Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | ANTI or PRO? Which is it? | 1 Tim 6:20 | kalos | 7406 | ||
ANTI or PRO? Which is it? "Does knowledge out weight truth Note 2 Tim 3:7 Lionstrong Wed 06/13/01, 4:40pm "That being said, your antipathy toward “book knowledge” is objectionable. Piety, our pursuit of holiness, doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with our God does not require us to be anti-intellectual. The above verses show the Apostle Paul to be a man of the books. To quote the Greeks poets evidences that he was well read in non-Jewish literature. As Paul is an example, “book knowledge” can enrich us and help us to speak more effectively to our culture." (06/13/01) All of the following quotes were submitted under the same user name. But, did the same person who wrote the first seven quotes also write the above, which is the same as the last quote? Can one condemn, ridicule and dismiss ALL science, asserting that "science is false", and then say to another "your antipathy toward 'book knowledge' is objectionable" and "God does not require us to be anti-intellectual"? Did the Forum just slip into the twilight zone or become part of the bizarro world? Read the following and decide for yourself. ANTI "Do you really know that the sun doesn't rise? Do you really know that the earth rotates on its axis?...I know the Bible uses figures of speech, but as serious Bible students isn't the only reason you believe that the sun standing still is a figure of speech is that you believe what you've been taught about the earth rotating on its axis? Because Science says so?" (05/11/01) "If Scripture, God's word, is our only source of truth, then what can be proven true by science, and mathematics?...what obligates us to believe that the earth spends...So far, the only reason given to take it as figurative is NOT based on a study of Scripture, but by imposing a belief on the Scripture, a belief whose source is not the Bible, but science....How do you know Jesus loves you? But how do you know the earth spins on its axis?" (05/15/01) "Some of us believe that it is a scientific fact that our solar system is heliocentric...Some of us, I think, have an unquestioned faith in science (for them it should be spelled with a capital S). To even question that the solar system is heliocentric is anathema...How do we know that Copernicus found the truth about the solar system when he concluded that it was heliocentric?" (05/17/01) "I am not OBLIGATED to believe in the earth's rotation. I am only obligated to understand and believe God's word." (05/17/01) "Once one defines what truth is, and depending on how one defines truth, science may be found to be false." "Truth is not physical...If truth is unchanging, then science is false." (05/29/01) "If we start from the Bible as our sole source of truth (sola scriptura) we could not deduce from the Scriptural data that the earth rotates on its axis." (05/11/01) PRO "That being said, your antipathy toward “book knowledge” is objectionable. Piety, our pursuit of holiness, doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with our God does not require us to be anti-intellectual. The above verses show the Apostle Paul to be a man of the books. To quote the Greeks poets evidences that he was well read in non-Jewish literature. As Paul is an example, “book knowledge” can enrich us and help us to speak more effectively to our culture." (06/13/01) My comment: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."--Emerson(?). No hobgoblins here! |
||||||
2 | ANTI or PRO? Which is it? | 1 Tim 6:20 | Lionstrong | 7407 | ||
Ooooo, a personal attack! Man! You must really have it in for me! I'm Pro-truth/knowledge, which is not science, which is falsely called truth :-). Paul quotes the Greek poets who happened to say something true. Now everything else they wrote might have been false, but on that one point they were right, and Paul used that truth to communicate the gospel. Affirming that science is false is not a dismissal, condemnation or making ridicule of it. Sometimes to use part of a quote is to misquote: "In this forum some have used the expression sola scriptura (Scripture only), which I accept. If Scripture, God's word, is our only source of truth, then what can be proven true by science, and mathematics? Then too, can science or math prove ANY biblical statement true or false?" |
||||||
3 | ANTI or PRO? Which is it? | 1 Tim 6:20 | charis | 7412 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, I have been reading this thread and it's many convolutions (and even participated in some of it :-). I think I know what you are getting at. Tell me if I'm wrong in my perception of your drift. 1) Only the Bible contains real truth. 2) This truth is in accord with the spiritual nature of God. It is not 'knowable' by the natural man. 3) Man's perception of truth is warped by his fallen nature. The history of human science is bound by this curse. 4) We are to try to discern truth through the Spirit of God, doing all we can to disassociate ourselves from the nature of man. 5) I can't think of point 5 :-) In my humble opinion, this is taking sola scriptura to absurd excess. I think that yours is a valid philosophical point, but it borders on the mystical. (mystical - having a spiritual menaing or reality that is neither apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence. Webster) Friend, I do not condemn this viewpoint, but I wonder what the purpose is. (?) If we try too hard to deny our involvement (or relevancy) in the natural world, we can find ourselves denying it's Creator. Nature is not the enemy, the devil is the enemy. In all honesty, it sometimes sounds as if you confer enemy status on the natural world. If I am way off base in my assumptions, I truly beg your pardon. Blessings to you. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
4 | ANTI or PRO? Which is it? | 1 Tim 6:20 | jim | 7414 | ||
The natural man cannot understand the things of God and most of all they are foolish to him. I shall try to always have the mind of Christ. We must have some fun but not folly | ||||||
5 | ANTI or PRO? Which is it? | 1 Tim 6:20 | charis | 7416 | ||
Dear jim, I'm sorry, but I think I missed the logic of your statement. The things of God are foolish to natural man, but we are not to have any folly? Friend, I believe man is a tripartite being. Flesh, soul, and spirit. "For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." Hebrews 4:12 NASB. I believe that the soul is erratic in it's loyalties, sometimes closely linked to our spirit, which is indwelt by the Spirit of God. Sometimes, though, our soul is very much influenced by the flesh, thus set against the Spirit. This is where we get 'soulish behavior' that is definitely not spiritual. It is the realm of the emotions. We need the Word of God to discern between the two, because man is not inherently capable to do so. The reason I get into all this is because I think that sometimes we tend to think that we are either 'in the flesh' or 'in the Spirit.' I do not agree. Sometimes we are clearly in an emotional (soulish) realm, but we want to believe ourselves spiritual. This also causes us to judge our neighbor by this bipartite measure. This is exactly why humans are often 'judgmental.' The offender is 'of the flesh,' and the arrogant judge believes himself 'of the Spirit.' Correctly discerning soulish behavior by the Word of God will clarify a multitude of problems in the fellowship of the saints. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||