Peter Debelak
Quote:
Dear Socrates, er, MacDuff:
I'd prefer you say what you mean rather than the prolonged socratic method.
|
Prolonged??? That was one of my shortest posts. Well under 200 words.
No Socratic method intended. I really thought I had it right with those two simple questions. Just thought I’d spend what little time I have left here trying to understand what it is you are trying to say. I thought it might be a little different than what is the norm here. Maybe a little closer to what I was trying to get across. But I no longer think that is the case.
As I read your posts to unregistered, I note you have a problem that is common here. You pretend to be open to what others say. But if they question you, you tend to take offense. I perceive that thou protests too much. Belying what you think you are. Oh for the gift he gie us. To see ourselves as others see us. I’ve been fortunate to have that gift, and often to agree with it. If you believe in the Spirit as you say, then it would be through the Spirit you are able to see yourself. Not reflected on anyone in particular. Apart from the Spirit, the only way to see yourself is through your reflection on others.
I have some experience with Lutheran Churches. If you attended Lutherans of the Missouri synod or the Wisconsin Evangelical, and they let you take communion with them, it was a fluke. Both denominations practice closed communion, being of conservative persuasion or Confessional Lutherans. But if of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, they let anyone take communion with them. And they ordain women pastors and accept gay Christians (and I understand gay Pastors as well currently), and the members generally accept abortion as acceptable, the denomination being of the liberal persuasion. I understand they deny the authority of the Bible and don’t hold explicitly to Justification by faith alone in typical liberal Protestant fashion. One would think I would have no problem with becoming a formal member of a liberal Protestant Church. But I have a different view of the Bible and Justification than they do. And I oppose their idea that being gay and abortion as being acceptable. They don’t practice formal closed communion. But to oppose them in those areas is a definite no-no, and they will strongly encourage you to go elsewhere if they know you hold a conservative view on those matters. Closed communion by any other name. The conservative view is considered discriminatory by them. And unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on ones point of vew, I’m closer to the conservative side when it comes to these matters.
Quote:
|
In Revelation 2-3, for example, the Spirit speaks "to the church" - that is to a community of people - but the call to action the call to "agency" is to the individual.
|
I’ve been fascinated by how so many Christians can’t take the first and last books of the Bible literally. As if what was written is some sort of mythical reference or a parable like thing that stands for something else.
Quote:
|
I've read just about all of your posts and I glean a disdain for historical Christianity - thus the reference to my thinking being "classic Protestantism" I read as having implicit disdain. If not, say so. If so, speak out where you think my thoughts are "off." Really, I'm open.
|
I will only say in my own defense that I have absolutely no disdain for Christianity. It has managed to serve Christians quite well for two millennia. I just don’t think there has been any real difference between the history of Christianity and the history of humanity in general. And thus to me Christianity is not really an expression of the Bible that is explicitly supernaturally oriented with obvious claims for evidence of the supernatural. So like everyone else here, you have totally misunderstood my view.
And I really don’t get the gist of your view. So it’s pretty hard to have disdain or respect for your view. Obviously you think nothing I have said so far is on target. You joined this forum back in 2008. And maybe the others here get it. I haven’t the same point of reference as they do to get it. So I guess I probably won’t get it before I leave here. And usually I’m pretty good at understanding the views of others whether I agree with them or not. Maybe if I were to stick around a little longer I would finally get it. But I see no reason to do so, having nothing in common with anyone here. Obviously.
Quote:
|
It doesn't matter much to me whether my view resembles a particular intellectual/religious history - I don't derive the strength of my convictions by how wide-spread they are accepted. It is nice when they are accepted, but I can't derive my self-worth or conviction that way anymore. It matters to me whether my view is born out by Scripture, my own experience - and yes, vetted by an open community of fellowshp and sharpening stones of loved ones. I don't know how to do much otherwise, even if I am greatly mistaken.
|
Do you think you got your thinking in a vacuum? That what you think is unique? Think again. Not even my view is unique. Unusual? Perhaps. Often misunderstood? Plainly. But definitely not unique.
But you thinking that your view is unique to you, and your not thinking it matters much if your view resembles “a particular intellectual/religious history”, and that you are only concerned whether your view is “born out by Scripture, my own experience - and yes, vetted by an open community of fellowshp”, a fellowship of your own choosing, is why you can be considered a lone wolf. I too have been referred to in that way, among others. My personal favorite is that I am a denomination unto myself. How can that even be possible unless I have followers, which I don’t, nor do I want any. Eventually they denied me any Christian status at all. And to be denied the status of Christian only requires I reveal my view on one particular doctrine that is the uber essential in most of Christianity.
Christians have a habit of understanding Scripture by interpretation. It’s the common denominator between Catholics and Protestants. And the reason why Catholics and Protestants are doctrinally divided, as well as why Protestants are doctrinally divided from one another. They think their interpretations are what Scripture says. The diversity of the result doesn’t seem to bother Christians at all as they go about their business in whatever Church they happen to find themselves. Until someone gets them riled about something, then they just go off to find another Church that they deem more suitable. The current state of Christianity is very convenient for riled Christians.
So what does Scripture say? Whatever one wants it to say. It will always back one’s own view. I think Scripture backs my view. But who here agrees that it does? The one who calls my Scriptural view a theory with no conclusion? Or the one who calls my Scriptural view a fairy tale with no practical expression? I rarely even present Scripture anymore when I present my own view. Christians don’t understand the Bible alike. What’s the use? I could be a fundamentalist and hit people over the head with my Bible all day long. To no avail. They would just hit me back with their own Bible. And curiously enough the Bibles wouldn’t say the same thing.
Once, when I was still new to the forums, I made the mistake of just posting a list of Scriptures without any comment whatsoever. Except to say that they represented my view. Only to have the post called my personal opinion. Is that what Scripture is about, just a matter of personal opinion? That does seem to be the case in Christianity. Especially in Protestantism, where Scripture is claimed to be the only authority for all faith and practice, while simultaneously the claim is interpretively executed. They can’t even agree on what morals to follow, having their own interpretations for that as well. Catholicism makes much better sense in that regard acknowledging both the necessity for interpretation (that is commonly practiced by all) and having an authority that deals with that necessity. Doesn’t make my faith in the Bible any stronger. And it makes my faith in Christianity, that interprets the Bible according to whatever seems naturally reasonable to them, non-existent. Yet how can I tell whether or not I may be just as guilty of Biblical interpretation as the Christians, even though I’m savvy enough to oppose the practice?
The only reason why I still have some faith in the Bible is because it was through reading the Bible for myself after being a Catholic from birth that I actually began to believe that all that stuff was really true. By the time I was 12 I already began to doubt the verity of Catholic doctrines. When I read the Bible for myself, something inside seemed to say, now you know what’s real. And at first I was really enthused, to the point of near fanaticism. Talked about it all the time. Until I saw that the Catholics didn’t like what I thought was real. Just like here. So I went on a quest through Protestantism. Who liked what I thought was real no more than the Catholics. Just like here.
I didn’t really come on this forum to promote my own view. At this point in time I really couldn’t care less if Christians agree with my view or not. But it would be nice if they at least understood what it is they are disagreeing with. Not that I think that all who disagree don’t understand. Which is very revealing to me of their own thinking.
I only came here initially to share my own experience of the Recovery. Never did get to do that, except to say I experienced zero abuse. Not that zero abuse is really what too many on this forum want to hear. Whether unconsciously or openly, they don’t want their wounds to heal. Their wounds being their identity.
MacDuff