Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (9948)	3/28/2001 12:15:10 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

How many times do I have to tell you I am not a Christian before it will sink in? I have said it frequently to you.....

To: E who wrote (9948)	3/28/2001 12:28:52 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Message 15513707 I have serious difficulties with fundamentalism. The Catholic doctrine is that the Bible is "theologically inerrant", that is, that it is true in respect of all important doctrinal matters, but is not without flaws as an historical document. Even St. Augustine did not consider the story of Genesis literally true. For one thing, there are actually two different accounts, which should be a clear signal that it is not true in historical detail. Now, from my perspective, I am not sure how far to credit the Bible. It makes sense to me that God should have had a discrete presence in history, and that there should be a revelation through the interaction of God and a certain people. Also, if God is omnipotent and benevolent, I cannot reject a story merely because it has miraculous elements. On the other hand, there is much that is troubling in the Bible, and that suggests that whatever was true in the account of the interaction of the Children of Israel with God has been fallibly related by the human side, not infallibly "dictated" from the Divine side. As for the New Testament, there is something sublime in the idea of God mystically taking on our suffering, and rescuing us from the grip of sin and death, and it makes some sense that a God of both justice and mercy would strive to reconcile the two by undertaking the burden of Vicarious Atonement. I find the idea entertainable, but for various reason do not have sufficient conviction to be a communicant of any church. Part of my problem is that I am, in an older sense, a religious liberal. I do not mean that I think that all faith- traditions are equally credible, but I do think that God did not abandon everyone else, even if He focused on the Jews, and therefore that some truths are reflected in various faith- traditions. Additionally, I find it difficult to believe that salvation depends upon "getting it right", when it is so easy and so common to get it wrong. In other words, whatever the final truth is, I think that God cuts us some slack if we did the best we could within the framework we found ourselves........