrammaton in Isaiah 6:10 refers to Jesus.
John 20:28: “Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’” Due to the strict laws of Moses concerning blasphemy, Jesus and all of the apostles in the room were obligated to put Thomas to death for the blasphemy of calling a man God, unless that man truly was God. Jesus was similarly prohibited from receiving the worship of men as God, unless he was God. Thus the response of Jesus and others in the room indicates that all of them believed Jesus to be God, not only Thomas.[citation needed]
Matthew 28:17: “When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some were doubtful.” Under the Laws of Moses, no man could allow others to worship him as God – this being considered blasphemous. Jesus allowed his followers to worship him, indicating that Jesus believed himself to be God.[citation needed]
Philippians 2:5–8: “Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!”
Colossians 1:15: “He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God”
Colossians 1:16: “For by him [Jesus] all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.”
Colossians 1:17: “He [Jesus] is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”
Colossians 2:9: “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form”
Titus 2:13: “while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.”
1 Timothy 3:16: “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”
Hebrews 1:8: “But about the Son he [God] says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.”
1 John 5:20: “We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.”
Revelation 1:17–18: “When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.” This is seen as significant when viewed with Isaiah 44:6: “This is what the LORD says—Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.”[citation needed]
How many can you find that contradict these passages?
You don’t really have to answer. I just thought if you hadn’t considered any of these you might want to.
One more thing; The Old Testament states that God is the only savior for mankind and also states that the Christ is the Savior. Logic would suggest that If God is the Savior and Jesus is the Christ, then Jesus is God.
By: netprophet on December 29, 2008
at 2:07 am
Net, I think we are quibbling over words. And if the Trinity works for you, then great. I just don’t think there is enough support for Christians (read Trinitarians) to accuse non-Trinitarians of being ‘wrong’. I will wholeheartedly jump on the Trinity bandwagon when someone provides the conclusive scriptural support.
My point was not to question the Trinity per se, but to question the Biblical literalists who argue that some Christians espouse ideas that are not CLEARLY spelled out in scripture and yet I (and many others) do not think that the Trinity is CLEARLY spelled out either. Look at the debates that have generated throughout the centuries, look at the fact that the word is not found in the Bible. If the Trinity is that clear then why wouldn’t the Jews have had some sort of perspective of God that involves duality?
Again, none of the verses you use suggest a triune divine nature. I do think that the doctrine of the Trinity is essential if one must believe that Jesus was first and foremost the scapegoat for original sin. I am not too fond of TULIP (I don’t think you are either) so do not feel so compelled to embrace the triune doctrine. (Although why anyone, even Calvinists, would insist on the personhood of the Holy Spirit is beyond me.)
I have had many people present some very nice analogies and metaphors for describing the Trinity. The most recent and novel being “The Shack”. But that seems a little circular to me; using metaphor to explain metaphor.
By: Christian Beyer on December 29, 2008
at 5:15 pm
Hey Christian, long time no .. post?
Now I’m no fan of Protestantism or Roman Catholicism for that matter – I’m an Orthodox Christian. However, the Trinity is certainly contained in the bible even if the word Trinity is not.
Worship of the Trinity was established at Jesus’ baptism.
I agree with your argument though – Protestants are not Sola Scriptura. There are many things which are in the bible which Protestants do not do or believe, and many things which are not in the bible which they do believe and do. In fact I would say that the Orthodox are more sola scriptura than the Protestants.
The main difference in reality between the Orthodox vs. Catholics and Protestants is not so much the place of scripture and tradition, but more so a case of which tradition you choose to follow.
The notions of salvation, for example (which for some reason seems to be a running theme in any my replies on your blog) as set forth by Anselm of Canterbury and John Calvin, are man-made traditions which state essentially that God came to save us from His own malice. Yet this teaching is not found in either scripture or in the Apostolic tradition.
The reformers did not simply get rid of ‘tradition’ and hold on to that part of tradition called the Holy Scriptures – they abandoned the tradition of the Apostles for the traditions of men. Some of the true Christian tradition was held onto quite firmly, such as that of the Trinity (although I have met Protestants before who deny this teaching), or Luther’s belief that Mary was always a virgin, but they also kept and developed Roman Catholic teachings which were man made and also came up with their own.
By: vernet1 on January 3, 2009
at 11:03 am
Also it’s worth it to add something here about the doctrine of the Trinity, which actually most Protestants and Roman Catholics don’t have correct (they say that the Holy Spirit proceeds pre-eternally from the Son).
Some people (and I used to be included in this group) think that the doctrine of the Trinity isn’t really all that important. Particularly if you believe that simply acknowledging Jesus’ sacrifice is all we need to enter into heaven since now God is appeased, what does it matter whether the Holy Spirit is God?
As an Orthodox Christian, I realize that the different persons of the Trinity play different roles in creation and salvation, in manners which are important to recognize in order to work that salvation out. The fact that God the Word is from before the ages and through Him all things came into and have their being is important. The fact that the Holy Spirit, or otherwise translated as the Holy ‘Breath’ or ‘Wind’ is everywhere present, filling all things, and the giver of life, and that we want Him to abide in us, is important.
Basically what I’m trying to say is that in the Orthodox spiritual life, we know the persons of the Triune God not just because of some teaching that is written down on a piece of paper or in a book, but because of living experience. We are taught that if we acquire the Holy Spirit, then thousands around us will be saved. How (or why, for that matter) can we possibly prepare our hearts for Him to enter if we don’t know who He is? We are told that before saying the Jesus prayer (lord Jesus Christ Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner) that we should pray to the Holy Spirit before hand so that He will prepare the way for us to receive the Son. And we are taught that the door to the Father is the Son.
If you believe that Christianity is not merely a one time decision, but a life, and that working out the gift of our salvation means prayer, fasting, and receiving God into our hearts, then the Trinity is very important.
By: vernet1 on January 3, 2009
at 11:20 am
Hey DTW – good to hear from you. Thanks for bringing something for us to chew on. I’ll need some time to respond effectively but I would like to ask you one question;
Do you think that the concept of the Trinity is complete or even really comprehensible to created beings? Can the created even begin to describe the created? My (likely incorrect) understanding of the Orthodox church’s affinity for the doctrine is that the incomprehensibility of the Trinity encourages an open minded and mystical view of God that does not limit him to our imaginations.
By: Christian Beyer on January 3, 2009
at 6:59 pm
Christian,
You are correct, of course. What does it mean, for example, for the Spirit it proceed and for the Son to be begotten? As you said (or meant to say?), the created cannot even begin to describe the uncreated.
By: vernet1 on January 7, 2009
at 12:07 am
Hey that is what I said and what I meant to say.
By: Christian Beyer on January 7, 2009
at 7:21 am
btw – if you ever have any interest in seeing what I’ve been writing about, you’re more than welcome to come to a liturgy. My parish is in Linthicum. Here is the parish website: http://www.holycrossonline.org.
By: Alex on January 7, 2009
at 10:23 am