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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (16670)	3/11/2004 7:40:53 PM
From: briskit	Respond to of 28931

It is the core stories that buttress their centuries of refined dogma which I question--along with many others. The writing of Paul precedes the rest of the bible by at least 15 years. The dogma to justify Christianity was not written until at least 70 AD with Mark. I really don't mind questioning at all. I have more questions than answers, both theoretically and in life practice. I like the process and engagement actually. I think a Paul Johnson would be an interesting person to ask why he is not completely insulted by the basic story. I am wondering about the nature of the disagreement, the questioning as you say. Much of it reminds me of political disagreements. Seems to me in our country democrats will never become republicans, and visa versa. Dems say Bush knew about the WTC attacks, maybe even conspired in it for his own purposes. Relatively smart people are on both sides looking at the available evidence and making startling claims. There is such vitriol and bile in the discussion. That is why I said a few posts back that I doubt we will find ways to have this conversation about historicity, reconstructing what happened, what got borrowed and how, and the relevance of it, etc. It's hard to describe, but it feels just like talking to friends of mine who are on the other side politically. It's like speaking different languages, and I speak a couple LOL. It's pretty clear that even in Paul's writings he includes tradition and theological conclusions given to him as tradition. It's not that he makes stuff up, especially interpretations about the basic positions. He makes little reference to teachings, activities, or life of Jesus, even though he talks about him all the time. There can be a lot of reasons for this. One must look carefully at one's purposes for advancing particular arguments to see if they determine the conclusions being advanced in the argument. Ph 2.5 is a hymn already used in worship, and not something made up by Paul. In it you see an interpretation of Jesus handed down to Paul. The basic ingredients were given to him. He spends most of his time trying to make practical applications in the various local groups of Christians. He was more administrative than innovative theologically in many ways. That's not to say he didn't make contributions in the area of law vs. grace. So too the gospels as Luke says in his introduction to Luke/Acts contain materials that "have been handed down," i.e. have been gathered previously, and can be reviewed and evaluated. You spoke of a world without worldly hope. Becker is interesting to read in all this connection as well, from the psychological side. In the Nicholi book Freud and Lewis died in the last chapter. Quite interesting about all that, as it ties into resignation and hope, heroism, and animal nature, and self-expansive aspirations.