Been there, done that

[Runner]

Could you give an example of the line you are not able to step over concerning belief in this "stuff" about Jesus ?
I ask the question assuming it can't be all "stuff" concerning Him ?
For instance there are many completely atheist academics who have no problem attesting with 100% historical certainty that there was a Jewish religious figure named Jesus Christ who was put to death by roman execution 2000 years ago.
They make no claim to having a historical certainty about anything more than that, yet they claim historical basis for His existence completely trustworthy.
Is it safe to say this is one of the "things" you believe ?

Jesus is the only biblical association he makes in the 1st paragraph .

" ,,, my interest in Jesus was less than zero."

Immediately followed in 2nd paragraph by saying :

“I don’t really believe most of this stuff."

That being the case I don't see why Jesus wouldn't be included in the "stuff" ?

Discussing specific "stuff" provable in the epistemological sense seems perfectly reasonable to me .

Why all the fear ?

Don't you have any specific biblical stuff you believe to be historically established fact that you'd like to discuss out of your own interest ?

Do you have any current threads

You don't think it would be odd that Runner's mentioning of Christian based "stuff" is a reference completely void of all stuff concerning Jesus , as you assert it to be?
Jesus being the paramount personality of Christianity how could He not be included in the aforementioned "stuff"
Knowing as you do what specific "stuff" Runner is unable to discuss you must also have some notion what specific Christian "stuff" Runner is eager & available to discuss ?
Can you share ?

A simple request for some specificity when the term "stuff" is vaguely applied in a most comprehensive manner would only constitute an "attack" if runner was my wife .
And since neither Runner or you for that matter are not my wife then the simple request for a little specificity stands as being completely reasonable and is not an " attack ".

The others have you pretty well pegged. Your only interest is in baiting me, hoping I'll satisfy your urge to harrumph that I'm not a Christian at all. Sorry, but I've been doing this too long at a much higher level than an internet forum to take the bait. I will, however, attempt to give you a more thoughtful response than your posts warrant.

As I've made clear on other threads, I had precisely zero childhood indoctrination into Christianity, nor did I have any interest in Christianity. At the time of my born-again experience, I'm not sure I'd ever read a page of the Bible.

I'm not going to describe my born-again experience because it's none of your business. Suffice it to say, it involved a chance encounter with the Gospel of John and an overpowering supernatural element. I now believe God reached down and claimed me at a critical juncture of my life when it was on the verge of taking a very different turn.

Because I'm intelligent and articulate, I was immediately thrust into a leadership role by well-meaning pastors and Campus Crusade staff members way before I was ready. I was surrounded by people who'd been neck-deep in dogma since they were toddlers and had never questioned any of it. I realized I simply didn't have the base to be playing the "Christian leader" game and was mostly pretending. Moreover, I was rational enough to realize that my born-again experience theoretically could have been the product of delusion or other psychological state. I wasn't prepared at that time to base the rest of my life on the reality of that one experience.

My specific beliefs now are none of your business and I frankly don't think you're someone I'd care to share them with. Suffice it to say, you're about as far off the mark as you could possibly be. Your speculation as to what I believe about Jesus could hardly be more wrong if you'd intentionally set out to make yourself look silly.

So there you go. Now you can get on with your consecrated life, which I feel sure is causing all heaven to rejoice at the sheer consecratedness (is that a word?) of it.

 

[Runner]

There is a lot to unwind in your post, if you don't mind, I would like to ask a few questions about your beginnings of being born-again .

When you talk about your born-again experience being unanticipated and startling are you saying it was like an accident you becoming a Christian ? If you would elaborate, I have not heard it described the way you did .

It was "accidental" in the sense that I went in the space of an hour from someone who'd never given Christianity a thought - truly not a thought - to someone who had accepted Christ and was crying like a baby. I was completely alone during that hour - no one "led" me to Christ. As I said above, it involved a completely chance encounter with the Gospel of John and a strong supernatural element. In 50+ years as a Christian, that was one of only two incidents that I would describe as having a specifically Christian supernatural element.

Do I think what occurred was accidental? Absolutely not. I believe every last detail was orchestrated by God. I believe God reached down and claimed me at a critical juncture of my life when it was in danger of taking a very different turn. I think he knew full well I wasn't ready to fully embrace Christianity and that the experience would launch me on a long quest, but I believe he reached down at that unlikely instant because it was a critical time - "now or never," you might say.

I am going to take a guess here and say the "stuff" you speak of are the supernatural aspects of God and maybe the supernatural aspects of being a Christian . Maybe I am wrong . Elaborate if you will .

The supernatural aspects of Christianity never troubled me in the slightest. I'd had fairly compelling paranormal experiences before my born-again experience and have had them throughout my life. I've been a member of the British Society for Psychical Research, the American Society for Psychical Research, the International Association for Near-Death Studies and other similar organizations.

If I'd been resistant to the supernatural aspects, my born-again experience wouldn't have been nearly as compelling to me as it was. My answer to those who ridicule the supernatural aspects is always, "If we believe God is the creator of the universe and the author of life, why would any supernatural aspect of the faith trouble us?

 

[Runner]

In the end we each stand it fall before our own master. We stand alone. No one is there to blame. Remembering this helps.

Right - and we're pretty much standing there every second of every day as well. There is no point in pretending or parroting what we think we "should" say. There is no point in being anything less than honest with God because we aren't fooling him.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Right - and we're pretty much standing there every second of every day as well. There is no point in pretending or parroting what we think we "should" say. There is no point in being anything less than honest with God because we aren't fooling him.

Being honest and truthful is very refreshing but costly at times. Not just that others reject you, but more that you have to reject your own pride in yourself, your abilities and knowledge. We are generally a lot less than we like to think we are.

 

[Runner]

I’m closer to your age but still younger…..and started asking questions in my 20s. I think there wasn’t much I didn’t question except God being there. Of that I do not doubt. For a space I didn’t want Him anymore but I didn’t think He wasn’t there (which is a cop-out to me.)

As I said elsewhere, I was raised by two incorrigibly alcoholic parents. Nevertheless, from a very early age - maybe three - I had a sense that I was watched over and protected and that everything would somehow turn out OK for me (as it did, way beyond my expectations). I never really connected this with a "god" or "angel" or anything like that. It was just an inner sense and confidence that in the midst of the chaos I was protected by someone or something outside myself.

I've also always had a strong sense of the mystery of life. I believe God is far bigger and more mysterious than the God of evangelical Christianity, who always strikes me as sort of a Cosmic Walt Disney.

 

[Hopeful]

Is living without sinning your evidence of having been reborn?

Yes, as no son of the devil can do it.

If so, you're unique in the history of Christianity. I probably sin every hour or so, but I confess and keep on truckin'. A pretty thorough transformation of one's life does not require "living without sinning."

Not unique, or the first.
If Jesus hadn't freed us from service to sin, (John 8:32-34), the only thing that would have changed between the OT and the NT is that the sacrificial animals gained their freedom.
Jesus didn't die for animals.
He died to free us from the whims of the fleshly mind.
In Christ, we have been changed from walking after the flesh to walking solely after the Spirit.
It is the product of rebirth from God's seed and liberation from Adam's seed.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

As I said elsewhere, I was raised by two incorrigibly alcoholic parents. Nevertheless, from a very early age - maybe three - I had a sense that I was watched over and protected and that everything would somehow turn out OK for me (as it did, way beyond my expectations). I never really connected this with a "god" or "angel" or anything like that. It was just an inner sense and confidence that in the midst of the chaos I was protected by someone or something outside myself.

I've also always had a strong sense of the mystery of life. I believe God is far bigger and more mysterious than the God of evangelical Christianity, who always strikes me as sort of a Cosmic Walt Disney.

Well He is certainly bigger than the God some Christians believe in. The God Jesus taught us to desire to know is a LOT bigger.

He is mysterious because He hides Himself from some kinds of people but reveals Himself to others. These are not random choices in His part but a result of our choices.

“The eyes of the Lord go to and fro throughout the earth that they find find the one whose heart is completely His.”

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Is living without sinning your evidence of having been reborn? If so, you're unique in the history of Christianity. I probably sin every hour or so, but I confess and keep on truckin'. A pretty thorough transformation of one's life does not require "living without sinning."

There’s a group of Christians who insist they are now sinless and perfect. Don’t let them bother you. They do this by appropriating scriptures and claim by faith that they describe them personally. A number of Christian teachers do this in a number of scriptures. It is correct for some scriptures, I know, but not all. They do it for the scriptures that feed their pride. I mean it doesn’t get more prideful than claiming you, above all the other people in earth, you are actually sinless. One can see the root of this teaching and who is behind it…this being like God, perfect.

Another popular claim is “we have the mind of Christ” no matter what evil thoughts we entertain. They cherry pick out the flattering passages and tell the man in the mirror that these words describe them. Truth doesn’t lighten the doorstep.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Runner

One reason I was sorry you left is because you’re a lawyer. Now that means you are trained to think of the written law or case law as binding not descriptive. I thought this kind of thinking could add a particular dimension.

I’m trained as a scientist which has trained my mind to think in terms of theory and testing theory to see if the ideas in the theory match real life. This has proven to be useful in the pursuit of truth.

The “Disneyland” God you mentioned is one of imagination sans testing or comparison to the written Word describing Him in truth. So the God they imagine Him to be and how He acts doesn’t match who is really is (scientific method) nor the written Word (legal method.)

 

[stovebolts]

Yes, as no son of the devil can do it.

I see your back at this again…

If we say we are without sin, we make him a liar…. Those are not my words…

Runner
Hopeful is our local “if you have sin in your life, your a child of the devil” member. He seems to think that a true Christian is one who cannot sin, which is very unorthodox.

As I told Mister E , everyone has a voice at the table. Even those we disagree with.

 

[Consecrated Life]

The others have you pretty well pegged. Your only interest is in baiting me, hoping I'll satisfy your urge to harrumph that I'm not a Christian at all.

Just an attempt to satisfy natural curiosity on my part.
How odd that when you issue very vague proclamations of being labeled as " not sounding very Christian" you are taken aback at the natural reaction of wondering what utterances caused you to be branded as " not sounding very Christian " ?
That's fine, you are allowed to remain locked into your refusal to elaborate.
At this point I can only conclude the refusal to add any magnification to your enlarged proclamations of being verbally bruised in your Christian encounters is due to other personal issues that there is no need to delve into.
How about we turn the whole thing a completely different direction & instead of " baiting" you by asking you what you do not believe in the epistemological sense, as you accuse me of doing , are you equally as fearful of me simply asking what would be a biblical text that you fully believe & that is dear to you in the epistemological sense.
What could be the harm in providing what you do believe, rather than any more attempts at unearthing won't you don't believe?
Certainly there would be no potential of "baiting" involved in you providing a biblical text that is proven and is precious to you in terms of full epistemological belief, and that has been through the years a great source of help, comfort, encouragement to you ?
After all for me to criticize such an expression of biblical trust and devotion in a particular text would only subvert my Christian character, not yours.
Kind regards, Consecrated Life .

 

[Runner]

There’s a group of Christians who insist they are now sinless and perfect. Don’t let them bother you. They do this by appropriating scriptures and claim by faith that they describe them personally. A number of Christian teachers do this in a number of scriptures. It is correct for some scriptures, I know, but not all. They do it for the scriptures that feed their pride. I mean it doesn’t get more prideful than claiming you, above all the other people in earth, you are actually sinless. One can see the root of this teaching and who is behind it…this being like God, perfect.

Another popular claim is “we have the mind of Christ” no matter what evil thoughts we entertain. They cherry pick out the flattering passages and tell the man in the mirror that these words describe them. Truth doesn’t lighten the doorstep.

There are indeed some wild and wacky notions out there. One of the principal posters on another forum insists that every time we stumble, we must simply "confess" and God is obligated to forgive us. "Yep, committed adultery again." The confession, he insists, need not be accompanied by any hint of remorse or repentance. It's a purely mechanical transaction - you do this, and God is then obligated to do that.

 

[Mister E]

How about we turn the whole thing a completely different direction & instead of " baiting" you by asking you what you do not believe in the epistemological sense, as you accuse me of doing , are you equally as fearful of me simply asking what would be a biblical text that you fully believe & that is dear to you in the epistemological sense.
What could be the harm in providing what you do believe, rather than any more attempts at unearthing won't you don't believe?

How about we do you?

Here's a thread where you can go a completely different direction and bring what YOU believe for examination. Will you do what you ask of him?

Slaying sacred cows-- the myth of essential Christian beliefs

What are essential beliefs? That term "essential" means very different things to different people and groups of people (denominations). What a Southern Baptist considers to be essential is different from what a Seventh Day Adventist or a Calvinist or a Preterist would insist as being...

christianforums.net

 

[Runner]

Just an attempt to satisfy natural curiosity on my part.
How odd that when you issue very vague proclamations of being labeled as " not sounding very Christian" you are taken aback at the natural reaction of wondering what utterances caused you to be branded as " not sounding very Christian " ?
That's fine, you are allowed to remain locked into your refusal to elaborate.
At this point I can only conclude the refusal to add any magnification to your enlarged proclamations of being verbally bruised in your Christian encounters is due to other personal issues that there is no need to delve into.
How about we turn the whole thing a completely different direction & instead of " baiting" you by asking you what you do not believe in the epistemological sense, as you accuse me of doing , are you equally as fearful of me simply asking what would be a biblical text that you fully believe & that is dear to you in the epistemological sense.
What could be the harm in providing what you do believe, rather than any more attempts at unearthing won't you don't believe?
Certainly there would be no potential of "baiting" involved in you providing a biblical text that is proven and is precious to you in terms of full epistemological belief, and that has been through the years a great source of help, comfort, encouragement to you ?
After all for me to criticize such an expression of biblical trust and devotion in a particular text would only subvert my Christian character, not yours.
Kind regards, Consecrated Life .

I have no obligation to satisfy any natural curiosity on your part. Your particular beliefs don't interest me in the slightest, so I'm mystified as to why mine appear to fascinate you. "What I Believe" was not the title or purpose of this thread. If I decide to start such a thread, you'll be the first to know.

Here ya go: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." I believe that quite literally and find it comforting and encouraging.

Happy now?

I didn't think so.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Consecrated Life said:
How about we turn the whole thing a completely different direction & instead of " baiting" you by asking you what you do not believe in the epistemological sense, as you accuse me of doing , are you equally as fearful of me simply asking what would be a biblical text that you fully believe & that is dear to you in the epistemological sense.
What could be the harm in providing what you do believe, rather than any more attempts at unearthing won't you don't believe?

How about we do you?

Here's a thread where you can go a completely different direction and bring what YOU believe for examination. Will you do what you ask of him?

https://christianforums.net/threads...ial-christian-beliefs.91717/post-1686802[/URL

More than glad to return in kind ... own as well . Kind Regards, Consecrated Life

 

[Dorothy Mae]

There are indeed some wild and wacky notions out there. One of the principal posters on another forum insists that every time we stumble, we must simply "confess" and God is obligated to forgive us. "Yep, committed adultery again." The confession, he insists, need not be accompanied by any hint of remorse or repentance. It's a purely mechanical transaction - you do this, and God is then obligated to do that.

That’s the legal view I referred to earlier. Some think they’ve God corned and obligated to fulfill his Word as they interpret it. It’s sort of like how the enemy used scripture with Jesus.

 

[Runner]

One reason I was sorry you left is because you’re a lawyer. Now that means you are trained to think of the written law or case law as binding not descriptive. I thought this kind of thinking could add a particular dimension.

I'd see it a little differently. Every legal problem is a matter of applying "the law" (case law and/or statutes and regulations) to a particular set of facts. As we just saw with the overruling of Roe v. Wade, the case law is never 100% settled. Moreover, we seldom find a case with precisely the same set of facts as ours. Hence, being a lawyer is all about convincing the court that the case law should be interpreted the way your client would like it to be and/or showing the court that your opponent's cases can be distinguished and shouldn't apply to this set of facts.

Even in a case governed by statutes and regulations, there is always room to debate what the language means, what the legislative intent was, and how the statutes and regulations should apply to your set of facts. This is true even when the statute seems "absolutely clear" on its face and your opponent is trying to convince the court there's no need for interpretation or consideration of the legislative intent.

In short, the case law, statutes and regulations are almost always just the "starting point" for legal argument rather than decisive in their own right. Hence the old saying that law school doesn't teach "the law" (which it certainly doesn't) but rather teaches "how to think like a lawyer."

In short, the practice of law is pretty much exactly like discussing religion on an internet forum!

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I'd see it a little differently. Every legal problem is a matter of applying "the law" (case law and/or statutes and regulations) to a particular set of facts. As we just saw with the overruling of Roe v. Wade, the case law is never 100% settled. Moreover, we seldom find a case with precisely the same set of facts as ours. Hence, being a lawyer is all about convincing the court that the case law should be interpreted the way your client would like it to be and/or showing the court that your opponent's cases can be distinguished and shouldn't apply to this set of facts.

Even in a case governed by statutes and regulations, there is always room to debate what the language means, what the legislative intent was, and how the statutes and regulations should apply to your set of facts. This is true even when the statute seems "absolutely clear" on its face and your opponent is trying to convince the court there's no need for interpretation or consideration of the legislative intent.

In short, the case law, statutes and regulations are almost always just the "starting point" for legal argument rather than decisive in their own right. Hence the old saying that law school doesn't teach "the law" (which it certainly doesn't) but rather teaches "how to think like a lawyer."

In short, the practice of law is pretty much exactly like discussing religion on an internet forum!

Pretty interesting. The difference between then is that in the Jindgin of God, there is a truth and there is justice and what one wants won’t play any role at all. In God’s it all turns on justice with mercy where it can be applied.

 

[Runner]

Pretty interesting. The difference between then is that in the Jindgin of God, there is a truth and there is justice and what one wants won’t play any role at all. In God’s it all turns on justice with mercy where it can be applied.

Yes, God's Justice and Truth are absolute - there's no opportunity for "creative lawyering" with God, darn it! But here on earth, we do have to do our best to interpret, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, how justice and mercy should be applied to a particular set of facts.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Your particular beliefs don't interest me in the slightest, so I'm mystified as to why mine appear to fascinate you.

I would say that my interest/fascination as well as the interest in others I have noticed as to mystery of your particular beliefs is due in large part to your issuing of statements which assail the Christianity of others being based in such things as" fear" or "mental illness".
Assaults issued void of any specific facts, as is your well established custom.
Quite a contradiction for rock ribbed adherent of epistemology such as yourself, by the way
That coupled with the depressive perfume of your own vague non-specific testimony of dissatisfaction and lack of confidence with Christ and His Word is at the heart of the interest in what is really behind this barren pall that cloaks your every thread & post .