via: Per Crucem ad Lucemfredag, november 13, 2009
Prenumerera på:
Kommentarer till inlägget (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Om bloggen
Bloggar jag läser
- An und für sich
- Church and postmodern culture
- Cruciform Phronesis
- Emmausvandrarna
- Faith and Theology
- Fors Clavigera
- Inhabitatio Dei
- Kolportören
- La nouvelle théologie
- Mariborchan
- On Journeying with those in Exile
- Silentium Dei
- Stalin's Moustache
- Sub Specie Aeterni
- Teologisk verkstad
- The Immanent Frame
- Theopolitical
- Theos
Bloggtoppen
Spot on:
"All understanding of reality involves a commitment, a venture of faith. No belief system can be faulted by the fact that it rests on unproved assumptions; what can and must be faulted is the blindness of its proponents to the fact that this is so." - Lesslie Newbigin
Label Cloud
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(114)
-
▼
november
(12)
- Zizek på BBC Hard Talk
- Digital solidaritet?
- Visshet vs. Trohet
- Hauerwas om liturgi
- Habermas vs. Charles Taylor
- Om burkan och liberalismen ...
- Liten guide i stora frågor ...
- Fråga i tiden ...
- Kom och recensera vår gudstjänst!
- Andlighetens plats i de offentliga rummen ...
- Samtal om yttrandefrihet och religionsfrihet
- God Said It, I Interpreted It
-
▼
november
(12)
6 kommentarer:
stupid
Theology is stupid. Its a teaching of guesses made by men thousands of years ago to calm a world in turmoil at the time, Its just bending what the earliest philosophers said.
If you want to believe in "God", be my guest. But just so you know, Your "God" has been holding the human race back for a couple hundred years.
It actually makes me sad to see that people still believe in superstition, intelligence still has a far way to go.
Im sorry.
Thank you for sharing your emotions on how you feel about theology :)
If you try to break it down to an consistent argument, I will try to counter it.
However, If we understand religion, not as a certain set of doctrines and beliefs, but in terms of practice--as "liturgy"--then in fact much that we consider "secular" is actually religious, such as nationalism, liberalism, and even scientism.
Even the emergence of the "new atheism" and a secular fundamentalism are religious in this sense.
Peace!
I agree, IF we understand religion as a term of practice, way of life etc., then many things can be classified as religious, even drug addiction and alcoholism. But thats straying from the point, I am concerned with the Bible itself, just as much as the Quo-ran or the Hindu Veda. They are great books with impressive descriptions that portrait the virtuous life. Its the fact that people actually take it literally, as a divine truth. Is it not true that the bible contradicts itself? That Christianity is also essentially eclectic in the sense you pick and choose what you want to believe?
Do you believe in the entire bible, without excuse?
Since it IS the word of God, shouldn't the whole be treated as sacred truth? Shun Homosexuals and sell your daughters, right?
I know what your thinking - it how you interpret it! But look back at the very beginning of christianity, the new testament was just a final outgrowth of comments made by early christian followers, it follows that, this information - The word of God- must be looked upon as an oversimplification, not always to be taken literally true. But this eclectic way of believing led to contradictions and disputes, even in modern day. Your Dec 1 post shows clearly what I mean.
I will quote Plotinus on his Neoplatonistic God ca. 100 b.c.
"God is substance, That which is prior to all things and dependent on nothing, no words can describe him, for any prediction would limit him. Any comparative designation such as beauty, perfection, intelligence, goodness, can be taken merely as finite human concepts falling short of the essence of God. Any designation limits him and on must be content in the realization of his complete transcendence"
I would like to hear your view on God, and especially this promise of everlasting life in heaven if you believe in him.
E pluribus unum - Out of many, One.
One love.
Well, so much for a "consistent argument". Live well.
Well Naxos ...
I am not sure what you are really after ...
We as humans have to interpret everything around us - the Bible is no exception. Of course I don´t think that any interpretation is as good as the next one - and this is of course were we must keep the discussion going and admit that my view is just a possible interpreation amongst many.
Regarding Plotinus ... I agree that God is always greater than our human limited understandings of him. But I also believe that God i revealed in Jesus Christ, so that gives us a pretty good idea.
So, to answer your question about my view of God: Jesus Christ!
Jesus Christ.
What I'm after is just a discussion of your beliefs. You quote "Foolishness to the Greeks" on your blog -
"All understanding of reality involves a commitment, a venture of faith. No belief system can be faulted by the fact that it rests on unproved assumptions; what can and must be faulted is the blindness of its proponents to the fact that this is so." - Lesslie Newbigin
Just because I cannot disprove Jesus or God doesn't mean that he/they(Polytheism?;)exist.
I cannot disprove that a teapot orbits the sun, does that mean I should belive in that? Its a quote that promotes non-thinking, aka "faith".
GOD and Jesus might exist, I cannot prove anything otherwise- But,Why would God, almighty and all knowing, be so petty?
example -
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Leviticus 20:27
Deuteronomy 13:13-19
Religion does alot of good, in fact, every religious person Ive ever met has always been a genuinely good person. Churches offer refuge for people, feed the hungry and offer Hope through belief.
...But then again I wasn't around for the Crusades or the Inquisitions...
Best Regards
Skicka en kommentar